Israeli politicians laud US strikes on Iran
Israeli politicians across the ideological spectrum have welcomed US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, with only a minority of left-wingers warning that an open-ended war could have devastating consequences for the Middle East.
Former prime minister Naftali Bennett, widely viewed as one of the strongest challengers to current leader Benjamin Netanyahu in the next elections, described the strikes as 'a historic action that crushes the nuclear head of the Iranian octopus'.
'The President of the United States, Donald Trump, displayed the might of the United States in the face of evil and his uncompromising leadership against the danger to the entire world,' Mr Bennet said in a post on X.
The praise of politicians such as Mr Bennet reveal quite how single-minded most Israeli politicians are in the campaign against Iran and how the strikes have, for now, secured Mr Netanyahu's political future, despite him being in the midst of political and legal crises before the war with Iran began.
Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who at one point nearly quit Mr Netanyahu's government over a Gaza ceasefire deal, wrote on X: 'God Bless President Trump. God Bless America. God Bless the United States Army. God Bless the Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu.'
Yair Lapid, the leader of Israel's opposition and one of Mr Netanyahu's highest-profile critics, said: 'Thank you President Trump for your historic decision. Israel, the Middle East and the world are now safer.'
Democrats leader Yair Golan, who heads arguably the most dynamic party on Israel's beleaguered and dwindling left, described the US strikes as 'impressive, important and justified'.
He continued with a call for peace: 'And as President Trump wrote: Now is the time for peace. For a comprehensive agreement, for the release of the hostages, for an end to the war, for regional normalisation, for real security for the citizens of Israel.'
'And for the citizens of Israel - complex days lie ahead."
Far-left criticism
Politician Ofer Cassif, on the far left, criticised the US attack, saying it worsens an 'already harsh reality'.
'The attack on Iran will, in the not-so-distant future, be revealed, as happened with Iraq in 2003, as a deception serving those in power, paid for by the peoples – in Israel, in Palestine, in Iran, and throughout the region,' he said.
Many politicians called on the Israeli public to stick to civilian rules issued by the military and to seek shelter during Iranian barrages. Israel further tightened the rules after the American strikes.
Sarit Zehavi of the Alma Research and Education Centre, an Israeli think tank, said Iran's missiles were 'very different' to those fired by groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in other conflicts.
'Hezbollah rockets would destroy a room or a home. Iran missiles [mean] a street destroyed,' she said. 'The missiles of Iran appear to be very accurate. What is happening now is that you have 30 missiles in a barrage you need to intercept,' said Ms Zehavi, which differs from previous barrages when many less accurate rounds would hit open areas.
She added that the current rate of Iran's fire 'can still continue for at least a month, in a worst-case scenario'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
19 minutes ago
- The National
UAE President holds talks with Gulf leaders over Israel-Iran conflict
President Sheikh Mohamed held phone calls with Gulf leaders on Sunday to discuss how air strikes on Iran could affect regional security and stability. The UAE leader discussed the escalating Israel-Iran conflict in key talks with Kuwaiti Emir Sheikh Meshal, Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The talks formed part of consultations led by Sheikh Mohamed aimed at de-escalating tensions in the region, state news agency Wam reported. During the calls, all sides emphasised that the current hostilities could have grave repercussions for the region and the global. The leaders emphasised the need to prioritise dialogue and seek peaceful solutions to the conflict. US President Donald Trump on Saturday said American forces bombed the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear sites in Iran, bringing to an end days of speculation about whether Washington would become directly involved in the conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the US strikes 'outrageous' and said they would have 'everlasting consequences'. The UAE has expressed concern over the tensions in the region and attacks on nuclear sites. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on Sunday that stressed the importance of prioritising diplomacy and dialogue to resolve disputes in ways that "promote stability, prosperity and justice". The UAE's Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation said developments related to nuclear sites in Iran are being monitored closely. "There are no impacts on the UAE resulting from these developments," it said in a statement carried by Wam. "FANR confirmed that it is well-informed and continuously following up on the situation, in co-ordination with international partners, including the International Atomic Energy Agency, and receives regular updates through official channels."
