English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Gates’ words imply the Bush administration will disavow its long-held pledge to stop Iran obtaining nuclear weapons.

The designated defense secretary Robert Gates’ replied to the Senate committee’s at his confirmation hear Tuesday: “If Iran obtains nuclear weapons no one can promise it would not use them against Israel.”

DEBKAfile’s military sources note: This assertion presupposes that Iran will not be stopped from acquiring nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Gates spoke in the plural about nuclear weapons. In all, he addressed three messages to Jerusalem:

1. There are no assurances that we will be able to prevent an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel.

2. Iran’s nuclear arsenal will contain different types of weapons.

3. On the nuclear issue, you are on your own; don’t count on us for a response.

Will the U.S. really just give up on preventing Iran from nuking whoever they decide to?

2006-12-05 18:05:41 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

8 answers

This is hard to believe. With that kind of help, who would be surprised if Israel hit Iran? It won't make any difference who does it, the result will be the same. We would take the blame. Don't know if I like this guy.

2006-12-05 18:17:48 · answer #1 · answered by JudiBug 5 · 0 0

More likely than not Iran will have or does have Nuclear weapons, will the U.S. fail to retailate against Iran if Iran launches a successful or for that matter an unsuccessful nuclear attack on Israel. No, The United States would not fail to retaliate. Nuclear strike if they were successful, probally conventional bombing if they were unsuccessful.

2006-12-05 18:40:09 · answer #2 · answered by Ryan W 2 · 0 0

First, the Bush admin is over. Second, no one wants to see Iran aquire Nukes but as we have only stalled all the current nuke club members from aquiring them it's just a matter of time.
We live in a dangerous world, all of us. There is something to be said about mutually assured destruction, it kept the cold war cold.

2006-12-05 18:27:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Why all pointing figure will merge Iran as new threat to whom? Israel ? USA ?

Israel also have 25,000 nuke head bombs supplied by USA.

USA also make new nuke test to produce mini nuke head bomb that can be easily mobilized in small container.

Why IEAE doesnt counter of this ? Are there hypocracy in here ?

Why all people pushing Saddam Hussien of Iraq to disarm nuke head bomb or WMD since there was a violence of IEAE regulation, but in case of what happened in USA or Israel nowadays, no such same actions were taken ?

Hyprocracy, money, power or errogant in the minds of USA people in their daily routine day but they always teach the other nations not to make nuke bombs.

Who the hell of you people?

2006-12-05 18:29:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The recently disclosed CIA intelligence rewards Iran for battling their gorilla conflict against the yank occupation of Iraq, and cools the point of the chilly conflict between Iran and the U. S.. the comparable intelligence grow to be withheld in 2003 to create conflict hysteria against Iran, with the intention to make a threat a armed forces attack against them and to intimidate Iran by employing making them have self belief we would attack them. Barring such an attack, Bush II can attempt to rigidity Iran into backing off of Iraq. The CIA releases the intelligence that can assist you the plans of Bush II. this isn't any longer an open democratic enterprise. For conflict against Saddam in Iraq it lied with claims of WMD. For the tried attack against Iran (which now's on carry) it lied concerning the state of Iranian weapons progression. Bush i grow to be head of the CIA, and at the same time as he grow to be there crafted a plan for armed forces domination of the area, construction underground bunkers in the barren area of Saudi Arabia that we nevertheless occupy. while he grew to become President, Bush i began out to have interplay his plan by employing goading Saddam to attack Kuwait by employing telling him by using diplomatic “decrease back channels” the U. S. would not merchandise if he might take over Kuwait (an historic province of Iraq). as quickly as Saddam invaded of direction, Bush I unleashed conflict plans that allowed the U. S. to proceed to be in the area with armed forces forces. As a democracy we can't have faith the CIA to furnish us trustworthy innovations. The elite view in government is that public opinion in a democracy must be controlled and manipulated. concern of WMD seems to be their favourite technique. in fact, Iran is springing up WMD. One would desire to question, besides the fact that, how lots of it particularly is a self-pleasurable technique by way of Iran attempting to guard itself against the bullying of the Bush dynasty.

2016-10-14 03:09:59 · answer #5 · answered by cutburth 4 · 0 0

I dont know. I will research it.
I would not be surprised by ANYthing this administration does or fails to do in its last two long years.
votetoimpeach.org

2006-12-05 18:56:44 · answer #6 · answered by soulsearcher 5 · 0 0

No. It sounds like he is threatening Iran.

2006-12-05 18:08:25 · answer #7 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0 0

I hope not. But Dr. Gates' performance today was troubling ... and apologetic.

2006-12-05 18:10:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers