It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran Laughs at US

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:
Sep

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
ere we go with your anti US crap.

Our leaders, and my self, dont WANT a fight. We want a TERRORIST nation NOT to have nukes. Most people agree with that. The difference is that some people are willing to do what it takes to make sure that happens (like myself) and some arent (like you).

They are going to learn not to openly defy the US because we will not allow them to become a nuclear power. We do that because, to use your good and bad jargin, WE are the GOOD guys and THEY are the BAD guys.

What is America you ask? The greatest nation on earth - the one which will protect it's citizens (and thus also the rest of the free world) from terrorist supporting nations from obtaining nuclea weapons. No flip-flopping from my side - that is for liberal America haters like you.


What makes Iran a terrorist nation? Is it because they support a couple of groups in Lebonon? As other members mentioned before how are these groups diffrent from the Mujahedin? It is common knowledge that the US had supported terrorists before and is still doing it. They are harbouring MKO who is on the terror list of every nation including the US. Now to me that sounds like US is a terrorist nation. Iran has not started any wars for a few hundred years now. America has started two in the last 4 years. So America is also an aggresive nation. It has unknown amounts of nuclear weapons. Gen. John Abizaid yesterday talked about nuclear weapons in military terms. US is is the only nation that has used nukes. Now please tell me what has Iran done that makes them less responsible and more a terrorist nation than the US?




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:35 AM
link   
I feel sorry for you Sep, your living in a dream world.
Iran will be liberated.
Those of you who think I approve of the empire building we will see in the next 20 years are wrong I don't.
I do however recognise the signs.
The world won't stop us becuase those who could will be co-opted into working for us.
Russia will be one of our primary allies in this.
As will the UK
The EU however will be marginalised and in truth don't have the will to stop us.
China will be bought off at first starngled afterwards.
Within 10 years Washington will be calling the shots in Bagdhad, Tehran, Kuwait, Kabul, Damascus etc.
Either through open intimidation or naked force.
The US uses more oil than anyone else and the only way to guarantee supply is through conquest.
Once we controll the supply we will use it as a weapon of conquest.
Its sad because once a nation becomes focused on conquest its only a matter of time befre someone takes power.
Look how ceaser cme to power, as a general he was in charge of egypt, when he came home he took over.
Once we were a republic, now we are becomming a conquistadorial republic, one day we will be an empire.
Sad but true.


Sep

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
I feel sorry for you Sep, your living in a dream world.
Iran will be liberated.
Those of you who think I approve of the empire building we will see in the next 20 years are wrong I don't.
I do however recognise the signs.
The world won't stop us becuase those who could will be co-opted into working for us.
Russia will be one of our primary allies in this.
As will the UK
The EU however will be marginalised and in truth don't have the will to stop us.
China will be bought off at first starngled afterwards.
Within 10 years Washington will be calling the shots in Bagdhad, Tehran, Kuwait, Kabul, Damascus etc.
Either through open intimidation or naked force.
The US uses more oil than anyone else and the only way to guarantee supply is through conquest.
Once we controll the supply we will use it as a weapon of conquest.
Its sad because once a nation becomes focused on conquest its only a matter of time befre someone takes power.
Look how ceaser cme to power, as a general he was in charge of egypt, when he came home he took over.
Once we were a republic, now we are becomming a conquistadorial republic, one day we will be an empire.
Sad but true.


I beleive we already agreed to disagree.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:09 AM
link   
You believe wrong Sep, I haven't agreed to disagree.
I don't have to I'm right your wrong.


Sep

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:56 AM
link   
Please do prove me wrong. Your army is starting to shake in Iraq. A country with under 30 million inhabitans, a stuffed up army and a straight desert ground. Now if you want to control the entire Middle East. With mountains, forests and rivers. You are looking at 10 Iraqs if not more. You need well over 1 million troops. Where exactly are they going to come from? You are going to need 110% support at home, but the Americans are not going to stand by as their leaders do this. You are going to need lots of money, which you dont have right now. You are not going to do this because Americans will not allow you to do this politically, Russians and Chinese can threaten you Militarly, and the middle east, china and pretty much the whole world can destroy your economy. But I dont suspect you know anything about these things. You dont know anything about politics military or economy so you can keep your theories or fantasies or wet-dreams to yourself.

[edit on 1-12-2004 by Sep]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Iran will be liberated.


Are you all still pulling John Kerrys here?

After all that Pax America talk, since when did liberation become an objective? Didn't you reiterate time and again the U.S. should invade and conquer the whole world? What does liberation have to do with that?

Nobody should read your posts, especially from someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
No flip-flopping from my side - that is for liberal America haters like you.


