Strike on Iran nukes 'will be welcomed'

2012-10-31 22:18

Paris - The Arab world will be "relieved" if Israel strikes at Iranian nuclear installations, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in an interview published on Wednesday by France's Paris-Match weekly.

In case of an attack, "five minutes later, contrary to what sceptics think, I believe there will be a great feeling of relief throughout the region", said Netanyahu, who on Wednesday began a key two-day visit to France.

"Iran is not popular in the Arab world, far from it," he said in comments reported in French.

"And some neighbouring regimes and their citizens have well understood that a nuclear-armed Iran is a danger for them, not only for Israel," he said, without mentioning specific nations.

Netanyahu has warned that a nuclear Iran would pose an existential threat to the Jewish state and has repeatedly refused to rule out military action, fuelling speculation that an attack was imminent.

But he then appeared to pull back, pushing the deadline until spring or even summer 2013, ostensibly to allow time for international sanctions to work.

Iran denies Israeli and Western suspicions that its nuclear programme is a front for a drive for a weapons capability.

Netanyahu also said economic sanctions aimed at forcing Tehran to abandon its nuclear arms programme were biting "but have not impacted on the nuclear programme in any way," adding: "How do we know this? Because the regime is organising tourist visits to its centrifuges."

He said he would discuss "concrete ways of stepping up sanctions against Iran", in his first face-to-face talks with President Francois Hollande.

  • Mathys Theart - 2012-11-01 03:49

    Until Israel destroys its own nukes, they have no right to criticize other countries for nuclear activities. Other countries have as much a right to have nuclear deterrents as they do.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-11-01 04:57

      That's immature thinking. You're mistaking the Iranian regime with Iran.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-11-01 04:58

      The Iranian regime adjusts elections to hold onto power. It has stolen the Iranian government from the Iranian people. It funds the Jihadist movement that has killed and maimed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, mainly Muslims in the Middle East, Africa and elsewhere. It is supporting Bashar Assad's brutal oppression of Syrians wanting nothing more than the right to vote. It supports the stoning of women. It openly calls for the elimination of Israel and denies the Holocaust, the single biggest attempt at human genocide in human history: six million people exterminated. It is dishonest, highly repressive, and self-serving at the expense of the Iranian people and humanity. It's days are numbered, and it knows this. That is why it is trying to make a dash for nuclear weapons.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-11-01 05:08

      Left to you, the freer-world would walk single-file to its destruction at the hands of illegitimate, extremist regimes.

      moses.mabhida.52 - 2012-11-01 06:32

      The sarcasm in your name sheds light on your position. Many countries have nuclear activities, whether it is the UK, India, Pakistan or China. However, the game plan changes when a state run by Islamic fundamentalists like the Ayatollahs who have on numerous times in history shown suicidal tendencies (Iran/Iraq war) want nuclear arms; while at the same time continuously calling for a member state of the United Nations to be wiped off the map (youtube Iranian leaders calling for Israel’s destruction and watch.) The question is not weather Israel, Russia or Pakistan have nuclear weapons, as they have every right to have them, the imperative factor in this is Iran's continues endeavours to go to war with Israel indirectly (through Hamas & Hezbollah which they support with money & arms and maybe nuclear arms if the world does not stop them). To have a country like Iran with nuclear capabilities and knowing the way they support their proxy armies in Gaza & Lebanon makes an Iranian nuclear weapon unacceptable to countries like Saudi, Greece, UAE, US, Brazil, Yemen, China, Israel, Spain and the rest of the civilized war. This is why the Israeli prime-minister is correct in stating that the Arab league fears an Iranian nuclear arsenal as much as Israel fears it.

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-11-01 07:54

      Simply put if Iran gets the bomb (and by bomb I mean the capability) , the nuclear arms race in the most unstable region in the world riddled with superstition and conspiracy will be in a mexican stand-off with the untimate weapon and its nasty derivatives. Everyone has a interest in this not happening.

      richard.bosmano - 2012-11-01 08:15

      What nukes? Israel don't have nuclear arms,just a bad rumour. Plus ,NPT prohibits members ,of which iran is a signatory from developing nuclear weapons. The great powers get to decide who has the bomb,not people who take dan brown books seriously

      SarcasticAgnostic - 2012-11-01 08:25

      Listen, I'm not saying give Iran nuclear capabilities. I'm saying that attacking Iranian nuclear installations, while leaving Israel's nuclear arsenal intact, is religious discrimination, plain and simple. @Richard: Are you talking about the treaty Israel refused to sign? What reason did Israel have to not sign that treaty, other than having a nuclear arsenal?