The National
24 minutes ago
- The National
Operation Midnight Hammer: Pentagon chief Hegseth says Iranian troops and civilians not targeted
The US does not want Operation Midnight Hammer to turn into a prolonged conflict with Iran, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said on Sunday. Speaking at the Pentagon, Mr Hegseth said the US had 'devastated' Iran's nuclear programme but stressed Saturday's attack was calibrated to try to avoid a broader war. 'It's worth noting that this operation did not target the Iranian people or Iranian troops,' he said. In his first Pentagon news conference since taking office six months ago, Mr Hegseth said President Donald Trump had ordered officials to come up with a mission focused on avoiding larger military involvement. The B-2 stealth bombers used in the attacks took off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri for the 18-hour mission. They were refuelled in the skies in an operation that appears designed to minimise controversy by avoiding the US-UK military base on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, or any US bases in the Middle East. 'We were able to destroy nuclear capabilities and our boys in those bombers are on their way home right now,' Mr Hegseth said. One reporter asked Mr Hegseth if the US had planned adequately for a potential Iranian decision to escalate and provoke the US into a prolonged war. 'Anything can happen in conflict and we acknowledge that,' Mr Hegseth said before pivoting back to the talking point of the strikes on Iranian nuclear sites as being narrowly focused. ' The scope of this was intentionally limited and that's the message we're sending, thought the capabilities of the US militaries are still unlimited so Iran in that sense has a choice,' he said. Mr Hegseth was joined at the press conference by Gen Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He said proactive measures had been taken to protect US troops, officials and government staff stationed in nearby countries after the strikes on Iran. 'We are being very thoughtful about ensuring that we do all that we can to protect our forces out there,' he said. In the minutes leading up to the strikes, Gen Caine said the US attack went largely undetected by Iran's military. 'This was a complex and high-risk mission carried out with exceptional skill,' he added, explaining that it was probably the largest B2 bomber strike in US history. Though both officials claimed the strikes achieved their goals, Gen Caine warned battle damage assessments would 'take some time.' 'Initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' he said. Mr Hegseth said congressional officials in the US House of Representatives and the Senate were notified about the strikes after they were complete. That is not sitting well with Democrats. Hours after the strikes were announced on Saturday evening, US Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer criticised Mr Trump for not seeking approval from Congress. 'President Trump must provide the American people and Congress clear answers on the actions taken tonight and their implications for the safety of Americans,' Mr Schumer said. 'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy.' During an appearance on ABC, US Vice President JD Vance said on Sunday that any counterattack on US forces stationed throughout out the Middle East would be met with a response. 'How Iran responds, I mean, the ball is in their court, but what we did was very focused,' he said, urging US citizens to pray for US troops stationed in the region.
The National
24 minutes ago
- The National
Peace takes time and trust. US strikes on Iran deal a blow to both
America's overnight strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have not only raised the stakes in this crisis to another level – they have injected yet more uncertainty into international efforts to find a way out of this escalating conflict. On Friday, US President Donald Trump said Tehran had a maximum of two weeks to "see whether or not people come to their senses". The same day, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met European counterparts in Geneva for talks. Many in this region and further afield hoped that direct US involvement would be stopped, or at least deferred, allowing time to find a diplomatic off-ramp. As it turned out, 'two weeks' meant two days. The highest priority now, particularly for countries in the Middle East, is finding a way to halt a growing war that has no clearly defined goals and threatens to lead to years of further instability. This paper has consistently called for de-escalation and talks. However, these are processes that require time and trust. The US strikes have delivered a blow to both, while the Iranian government failed to act seriously towards a long-lasting solution. Tehran's decades-long meddling in the Arab world has been a persistent threat to regional peace. Given the leadership's 'death to America, death to Israel' rhetoric, Iran's nuclear programme was always going to be viewed with suspicion, especially as its enrichment went beyond what is required for a civilian programme. But what effect will America's strikes have and what cost will the region pay? The answers to those questions are not known, but certainly de-escalation is the best move forward. There is reason to believe that Mr Trump's decision to hit Iranian targets has been informed by his previous experience with unilateral strikes. In April 2017, the US dropped the largest non-nuclear bomb in its arsenal on an underground ISIS base in Afghanistan. The same month, the US Navy launched almost 60 Tomahawk missiles at an air base controlled by the Syrian government, following a chemical weapons attack on a town in Idlib province. Almost three years later the US struck again, this time in Baghdad, assassinating Iranian commander Qassem Suleimani in a targeted drone strike. In the cases of Afghanistan and Syria, war continued in spite of these displays of American force. The killing of Suleimani was a significant loss for Tehran, but it was still able to make its presence felt across the Middle East. Direct strikes on Iranian territory are quantifiably different. Although there are few initial reports about the extent of the damage to Tehran's nuclear capabilities, some form of retaliation is to be expected and this morning there have been more missile strikes on Israeli targets. Even if the Iranian government's instinct for self-preservation precludes strikes on US assets in the region, the threat of terrorism, cyberwarfare or violence from Tehran's remaining regional proxies has significantly increased. There has to be a redoubling of efforts to convince American, Iranian and Israeli leaderships to find a way towards peace So-called pre-emptive strikes make meaningful diplomacy difficult. The uncertainty they introduce into international engagement risks fuelling the very conflict that Mr Trump and Israel claim they are heading off by striking first. Despite the bleak picture emerging this morning, a way must be found. There has to be a redoubling of efforts to convince American, Iranian and Israeli leaderships to find a way towards peace. Although wars are easy to start, they are more difficult to end. This is not the time for lip-service or talks for the sake of talks. To avert regional disaster, cooler heads must prevail and diplomatic efforts must be sincere.
