A voice of reason in the islamic world? Some sanity? The ambassador to the United States from the United Arab Emirates has made the statement that U.S. and/or Israeli military strikes on Iran would be preferrable to the Iranians attaining nuclear weapons. Thud.
From the report at IPT:
I've said it before, if the U.S. took out the nukes in Iran, there would be so little outcry from the rest of the world it would be over in a matter of days. I would expect a mild stern statement from Russia and China but that would be it. Hell, we'd probably see more outrage from the hippie Left in America.
From the report at IPT:
U.S. or Israeli military action against Iranian nuclear facilities would be preferable to allowing Tehran to get atomic weapons. That hawkish account comes from an unexpected source - Yousef al-Otaiba - the United Arab Emirates' Ambassador to the United States.I don't know much about the U.A.E. and quite frankly, don't know who their "big brother" would be in any aggression from Iran - and after these statements, they might need to reinforce just who that is. But, this ambassador is pretty much saying what a LOT of Sunni countries are thinking in the world. We know for a fact that Saudi Arabia is one of the most fearful of a nuclear Iran.
At the Aspen Ideas Festival Tuesday in Colorado, Jeffrey Goldberg, national correspondent of The Atlantic, asked Otaiba if he wanted the United States to stop the Iranian program by force.
"Absolutely, absolutely," Otaiba replied. "I think we are at risk of an Iranian nuclear program far more than you are at risk. At 7,000 miles away, and with two oceans bordering you, an Iranian nuclear threat does not threaten the continental United States. It may threaten your assets in the region. It will threaten the peace process. It will threaten balance of power. It will threaten everything else, but it will not threaten you."
Otaiba added that "out of every country in the region, the U.A.E. is most vulnerable to Iran. Our military, [which] has existed for the past 40 years, wake up dream, breathe, eat, sleep, the Iranian threat. It's the only conventional military threat our military plans for, trains for, equips for, that's it. There's no other threat. There's no country in the region that is a threat to the U.A.E. It's only Iran. So, yes, it's very much in our interest that Iran does not gain nuclear technology."
I've said it before, if the U.S. took out the nukes in Iran, there would be so little outcry from the rest of the world it would be over in a matter of days. I would expect a mild stern statement from Russia and China but that would be it. Hell, we'd probably see more outrage from the hippie Left in America.
U.A.E. Ambassador: U.S., Israeli Military Strikes Preferable to Iranian Nukes
U.S. or Israeli military action against Iranian nuclear facilities would be preferable to allowing Tehran to get atomic weapons. That hawkish account comes from an unexpected source - Yousef al-Otaiba - the United Arab Emirates' Ambassador to the United States.
At the Aspen Ideas Festival Tuesday in Colorado, Jeffrey Goldberg, national correspondent of The Atlantic, asked Otaiba if he wanted the United States to stop the Iranian program by force.
"Absolutely, absolutely," Otaiba replied. "I think we are at risk of an Iranian nuclear program far more than you are at risk. At 7,000 miles away, and with two oceans bordering you, an Iranian nuclear threat does not threaten the continental United States. It may threaten your assets in the region. It will threaten the peace process. It will threaten balance of power. It will threaten everything else, but it will not threaten you."
Otaiba added that "out of every country in the region, the U.A.E. is most vulnerable to Iran. Our military, [which] has existed for the past 40 years, wake up dream, breathe, eat, sleep, the Iranian threat. It's the only conventional military threat our military plans for, trains for, equips for, that's it. There's no other threat. There's no country in the region that is a threat to the U.A.E. It's only Iran. So, yes, it's very much in our interest that Iran does not gain nuclear technology."
Goldberg asked if that would be the case even if the attack came from Israel.
"A military attack on Iran by whomever would be a disaster," Otaiba answered. "But Iran with a nuclear weapon would be a bigger disaster."
Goldberg observed that the ambassador's position, though stated more publicly than usual, is the standard view of many Arab states.
"It is not only Israel that fears the rise of a nuclear Iran; the Arabs, if anything, fear such a development to a greater degree," he wrote. "The Jews and Arabs have been fighting for one hundred years. The Arabs and the Persians have been going at [it] for a thousand. The idea of a group of Persian Shi'ites having possession of a nuclear bomb scares Arab leaders like nothing else - it certainly scares them more than the reality of the Jewish bomb."
Iranian television reports that the UAE government is walking back Otaiba's statement as "taken out of context."
1 comment:
The Arabs know that Israel has had nuclear weapons for years, and yes they fear an Israeli use of them if the Israelis were ever pushed to it, with good reason. But they also know that Israel would not use them in an offensive capability, time has simply showed them that. But the Arabs fear the Iranians and their Shia Twelver movement. They know that Iran would never stop with Israel, they would be next. They see that the preparations that Iran is going through is not for a weapon or two, but mass production. But I do not give the Sunnis a break on this, because in their mind a nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran would be a win/win for them.
I think that an Israeli attack on Iran's facilities, prior to the Iranian completion is the second best solution to this problem, considering the total hatred of muslims towards the Jews. However, if the Israelis did do it I would not hesitate to support their actions. A Jewish response to Iran would unite the muslims against Israel. While the Arab leaders would be privately pleased that the Iranian project was destroyed they would also use that to further inflame their own people against Israel, and most certainly use it in the Useless Nations.
The Best solution would be military action by the US, solely if need be, or with European help (yeah fat chance). Notice I never mentioned diplomacy as a solution. I don't mention it because with the current Iranian leadership that has no chance of being done, and these sanctions have even less of a chance to work. No, Military action is the only thing that will work, it is not a matter of if, but a matter of when. The only real question is, will we or the Israelis wait until a nuclear option is the only one on the table. I pray that it is done soon conventionally, because if nukes do get used it will be a completely different ball game.
Post a Comment