Republican candidates bid to be toughest on Iran

WASHINGTON Tue Mar 6, 2012 6:43pm EST

1 of 4. Newt Gingrich appears on a monitor as he speaks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference in Washington March 6, 2012.

Credit: Reuters/Joshua Roberts

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican presidential candidates competed to be the most hawkish on Iran and favorable to Israel before the powerful pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC on Tuesday, telling Iran it would be in real danger if it goes nuclear while they are in the White House.

"If Iran doesn't get rid of nuclear facilities, we will tear them down ourselves," said Rick Santorum, the conservative former senator whose views on the subject already were well known. In January, Santorum said he would be in favor of launching U.S. air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities.

Santorum, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and congressman Ron Paul were busy battling for U.S. votes on Tuesday, the biggest day in the race so far to be the Republican challenger to President Barack Obama in the November 6 election. Ten states were holding primary contests on what is called "Super Tuesday."

But Santorum took time to appear in person while Romney and Gingrich provided video remarks to the annual gathering in Washington of AIPAC, which includes some of Israel's staunchest supporters in the United States. Paul, a libertarian who is critical of U.S. support for Israel, did not participate.

Romney, in a speech delivered by satellite link, assured AIPAC that if he becomes president, Israel will know that America stands at its side "in all conditions."

But Romney, who as the winner of the last five primary contests carried the momentum going into Tuesday's U.S. primary voting, was slightly more circumspect than Santorum in his choice of words about how he would respond as president to an Iranian nuclear program.

Romney said he would end Obama's "procrastination" on the matter by imposing further crippling sanctions on Tehran, and "I will make sure Iran knows of the very real peril that awaits if it becomes nuclear."

"As president, I will be ready to engage in diplomacy. But I will be just as ready to engage our military might," Romney said.


Gingrich, speaking by video link from the campaign trail in his native state of Georgia, said the U.S. State Department policy was wrong and the U.S. intelligence community was "timid."

As far as Gingrich was concerned, Iran already had crossed a "red line" with its nuclear program and was "deepening their commitment to nuclear weapons while we talk."

Iran insists its nuclear development is for generating nuclear power, not military purposes.

Gingrich, speaking in a week in which Obama has been appealing to visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to allow international sanctions to work against Iran, indicated that if Israel wanted to attack Iran's nuclear sites, it did not need to check with him first.

"I will provide all available intelligence to the Israeli government, ensure that they have the equipment necessary, and reassure them, that if an Israeli prime minister decides that he has to avoid the threat of a second Holocaust through pre-emptive measures, that I would require no advance notice," he said.

Iran has called for the destruction of Israel and the Israeli government is adamant it will not let Iran build an atomic bomb. Israel, believed to be the only nuclear power in the region, has been pushing Washington to pile pressure on Tehran to force it to abandon its nuclear program.

The Republicans' speeches contrasted sharply with Obama's to AIPAC earlier in the week, in which he warned against "loose talk" of a war with Iran and said "bluster" about a possible military strike was driving up oil prices.

Netanyahu sharpened his own tone toward Iran in remarks to AIPAC on Monday night, saying he had waited for diplomacy to work but "we cannot afford to wait much longer."

On Tuesday, Netanyahu expressed his gratitude for the "remarkable solidarity" he found in the U.S. Congress, which last year gave him some two dozen standing ovations during an address on Capitol Hill.

(Reporting By Susan Cornwell; Editing by Bill Trott)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (8)
AlkalineState wrote:
“Armchair candidates have talking contest in camo armchairs.”

Easy to talk war when you don’t have any responsibilities. This is like the teenage son who says he would have just built the family house bigger and…. just bought a nicer car than junky van we have to ride in.

Get a job, then we’ll talk.

Mar 06, 2012 3:47pm EST  --  Report as abuse
UnPartisan wrote:
Ron Paul is the only one not beating the drums of war. That includes Obama. Why the Press wont give him the time of day, I will never understand.

Mar 06, 2012 4:09pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Good grief. We heard the same rhetoric about Iraq. All we have to show for that war is egg on our faces and trillions of dollars of debt. Not one “weapon of mass destruction” was ever unearthed from Iraq. Enough already. It is understood that using brains is always more challenging than using might. May cooler, calmer heads prevail.

Mar 06, 2012 4:11pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.