Is "liberal" your only comeback now? You better find another one quick, because it hasn't worked since Day One.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 08:41 AM
link   
sweatmonica - I was using liberate in the sarcastic form, as in a thinly veiled euphemism for conquest.
Sep - You have no conception of the current size of the US army do you? In an incremental conquest in won't be necessary to have that large of a force in any case. The coalition has already begun training iraqi's for armed service work, that represents an additional force.
Look at the actions of europe during WW2, the nations of europe though highly concerned by hitlers actions did not began outright military opposition until he had conqured france, besides his innate idicy what kept him from taking over europe was
1) He attempted to move too fast, had he waited a year maybe 2 after his conqest of poland before moving on to the next country he could have easily assimilated its military and industrial capabilities into his war machne as it was, the pace of his advanced meant the germans were nable to really make use of polands resources untill several yers after the "blitz"
2) He made a mistake in attacking the soviet union whle still engaged in war with the allies.

Now obviously we are talking an incremental conquest, maybe another year of Iraq, building up thier armed services, framing an attck on iraq on Iran, using combined US Coaalition, afghani and Iraqui forces to launch attacks on Iran, a few more years to cement thier hold on Iran before using Iranian, Iraqui, Us etc forces against whoevers next, repeat.
Each time this happens the case for war will be made and each time the US populace will support it, each time while the rest of the world knows the reasons are bull#, they will be just plausible enough to keep anyone else from direct millitary opposition.
In the mean time washingtn will support russia's more and more brutal crackdowns on the chechens, ukranians etc.
What you are deluded about however is the Idea that russia and china will ever join forces. Hell even when both coutries were communist they hated each other, always have always will.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 09:46 AM
link   
mwm1331 if you seriously think the UK is willing to go along with any more US pre-emptive action and an expansion of the wars into Iran, Syria or even North Korea you are seriously ill-informed over how things are in the UK right now.

This government will be reelected in spring summer of 05 or 06.... but, they will be achieving this despite their support for Bush in Iraq not because of it and their success in that election will be much reduced from what it would have been because of their going along with it all.

As far as many in the UK are concerned we not only never did like Bush and consider him illegitimate to begin with but we are begining to hear how the Bush crowd just stole their 2nd election.

There would be no British support forthcoming over any further war in Iran etc.

In the UK now, thanks to all the preamble to the Iraqi war we now have public scrutiny for such things for the first time......including much of the intel reports used to justify the actions.

We can see how we were lied to about the reasons for war.....and we can also see how our government was lied to by our so-called friends in this US government; we can even see (as the House of Commons Foreign Affairs committee reported) now the neat little 'round robin' game played out as US sources 'fed' UK intel to make it look like new and highly damning info was coming, originally, from us.

If you think there will be public support to fall for that nonsense again you are utterly fooling yourself matey.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo


Are you all still pulling John Kerrys here?

After all that Pax America talk, since when did liberation become an objective? Didn't you reiterate time and again the U.S. should invade and conquer the whole world? What does liberation have to do with that?

Nobody should read your posts, especially from someone who doesn't know what they're talking about.


well stated almost all his replys
one min almost is just an understatement
are just jokes ( thank god not all americans are like this or this world wouldnt last a day )

[edit on 1-12-2004 by bodrul]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Can you clarify, bodrul? I'm not getting what you wrote.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo
Can you clarify, bodrul? I'm not getting what you wrote.


was in abit of a rush so i didnt get to post it properly ( sorry )

well stated almost all his replys
almost is just an understatement ( because it is )
are just jokes

and thank god not all americans are like this or this world wouldnt last a day

is that clear enough

[edit on 1-12-2004 by bodrul]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scarface
More US hypocrisy, as they research for more effective low-yield nukes to use on the battlefield, but noone else can build nukes
. Hmmm i doubt this will turn into WWIII but who knows... im up for anything to take down the current administration.


Funny you should mention that. I was just thinking, if someone "liberated" us from our current government, I wonder how many people would be happy? Approximately 50%, I'd think. I suppose it all depends on whether the "liberators" would be forcing their ideas about what type of government they think we should have upon us.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331


Its funny how you keep mentioning Mullahs when it comes to bombing a country. You never mention the children and the women who die by their thousands. Is this a way to stop yourself from feeling bad about the killings or do you really beleive that the mullahs are the only ones who will get killed?


The women and chldren are gonna die because the men let the mullahs run things. They cant keep thier government n check we gotta end it that simple, either the citizens of a country make thier goverment comply or we take em out.




you sound like a threat to me/my country , so now should i take you ''out'' ?

