Reply
Wed 12 Sep, 2012 09:14 am
Netanyahu Says World Has No 'Moral Right' To Stop Israel From Attacking Iran
September 11, 2012
by Eyder Peralta - NPR
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a joint press conference with his Bulgarian counterpart Boyko Borissov, not seen, in Jerusalem on Tuesday.
Comments from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are ratcheting up diplomatic tension between Israel and the United States.
During a joint press conference in Jerusalem with Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov, Netanyahu expressed his frustration with how world powers are handling Iran and its nuclear program.
"The world tells Israel 'wait, there's still time'. And I say, 'Wait for what? Wait until when?' Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel," Netanyahu said.
He added: "Now if Iran knows that there is no red line. If Iran knows that there is no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it's doing. It's continuing, without any interference, towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there, nuclear bombs."
From Tel Aviv, Lourdes Garcia-Navarro tells our Newscast desk this is the latest in "an increasingly strident and public war of words with the United States."
Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but Israel and others say Iran is chasing nuclear weapons capabilities.
As The Washington Post notes, despite the fact that Netanyahu did not name the United States, he was reacting to an interview given by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over the weekend. Clinton said that the U.S. is "not setting deadlines" and that diplomacy is the best way forward when it comes to Iran.
This also comes on the heels of a report from the AP that says the International Atomic Energy Agency has found that over the past month, "Iran has moved further toward the ability to build a nuclear weapon."
The New York Times reports that Netanyahu criticized the U.S. approach to Iran, specifically the long list of sanctions meant to encourage Iran to comply with demands from the United Nations.
"The fact is that every day that passes, Iran gets closer and closer to nuclear bombs," Netanyahu said according to the Times.
The Times also notes that it is unclear what "red lines" mean for Israel. It reports:
"In general, for Israel, the red line would be Iran achieving the capability to produce nuclear weapons in a location invulnerable to Israeli attack. But Israeli officials have long said that the Israeli and American "clocks" tick at a different pace on Iran. The United States, for example, could wait longer to launch an attack and could have a deeper reach because of its superior military capabilities.
"Israeli experts say that for Israel, all the previous red lines have been crossed already and that setting more lines might be meaningless, because international intelligence agencies may not know immediately if Iran has overstepped them."
Bradley Burston, of Haaretz, has an interesting read on the politics of it all. Netanyahu, he said, is betting that President Obama will lose the elections this coming November and Mitt Romney will embrace a more hawkish stance.
But, Burston writes, Netanyahu made that bet when Obama was "on the ropes." Now that Obama is surging, Burston says he hopes Netanyahu recalibrates and that he does so quickly.
Update at 5:54 p.m. ET. A Rejected Meeting?:
Earlier today, Haaretz made a splash with a report that the White House had rejected a meeting with Netanyahu while he was at the U.N. in New York later this month.
The New York Times reports the White House confirmed that Obama and Netanyahu would not meet but that it had nothing to do with Netanyahu's statements, instead, it was due to a scheduling problem.
The White House added that Netanyahu would meet with Secretary Clinton and other officials.
Update at 9:35 p.m. ET. White House Says No Request To Meet In Washington:
In a statement late Tuesday, the White House said "contrary to reports in the press, there was never a request for Prime Minister Netanyahu to meet with President Obama in Washington."
Here's the complete statement:
"President Obama spoke with Prime Minister Netanyahu for an hour tonight as a part of their ongoing consultations. The two leaders discussed the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program, and our close cooperation on Iran and other security issues. President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu reaffirmed that they are united in their determination to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and agreed to continue their close consultations going forward. Contrary to reports in the press, there was never a request for Prime Minister Netanyahu to meet with President Obama in Washington, nor was a request for a meeting ever denied."
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
The U.S. government should tell Netanyahu if he wants to attack iran he will do so by himself without U.S. help.
Quote:"The world tells Israel 'wait, there's still time'. And I say, 'Wait for what? Wait until when?' Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel," Netanyahu said.
What a bare faced hypocrite, talking about morals to the international community while Israel--to exist as the Zionists' ethnocentric Never Never Land--necessarily oppresses and discriminates against the Palestinian peoples. What a schmuck.
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:The U.S. government should tell Netanyahu if he wants to attack iran he will do so by himself without U.S. help.
The US wishes to help with the bombardment of Iran though. We just want the bombardment to happen at a later date.