      moses.mabhida.52 - 2012-11-01 08:32

      From Morocco to Afghanistan, from the Caspian Sea to Aden, the 5.25 million square miles of territory belonging to members of the Arab League is home to over 330 million people, whereas Israel covers only eight thousand square miles, and is home to seven million citizens, one-fifth of whom are Arabs. The Jews of the Holy Land are thus surrounded by hostile states 650 times their size in territory and 60 times their population, their last, best hope of ending two millennia of international persecution is to be a nuclear power – and thus I am sure and hope they are.

      dave.kofang - 2012-11-01 09:35

      @Moses Mabhida im so suprised by your statement.I cnt even believe you use da name of a great man.You are outrageously naive.

      moses.mabhida.52 - 2012-11-01 09:58

      Dave, i apologize if you don't like the association you have with my name. my views are just that, mine. I have been to the Middle East numerous times and this is what i believe, I am interested in and constantly research the subject; my obsesstion started when people started applying the apartheid bage to Israel wrongfully but that is another subject altogether. On your facebook wall is a picture of Madiba embracing Fidel. On my wall at home I have a picture of Madiba embracing Clinton. I am of the opinion that we can debate in a civil way - but do not get angry if some don't hold your views, for this is a democracy we live in. My advise to you is to research facts on the ground rather then buying into the bias propaganda your are fed by... well... fidel (not the one in your picture)

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-11-01 10:11

      @Ninja You are starting the clock for the 'Middle East arms race' at a point which suits you, and completely ignore that there's already a nuclear armed nation in the ME, as well as others on its periphery. @Moses It's ridiculous of you to claim that an existing Israeli bomb is entirely benign, whereas a putative Iranian one is going to spark an arms race. The Russians live next door to Iran and they don't seem to be "too worried" by all this nuclear Iran stuff.

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-11-01 10:46

      Big difference is the regime in charge , one is a plural demcrocay which respects human rights and the other is a theocracy whose leader invokes the end times and then proceeds to call for the elimination of one of the organisations member states . Denies the holocaust and the calls for the next and has no respect for human rights andopenly sponsors terror organisations with funds and weapons. If you can't see that difference then there is a disconnect.

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-11-01 11:12

      You may not trust the Iranians, but I trust the Israelis even less. How has democracy stopped democratic countries from from waging wars of aggression, killing and displacing millions of civilians in the processes. It is the wonderful democratic war machine that has brought mayhem to the world over the past decade. The failure of democracy to control unaccountable elites in Western countries as they go on colonial rampages, murdering people, is itself proof that the system is flawed and shouldn't be the basis of establishing probity. It is the "democratic" US that has used nuclear weapons, not China, Russia, and certainly not Iran.

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-11-01 11:59

      Are you a fascist? How many times have 2 democracies gone to war? Once again blaming everyone else accept the perpetrators who are islamic extremists who use terror around the world to take power while vilifying at every turn the people who are victims of and fighting this . Don't come with that colonisation , imperial BS when that happened during the actual imperial times deconstructed by the very insitution you seem to not grasp . I probably don't think you've even looked at the bombing of Japan oor its context, the bombing of Tokyo claimed around the same amount of lives and the use of nuclear power in that war was based on estimates of casualties and likelyhood of surrender . The choice however unpleasant was the right one unless balancing your losses to theirs is a intelligent strategy in war. Lets see Russia at that time was excuting hundreds of thousands of its own people and imprisoning many more in gulags , lets not forget their unwillingness to return states to their people after ww2 and their minor attempt at taking Afganistan in the first place (we'll forget this). China , well the largest recorded deaths known to man sits right there thanks to Mao , cultural dessimation during the revolution as well as the 'forgettable' Tibetians and Taiwanese. Yeah , democracy has flaws but also checks and balances .

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-11-01 13:28

      Fidel, democracy is good, however it is only good if all countries operate as a democracy. You will have to search very hard to find one democratic country going to war with another democratic country. It has not happened, and it will not happen in all likelihood. So, the shift to democracy will make for a world at peace with itself, and bring massive relief and prosperity to those who make the transition. Democratisation of the world is not only inevitable, but highly beneficial to world peace. Until such time, democracies will war against tyrants, from a moral standpoint, and because tyrants create regional and worldwide instability.

