US Starts New Horror Show For Israel
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa is calling out for New Zealanders to condemn the US bombing of Iran.
PSNA Co-Chair, Maher Nazzal, says he hopes, but does not expect, that the New Zealand government will be critical of the US for its war escalation.
'Israel has once again hoodwinked the United States into fighting Israel's wars.
'Israel's Prime Minister has declared Iran to be on the point of producing nuclear weapons since the 1990s. It's all part of his big plan for expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine to create a Greater Israel, and regime change for the entire region.'
'Israel knows Arab and European countries will fall in behind these plans and in many cases actually help implement them.'
'It is a dreadful day for the Palestinians. Netanyahu's forces will be turned back onto them in Gaza and the West Bank.'
'It is just as dreadful day for the whole Middle East. Trump has tried to add Iran to the disasters of US foreign policy in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. The US simply doesn't care how many people will die.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
5 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Donald Trump targets Iran's nuclear programme with B-2 bomber strikes
He is betting that the United States can repel whatever retaliation Iran's leadership orders against more than 40,000 US troops spread over bases throughout the region. All are within range of Tehran's missile fleet, even after eight days of relentless attacks by Israel. And he is betting that he can deter a vastly debilitated Iran from using its familiar techniques – terrorism, hostage-taking and cyber attacks – as a more indirect line of attack to wreak revenge. Most importantly, he is betting that he has destroyed Iran's chances of ever reconstituting its nuclear programme. That is an ambitious goal: Iran has made clear that, if attacked, it would exit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and take its vast programme underground. That is why Trump focused so much attention on destroying Fordo, the facility Iran built in secret in the mid-2000s that was publicly exposed by President Barack Obama in 2009. That is where Iran was producing almost all of the near bomb-grade fuel that most alarmed the United States and its allies. Trump's aides were telling those allies on Saturday night (UST) that Washington's sole mission was to destroy the nuclear programme. They described the complex strike as a limited, contained operation akin to the special operation that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011. 'They explicitly said this was not a declaration of war,' one senior European diplomat said, describing his conversation with a high-ranking administration official. But, the diplomat added, bin Laden had killed 3000 Americans. Iran had yet to build a bomb. In short, the administration is arguing that it was engaged in an act of pre-emption, seeking to terminate a threat, not the Iranian regime. But it is far from clear that the Iranians will perceive it that way. In a brief address from the White House on Saturday night (UST), flanked by Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defenve Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump threatened Iran with more destruction if it does not bend to his demands. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' the President said. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' 'There will be either peace,' he added, 'or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left.' He promised that if Iran did not relent, he would go after them 'with precision, speed and skill'. In essence, Trump was threatening to broaden his military partnership with Israel, which has spent the last eight days systematically targeting Iran's top military and nuclear leadership, killing them in their beds, their laboratories and their bunkers. The United States initially separated itself from that operation. In the Trump administration's first public statement about those strikes, Rubio emphasised that Israel took 'unilateral action against Iran', adding that the United States was 'not involved'. But then, a few days ago, Trump mused on his social media platform about the ability of the US to kill Iran's 86-year-old supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, any time he wanted. And Saturday night, he made clear that the US was all-in and that, contrary to Rubio's statement, the country was now deeply involved. Now, having set back Iran's enrichment capability, Trump is clearly hoping that he can seize on a remarkable moment of weakness – the weakness that allowed the American B-2 bombers to fly in and out of Iranian territory with little resistance. After Israel's fierce retaliation for the October 7, 2023, terror attacks that killed over 1000 Israeli civilians, Iran is suddenly bereft of its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. Its closest ally, Syria's Bashar Assad, had to flee the country. And Russia and China, which formed a partnership of convenience with Iran, were nowhere to be seen after Israel attacked the country. That left only the nuclear programme as Iran's ultimate defence. It was always more than just a scientific project – it was the symbol of Iranian resistance to the West, and the core of the leadership's plan to hold on to power. Along with the repression of dissent, the programme had become the ultimate means of defence for the inheritors of the Iranian revolution that began in 1979. If the taking of 52 American hostages was Iran's way of standing up to a far larger, far more powerful adversary in 1979, the nuclear programme has been the symbol of resistance for the last two decades. One day, historians may well draw a line from those images of blindfolded Americans, who were held for 444 days, to the dropping of GBU-57 bunker-busting bombs on the mountainous redoubt called Fordo. They will likely ask whether the United States, its allies or the Iranians themselves could have played this differently. And they will almost certainly ask whether Trump's gamble paid off. His critics in Congress were already questioning his approach. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Trump had acted 'without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community' that Iran had made no decision to take the final steps to a bomb. If Iran finds itself unable to respond effectively, if the Ayatollah's hold on power is now loosened, or if the country gives up its long-running nuclear ambitions, Trump will doubtless claim that only he was willing to use America's military reach to achieve a goal his last four predecessors deemed too risky. But there is another possibility. Iran could slowly recover, its surviving nuclear scientists could take their skills underground and the country could follow the pathway lit by North Korea, with a race to build a bomb. Today, North Korea has 60 or more nuclear weapons by some intelligence estimates, an arsenal that likely makes it too powerful to attack. That, Iran may conclude, is the only pathway to keep larger, hostile powers at bay, and to prevent the United States and Israel from carrying out an operation like the one that lit up the Iranian skies Sunday morning. This article originally appeared in the New York Times. Written by: David E. Sanger Photographs by: Carlos Barria / Getty Images ©2025 NEW YORK TIMES
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
US Starts New Horror Show For Israel
The Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa is calling out for New Zealanders to condemn the US bombing of Iran. PSNA Co-Chair, Maher Nazzal, says he hopes, but does not expect, that the New Zealand government will be critical of the US for its war escalation. 'Israel has once again hoodwinked the United States into fighting Israel's wars. 'Israel's Prime Minister has declared Iran to be on the point of producing nuclear weapons since the 1990s. It's all part of his big plan for expulsion of Palestinians from Palestine to create a Greater Israel, and regime change for the entire region.' 'Israel knows Arab and European countries will fall in behind these plans and in many cases actually help implement them.' 'It is a dreadful day for the Palestinians. Netanyahu's forces will be turned back onto them in Gaza and the West Bank.' 'It is just as dreadful day for the whole Middle East. Trump has tried to add Iran to the disasters of US foreign policy in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan. The US simply doesn't care how many people will die.'
