BY RUTHIE BLUM
In a Fox News interview with Mark Levin in March 2018, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defined the three greatest threats to his country as “Iran, Iran and Iran.”
This was by no means the first time that Netanyahu had pointed to the perils posed by Tehran’s race to acquire nuclear weapons, nor would it be his last.
This was by no means the first time that Netanyahu had pointed to the perils posed by Tehran’s race to acquire nuclear weapons, nor would it be his last.
Yes, the very enemies who think nothing of comparing Netanyahu and his ally in the White House to Hitler have been downplaying the concrete danger that has been emanating from the Islamic Republic since its establishment 40 years ago – a menace that has escalated to alarming levels. Thanks to the “appeasement deal of the century,” otherwise known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA, pushed forth by a coalition of ostriches, led by former US president Barack Obama and his criminally negligent, if not outright criminal, administration.
Netanyahu’s repeated appeals to the so-called “international community” not to enter into a nuclear agreement favorable to Iran initially fell on deaf ears. But it did not deter him from his two-pronged approach: gathering and exposing intelligence about Tehran’s spinning centrifuges on one hand while launching limited military strikes against Iranian and proxy Hezbollah targets in Syria on the other.
Due to Israel’s policy of “strategic ambiguity,” which in the age of the Internet is widely considered to be obsolete, Netanyahu and members of his government occasionally allude to IDF cross-border operations without being specific.
Due to Israel’s policy of “strategic ambiguity,” which in the age of the Internet is widely considered to be obsolete, Netanyahu and members of his government occasionally allude to IDF cross-border operations without being specific.
Take Wednesday morning’s missile attack on Tel Al-Hara, a military base in southern Syria believed to contain Iranian militias. Everyone assumes that Israel was behind it, and with good reason.
Nevertheless, Israeli Regional Cooperation Minister Tzachi Hanegbi was raked over the coals this week for “explosive comments” he made on Sunday during an interview with KAN News Radio. When asked by host Aryeh Golan whether he was concerned that Washington’s mild response to Iranian aggression against a British tanker in the Persian Gulf bode ill for US support in the event that “our little Israel” were to encounter a similar problem, Hanegbi replied that he was not worried.
Nevertheless, Israeli Regional Cooperation Minister Tzachi Hanegbi was raked over the coals this week for “explosive comments” he made on Sunday during an interview with KAN News Radio. When asked by host Aryeh Golan whether he was concerned that Washington’s mild response to Iranian aggression against a British tanker in the Persian Gulf bode ill for US support in the event that “our little Israel” were to encounter a similar problem, Hanegbi replied that he was not worried.
Hanegbi’s radio and Twitter remarks were simply a nutshell summation of Israeli policy vis-à-vis Iran. Furthermore, they followed two statements made by Netanyahu earlier in the month – one aimed at Tehran and the other at Brussels – voicing a similar sentiment.
On July 9, while visiting the Nevatim Air Force base and standing next to an Adir F-35 jet, he said, “Iran has threatened recently to destroy Israel. It is worthwhile for them to remember that these planes can reach everywhere in the Middle East, including Iran and Syria.”
Less than a week later, on July 15, Netanyahu reacted harshly to the European Union’s insistence that Iranian violations of the JCPOA were not severe enough to warrant a reimposition of sanctions.
At a surprise gathering in honor of his lengthy leadership record thrown for him on Monday by his family and members of Likud, Netanyahu took an apt jab at his defamers in general and the Blue and White chiefs in particular.
“If not for the actions we’ve taken, Iran would have had a nuclear arsenal a long time ago, and its coffers with which to take over the Middle East would have been even fuller. We’ve blocked it up until now but it hasn’t been permanently blocked. No one knows what will happen... the Iranians are banking on it being only a little while more until they’re free of [us].... The Iranians are just waiting, they’re waiting for our opponents. Who will stop [them]? Benny Gantz? Yair Lapid? [Those] who said we mustn’t walk away from the [nuclear] deal? That it was alright?”
“If not for the actions we’ve taken, Iran would have had a nuclear arsenal a long time ago, and its coffers with which to take over the Middle East would have been even fuller. We’ve blocked it up until now but it hasn’t been permanently blocked. No one knows what will happen... the Iranians are banking on it being only a little while more until they’re free of [us].... The Iranians are just waiting, they’re waiting for our opponents. Who will stop [them]? Benny Gantz? Yair Lapid? [Those] who said we mustn’t walk away from the [nuclear] deal? That it was alright?”
No comments:
Post a Comment