Welcome to Roya News, stay informed with the most important news at your fingertips.

1
Image 1 from gallery

Ex-US defence chief recalls Netanyahu lobbying for attacks on Iran as far back as 2009

Listen to this story:
0:00

Note: AI technology was used to generate this article’s audio.

Published :  
2 hours ago|
  • Former US defense chief says Netanyahu predicted Iran would collapse after military strikes.
  • Gates says he warned the 'Israeli' prime minister that Iran’s resilience was being underestimated.

Former CIA director and US defense secretary Robert Gates has recalled a 2009 exchange with Benjamin Netanyahu in which the 'Israeli' prime minister argued that Iran’s government would rapidly collapse if subjected to military strikes.

Speaking on CBS’s Face the Nation, Gates said Netanyahu made the remarks during a meeting in July 2009, describing Iran’s leadership as politically fragile.

According to Gates, Netanyahu argued that the Iranian regime would “crumble at the first attack.”

Gates said he strongly disagreed with the prediction at the time and warned Netanyahu that such an assumption misjudged Iran’s internal resilience.

“I told him he was dead wrong,” Gates said, adding that Netanyahu was underestimating “the resilience of the Iranians.”

The former Pentagon chief’s account offers rare insight into long-running disagreements between US and 'Israeli' officials over how Tehran would respond to direct military action.

Gates linked Netanyahu’s position to previous 'Israeli' military operations in the region that faced limited retaliation.

He pointed specifically to the 1981 strike on Iraq’s Osirak Nuclear Reactor and the 2007 attack on a suspected Syrian nuclear facility.

According to Gates, those operations may have contributed to what he described as an “unrealistic position” regarding Iran’s likely response to similar attacks.

The remarks come as debate continues over military options involving Iran and the broader regional consequences of escalation.

Gates’ recollection underscores the strategic divide that has persisted for years over whether direct military pressure could weaken Tehran or instead trigger a broader and more dangerous confrontation across the region.