world

Iran's top leader warns U.S., Israel against strike

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

27 Comments
Login to comment

"should get ready to receive a strong slap and an iron fist” by the Iranian armed forces"

Would that be a strong spanking like the Iraqi army laid on the coalition forces?

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

is it possible to create nuclear energy in a way that is not the same as producing it for use in weapons? i'm no scientist but it seems that the methods are one and the same, therefore making them almost indistinguishable. Are we now suppposed to follow what the US and Israel lead us to believe in the media, as the US and UK did when they claimed Iraq was producing weapons of mass destruction? Look at what they did to Iraq? They left it in ruins and to this day, after almost ten years, it is still picking up the pieces.

I for one would not want my name on even a single bullet in this conflict between nations whose mandate involves destroying each other, nor will I trust what the US and Israeli governments say to be true. Americans will cry freedom, and say the reason why anyone in the free world can speak their mind is because of these wars they wage. I ask any american, are you afraid of Iran? Do you think they're going to come bomb you with their supposed nuclear weapons? do you even know where iran is on a map? okay, that's a low blow, but what i'm getting at is what will this accomplish for americans in america? not a whole hell of a lot. How will your daily lives change? Same answer. what I am certain will happen is that many of your brothers and sisters will again perish. that I am certain of and no one is able to refute.

Your government has thrown your economy, and those of several countries into turmoil, and your present leader's approval rating is at its lowest. look at just exactly what they are trying to do here. they want to emphasize to no end that there is a threat from iran through media reports, drum up a feeling of intense patriotism to the point where you yourself will feel like going to fight on the front line, and then go to war once again. This governmet, like any, needs the support of people, and what better way for them to do that than to present a threat and go after it.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Mike, Iran and Iraq..two completely different animals. Iraq (91) required round the clock bombing sorties for about a month by the air forces of many different countries, before ground forces were sent in. And then, you were talking about a small country ruled by a dictator, with little loyalty to him.

Iran, a massive, mountainous country, the size of Alaska, with an indigenous arms industry, a huge, young and very patriotic population, as well as the capacity to permanently block the shipment of a third of the world's ocean transported petroleum, at the drop of the hat.

The US is tied down with two wars, and depleted reserves of money, arms you name it, and no ally except Israel willing to join a fight against Iran.

Do the math.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

sharpie: is it possible to create nuclear energy in a way that is not the same as producing it for use in weapons? i'm no scientist but it seems that the methods are one and the same, therefore making them almost indistinguishable.

It's possible with outside help, for example having the materials enriched by another country and then having it shipped into Iran. I believe Russia was the one who offered to do that in past negotiations. That way Iran would get all the benefits of nuclear power but wouldn't have the option to build nuclear weapons. Naturally they passed, even with incentives attached to make the deal sweeter for them.

sharpie: I for one would not want my name on even a single bullet in this conflict between nations whose mandate involves destroying each other, nor will I trust what the US and Israeli governments

Then don't trust those governments. Trust the 200 or so other governments who are concerned about Iran. But I suppose you don't have ready-made speeches about them so you'd be forced to actually talk about Iran, at which point your contributions would fall to zero.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Iran under present authoritarian theocracy state sponsored terrorism has stirred troubles in the whole region. Hitler was a one man show with serious ambition and agenda. Does Iran supreme leader (?) travel on the same path, hope not? Just ask the Sunni states around Iran, one would have better understanding. Besides, action is louder than word. Be careful what you wishing for, since there is smoke; there will be fire soon or later. May good Iranians find strength to better Iranian nation and that is the solution; otherwise .... it is just a matter of time.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Sharpie, it is in principle possible to use non-weapons grade material in a Thorium-based reactor. However, that technology hasn't been developed to commercial level and (almost) all those nuclear bigwigs stuck to the Uranium base because they wanted nukes. It would be difficult at best to get a Thorium system working.

The problem with Uranium based nuclear plants that you either need enriched Uranium (3.5% U235), which is not yet enough for a bomb, or you need heavy water (with deuterium). In the latter case natural Uranium is okay. But heavy water can be used in manufacturing nuclear weapons as well. A safe way would be to supply Iran with enriched Uranium with them refraining from enriching it themselves.

