Skip to main content

Iranian response to Israel's "red line": Fair comment

Yes, the Iranian President - and man with a high profile but not the real power in the country - has made some inflammatory and plain stupid statements, but he hasn't said his country will attack Israel.   He has said his country will duly respond to any attack from by Israel.   Not unfair on any view.  

Given the Israeli PM's "red line" speech at the UN last week, CommonDreams has a piece "Iran says to Nuclear Israel: Don't Talk to Us about "Red Lines""addressing the Iranian response to the Netanyahu speech.

"A high level official in Iran fired back this weekend following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at the United Nations on Thursday where he took out a red magic marker to draw on a chart depicting an alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program.

The so-called "red line" is the point at which Israel says Iran will have reached breakout nuclear weapons capacity and the perceived point at which Israel—with or potentially without US support—would take military action against Iran.

Iran’s Defense Minister Brigadier General Ahmad Vahidi said on Saturday that Israel long ago crossed the "red line" and remains the only country in the Middle East with a nuclear weapons arsenal.

“If having nuclear bomb is crossing the red line, [Israel], which has dozens of nuclear warheads and various kinds of weapons of mass destruction, has crossed the red line years ago and should be dealt with,” Vahidi said on Saturday.

Which is more dangerous, he asked, “An occupier and aggressive regime... which possesses nuclear weapons and threatens to launch military attack... or Iran which has no nuclear weapons, and stresses the necessity of nuclear disarmament?"

"If American and other Western authorities truly seek to avert threats against the region and the world," Vahidi continued, "they must mount pressure on the dangerous regime of Israel through cutting ties with the regime and imposing sanctions on it until all its weapons of mass destruction are destroyed.”

According to the non-partisan Arms Control Center in Washington, the Israeli's possess between 75 and 200 nuclear warheads."




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more