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.

 

WW3/Yemen Conflict

page: 2
37
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

That saying all is fair in love and war seems to run true .To imagine a country the size of Iran in the ME and them not having relationships with some of their neighbors is a bit unrealistic I would think . This whole vilifying Iran started back when they took their country back from the American installed govt. ... It would seem that they could not go back to what they had before because that type of govt. wont be able to stand in a dog eat dog world .

This act of war on Yemeni is unlawful I would think , but I don't suspect it will get to the world courts in my life time .




posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: the2ofusr1

if you are referring to other nations I would surmise it comes from their dislike of Iran and its stated goals for the region. I think it might also have to do with just how weak Obama really is and that he cannot be trusted when it comes to supporting allies.

With Iran involved in Syria and Iraq its also possible the Saudis did not want their southern border to have an Iranian presence.


I think Obama's actions concerning the nuke deal has played a big role here. To be clear, I am not someone who has advocated any sort of war with Iran.. I think the posturing against Iran has been ridiculous, since we don't even have evidence of them having even ONE nuke!! But I do see how this recent "deal", allowing them to basically have a nuke, but not even a power plant... could damper things. Obama made a horrible mistake, and it's sad how quickly it might escalate things..



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: the2ofusr1

With Iran involved in Syria and Iraq its also possible the Saudis did not want their southern border to have an Iranian presence.


Saddam Hussien didn't have a problem keeping the Iranians out even during tough sanctions. Talk about unintended consequences. Didn't someone predict something exactly like this before Desert Storm? Supposedly why we didn't cross the border into Iraq to "finish" the job the first time.

All brought to you by the Neo-Con Army Adminstration and the subsequent Obama the Manchurian Candidate Adminstration.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:42 AM
link   
a reply to: the2ofusr1

not completely... I think it would be more appropriate to say the vilification of the Iranian government and not the Iranian people.

Iran has relations with other nations in the gulf but just like everything else all politics are local. There are ideological / theological differences which I think forms the basis of the mistrust. Not to mention Iran is really not a middle east nation. They are Persian and there are fundamental differences in that area alone that has an impact as well.

The only country I am aware of that Iran does not recognize is Israel.

The justification Saudi Arabia gave was the President of Yemen requested military assistance. As for lawful ambassadors at the UN dealing with this are looking at Article VII of the UN charter (which is breach of peace).


edit on 28-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wookiep

I think Obama's actions concerning the nuke deal has played a big role here. To be clear, I am not someone who has advocated any sort of war with Iran.. I think the posturing against Iran has been ridiculous, since we don't even have evidence of them having even ONE nuke!! But I do see how this recent "deal", allowing them to basically have a nuke, but not even a power plant... could damper things. Obama made a horrible mistake, and it's sad how quickly it might escalate things..


Some things to consider.

* - Iran did have a nuclear weapons program that ended around 2003.
* - Iran did have a secret nuclear facility that is fortified under a mountain that they never disclosed. It did not become public knowledge until intelligence services outed the facility.
* - The IAEA report is still showing Iran has only talked about 1 of 12 outstanding issues dealing with the nuclear weapons element of their program.

The goal of these talks and the threats of force never had anything to do with a civilian nuclear program or even Iran building a bomb. The "redline" so to speak was their "capability" to build a bomb. That goes back to the enriched Uranium levels. The levels they enriched to are not standard in civilian nuclear programs.

As for Yemen and Iran we need to keep in mind we don't live in the region. Those nations that are geographically closer to Iran are going to have their own sense of urgency.

As for the agreement its looking like details are being leaked out about it. From what I have read, and if its true, Congress and Obama are going to clash something fierce.

ETA: Changed 23 to 12 for outstanding IAEA issues.
edit on 28-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Rosinitiate

Saddam Hussein and his ruling party were the minorities religion wise. We see the same thing in Syria with their Ba'ath party.

He fought an 8 year war with Iran which left both countries militarily depleted. In the early 90's he invaded Kuwait, resulting in another war and UN sanctions / no fly zones.

in 2003 we invaded Iraq..

Was his removal and subsequent shift to Iran an unintended consequence or was the back and forth between the 2 always present from when Hussein took power?

As for crossing the border I was under the impression it was a political issue. In Desert Storm Arab nations joined the coalition to help drive Iraq out of Kuwait. Syria was a member of that coalition. If the goal was to remove Saddam then we would not have had Arab coalition partners.

To bring it back around to the op topic we should keep an eye on the UN and see what type of UNSC resolution, if any, are passed concerning Yemen.
edit on 28-3-2015 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 05:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Thanks for your points.


I don't think there is any debate that Iran has now or has had in the past the "capability" of building nukes. I think the question always has been if they actually have a nuke..

Again, I'm not saying that it's a good thing if they do.. but the facts are, we simply don't really know for sure! Even if we did know for sure... does that warrant a WWIII scenario? Just something to think about...

As for Yemen and Iran... You are absolutely correct, we don't live there! I hope we can get more news from people in that region!!



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


To bring it back around to the op topic we should keep an eye on the UN and see what type of UNSC resolution, if any, are passed concerning Yemen


It will be very telling the UN's intentions if they announce or don't announce resolutions. It will show their true colours.
edit on 28-3-2015 by sosobad because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad


And even worse the deploys a strike group to the area? With a link to the Noth Fleet being put on alert for execises two weeks ago. I get people want to make this more exciting that it is but, come on.

