Prefers strike to armed foe
By Eli Lake
The Washington Times
ASPEN, Colo. | The United Arab Emirates ambassador to the United States said Tuesday that the benefits of bombing Iran's nuclear program outweigh the short-term costs such an attack would impose.
In unusually blunt remarks, Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba publicly endorsed the use of the military option for countering Iran's nuclear program, if sanctions fail to stop the country's quest for nuclear weapons.
"I think it's a cost-benefit analysis," Mr. al-Otaiba said. "I think despite the large amount of trade we do with Iran, which is close to $12 billion … there will be consequences, there will be a backlash and there will be problems with people protesting and rioting and very unhappy that there is an outside force attacking a Muslim country; that is going to happen no matter what."
"If you are asking me, 'Am I willing to live with that versus living with a nuclear Iran?,' my answer is still the same: 'We cannot live with a nuclear Iran.' I am willing to absorb what takes place at the expense of the security of the U.A.E."
Mr. al-Otaiba made his comments in response to a question after a public interview session with the Atlantic magazine at the Aspen Ideas Festival here. They echo those of some Arab diplomats who have said similar things in private to their American counterparts but never this bluntly in public.
The remarks surprised many in the audience.
Rep. Jane Harman of California, a former ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee, toldThe Washington Times after the session that "I have never heard an Arab government official say that before. He was stunningly candid."
John R. Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said the comments reflect the views of many Arab states in the Persian Gulf region that "recognize the threat posed by a nuclear Iran."
"They also know — and worry — that the Obama administration's policies will not stop Iran," he told The Times in a separate interview.
Arab leaders, Mr. Bolton said, regard a pre-emptive strike as "the only alternative."
© Copyright 2010 The Washington Times, LLC.
Note:
Meanwhile, PM Netanyahu is meeting with Obama this week and it appears, at least publicly, that the two leaders have come to an understanding. What each "understands" will be something only time will tell; for most folks realize that no amount of sanctions, which have come too late, will prevent Iran from obtaining their goal of a nuclear weapon; and their second goal is to wipe Israel off the map!
Secondly, the fact that Obama has had his administration contribute millions, if not billions, in technology and military training, to the Palestinians, plus the millions he continues to give Hamas/Gaza, this subject has not been mentioned in the media, so far.
I am sure all American Jews (both liberal and conservative - we're all in the same boat) would like to know exactly how to help Israel, and being told by Bibi that "every thing is A-ok" does not help anyone here in the states know exactly how or what Bibi would have anyone do! For instance, the American Jews and organizations are being accused of silently watching Obama slam Israel while siding with the PA's, so for starters, it would be appropriate at this time for Bibi to speak openly and honestly, in private if necessary, to the leaders of Jewish organization and explain exactly what issues are important to Israel.
Diplomacy goes just so far and with Iran's ambitions becoming a reality, now is not the time for political correctness.
Bee Sting
