Posted on 12/05/2006 2:29:40 PM PST by anotherview
Dec. 5, 2006 20:41 | Updated Dec. 5, 2006 23:31
Gates: Iranian attack on Israel possible
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
"If Iran obtains nuclear weapons no one can promise that it would not use them against Israel," Defense Secretary-designate Robert Gates said Tuesday during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing to replace Donald H. Rumsfeld.
Gates was asked by senators about the Iranian nuclear threat and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's threats to wipe Israel off the map.
Gates responded by saying that the threats were very severe. However, he added that Iran had "forces from Ahmadinejad who are interested in nuclear power as a deterrent against nuclear nations around them - Pakistan from the East, Russia from the North, Israel from the West and us in the Persian Gulf."
Gates said that the United States would pay an extremely high price for a military attack on either Iran or Syria.
He suggested that Iran could respond to a US attack by closing off the Persian Gulf to oil exports and to "unleash a significant wave of terror" in the Middle East, Europe and the United States itself.
While Iran has not been helpful in Iraq, the country could do a lot more to hurt US efforts there.
Also, he said, Iran's "ability to get Hizbullah to further destabilize Lebanon I think is very real."
Gates described a military attack against Iran as an "absolute last resort." The first option for the United States to deal with Iran should be diplomacy and working with allies.
"I think that we have seen, in Iraq, that once war is unleashed, it becomes unpredictable," he said.
As for Syria, Gates said a US attack on that country would unleash a wave of anti-Americanism in the Middle East.
It would have "dramatic consequences for us in Middle East," Gates said. "It would give rise to greater anti-Americanism than we have seen to date. It would immediately complicate our relations with every country in the region."
ping
Well duh..........
Turn Iran into glass.
SS
This exchange between Lindsay Graham & Bob Gates today is disturbing, to say the least. Asked by Senator Graham if Iran would use nuclear weapons against Israel, Gates responded, "I don't know that they would do that, Senator." Somewhat astounded, Graham pushed back: Graham: The president of Iran has publicly disavowed the existence of the Holocaust, has publicly stated that he would like to wipe Israel off the map. Do you think he's kidding?
Gates: No, I don't think he's kidding, but I think there are, in fact, higher powers in Iran than he, than the president. And I think that, while they are certainly pressing, in my opinion, for nuclear capability, I think that they would see it in the first instance as a deterrent.
---- This to me says volumes: a) it shows an underestimation of murderous rhetoric from Islamists and b) it indicates his belief that the mullahs who are more religious--one might say the "religious fanatics"--than Achmadinejad can temper Achmadinejad and be a moderating influence.
This is all to discount the severe and sincere ideology of the Islamist radicals such as the Mullahs', such as those who say things to please the Mullahs.
I worry about such underestimations. At the end of the day, in wartime, I want a hawk!
I think the American people are in for a very UGLY surprise.
Where has this guy been? Under a rock?
Geeze, to a lesser extent, we have that problem right here at home.
Pretty much my thoughts exactly... The morphing of the administration into a clone of the first Bush administration is NOT a good thing. Foreign policy driven by public opinion polls, which is what you seem to have after the midterm elections, is a VERY BAD thing.
You've hit the nail on the head. Yes, in wartime you need a hawk.
What a completely spineless little twit we now have for SecDef. Pardon the uyse of an old Navy saying, but everyone better stand by for High Sea's and Heavy Rolls.
More people in the Middle East might hate us if we attack Iran? Aren't we polling 90%+ unfavorability as we speak.
He suggested that Iran could respond to a US attack by closing off the Persian Gulf to oil exports and to "unleash a significant wave of terror" in the Middle East, Europe and the United States itself.
BONE UP SPINELESS!!!
PAY THE PRICE
WAIT ANY LONGER AND THEY GET STRONGER
pay the price, elsewise your grandchildren will call you grand dhimini
Iran has everyone fooled. Israel is their LAST target. Iran fires one nuclear firecracker at Israel, and Israels launches 25 Jerichos back, obliterating Iran. Iran knows this, which is why they would never attack Israel with a nuke UNTIL the entire mid-east is pro-Iran. This is why their #1 goal right now is to turn Iraq into a puppet, and their next goal is to turn SA (And UAE, Kuwait) to the dark side. Israel is their LAST target.
'07 is going to be a great year for mullahs, imams and terrorists.
And that is different from today... exactly how?
Good point. If Iran annihilates Israel, the Arab countries no longer have any use for it.
Green light for Syria and Iran. America's Sec of Defense is scared of what you might do.
Actually you mean, according to his (Gates) own position here is do nothing until they actually use nuclear weapons. That is what is meant by saying "absolute last resort" You see, as long as they haven't used them we still have the opportunit to try and talk them out of it, even if they have been telling you for 5 years that they will NEVER give them up and are acting accordingly.
"Turn Iran into glass."
Agreed. It would be to our benefit to choose the time. It's either now or after they destroy Israel. I prefer now. Get it over with. They aren't suddenly going to become nice guys and change their attitude towards the west. They hate us and want us all dead. Level 'em and suffer the anti-American sentiment later...big deal.
Good personal page you have there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.