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-11-01 13:51

      How long have western countries been democratic? How many democratic or non democratic countries has non democratic China or Russia gone to war with? Conversely how many non democratic countries have gone to war with one another. The system of governance has had no significant bearing of political stability in Europe. Political stability has happened inspite of democracy but because of high levels of social development. By the way both Israel and Iran are theocracies!

      allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-11-01 14:24

      China: Sino - Indian war (India) /Tibet/Taiwan/ Japan/ Sino -Vietnamese (Vietnam)/ Korean War Russia : Korean war /Sino–Soviet conflict (1929)/Soviet–Japanese Border Wars/Soviet war in Afghanistan History is a narrative of non-democratic nations going to war with each other , in fact both those nations primary influence have been military action against democratic movements. Europe , its democratisation , the formation of the UN, EU and Nato has since its inception kept it at peace and stable for more than 60 years now . Show me a supreme leader in Isreal and then we can star talking of Isreali theocracy.

  • derek.bredenkamp.3 - 2012-11-01 06:45

    And the entire world would be relieved if someone would take out Israel's nuclear arsenal.

      moses.mabhida.52 - 2012-11-01 07:30

      The entire world haha nice... seems as though fidel needs to share her prescription for the antipsychotic.

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-11-01 07:32

      Derek, you do not speak for the entire world, notwithstanding what your Ego tels you. Based on your posts here, it seems your Ego rues the roost in your world. This would account for your almost total detachment from true reality.

      dave.kofang - 2012-11-01 09:23

      @Richard why dnt you go stay in israel n stop shouting from far.So that when sh*t start hitting the fan you are in action.Lapdogs like you and Fred disgust me with your blind loyalty wen you know Israel is wrong.

      richard.bosmano - 2012-11-01 10:15

      No sweat Dave.I'm a jew and a pilot. If the brown stuff hits the fan,i will have no issues with taking out muslims by the thousands.Perhaps drop excess munitions on the africanised suburbs in Tel Aviv while we at it,to reduce the crime that has increased since they arrived illegaly

      alfred.karius - 2012-11-01 12:04

      @richard.bosmano And the difference between you and a nazi is?

  • alfred.karius - 2012-11-01 07:32

    "Well, unlike Iran, Israel refuses to allow inspections at all, refuses to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty, has hundreds of nuclear weapons, has advanced delivery systems. Also, it has a long record of violence and repression. It has annexed and settled conquered territories illegally, in violation of Security Council orders, and many acts of aggression—five times against Lebanon alone, no credible pretext. In the New York Times yesterday, you can read that the Golan Heights are disputed territory, the Syrian Golan Heights. There is a U.N. Security Council resolution, 497, which is unanimous, declaring Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights illegal and demanding that it be rescinded. And in fact, it’s disputed only in Israel and in the New York Times, which in fact is reflecting actual U.S. policy, not formal U.S. policy. Iran has a record of aggression. too. In the last several hundred years, it has invaded and conquered a couple of Arab islands. Now that was under the Shah, U.S.-imposed dictator with U.S. support. That’s actually the only case in several hundred years." Noam Chomsky

  • scholesss - 2012-11-01 07:33


  • fidel.mgoqi - 2012-11-01 15:25

    I see that the moderator has been busy with some keyboard bouncer work! Perhaps in future News24 shouldn't bother publishing any articles re Israel/Iran nuclear feud. It's a testament of how Israel and Netayahoo have become pariahs that they now require protection from News24 moderators, from political censure. - 2012-11-01 15:51

      My comment was deleted as well so not sure what point you trying to make. However I will agree with you on the first point - there are more Israeli articles on News24 then the whole of Africa combined... the Aljazeera-fifth-column sponsored, anti-Israel propaganda is laborious. Israel is a democracy and no amount of your bs or propaganda is going to change that – and if you don’t agree with me just ask one of Israel million strong Muslims where they would rather live – a democratic Jewish state or one of their own Islamic heavens from which million of their brethren have escaped to the free shores of Europe. Just last week News24 reported of the sixty thousands Muslim asylum seekers seeking asylum in the only place they feel safe – Israel.

  • duncan.gill1 - 2012-11-01 19:28

    If Israel was such a peace loving nation why did they feel the need to develop a nuclear arsenal????If Israel had embraced its position in the middle East with sense and willingness to work together with its neighbors then the situation might have been different.Its actually to their downfall that they have embraced the West and not their cousins as this is where they live and the realities they have to deal with are difficult for a Jewish nation!I disagree with their approach which is inspired by a US mindset of rule and influence to your advantage,which was spawned by their economic superiority after the end of hostilities after 1945,after all its their infrastructure that was left undamaged, ..the US has failed its mandate to lead the world after the 2nd world war..they have succumbed to bluster and mediocrity in their foreign policies!They are a failed state that has now failed economically and spent wantonly all they had going for them..16 trillion in debt and a deficit of one trillion dollars every financial year will only lead to disaster..thank God for the economies of Germany Russia India Brazil and China who will keep the world thriving!

  • pages:
  • 1