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.

 

Is John Kerry really this stupid?

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: stormbringer1701

Iran is responsible for those actions or terrorists from Iran are responsible for those actions? Are Christians responsible for a minority of Christians fire bombing abortion clinics?



if they fund and support terrorist, yes they are.
hell Iran is still on the U.S. state sponsored terrorist list. it is also a well known fact that Hezbollah was founded,trained and is backed by iran during the reign of Ayatollah Khomeini. Hamas's president Mahmoud Abbas has admitted that Iran is their biggest supporter. both are still on terrorist lists of many nations and Iran funds and supports them. both are still on the terrorist list of most western nations. regardless of the EU's court ruleing on hamas.

the most recent group to receive their funding and support Houthi in Yemen who are know to have ties to al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). here is evidence that they are supporting them.

Rival Yemeni camps entrench as Iran flights arrive

all of the statements i made are verifiable and only takes a few minutes to search and find. to continue to say that they are not attacking any one or fighting might be technically true, but just as U.S. detractors like to note about U.S. of certain groups, iran is fighting through these groups a proxy war and to deny it is nothing but pure ignorance.

edit on 4-3-2015 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: vkey08
a reply to: tothetenthpower

Gee Keeper, I go away for a few months and I come back to talk of shiny things..


I have to agree, I thought Bibi gave a good speech, as speeches go, but it was really only a campaign speech for his election back home, it had nothing to do with the reality of the situation in the Middle East currently, esp when news has come out that Iran is actually helping coalition forces by sending in ground troops to counter ISIS/ISIL in Iraq, really sounds like a state that wants to annihilate everyone.. (rolls eyes)


Been wondering where you've been lol

And yeah, all those points


~Tenth



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: joemoe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: peskyhumans

Iran hasn't started a conflict in like..50 years.

~Tenth


It's more like 200+ years


Iran's current regime took power in 1979, how is that 50 or 200+ years? Did I miss something?


Ok, that is technically true. I guess you could say the people living on the landmass that is Iran haven't attacked anyone for 200+ years.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

So how do you explain how Iran is trying to fight ISIS then?



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Which is again true because Iraq started the Iran / Iraq war when they invaded Iran..



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

iran doesn't fit into the ideology of isis.
true iran may have been waiting for the 12th at one point and may still be. but the government of iran ( the leaders ) are not willing to give up their power and change their policies if isis were to turn their sights on them as in iraq and syria.

in other words they don't see it as in their best interest.

edit on 4-3-2015 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: joemoe

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: peskyhumans

Iran hasn't started a conflict in like..50 years.

~Tenth


It's more like 200+ years[/qu





Iran's current regime took power in 1979, how is that 50 or 200+ years? Did I miss something?


Ok, that is technically true. I guess you could say the people living on the landmass that is Iran haven't attacked anyone for 200+ years.



I still don`t see how you can trust the Iranians,don`t you remember the battle of Marathon when Iran trird to invade Athens?Geez!
edit on 4-3-2015 by Sunwolf because: error



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

Well its good to see that you don't think all Muslims share the same ideology.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

And the US provides financial and military support to the State of Israel, which objectively portrays as many or more characteristics of a rogue terrorist state/organization than Hamas or Hezbollah (or Iran).

If we're comparing apples to apples that is.
edit on 9Wed, 04 Mar 2015 09:54:37 -060015p092015366 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
a reply to: peskyhumans

Iran hasn't started a conflict in like..50 years.

It's a far more peaceful country than a lot of other place, a lot of other places we call 'allies'.

*cough Saudi Arabia*

But we don't complain about them having weapons etc.

What a joke.

Iran has the right to do as it wishes, so long as it actually isn't doing anything to start a world war, which it isn't according to EVERY SINGLE person whose investigated it, that's not from Israel.

How dare the West continue to play mother with countries it's failed so many times, over and over again.

~Tenth


I have to agree with you there. As an example, South Africa was the west's primary ally in the African region prior to 1985 and the US still had weapons deals going on with them right up to 1989 to supply Saddam. South Africa even began the process of dismantling their nuclear program in the 80's voluntarily at Palendaba/Velindaba (which went under US nuclear audit). The CIA through their point man John Stockwell along with the US military were handling recon, logistics and weapons supplies for the South Africans and UNITA in the Angolan conflict as well. Then the US, prompted by the IMF/World Bank and UN all ganged up on South Africa because of they claim, apartheid and mandela (a terrorist). So there is distinct history of the US turning their backs on an ally that was a world power with nuclear weapons over allegedly, a political ideology.

Israel is no different, it is also an apartheid state, just as South Africa was, so one really has to question why it is ok for an ally that is also apartheid, has nuclear weapons, holds an extremist ideology and is also in the business of theft and committing genocide? (South Africa only had the nuclear weapons, not the other craziness) The rule has to apply equality or there is no rule.

