Medvedev: An Israeli strike against Iran could include the use of nuclear weapons..., page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times

Topic started on 12-4-2010 @ 03:32 PM by john124

www.debka.com...

Medvedev: An Israeli strike against Iran could include the use of nuclear weapons and nuclear strikes in the Middle East mean global catastrophe • The Russian president in ABC interview warned of a "gigantic human disaster" - and not only for the Middle East • Iranians trying to escape would go to Azerbaijan.

From the scrolling breaking news bar at the top of the website.

Can anyone with ABC news verify this to be what Medvedev said, as it's probably not yet on the website?

edit: another source - www.haaretz.com...

[edit on 12-4-2010 by john124]

reply posted on 12-4-2010 @ 03:37 PM by getreadyalready

I don't know if that is what he said, but that is common knowledge, isn't it?

Yes, the strike "could" include nuclear weapons. And any use of nuclear weapons in the middle east would be a human catastrophe.

Not much breaking news there? Unless he went on to say they had intel that the strike was in the planning or executing stages.

reply posted on 12-4-2010 @ 03:39 PM by john124

reply to post by getreadyalready

Not much breaking news there? Unless he went on to say they had intel that the strike was in the planning or executing stages.

Oh, I hadn't realised that the Russian's had said this already in the past.

I know many on ats already seriously believe Israel could use nukes.

[edit on 12-4-2010 by john124]

reply posted on 12-4-2010 @ 03:40 PM by ZeroKnowledge

reply to post by john124

You should always include "Debka factor". They are opposite twin of Presstv.

STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, I-- I think you-- you bring up an important point at the end there. There are so many signs in Israel-- of invasions. And-- that at some point, perhaps soon, some former ministers have suggested by the end of the year Israel be-- feel forced to take military action. What would that mean?
MEDVEDEV: It would be the worst possible scenario. Because any war means lives lost. Secondly, what does a war in the Middle East mean? Everyone is so close over there that nobody would be unaffected. And if conflict of that kind happens, and a strike is performed, then you can expect anything, including use of nuclear weapons. And nuclear strikes in the middle east, this means a global catastrophe. Many deaths.

abcnews.go.com...
And Medvedev is right - use of nuclear weapons in the area would be awful. Globally awful. This is the reason Israel uses to convince other countries to mutually pressure Iranian nuclear program.
However if Israeli leaders seriously consider using nukes to stop future nukes - i would be the first to protest it. This is insane, and i hope that even those who consider military actions against Iran have brains. Heart will be a nice bonus, too.

reply posted on 12-4-2010 @ 03:43 PM by getreadyalready

reply to post by john124

No offense. It just seems like a very general statement, regardless of the source. I wouldn't expect any world leader to say anything different than that. Israel has confirmed that it has the capability to use nuclear weapons. We all knew that all along any way. Nuclear weapons anywhere in the world would be a catastrophe.

I hope my comment wasn't taken as sarcasm. The statement could have come from any leader in the world in my opinion, and been equally general and inconsequential.

Pages: ^^TOP^^