[edit on 1-12-2004 by myformerself]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:04 PM
link   
You know the war in iran begins when the american/israeli tv shows dramatic footage of people buying gasmasks(i mean PULLEASE every person should havelike 3 gasmasks already in the closetby now...), still this time they might prove to be actually usefull other than keep us reminding of WW2 and who are the good guys and the bad guys in the middle east.

you can read on the net that the Hezbollah is believed to have a whole bunch of retaliation rockets to be launched from lebanon , I don't know to what extend that is true and/or they contain biological/chemical agents as well, but it wouldn't surprise me....


[edit on 1-12-2004 by Countermeasures]

[edit on 1-12-2004 by Countermeasures]



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   


ran is laughing all the way to WWIII. They intend on getting and using nuclear weapons and the world "debates". This is an age old Muslim trick, talk-stall-talk-stall.......get stronger and attack.


You're postulating to much here. Iran has never once stated that it intented to start a third world war, or attack anyone with nuclear weapons. Iran may use in defense, but not in offence.

Deep



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sweatmonicaIdo

Originally posted by metalfan87
Umm... I know what I wrote, now why don't you tell what "I obviously don't know", and I'm still waiting for you to educate me. "Best of all in the military" why thank you.. how considerate of you, and no I'm not excited about killing Iranians, but if i'm needed I will go and I will kill one if I really have to.


Can you not read? Can you not educate yourself? Why must we do everything for you? Wait, you're inept.

Anybody who says "if I need to go and kill one" is definitely excited about killing. Nobody in their right mind ever looks forward to killing before it happens, needed or not.


I made a statement and you decided to bash it and not give a good reason why or even try to prove me wrong, and obviously I can read or else I would not be responding to your pathetic responses. "why must we do everything for you?" who's "we" and you haven't done one thing for me. I asked you to prove me wrong on my earlier statements, and all you can do is tell me to re-read my posts, ok well I have and I know what I wrote, so why don't you actually teach me about the things "I obviously don't know about". How can I take you seriously on your comments.


"Anybody who says "if I need to go and kill one" is definitely excited about killing. Nobody in their right mind ever looks forward to killing before it happens, needed or not."

No I'm not excited about killing an Iranian. Don't put words in my mouth. But I do plan on serving in the military, and if I am sent to Iran or another place, my life will be threatened by them so I will be forced to kill them before they get me, it's called self defense. Why would I join the military and be sent into harms way just to sit there being shot at? Maybe you would because you won't defend yourself, but most people would to survive.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 10:49 PM
link   
metalfan87,

I'm not gonna tell you what to think but I'm sorry if you can't educate yourself.

You are at least willing to take responsibility, correct? Most in your group fail to do that.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 12:38 AM
link   
As the U.S pushes for sanctions against Iran, the rest of the world are sitting back scratching their heads. It is obvious to all that the U.S is not fond of the Iranian ruling party and would like to see it replaced, but it seems they just don't have an effective strategy to make it happen.


From linked article
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States, after the agreement on Iran's nuclear program, remains deeply distrusting of Tehran's promises and has mixed feelings about European efforts at conciliation.

"Iran has failed to comply with its commitments many times over the course of the past year and a half, and for this agreement to succeed, the Europeans, the IAEA and the IAEA board of governors, as well as all members of the international community, will need to remain vigilant," White House spokesman Scott McClellan warned.

If the case goes before the Security Council, where the memory of discord over Iraq weighs heavily, Washington is far from the votes it needs for potential sanctions.

source


Mr Bush has named Iran as part of his perceived "Axis of Evil" and insists that Washington will do whatever it takes to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities. Just like a re-run of a bad movie, the scenario sounds all to familiar as though we've heard it all before,

Everybody listen up! There's this country in the middle east, and they absolutely hate America and everything we stand for. If they get the chance, they'll nuke us for sure, those crazy muslim religious fanatics.

Now we don't want to alarm you, but they've got Weapons of Mass Destruction. No really! Well, either that or their scientists are probably in the process of developing them at this very moment. Now there's no time to waste, because we've got to hit them before they hit US!

What do mean are we sure? Well of course we're sure. Our super duper intelligence agencies say so! Huh, you want proof? No, of course we cant show you the proof. It would be a threat to our National Security, wouldn't it dumbass?

We can tell you this much though, we may have someone on the inside, a double agent. They would never lie, and for that matter neither would we. How could you think such a thing? To show him our gratitude, we'll let him run the country after we overthrow the current regime. It's the least we can do.

Now the only thing stopping us is that were a bit short of troops at the moment, so were going to have to send your kids overseas for a few years. What do you mean you don't want them to die. What greater honour is there than to die for your country? Jeez, you know that you can only be with us or against us, so where do you stand. For freedom and democracy or terrorism?



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Iran is a threat to the world. Stop it before it begins again.

So is Bush. Since he is in charge the world is definitely not safer, USA got into 2 wars and so on..



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join