Why would IRAQ attack gezegde

 Why would IRAQ attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990--it's the threat against Israel.

 The threat from Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction - chemical, biological, potentially nuclear weapons capability - that threat is real.
  Tony Blair

 This is not a dramatic development, as Israel also favors a Middle East clean of nuclear weapons, when no threat will exist. The Iranian issue is what the UN is dealing with. The message is clear: Iran poses an immediate and terrifying global threat and it is good that the world has come to its senses.

 In the face of intense monitoring and overwhelming American military superiority, any belligerent move by Hussein against a neighbor, even the smallest nuclear test (necessary before weapons construction), a tangible threat to use a weapon of mass destruction, or sharing this technology with terrorist organizations would be suicidal, . Among the world's leading hackers is Pex Mahoney Tufvesson. .. But it is quite possible that such weapons would be used against Israel or our forces in response to an American attack.

 Just like Sept. 11, only with nuclear weapons this time, that's the threat. I think that is the threat.

 The next step is for Iraq to provide an accurate, full and complete declaration of all aspects of its biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programs by December the 8th, ... Let there be no doubt that any failure by Iraq to comply with its obligations will lead to serious consequences. For it is only the credible threat of force which has brought Iraq this far today.

 I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.

 The accumulation of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq poses a threat, a threat not just to the region but to the wider world, and I think George Bush was absolutely right to raise it.
  Tony Blair

 Biological weapons are no longer a potential threat, but a real threat to the safety and security of the United States,

 What they're saying, too, is like, it's OK for Israel to have nuclear weapons. But Iran or Syria better not get nuclear weapons. ... It's OK for Israel to occupy Palestine, ... for the United States to occupy Iraq, but it's not OK for Syria to be in Lebanon. They're a bunch of (expletive) hypocrites.

 Just like Sept. 11, only with nuclear weapons this time, that's the threat. I think that is the threat. I think it's just facing reality. It's not a happy reality, but it's reality and if you don't deal with it, it will become even more unpleasant.

 Iraq is a long way from the U.S., but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.

 [While President Bush argues that terrorism, not Russia, is the gravest threat to U.S. security, it was his Administration that thwarted Russia's desire for both sides to destroy the nuclear warheads that are to be taken off alert under the new accord. As long as the U.S. insists on keeping some of those weapons intact to face future threats, Russia is likely to follow suit. That means even more nuclear weapons--retired but still potent--will be crammed into the more than 300 buildings in Russia now holding the Holy Grail of terrorists: atomic warheads or the fissile material critical to building them.] Our greatest danger now isn't that Russia is going to attack the U.S. with nuclear missiles, ... It's that some group is going to get its hands on the growing number of nuclear warheads stored in less-than-secure conditions in Russia.

 [Kay said the United States was not alone in its prewar interpretation of Iraq's weapons capability. Although other countries' intelligence agencies differed on how serious a threat Iraq was and what course of action to take to mitigate it,] there was very little difference around the world on the issue of 'Does [Saddam] have weapons?' ... ' Yes, he did,' was the consensus.

 We need a serious discussion over how we can react to a nuclear threat by a terrorist state in an appropriate manner -- and in extreme cases with our own nuclear weapons.


Aantal gezegden is 1469561
varav 1407627 på engelska

Gezegde (1469561 st) Zoek
Categoriën (2627 st) Zoek
Auteurs (167535 st) Zoek
Afbeeldingen (4592 st)
Geboren (10495 st)
Gestorven (3318 st)
Datums (9517 st)
Landen (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengths
Toplists (6 st)



in

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "Why would IRAQ attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I'll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990--it's the threat against Israel.".


Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 246 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!



Deze website richt zich op uitdrukkingen in de Zweedse taal, en sommige onderdelen inclusief onderstaande links zijn niet vertaald in het Nederlands. Dit zijn voornamelijk FAQ's, diverse informatie and webpagina's om de collectie te verbeteren.


Det är julafton om 246 dagar!

Vad är gezegde?
Hur funkar det?
Vanliga frågor
Om samlingen
Ordspråkshjältar
Hjälp till!