Well, try to sell that to a nation. You are not allowed to produce your own energy. You must export your uranium, get it enriched somewhere else and have to buy it back. Sounds extremely humiliating. Despite that, I believe that Iran wants the nuclear bomb. I don't like it, but as long as there are other rogue states (which have not signed the anti-proliferation treaty and in fact have proliferated nuclear arms in the past) in possession of nukes, it is very difficult to forbid Iran their research. Even though their leader is a hateful and crazy man.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Johannes Weber: I don't like it, but as long as there are other rogue states (which have not signed the anti-proliferation treaty and in fact have proliferated nuclear arms in the past) in possession of nukes, it is very difficult to forbid Iran their research. Even though their leader is a hateful and crazy man.

Seems that the better choice would be to not make the same mistakes with Iran that the world has made with other countries. North Korea sank a South Korean warship and got away with it because of their nukes. Let's hope Iran doesn't go down the same path.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

SuperLib, sorry if I struck a chord with my words about Israeli, but mostly American tactics of propaganda which were in fact not prepared, but thought up during my morning coffee.

If there are 200 countries lining up to take their shot at Iran, do you really think Iran would be stupid enough to make the first move? They know what the consequences will be if they ever do use that kind of weapon they supposedly possess, which israel in reality possesses but still denies (hmm, can never seem to get my head around that one). It's their one card, their only card to play. So they play it, see what reaction it gets, then back off again, as they have in the past. there is NO imminent threat of attack by Iran on anyone. The only cries and calls for war come from who else? Sorry, I forgot, you're sick of hearing it. Well, I am too.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Again this bombastic rhetoric. This is where both Ghadafi and Saddam went wrong.

The world wants to see a mature and responsible Iran that can tell the truth (whichever way it chooses to go), and can be trusted to do the right thing when everyone else is busy trying to keep the peace..

And what have we had so far?

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Scap65, great comments, but I think you forgot one other HUGE difference between Iraq and Iran, IRAN supplies JAPAN, us here on these islands with good and CHEAP oil for many, many years, Killing off the regime there in Teheran is one easy thing, but say the Iranians turn around and blow up their own OIL FIELDS?? How long would it take for Japan, and other US allies to be brought down on their ECONOMIC KNEES for lack of oil??

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sharpie: SuperLib, sorry if I struck a chord with my words about Israeli, but mostly American tactics of propaganda which were in fact not prepared, but thought up during my morning coffee.

What I take exception to is people framing this as if it's the US and Israel going up against Iran. It's not. It's pretty much every country on earth with the exception of a few including North Korea and Syria. That's to say that the same countries who did not support the US on Iraq are completely in line with the US on Iran. That should tell you something. Like I said, if you don't want to believe the US then don't. Believe everyone else, especially the ones who obviously agreed with you about faulty US intelligence on Iraq.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

And more...

sharpie: there is NO imminent threat of attack by Iran on anyone.

Iran attacks on a near daily basis. They don't send warplanes to bomb targets, instead they choose to work through proxies. Where do you think Hamas and the militants get their missiles from? Do you think they are manufacturing them themselves? No, they come from Iran. Attacks that target and kill innocents in Iraq, they are financed and supplied by Iran. The same goes with Hezbollah but to a lesser extent since Syria plays a larger role. You're right in that Iran hasn't launched 10,000 missiles into Israel over the past decade, they just give them to Hamas so they can do it for them. And if Iran gets the nukes it's pretty much guaranteed that more missiles will be flying. More powerful ones as well. Again your hyper-focus on the US and Israel completely ignores the other Arab leaders who would love nothing more then to stop Iran from going nuclear. This isn't some "US propaganda machine" tricking Arabs into hating Iran. They have plenty of reasons with or without the US.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

SuperLib:

Hamas receives the majority of its weaponry via Egypt as far as I know. The Hisbollah is armed more or less directly by Iran as far as I know. However, controls of the (para-)military potential of the Hamas can only work in a democratic Gaza. Even if Israel locks down all official borders - the Hamas would prefer weapons to food even if they were starving.

A nuclear device is not that easy to pass on. Iran could distribute material for dirty bombs, but it's not very hard to get at. Go to Japan an steal a bit of incinerator ash from Kanto. Sneak into the exclusion zone and there is plenty of material for dirty bombs.Or go near Chernobyl. Or to any place where radioactive waste is stored under poor safety conditions...

