Posted on April 13, 2011 by rehmat1|
Last week, Lolita C. Baldor reported in Associated Press, under heading US may consider sending troops into Libya had quoted AFRICOM’s new leader General Carter Ham saying: “It was important for the U.S. to turn control over to NATO because many of the troops involved in the Libya strikes are preparing to go to Iran or Afghanistan or have just recently returned from the warfront“.
Last week, Lolita C. Baldor reported in Associated Press, under heading US may consider sending troops into Libya had quoted AFRICOM’s new leader General Carter Ham saying: “It was important for the U.S. to turn control over to NATO because many of the troops involved in the Libya strikes are preparing to go to Iran or Afghanistan or have just recently returned from the warfront“.
I don’t know, whether it’s a typo error or finally Barack Obama has lost his will to resist Israeli command for US troops to die in Iran on its behalf.
On January 28, 2011 – A diverse panel from the United States, Europe and the Middle East, gathered at World Economic Foreign in Davos (Switzerland). They agreed that a military strike on Iran could well spark a devastating counterattack. CFR president, Dr. Richard Haass (a Zionist Jew), who represented Obama administration – got irked by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan’s claim that the program might be civilian, as Tehran says. “There is no time for this because of the speed of Iran’s nuclear program”.
At the debate, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Turki al-Faisal urged the United States to instead pressure Israel to quit its own reported nukes as a way of coaxing Iran to drop its suspected weapons program as well.
In September 2010 – Barack Obama said that Iran having a nuclear weapon would be a “real problem” but he did not think military action by Israel or the United States was the “ideal way” to solve the crisis.
Even some top Israeli intelligence officials and others responsible for policy toward Iran have long argued, in fact, that the kind of apocalyptic rhetoric that Netanyahu has embraced in recent years is self-defeating.
River to SeaOn January 28, 2011 – A diverse panel from the United States, Europe and the Middle East, gathered at World Economic Foreign in Davos (Switzerland). They agreed that a military strike on Iran could well spark a devastating counterattack. CFR president, Dr. Richard Haass (a Zionist Jew), who represented Obama administration – got irked by Turkish Deputy Prime Minister Ali Babacan’s claim that the program might be civilian, as Tehran says. “There is no time for this because of the speed of Iran’s nuclear program”.
At the debate, Saudi Arabia’s Prince Turki al-Faisal urged the United States to instead pressure Israel to quit its own reported nukes as a way of coaxing Iran to drop its suspected weapons program as well.
In September 2010 – Barack Obama said that Iran having a nuclear weapon would be a “real problem” but he did not think military action by Israel or the United States was the “ideal way” to solve the crisis.
Even some top Israeli intelligence officials and others responsible for policy toward Iran have long argued, in fact, that the kind of apocalyptic rhetoric that Netanyahu has embraced in recent years is self-defeating.
Uprooted Palestinian
No comments:
Post a Comment