Scoop
6 hours ago
- Scoop
Analysis: Tensions And Timing Test Luxon On First Official China Visit
, Deputy Political Editor in Beijing Analysis - Luck was not on Christopher Luxon's side for his first official trip to China. Even before the visit began, the prime minister was battling for control of the narrative, as a suite of former political leaders - including Helen Clark and Don Brash - accused the coalition of antagonising China through its embrace of the US. A clearly irritated Luxon batted away the warning - "maybe listen to fewer former politicians" - but the commentary persisted. In fact, the superpower struggle was given more prominence by events unfolding in the Middle East as Israel launched open warfare on Iran, with the US and China backing opposing sides. No surprise New Zealanders at home showed more interest in US President Donald Trump's "will-he-won't-he" contemplations than in Luxon's Shanghai sales pitch. Then came news of the Cook Islands diplomacy crisis right on the eve of Luxon's big sit-down with President Xi Jinping. Luxon had to have been cursing the timing, as his pre-meeting media conference was consumed by questions about the government's decision to suspend funding to the Pacific nation after its controversial agreements with China earlier this year. He tried valiantly to characterise New Zealand's issue as being solely with the Cook Islands government, but it was impossible to ignore China's contribution as one-half of the deals in question. That was evidenced by a pointed response from China's Foreign Ministry: that its cooperation with the Cook Islands "should not be disrupted or restrained by any third party". Was the trip a success? Such comments were not repeated, however, in the brief public parts of Luxon's high-level meetings at the Great Hall of the People. The leaders on both sides were direct in their opening remarks but not at all confrontational. President Xi Jinping acknowledged "ups and downs" in the relationship while Luxon pointedly noted the importance of "stability in our region". But both also stressed the value of their ties. Premier Li Qiang even welcomed the "candid" nature of the conversations. Certainly, there was nothing to suggest China is contemplating economic retribution, as some have suggested. Supporters of the government's approach will see that as proof its strategy is working. Its critics will caution it means only that there is still time to change course. To understand China's perspective, one can look to the state media for an indication. On Thursday, state tabloid Global Times hosted a piece by Qin Sheng, associate professor at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Qin said the China-NZ relationship could provide an example of "healthy interaction" in a world of "rising geopolitical rivalry and pervasive uncertainty". At the same time, he warned that the US was "actively wooing" New Zealand to join its "small circles aimed at containing China" including AUKUS pillar two. "For New Zealand, it is important to see the broader picture and ensure that its choices align with the prevailing trend of history." From a personal perspective, the PM would've been thrilled that Xi had been "impressed" by him in their first meeting at APEC last year. Alas, that sentiment is unlikely to filter through to the NZ public in any meaningful way. All travelling media noted the paltry audience interest in the stories filed as they landed on the afternoon of the public holiday Matariki. More bad luck. Broadly speaking, business leaders in the delegation were enthused and positive about the China visit, but there were some quiet grumblings. Two particular gripes came up multiple times in conversations. The trip's length - just two nights in Shanghai and one in Beijing - was considered too brief from a business perspective. It was hard not to notice the extra empty seats on the 757 returning home with several delegates clearly deciding to stay on in Beijing a little longer. Several businesspeople also questioned Luxon's strategy for luring back Chinese tourists and his characterisation of the issue as a "marketing challenge". When speaking to reporters, Luxon repeatedly insisted the problem was that New Zealand lacked "share of mind" in China and simply needed more promotion. The blame, he said, lay with Labour for being too slow to come out of Covid-19. Never mind that China itself had been slower. Those spoken to by RNZ suggested the more pressing concern was cost - and pointed out the coalition had hiked visa fees and tripled the International Visitor Levy. What next? Luxon's focus will now shift to the NATO forum which is he due to attend in the Netherlands in the coming days. In his final media conference in Beijing, Luxon made clear he considered his attendance there to be quite separate from his China mission. But he must know the two are very much connected and will be viewed as such. In recent comments, NATO chief Mark Rutte has grouped China together with Russia, Iran and North Korea, as effective foes of the West. Asked about the remarks, Luxon said he had seen "no evidence" of those four powers actively working together against the West. One wonders how that "difference of opinion" - as Luxon put it - will go down when the PM arrives at the Hague. Just last week, China expert Jason Young told RNZ that one of New Zealand's biggest challenges over the next two decades would be navigating that tension between its Western security partners and its largest trading partner China. There can be no relying on luck for that.