1 ( +1 / -0 )

israel = biggest terrorists in in the middleeast

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Hamas receives the majority of its weaponry via Egypt as far as I know.

Yes, they receive them from Iran via Egypt. However, they are supported very heavily by Iran and Iran has admitted this on several occasions.

Even if Israel locks down all official borders - the Hamas would prefer weapons to food even if they were starving.

In fact, Hamas prefered weapons and fighting to food and peace even if Gazans were starving even when Israel did not lock down all the borders.

BTW, you opine that Iran's leader is crazy, yet you seem rather unconcerned about a country with a crazy and hateful leader having access to nuclear technology that can indeed be used to make weaponry. Care to explain this line of thinking? Because I fail to see the logic.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Johannes....

I don't think an Iranian nuke would be for export. I think they would give Hamas more powerful conventional weapons and use the nuke as a shield from an Israeli strike. Iran is operating with the thought right now that anything too big would prompt an Israeli response. Without that safeguard Iran would be free to step up conventional attacks through their proxies. I thought Hamas' financing and most of their more sophisticated weapons come from Iran, not Egypt. Egypt has absolutely no love for Hamas and absolutely no reason to want to see open warfare break out on it's border, no matter how much they hate Israel. They're also dealing with Iran meddling in their internal affairs which they detest. Expect that to increase as well if Iran goes nuclear.

I hope I'm wrong. I don't think a military strike would work on Iran anyway so I'm not advocating that. Time will tell. One of the big game changers will be Russia who will not want to live with a nuclear armed Iran as a close neighbor. Their stance on Iran will change overnight.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I thought Hamas' financing and most of their more sophisticated weapons come from Iran, not Egypt.

You are correct.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

“Anybody who takes up the idea of an attack on Iran, should get ready to receive a strong slap and an iron fist” by the Iranian armed forces, said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

They are going to strike with the 70s aircraft they bought from the US? Bring it on.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

SuperLib and Ben_Jackinoff:

As far as I know, You are both right about the main supplier of Hamas weapons. However, it must pass through Egypt. And Egypt would be extremely pissed if anyone smuggled weapons grade fissile material or even nukes through their country. As everyone would... And just start to think about how much Israel would be indebted to Egypt if they really stopped smuggling of nuclear weaponry towards Gaza. Egypt cannot afford to miss such a boon in their diplomatic relation to the western world.

Furthermore, nukes are not simple devices. I am nuclear physicist, so I know about some of the technical problems with nukes. It is definitely not possible to handle nuclear weapons like the Hamas usually does with their Kassam missiles. The problem with the Hamas would be resolved by itself rather quickly in that case...

And yes, I believe that Ahmadinedschad is crazy. And power-hungry. Though he is not the only one in power in Iran. Others like Khamenei have incredible amounts of power that they would lose if Iran were assaulted or if the people revolted. Thus, their goal is to maintain the status quo. Using nukes against other countries upsets the status quo and would basically force the opposition (Israel, USA, England?) to remove Iran from the map with nukes (in the worst case).

Furthermore, we had plenty of political leaders in the past, which were crazy to some extent - Stalin and a few others for the Soviet Union, Mao Zedong for the People's Republic, some crazy apartheid leaders in South Africa (which had obtained their nukes illegally from Israel before they gave them up on their own volition) and of course Kim Jong Il in North Korea and Musharraf in the recent past in Pakistan.

In my opinion some Israeli or American leaders cannot be considered completely sane (like Nixon, Reagan and GW Bush), but were quite frightening for the rest of the world. And still nothing happened because a leaders main goal was always and will always be to maintain and increase their personal power in their own countries. Being nuked from the map is counterproductive.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Iran has boxed themselves into a corner. I sure hope they learn the lesson of Iraq 2003. Not that the US can invade but rather that if you bluff too much you will not be believed when you do tell the truth. The last thing that the US or Iran want right now is a war. Iran is just maybe crazy enough to accidentally start one. Of course when you throw Israel into the mix things get even crazier. If I were Obama I would be telling Netanyahu that the US will not have its back if they attack. I would be getting all of the US’s allies on board to walk away from Iran and Israel if they tangle. The US need not go to war for Israel in this matter. This all highlights why we do not need conservative Republicans with their messianic views of Israel back in the Whitehouse. One thing is for sure if Israel attacks you can count on Iran striking the US fleet in the Persian Gulf and oil would be harder to get out of the Straits of Hormuz. Persian has been itching to get a lick in on the west for over 3000 years. May we all be fortunate enough not to witness it.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