This situation is very similar to the school boy bullies analogy. Two bullies, a small one (Israel) uses the larger bully (US) to terrorize any school yard kids who don't want to submit to the small bully's rule. That way, the small bully can keep whichever kids it wants in a state of arrested development and always keep the playground in a state of constant anxiety and apprehension. It's not right in the school yard and it isn't right on the world stage.

I am so sick and tired of hearing about how Israel has the right to exist and there will be no peace until this one or that one is disarmed. Presently, the way in which Israel operates shows it has no right to exist, at least until they change their political stance, stop the land grabs and stop the genocide. Until Israel stops the bullying and using their BS "guilt trip" (which omits the other 30 million dead or 5 times their claim), as far as I am concerned their politicians (and their supporters) need to go the way of the dinosaurs.

Cheers - Dave
edit on 3/4.2015 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

show me a official nations terrorist list that places Israel on it, not just nations where terrorist are in charge, or heavily influence the government.


the only govt. that i know that of, that has mention of Israel as being a home to terrorist is the U.S. and that is only for citizens, not the state. you also have to remember that arabs, and palestinians, live in Israel.

this happened during the obama admin, kinda strange to me, all these years and only during the obama years do they get put there.



"The US does not and never has considered Israel to have links to terrorism, but rather they are a partner in our efforts to combat global terrorism,” Christensen said. “Countries may have been included on the list because of the backgrounds of arrestees, not because of the country’s government itself. The United States maintains close intelligence-sharing relationships with many of these countries in order to address security issues within their own borders and in our mutual pursuit of safety and security around the globe."
United States puts Israel on its terror watch list



edit on 4-3-2015 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:30 AM
link   
The only thing dumber than John Kerry is the people who defend todays Iran. They are not 50 years much less 200 years. Iran as it exists today started in 1979. That is 36 years of radical Islam at the helm of a terror State.
This administrations appeasement at all costs approach is what the radical Ayatollahs have been praying for since their first day of bloody takeover.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

The only thing dumber than John Kerry is the people who defend todays Iran. They are not 50 years much less 200 years. Iran as it exists today started in 1979. That is 36 years of radical Islam at the helm of a terror State.
This administrations appeasement at all costs approach is what the radical Ayatollahs have been praying for since their first day of bloody takeover.


But the US/Europe are the ones who initiated the coup. And trained the people who carried it out.

And now they're mad...why? Because they did exactly as they said they would?

~Tenth



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

They haven't the NEED to directly act..www.washingtoninstitute.org...
They do so using proxies.
AS is WELL known and completely undialable for decades.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower



But the US/Europe are the ones who initiated the coup. And trained the people who carried it out.


i'm thinking maybe you got that backwards. the U.S. and UK back the Shaw, not Khomeini.
unless your talking about the 1953 Iranian coup d'état.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

When is the last time you heard Isreal threaten an unprovoked offensive using nukes against another country?

Don't get me wrong--let the ME annihilate itself, as they've been trying to do for millenia, but to pretend that Iran does not want nuclear technology for nefarious purposes is an active attempt to ignore their past statements.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: hounddoghowlie

I was always under the impression that the US and UK were in favor of having Khomeini return as Ayatollah, because The Shah wasn't playing ball anymore?

~Tenth



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: tothetenthpower

My Iranian professor pretty much told our class that Iran has a very young population who love Levi jeans and American TV. They'd love to have better relations with the USA, but the old fuddy-duddy religious leaders that control the government keep them at odds.

It seems like our leaders think there is more to be gained keeping the USA/Iran at odds.



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
When is the last time you heard Isreal threaten an unprovoked offensive using nukes against another country?
Don't get me wrong--let the ME annihilate itself, as they've been trying to do for millenia, but to pretend that Iran does not want nuclear technology for nefarious purposes is an active attempt to ignore their past statements.

'Nefarious' is such a subjective term...is the US nefarious for keeping a nuclear stockpile to keep Russia at bay? All weapons of mass destruction are kept for nefarious means, and they should be eradicated.
Don't get me wrong...I don't have a dog in this fight, but knee-jerk supplication to ANY foreign power is dangerous. As to Israel using nukes? There are whispers...



posted on Mar, 4 2015 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: tothetenthpower

My Iranian professor pretty much told our class that Iran has a very young population who love Levi jeans and American TV. They'd love to have better relations with the USA, but the old fuddy-duddy religious leaders that control the government keep them at odds.

It seems like our leaders think there is more to be gained keeping the USA/Iran at odds.


The Powers That Be: servicing Justice, Truth, & STFU & DO WHAT YOU'RE #ING TOLD since the dawn of time.




top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join