Obama: President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat

Bookmark and Share

Propaganda Alert

compiled by Cem Ertür
Featured Writer
Dandelion Salad
18 September 2009

1) Obama: President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat (17 September 2009)
2) Change of focus reflects changed thinking on threat from Iran (18 September 2009)
3) Pentagon offers Patriot missiles to Turkey (9 September 2009)
4) Obama: Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat to its neighbors (5 April 2009)

from the archives:

1) US Ambassador to NATO: Turkey is under the threat of Iran’s short and medium range missiles (March 2007)
2) Rumsfeld: Turkey is very interested in building a missile defense system to protect itself from Iraq (June 2001)
3) US State Department: Longer range Iranian ballistic missile could hit Central Europe (July 1998)



excerpt from: Remarks by the President on strengthening missile defense in Europe

The White House website, 17 September 2009

“As Commander-in-Chief, I’m committed to doing everything in my power to advance our national security. And that includes strengthening our defenses against any and all threats to our people, our troops, and our friends and allies around the world.

One of those threats is the danger posed by ballistic missiles. As I said during the campaign, President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat.

And that’s why I’m committed to deploying strong missile defense systems which are adaptable to the threats of the 21st century. […] [O]ur new missile defense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and America’s allies.”

[US President Barack Obama’s speech, 17 September 2009]


excerpts from: Change of focus reflects changed thinking on threat from Iran

by Catherine Philp, The Times, 18 September 2009

Two years ago the US State Department warned that Iran could have a missile capable of reaching American shores by 2015. It now seems that the threat was overplayed.

Instead, Tehran’s priorities have been to develop its medium and short-range arsenal […] [with a] capability to hit Istanbul, Riyadh and Tel Aviv but not the targets in Western Europe and the US that the Bush-era missile shield was designed to protect against.

The previous system did not deal with the more immediate threat that Iran poses to its neighbours and left Europe’s southern flank, including Turkey, a Nato member, unprotected.



excerpt from: Turkey – PATRIOT Advanced Capability-3 Guided Missiles

US Defense Security Cooperation Agency, 9 September 2009

Today the [US] Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) notified Congress of a possible Foreign Military Sale to the Government of Turkey of 13 PATRIOT Fire Units, 72 PATRIOT Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles, four PAC-3 Lot Validation Missiles, 197 MIM-104E PATRIOT Guidance Enhanced Missiles-T (GEM-T), four MIM-104E GEM-T Lot Validation Missiles, five PATRIOT Digital Missiles, five Anti-Tactical Missiles and other related support and equipment. The estimated cost is $7.8 billion.



excerpt from: Remarks by President Barack Obama in Prague as Delivered

The White House website, 5 April 2009

“So let me be clear: Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile activity poses a real threat, not just to the United States, but to Iran’s neighbors and our allies.”

[US President Barack Obama’s speech in Prague, 5 April 2009]


from the archives:


excerpt from: ‘Turkey is under the threat of Iran’s short and medium range missiles’ claims US Ambassador to NATO

by Utku Cakirozer, Milliyet, 6 March 2007

If a long-range missile were to be launched from Iran, then areas in Turkey threatened by this missile will be under protection. As for the short- and medium-range missiles, cooperation with vulnerable countries like Turkey will be undertaken either bilaterally or within the NATO framework.


excerpt from: Rumsfeld Says Air Patrols Over Iraq Are in Ever Greater Peril

by James Dao, New York Times, 5 June 2001

The [U.S. defense] secretary also said Turkey, in contrast to some of its NATO allies, is very interested in building a missile defense system to protect itself from Iraq. “Anybody who lives in this neighborhood knows what’s going on,” Mr. Rumsfeld said. “The threat is real and serious and growing.”


excerpts from: Longer range on Iranian missile Shahab-4 could hit Central Europe

by Bill Gertz, Washington Times, 29 July 1998

Iran is working on a longer-range version of the Shahab-3 [ballistic] missile […] U.S. intelligence agencies estimate that the Shahab-4 will have a range of up to 1,240 miles – enough to hit targets as far away as Central Europe.


related links:

U.S. Missile Shield Plans: Retreat Or Advance (18 September 2009)


UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency expresses concern over Israeli nukes (18 September 2009)


NATO official: Iran could fire conventional or nuclear missiles into Europe (31 August 2009)


Ahmadinejad: Some neighbouring countries are serving Zionism in the name of Islam (16 August 2009)


Israeli ambassador to US: Iranian nuke could wipe off Israel in seconds (4 July 2009)


Phony Nuclear Disarmament (8 April 2009)


CSIS report: Turkey would be the optimum route for a possible Israeli attack on Iran (16 March 2009)




U.S. Missile Shield Plans: Retreat Or Advance? by Rick Rozoff

U.S. Expands Global Missile Shield Into Middle East, Balkans by Rick Rozoff

Balkans Revisited: U.S., NATO Expand Military Role In Southeastern Europe by Rick Rozoff

Czech left welcomes U.S. decision to give up radar base

Obama drops missile shield for Czech Republic

9 thoughts on “Obama: President Bush was right that Iran’s ballistic missile program poses a significant threat

  1. Pingback: US: Turkey plays an important role as an ally at the front line of ballistic missile threats « Dandelion Salad

  2. Pingback: Israeli army chief: Dialogue with the Turks is ongoing on all military levels « Dandelion Salad

  3. Pingback: Turkey to Iran: You must show that you are acting transparently « Dandelion Salad

  4. Pingback: Turkey’ Prime Minister: I don’t think new sanctions against Iran can bring results « Dandelion Salad

  5. Pingback: Once again, a CSIS report designates Turkey as the optimum route for a possible Israeli attack on Iran « Dandelion Salad

  6. Pingback: NATO Chief: Weapons of Mass Destruction threat is real and growing « Dandelion Salad

  7. The second comments says it all very well.

    So much Israeli hogshit being spread around. The biggest detriment of peace in the Middle East is the nuclear armed Israel which seems intnt on continually attacking its neighbors. iran has not attack another country in ceturies.

  8. Well said, walidmaaytah,
    not to mention the fact that Israel is about as far from Iran as Chicago is to NY. Even if the Israelis didnt nuke them, they would still get the fall out if the wind blew the wrong way, sickening all of their people anyway.

  9. Hogwash!! It’s true that truth is war’s first casualty, and in this case, at any time politicians want to spin some fabricated stories to justify their own agendas.

    Iran would never attack Israel with nuclear weapons, even if they developed such capability for two simple reasons:

    1 – If it did, it would wipe out the Palestinians too, which they would never do.
    2 – They know that if they did, Israel would nuke them back, almost immediately, and totally obliterate Iran off the face of the planet – and Iran has no crazy suicidal tendencies. They are too smart for that.

    So all the talk and exaggerated nonsense is no more than sheer propaganda, fuelled basically by Israel, which would love it if it could entangle the US in such diabolical plot, so as to have it do its dirty work and destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities for it. It’s about time we grow up, in the US, and stop letting Israel dictate our foreign policy, and put America’s interests first before Israel’s, which, for us, would be tantamount to another independence day, but this time from Israel’s dictates and hegemony over our foreign policies.

Comments are closed.