I am surprised that no one here mentions the obvious, IRAN supplies most of the cheap oil to us here in Japan and not only to Japan a US alley but to other very important and strategic US economic and political allies, so the idea of attacking Teheran and that Saudi Arabia etc..will make up for that oil production overnight when CHINA and INDIA are starting to fall in love with gasoline and cars, well not a very good picture, simple economics 101.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib, i have no idea where ur coming from as u expect me to have a discussion about iran, without including the US and Israel?!? they are the two countries spearheading the whole thing. u keep referring to 200 countries, but in reality if this attack ever comes to fruition, this attack on Iran will be lead, carried out and poorly executed (as evidenced in the mess left by them in Iran and Afghanistan) by the US, not by a 200 country coalition, equalling to more war debt, even worse social conditions and dead, young Americans. Is it really worth it to attack? I guess that's really the question. How will this make life for regular people in America better?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The west has being dealing with the North Koreans exactly in the same manner---incessant threatenings, both have gone nowhere. An oriental saying that goes: "A dog that does bite seldom barks". Sign of decline and fall of western civilization?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@ sharpie----" How will this make life for regular people in America better?----

It will allow regular people in America drive their cars to work or to the mall, and to have lights at night. What Iran wants is not Israel, it wants oil, all of it, so it can impose an oil embargo against the West. In that sense, moderate ME nations are its foes. As to " even worse social conditions and dead, young Americans" ---, you can rest assured that US will not touch Iran before its laser weapon from the space is ready (that's unmanned). You think China and Russia will come to its rescue? I don't think so. They need oil too.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Mullahs are getting nervous. However, they don´t need to worry. Israel is not able to stop the Iranian bomb program, and the Obama administration is not willing to.

So, get used to the idea of Ahmedinejad armed with Allah´s bomb.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Johannes Weber,

OK, now you know Iran supplies Hamas, not Egypt. Let's continue. Weapons have been passing (smuggled) through Egypt for a very long time and Egypt was pissed about it. It did not completely stop the weapons flow at all from Iran. You just got through saying you knew weapons passed through, so you know it would be possible for more dangerous ones to get through as well, were they to be available. The possibility of more dangerous weapons in the hands of Iran or Hamas is not something to be ignored

However, I do not believe the real danger of Iran having weapons is them giving nuclear tech to Hamas. It is that it will make it easier for Iran to even more actively get involved in the conflict. Look how North Korea shoots missles at will toward Japan and Japan is basically helpless to do much about it. A nuclear weaponed Iran would pose the same problems. Also, you suggest Hamas would be unable to use the nuclear tech correctly. As you probably don't know, Hamas leaders and members are frequently trained by Iran, so all it would mean is expanding the curriculum to include the handling and care of dirty bomb material. However, as I wrote above, I don't think Iran will do this. They will just keep the dangerous of a possible nuclear response handy to allow them to play their hands more easily in the conflict.

Now, as to Ahmedinijad, he is not actually in control of foreign affairs. Those responsibilities go to Khamenei and the Supreme Council. Ahmedinijad acts with the approval of Khamenei and the Supreme Council, if it did not, he would not be president. Ahmedinijad is just a front man in this case. The real leaders approve of what he says and does in these regards.

Pointing out there have been other "crazy" leaders, does not change the fact that having an Iran with nuclear weapons tech would not be a good thing for the world. I thought the idea was to have less not more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib, i have no idea where ur coming from as u expect me to have a discussion about iran, without including the US and Israel?!?

Allow me to briefly respond. It seems that you were keeping your focus solely for the most part on those two countries and ignoring the facts that lots and lots of countries fear the idea of a nuclear weaponed Iran.

Personally, while there could possibly be attempts to take out their potential to make nuclear weapons, I do not think there will be any invading of Iran. Nobody has the stomach for it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites