Posted on 12/17/2001 8:13:53 AM PST by Lietmotiv
Iran's Rafsanjani suggests nuclear attack on Israel SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM Monday, December 17, 2001 One of Iran’s most influential ruling clerics called on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only". The speech by former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani failed to catch the attention of the western press but made waves in the Middle East. "If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in its possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran. In Washington Sunday, administration officials said the United States does not plan to target Iran in the war against terrorism. "Iran is a situation where there are clearly some pressures from young people, there are pressures from women in that country," U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said. "Iran had a different history than Iraq. I don't know, if nothing else happened and one looked at those two countries, I would say the likelihood of Iraq reforming itself is zero. The possibility, the remote possibility of Iran reforming itself is considerably above zero." Dr. Assad Homayou, president of the Azadegan Foundation in Washington, D.C. agreed. "To me the issue is not nuclear weapons but the responsibility of the regime," he said. "This regime is not responsible and that is why I have always emphasized that the removal of this regime is imperative. As the U.S. secretary of defense said the situation with Iran is different from that of Iraq. People only need the moral support of the United States." Analysts told the Iranian Press Service that Rafsanjani's speech marks the first time a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic had openly suggested the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State. Rafsanjani advised Western states not to pin their hopes on Israel's violence because it will be "very dangerous". "We are not willing to see security in the world is harmed", he said, warning that a war "of the pious and martyrdom seeking forces against peaks of colonialism will be highly dangerous and might fan flames of World War III." Rafsanjani, who, as the Chairman of the Assembly to Discern the Interests of the State, is the Islamic Republic’s number two man after Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. He was speaking on "International Qods (Jerusalem) Day" which is celebrated in Iran only. The Pentagon, which has pressed for a second stage in the U.S. war against terrorism, does not support any military campaign against Iran. Instead, officials have urged that Washington target the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. On Monday, Iranian President Mohammed Khatami said the stifling of dissent in the country could spark a new wave of student protests, Middle East Newsline reported. Over the last 20 months, officials said, 56 publications have been closed. This includes 24 daily newspapers. U.S. officials acknowledge that Iran is more advanced than Iraq in both missile development and weapons of mass destruction. They said that Iran, with Russian help, has succeeded in advancing its nuclear project and they could arrive at weapons capability as early as 2005. But the officials said the administration has been impressed with Iran's help in the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. The help has included military coordination, security along the Afghan border and intelligence exchange. Some officials expect Iran to also quietly support any U.S. military campaign against Iraq. Iraq is Teheran's rival and neighbor and Saddam used chemical weapons against Iran during their 1980-88 war. One scenario being envisioned by Pentagon sources is increased Iranian help to Shi'ite opposition forces in southern Iraq. The Iranian help could also include coordination for any U.S. ground attack in the oil fields around the southern port of Basra. "I would characterize Iraq as a dictator in a repressive system that is unlikely to be altered from within absent an assassination or something like that," Rumsfeld said.
The point is crystal clear and the same it's always been.
This is not about a home for Muslim Arabs (Jordan); it's entirely about preventing the Jews from having a country.
...or existing at all...
They would be very bright after the Israeli's nuked them into oblivion.
One of these days when you die (remember there is a 100% all of us will die someday), I don't think you will be thanking God for being an atheist.
This man's words show a serious lack of understanding about the true consequences of a nuclear attack on Israel...or anywhere else. The giant is still awake, and would cheerfully destroy "the Muslim states" which were stupid enough to try it.
The point is to destroy Israel as a people. The land doesn't matter. The only reason they make such a stink about it now is that Israel occupies it. They could buy real estate anywhere. It's the Israely people they hate.
Exactly. Further evidence of how the evil hatred of Jews has so warped the thinking of folks like this in the anti-Israel Islamic world.
He certainly learned the West won't budge if the Jews are nuked. It's telling of a conspiracy in the works, and he hedges his bets by accusing ahead of time the West sitting and doing nothing, daring Israel to pre-empt. AFter all, the West has decided to commit suicide and show the belly with whoever opens markets democraticaly.
We should make it clear to these phony holy men that if they go after Israel, they will be added to our list of war targets. Then we should encourage the Israelis to go after them.
The point, as many Israeli's will tell you (and it's true!) that the Arabs are willing to kill themselves just to take out a couple Jews. They would be willing to die en mass in order to eliminate Jews. Their hatred goes beyond all understanding. Western people cannot comprehend the palpable hatred the Arabs have toward Jews. It's beyond our comprehension. But, even if the land of Israel is a nuclear waste zone for 50 years, they'd think it was worthwhile - just to kill Jews and eliminate Israel.
55 years ago, there were hardly ANY Arabs in what is now Israel. It was inhospitable, and virtually a wasteland. The Jews came, and the land blossomed under their stewardship. What makes it so important now, is that the Jews live there, and that is totally unacceptable to Arabs.
By the way, Israel makes up .01% of the total land area of the Middle East starting in Egypt, and ending over in Turkey. It has no oil. It has no REAL religious significance to the Muslims (other than what has been contrived), since it isn't even mentioned in their holy book, except to say to leave it to the Jews. It is not strategically located. Why is it wanted so badly? Because Jews live there and consider it the Holy Land.
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.