Obama: Nuclear Iran 'unacceptable'
Yitzhak Benhorin
Published: 05.09.08, 10:11
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
18 Talkbacks for this article
1. Israel must take out (nuke) Iran on its own
Y ,   Nitzan   (09.05.08)
Now Jewish democrats have to ask themselves: Is Israel included in the "US interests" that Abama will defend by military action against Iran.
EDWINA KEN   (09.05.08)
onslaught that WIPED THE FLOOR WITH HIS ASS !!!!
3. He says one thing to the "base", something else to the USA
Rami   (09.05.08)
You cannot trust anything he says, he is just a very ambitious power-hungry wants-to-be-prez-at-any-cost person.
4. Ambiguous Obama
Raoul ,   Israel   (09.05.08)
Obama's latest remarks (to Fox News) are ambiguous, non-committal, and minimilast.
5. islamic ideology
irish in israel   (09.05.08)
but we must have the ability NOT to distinguise between these terrorist groups, they ARE ALL part and parcel of the same ideology and that is the steadfast belief that there is only one world dominated by islam, period!
6. Panderer
Robert ,   New Jersey, USA   (09.05.08)
Talbackers, you have figured this panderer out so much better than most Americans. Slick, a lawyer - like his template ex pres. Clinton, one has to examine every word out of Obama's mouth with a microscope for qualificational meaning. He says, for instance, a nuclear Iran "would be a game changer." What he leaves unsaid is that 'I won't play that game. Then, most revelatory, saying, "we have to have the ability to distinguish between (terror) groups. … They may not all be part and parcel of the same ideology.” In other words, there are acceptable terror groups as well as unacceptable ones. Israel: WATCH OUT! Slick Obama who - if he became president - could drive a rhetorical 'truck' through that statement. When push comes to shove, trust that Palestinians will be seen as 'acceptable' terrorists. As further evidence that he sees so-called Palestinians as freedom fighters - not terrorists - (Obama) '“absolutely” believes the US is fighting a war on terror against “Al Qaeda, the Taliban...' but omits reference to 'Palestinians.' Watch Obama's EVERY word! Bill Clinton used rhetorical sleight of hand and Obama paid attention.
7. What intrigued me the most after seeing clips of this inter-
JP ,   USA   (09.05.08)
view was all the ......umm's, well umm, ahhh, you see umm.....clear signs of hesitation while searching desperately for an answer that will make it sound as if he has a plan. Look, he said that he's not convinced that we have exhausted diplomacy with Iran. Ok, tell that to the EU, the UN, and the IAEA who after 6 years have been playing Irans game of "Let;s keep talking to make a deal". This let me see very clearly how little Nobama will do to stop muslim terrorists. This dem. vote will NEVER go for a man who is just to damn skeptical to protect me.
8. Which Homeland is he talking about
Todd Sparling ,   Pittsburgh, USA   (09.05.08)
I'm concerned that the homeland b. hussein is willing to protect might not be the USA barry hussein is as dangerous as he is naive and inexperience and prone to making WRONG decisions. we can't allow this youngster in the White House
9. Obama and Iran
DT ,   TA Isr   (09.05.08)
Totally naive and Obama hasn't a clue. Is he not aware that sanctions have continuously failed and negotiations are simply to buy time. If Obama becomes President Iran will have it's nukes and they will be using them
10. Obama has The "To Do" Order Correct
emanon ,   USA   (09.05.08)
Obama knows the correct order of business is "Ready, Aim Fire". McCain, on the other hand, would follow Bush's example of "Fire, Aim" and never get to "Ready". While I admit a military option needs to be considered, it should be a measure of last resort. If nothing else, time should be taken to consider the consequences of a preemptive strike against Iran. I do not think Iran has the capability to strike back against the US on US soil, so Iran will strike back where it can reach: Israel first, Europe second. McCain would have no hesitation pushing the button on Iran knowing full well Israel will take the brunt of the retaliation.
11. Obama is a friend to himself not Israel !
AlbertoGa ,   St. George UT, USA   (09.05.08)
I do not trust a Guy that change position every 24 Hours. Remember his position on Jerusalem The Guy has Antisemitic Church friends a start then he is eager to be one on one with all the Terrorist leaders without preconditions ! Obama is not good for the USA and for sure not good to Jews and Israelis. He must be send to the Senate to learn more about Democracy and how to defend it. We will see in 4 years the guy is performing. No flip flop Guy at the helm of the free World !... NOW. Never Again Alberto Shalom
12. Corruption in the Senate is untolerable, yet he accepts it.
He will do the same ,   with iran---NO BAMA   (09.05.08)
13. Iran will be stopped
Septimus   (09.05.08)
I do not know much about teh reality of Obama pledge, but one thing for sure, Iran has to be stoppe dand itw ill be stopped, by the military way, very soon !
14. News Flash!
Robert ,   New Jersey, USA   (09.05.08)
Bulletin: There have been double the number of deaths on the streets of South Chicago than in all of Iraq this past summer:( South Chicago...isn't that where Barack Hussein was a 'community organizer'? Maybe BHO should consider a troop surge for South Chicago. He did just concede (grudgingly) that it worked in Iraq.
15. Ayatollahs: Ooooh we're so scaaaaared of Obama!!!!
Dr. Dave ,   NYC   (09.05.08)
The night he wins they will dance all the whole day in Tehran.
16. Only America and Israel have the potential capacity and ...
Robert Bernier ,   Tel Aviv   (09.05.08)
Only America and Israel have the potential capacity and will to prevent Iran from attaining nukes. To allow the apocalyptical, jihadist, terrorist Iranian regime the most deadly weapons known to man, is tantamount to inviting an attack which would kill millions. There is no other choice but to deny Iran nuclear weapons. It seems that only America and Israel have the potential capacity and will to prevent Iran from attaining nukes. One of these two great nations must neutralize Iran’s nuclear facilities before it is too late. This, of course, must be done in conjunction with massive funding of Iranian dissident groups and energetic support for Iranian democrats who would like nothing more than to see their oppressive regime toppled. Regime change in Iran would be far superior to a military strike. But, the free world simply cannot take the chance that nukes are acquired before the regime is overthrown. More at :
17. Rogue Nation?
Kalfus ,   U.S.   (09.05.08)
Does anyone see the Irony in this? Wasn't U.S. been called a rogue nation after we got our independance from Britain?
18. Iranian TV promotes Obama for President
Gershon   (09.05.08)
Obama - preferred choice of Ahmadinejad and the mullahs.
Back to article