It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Former US ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton said on Monday that Israel may have to take military action to prevent its archfoe Iran from acquiring an atomic bomb.
Bolton also said that further UN sanctions against the Islamic republic will be ineffective in stopping Iran's controversial nuclear programme which Israel and the US believe is aimed at developing a bomb -- a claim denied by Tehran.
"One can say with some assurance that in the next year the use of force by the United States is highly unlikely," Bolton told AFP on the sidelines of the Herzliya conference on the balance of Israel's national security.
"That increases the pressure on Israel in that period of time... if it feels Iran is on the verge of acquiring that capability, it brings the decision point home to use force," he said.
The hawkish former diplomat said that after a US intelligence report published late last year that claimed Iran had suspended a nuclear weapons programme in 2003, the US was unlikely to take military action against it.
"The pressure is on Israel now after the National Intelligence Estimate because, I think, the likelihood of American use of force has been dramatically reduced," he said.
Bolton said that military action against Iran should be taken before Tehran acquires a bomb.
"The calculus in the region changes dramatically once Iran has nuclear capability, meaning the preemptive use of force or the overthrow of the Iranian regime has to come before they get the weapon," Bolton said.
"If you are worried about an Iran with nuclear weapons and an extreme theological regime in power, the time to take the plan of action is before Iran acquires the weapons.
"Once it acquires the weapons there is a risk of retaliation with nuclear capability and that's why Israel is in danger -- it is a very small country and two or three nuclear weapons (and) there is no more country. The pressure to act is intensive and the window of time available is narrow."
Originally posted by biggie smalls
We must attack Iran before it gets bomb - telegraph
Originally posted by Bunch
...from the Israel point of view is a matter of survival and for Iran is a matter of pride.
I don't think any more countries need nuclear weapons. What I do think is that those countries that have them should give them up.
Iran, Israel are just fighting over who is going to rule the ME, from the Israel point of view is a matter of survival and for Iran is a matter of pride.
Originally posted by Sky watcher
I just heard that the son of the Shaw of Iran is working with some Republican guard members to make a march on Tehran with massive amounts of non radical Islamic Iranians to force the radical government out of power. I hope for everyones sake this is true.
Originally posted by runetang
It would be a scene like the siege of what I believe was Bastogne(sp?) in WW2, as the Allied forces were trying to retreat off of the mainland into boats to take them to England as the Nazi Germans were coming in.