Nice deflection. Who is moving carriers to the Middle East? You left that word out. Another ME nation rises against its western puppet government.

Yah, Nothing to see here.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:14 AM
link   


US ARMY Hardware begins to enter UKRAINE. (Russia has said this is act of war if happened.)


That is hilarious. We wouldn't want anyone going around committing acts of war now would we?

And who would that be a war with? The USA? Because I think they kinda already started one with the Ukraine.

I say we move some Minuteman missiles into the Ukraine. After all Russia openly stated they were considering moving their nukes into the Ukraine, lets remind them they are not the only nuclear power.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:16 AM
link   

www.nbcnews.com...

U.S. Rescues Two Saudi Fighter Pilots After Splashdown Near Yemen
The U.S. Air Force and Navy rescued two Saudi pilots Friday after they ejected from their F-15 fighter over the Gulf of Aden during combat operations against Houthi rebels in Yemen.


This looks fishy to me, another downed plane. . . . .



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: sosobad
a reply to: Xcathdra


To bring it back around to the op topic we should keep an eye on the UN and see what type of UNSC resolution, if any, are passed concerning Yemen


It will be very telling the UN's intentions if they announce or don't announce resolutions. It will show their true colours.


Russia nor China, so far, have not outright refused the notion of a UN resolution.

All it takes is just one veto.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord

This one (Saudi Arabia) was from technical error according to media accounts.

The second plane (Sudan) was shot down over Yemen.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


Some things to consider.


One thing, as far as you are concerned. Iran this Iran that, Iran, Iran, Iran.

Last I heard it was Saudis dropping bombs on Yemen soil. But lets focus on Iran, right?

Lets overlook that the 'western backed coalition forces' are the ones violating yet another ME countries sovereignty.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


Russia nor China, so far, have not outright refused the notion of a UN resolution.

All it takes is just one veto.

Yah, after US misused "Humanitarian Grounds" to topple Libya they kind of lost trust in the US in the UN Security Council. Thats why China and Russia veto whatever mandate the US seeks… anywhere.


Case in Point, Syria and now Yemen. Has there been a declaration of war, a resolution proposed to give a mandate to pound Yemen?

Whats the point, right? US doesn't care, they will begin bombing whomever, wherever. Why go through the moves of seeking "world permission"?



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr

One thing, as far as you are concerned. Iran this Iran that, Iran, Iran, Iran.

Because they are involved.





originally posted by: intrptr
Last I heard it was Saudis dropping bombs on Yemen soil. But lets focus on Iran, right?

Last I heard the Houthis are backed by iran so yes, Iran will get some of the focus.




originally posted by: intrptr
Lets overlook that the 'western backed coalition forces' are the ones violating yet another ME countries sovereignty.

So far the united nations doesn't agree with you.

So while I have "Iran Iran Iran this Iran that Iran you apparently have west west west all west western backed. iran violated Yemens sovereignty by using the Houthis.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Xcathdra


Russia nor China, so far, have not outright refused the notion of a UN resolution.

All it takes is just one veto.

Yah, after US misused "Humanitarian Grounds" to topple Libya they kind of lost trust in the US in the UN Security Council. Thats why China and Russia veto whatever mandate the US seeks… anywhere.


Case in Point, Syria and now Yemen. Has there been a declaration of war, a resolution proposed to give a mandate to pound Yemen?

Whats the point, right? US doesn't care, they will begin bombing whomever, wherever. Why go through the moves of seeking "world permission"?





Reminds me of what Carlin said about war and bombing people. This also does seem a bit like Lybia, minus the vast resources to loot with impunity.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra


So while I have "Iran Iran Iran this Iran that Iran you apparently have west west west all west western backed.

Iran isn't dropping bombs in Yemen, the Saudis are, so yah.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr



Yah, after US misused "Humanitarian Grounds" to topple Libya they kind of lost trust in the US in the UN Security Council. Thats why China and Russia veto whatever mandate the US seeks… anywhere.

You should re-read the UNSC resolution on Libya for starters. Secondly Russia and China didn't object to it when they could have. One could argue that Russia and china are just as responsible for what occurred in Libya as the west is by allowing the resolution.


As for trust I was not aware there really was any when it comes to China, Russia the US etc. We have ideological differences whose goals are not compatible with each other.





originally posted by: intrptr
Case in Point, Syria and now Yemen. Has there been a declaration of war, a resolution proposed to give a mandate to pound Yemen?

Didn't completely read my posts did ya? if you did you would have seen where I talked about whats occurring in the UN regarding Yemen. Saudi Arabia notified the UNSC as they were required to do under the charter. However the UN charter does not require advanced notification prior to hostilities starting. They just have to be informed of why.





originally posted by: intrptr
Whats the point, right? US doesn't care, they will begin bombing whomever, wherever. Why go through the moves of seeking "world permission"?


The US is not involved in the attacks on Yemen. We are providing logistical / intelligence information. Whats occurring in Yemen is an Arab led coalition on their own.



posted on Mar, 28 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Xcathdra


So while I have "Iran Iran Iran this Iran that Iran you apparently have west west west all west western backed.

Iran isn't dropping bombs in Yemen, the Saudis are, so yah.



and Saudi Arabia is located in the ME and not the west.



new topics

top topics



 
37
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join