Hillary Clinton refused yesterday to rule out a pre-emptive Israeli military strike on Iran. It was the first time that a senior member of the Obama Administration had openly discussed such a possibility. The US Secretary Of State, speaking a few days before elections in Iran that will determine the fate of President Ahmadinejad, also warned that the country would face retaliation if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel. As President Obama extends "an open hand", seeking direct talks with Tehran in his attempt to halt its nuclear programme, Mrs Clinton appeared ready to unnerve the Iranian leadership with talk of a pre-emptive strike "the way that we did attack Iraq". She said that she was trying to put herself in the shoes of the Iranian leadership, but added that Tehran "might have some other enemies that would do that [deliver a pre-emptive strike] to them". It was a clear reference to Israel, where Binyamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, has talked about the possibility of military action to halt Iran's nuclear programme -- something he views as a threat to the Jewish state.
Hillary Clinton refused yesterday to rule out a pre-emptive Israeli military strike on Iran. It was the first time that a senior member of the Obama Administration had openly discussed such a possibility.
The US Secretary Of State, speaking a few days before elections in Iran that will determine the fate of President Ahmadinejad, also warned that the country would face retaliation if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel.
As President Obama extends "an open hand", seeking direct talks with Tehran in his attempt to halt its nuclear programme, Mrs Clinton appeared ready to unnerve the Iranian leadership with talk of a pre-emptive strike "the way that we did attack Iraq". She said that she was trying to put herself in the shoes of the Iranian leadership, but added that Tehran "might have some other enemies that would do that [deliver a pre-emptive strike] to them". It was a clear reference to Israel, where Binyamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, has talked about the possibility of military action to halt Iran's nuclear programme -- something he views as a threat to the Jewish state.
I'm disappointed that despite the lack of evidence challenging that view, it becomes Obama's. There is now, and never has been, any reason for Israel to attack Iran except to continue to justify its own internal state of fear and tension. That sense of being in imminent danger that allows it to postpone indefinitely any genuine move towards peace with its neighbours. keep to the Fen Causeway
"...would face retaliation if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel."
"...with talk of a pre-emptive strike 'the way that we did attack Iraq'."
"...has talked about the possibility of military action to halt Iran's nuclear programme..."
Did PreEmptiveRetaliationTM just enter the language? Did PreEmptiveRetailiation for using nuclear weapons that one doesn't have by using nuclear weapons that one doesn't admit to having, just enter without any front page news or editorial wondering how pointing out that the US Secretary of State delivered the message for the alleged client state?
Why isn't that the most embarrassing thing that the US could possibly do, not to mention playing into the hands of Ahmadinejad...as if they want to have him elected? Never underestimate their intelligence, always underestimate their knowledge.
Frank Delaney ~ Ireland