Telling Israel to do it on their own would foil both goals.
@BumbleBeeBoogie,
Quote: Ahmadinejad declared that his words reflected the views of the Iranian people, adding that Western world was free to comment, but its reactions were invalid.
Their all the same, war mongering zealots.
So Iran has said it wants to attack Israel and Israel has said it wants to attack Iran and both have said they have the right.
The lunatics are running both asylums.
Maybe both of them having nukes might put some manners on the pair of them.
I must agree with the Jews here; it is a simple act of self defense.
Delay tends toward self-destruction. On the day that the Moslems
can execute a nuclear 9/11/1, thay will DO it, both in America (probably NY again) and in Israel.
David
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:I must agree with the Jews here; it is a simple act of self defense.
Delay tends toward self-destruction. On the day that the Moslems
can execute a nuclear 9/11/1, thay will DO it, both in America (probably NY again) and in Israel.
The reason Obama wishes to wait is, there are some risks that bombing Iran will accelerate, not delay, their illegal nuclear program.
Obama is trying to follow a very narrow course, but he is actually pursuing the path that, mathematically at least, is the most likely to derail Iran's illegal nuclear program.
Of course, that doesn't make the waiting any less nervewracking for those who worry about Iranian nukes.
Instead of nuking us or Israel, what Iran would likely do is step up their misbehavior and then use their nukes to deter us from intervening.
@eurocelticyankee,
eurocelticyankee wrote:Maybe both of them having nukes might put some manners on the pair of them.
Israel already has manners.
And no, if Iran were allowed to illegally acquire nukes, it would only increase their already-bad misbehavior.
@InfraBlue,
Quote:What a bare faced hypocrite, talking about morals to the international community while Israel--
has nuclear weapons in complete defiance of the world community.
@oralloy,
Hi there, Oralboy. Still spewing your smegma far and wide. Swallow, young fella, swallow.
@JTT,
JTT wrote:InfraBlue wrote:What a bare faced hypocrite, talking about morals to the international community while Israel--
has nuclear weapons in complete defiance of the world community.
No defiance. It is legal for Israel to have nuclear weapons.
@oralloy,
Quote:it would only increase their already-bad misbehavior.
Iran didn't overthrow a democratically elected US government and install a brutal dictator. The US did that to Iran.
Iran didn't shoot down a US airliner filled with US citizens. The US shot down an Iranian airliner.
Iran didn't support a neighbor in attacking the US. The US did support Iraq in attacking Iran.
Iran didn't support the use of chemical weapons against the people of the US. The US did that to the Iranian people.
Iran doesn't go around the world attacking innocent countries and their people and stealing their wealth. The US did and does, regularly.
Whose bad misbehavior causes more suffering around the world than that of the US? Absolutely no one. No one comes anywhere close.
Just more semen dripping from your chin, Oralboy, you ole jism swallower.
@JTT,
JTT wrote:Iran didn't overthrow a democratically elected US government and install a brutal dictator. The US did that to Iran.
Nope. Iran did that to Iran.
The US did acquiesce to the coup, but the Shah was actually installed by the very same Iranian clerics who later overthrew him.
And even among "outsiders acquiescing to the coup" the US played only a bit role. Most outside support for the coup came from the UK.
JTT wrote:Iran didn't shoot down a US airliner filled with US citizens. The US shot down an Iranian airliner.
Iran was being aggressive. They had just placed mines in public waterways that had severely damaged a US warship. That led to tensions. The tensions led to an accident. All Iran's fault.
JTT wrote:Iran didn't support a neighbor in attacking the US. The US did support Iraq in attacking Iran.
And rightly so. Iran are the bad guys. It is good to attack them. We should do it more often.
JTT wrote:Iran didn't support the use of chemical weapons against the people of the US. The US did that to the Iranian people.
We did no such thing. Saddam made his own chemical weapons, from precursors sold to him by European companies, and we had nothing to do with it.
JTT wrote:Iran doesn't go around the world attacking innocent countries and their people and stealing their wealth. The US did and does, regularly.
Nonsense.
@oralloy,
Just more semen dripping from your chin, Oralboy, you ole jism swallower.
@oralloy,
Oralboy, stop spreading your lies and US propaganda mixed in with heaping loads of Uncle Sam's jism dripping from your gob.
@JTT,
JTT wrote:stop spreading your lies and US propaganda
You can't show a single factual error in anything I've said.