|
Anaxagoras -> RE: "No Iranian Nuke" IDF Chief confirms (4/25/2012 11:19:35 AM)
|
Tweak in her obsessive need to bash Israel has yet again uttely misrepresented what was said by Gantz in the article, and whitewashes the rather more complex US position as a lot of pro-Palestinians did when they misrepresented what Panetta said late last year. Gantz stated the risk against Israel from Iran was real but that pressure on Iran was bearing fruit. Essentially he was calling for hope and for calm:
quote:
"If Iran goes nuclear it will have negative dimensions for the world, for the region, for the freedom of action Iran will permit itself," Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz told Haaretz in an Independence Day interview.
That freedom of action might be expressed "against us, via the force Iran will project toward its clients: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Islamic Jihad in Gaza. And there's also the potential for an existential threat. If they have a bomb, we are the only country in the world that someone calls for its destruction and also builds devices with which to bomb us. But despair not. We are a temperate state. The State of Israel is the strongest in the region and will remain so. Decisions can and must be made carefully, out of historic responsibility but without hysteria," Gantz said.
Asked whether 2012 is also decisive for Iran, Gantz shies from the term. "Clearly, the more the Iranians progress the worse the situation is. This is a critical year, but not necessarily 'go, no-go.' The problem doesn't necessarily stop on December 31, 2012. We're in a period when something must happen: Either Iran takes its nuclear program to a civilian footing only or the world, perhaps we too, will have to do something. We're closer to the end of the discussions than the middle."
Gantz says the international pressure on Iran, in the form of diplomatic and economic sanctions, is beginning to bear fruit. "I also expect that someone is building operational tools of some sort, just in case. The military option is the last chronologically but the first in terms of its credibility. If it's not credible it has no meaning. We are preparing for it in a credible manner. That's my job, as a military man."
No one claims Iran has a nuclear bomb already so that’s yet another total strawman. The November 2011 IAEA report that led in part to the current impasse clearly states Iran is very likely developing technology incompatible with peaceful civilian usage as was was widely reported in the media at the time.
The report expressed strong concerns about the military dimension of Iran’s nuclear ambitions in http://iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-65.pdf section G. Part 41. It said there are indications of the development of weapon technology. In part 42 it says the information is credible as it came from many sources over a number of years. Part 43 states there is evidence of the development of indigenous nuclear weapons technology. Part 44 states the technology had specific military dimension.
The conclusion reaffirms the serious concerns, e.g. Part 53 “The Agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the Agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device.” - those that defend the indefensible out of prejudice should stick that in their atomic pipe...
|
|
|
|
