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.

 

For or Against War with Iran

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by cryptorsa1001
bodrul, your comment does not surprise me after looking at your avatar. You should be disgusted with yourself. The avatar compares hitler with bush. Hitler had people with mental desease fixed so they could not breed. He was involved with the occult and he killed at least 6 million jews most of them by buring them or starving them to death not to mention the millions he killed with his war machine.

Having a difference with bushes policies is one thing but comparing him to hitler is another.

Indog's posts are not based on reality so I guess neither are you.



why should i be disgusted?

1. bush always claims america is chosen by God
hitler claimed that the nazis were supperir to all others

2. i compare hitler to bush because they are the same bread

3. i will always compare the tyrent to hitler and the chances of me changing that view is more chances of bush been able to make a full sentence.

ps i like my avatar stu



by the way what is reality to you
because lies and making sh*t up seem to follow you


[edit on 24-1-2005 by bodrul]




posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
27id

In this day and age, aren't large-scale nuclear weapons just really a deterrent? There is a certain responsibility that comes with obtaining them, and imagine the paradox a country's administration is in upon staring at their first ones. "Wow, we got the bomb. We can blow em all away now, hehe, hehe, hehe. Yippee! But wait, we got 5, but they got like 10,000. Damn, you mean we just spent a gadzillion dollars for THIS? What for? We're only better off because if they use them against us, if there is anyone left, we can use ours against them. This is truely MAD."

As in Mutually Assured Destruction. Iran, even if they had them or do obtain them covertly, will come to this realization rather quickly. The way you spell things out, Iran's religious convictions will override self-preservation, by initiating a a nuke launch against Israel. The ramifications of that action have up till this point have proven too unbearable for any other nuclear-armed nation after 1945, and I can't see Iran being any different. Sure there's a few radical suicide bombers. But to commit an entire nation to certain destruction just to take out a few cities in Israel? No way.

I'd be willing to bet that even if the US or Israel went in preemptively with conventional weapons to take out some nuke facilites, and Iran already had a few well-hidden nukes, they'd be scared out of their minds to use them against any country, knowing what was coming right afterwards.



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Does this help anyone make a decision...

U.S. INTELLIGENCE OBTAINS IRANIAN NUKE PLANS

WASHINGTON [MENL] -- The U.S. intelligence community has obtained plans for what was described as an Iranian project to develop a nuclear warhead.

Officials said the plans were obtained by the CIA in November from an unidentified source. They said the source relayed more than 1,000 pages of technical drawings and documents of an Iranian nuclear missile warhead design.

In November, 2004, officials said, the CIA had sought to confirm the authenticity of the Iranian documents. The Iranian documents -- first reported by the Washington Post on Nov. 19 -- were said to outline a design for a nuclear warhead of the enhanced Shihab-3 intermediate-range ballistic missile. Officials said a warhead capable of containing a nuclear bomb appeared have been developed for the launch of the Shihab-3 in October 2004.

Iran has acknowledged that information from its nuclear program has been leaked to opposition sources and Western intelligence agencies. Since last August, Teheran has reported arrests of unidentified scientists and technicians in Iran's nuclear program.

www.menewsline.com...



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Geneticus
Does this help anyone make a decision...

U.S. INTELLIGENCE OBTAINS IRANIAN NUKE PLANS


they couldnt even find a pin if it was stuck on the back of their heads


what makes you think that thease so called plans will be trusted?
like the last time with the so called Iraq WMDs

this will just be more cry wolf by the USA



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul

Originally posted by cryptorsa1001

why should i be disgusted?
Since you live in the uk you should know the difference. I guess you are just too dumb to be able to figure it out.

1. bush always claims america is chosen by God
hitler claimed that the nazis were supperir to all others

When has bush ever said america was gods chosen people. I have listened to the majority of his speeches and have not heard it once.

2. i compare hitler to bush because they are the same bread

There is no comparison. Hitler truly was evil bush is just protecting america.

3. i will always compare the tyrent to hitler and the chances of me changing that view is more chances of bush been able to make a full sentence.

Put down the bong for a while and wake up and confront reality.

ps i like my avatar stu



by the way what is reality to you
because lies and making sh*t up seem to follow you


Point out where I have made up anything. Like I said earlier put the bong down and use your brain for a change.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by bodrul]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Gee, you're right, because the city has not acted timely enough to clean up grafitti, they obviously support what was written. How could I be so stupid, I guess that means my city government supports all the gangs that spray up the walls in my neighborhood. I knew it. Think about that claim again.


Again, read the article. The muncipality knew about the graffiti, and also knew it was common in the city. Nothing was done about it. However, who needs graffiti, when we have state terrorism against Palistine.


You didn't read anything I posted did you? YES. Israel has them. Throwing an opposing nuclear force, an irrational religious one bent on the other's destruction, is what I meant. Nuclear war will be a certainty, IMO. Is that acceptable to you? You still have not answered my question, as nobody has, DO YOU TRUST THE LIVES OF YOU AND YOUR LOVED ONES IN THE HANDS OF IRAN'S ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST LEADERS???!!! Please answer, yes or no.


No, I did read your post. I just don't concur that Iran is an irrational, extremist terrorist nation or is anymore dangerous than others. The facts suggest Iran is a modernizing, relatively peaceful nation. I am willing to reconsider if you can present me the evidence to the contrary.


How can you be SO ignorant to the obvious. Iran does not wish to exist in harmony with Israel. Your point would only hold water if there were two nations that were trying to co-exist that maybe did not get along, but both just wanted to exist in peace. IRAN WANTS TO DESTROY ISRAEL, RESEARCH IT, IT'S NOT DISPUTED!!! What on Earth makes you think this will stabilize the region?


I would suggest you don't shout, as it causes your "brain to bleed"(your words, not mine)

Please provide me hard proof that the Iranian government wants to destroy Israel.



OH MY GOD!! I think my brain is bleeding! Do you not recall that they almost went to nuclear war a few times recently? And thus far, because Pakistan could go either way, neither party is currently ruled by religious extremists who think it's a good thing to die in battle against the other, the enemy of god. If that was the case, I doubt peaceful dialog would have prevailed, and the nightmare scenario you seem to welcome, would already have occured.


Just recently, India and Pakistan just mobilized thousands of troops on each others borders. They did not go to war. This was because they were nuclear powers. Realizing their status-quo, they were galvanized into a peace dialogue and have since had the warmest Indo-Pak relations ever.

As for Pakistan, it is a dictatorship, and has a frail nuclear-command structure. It is constantly threatening India of using them, even when India was planning surgical air strikes on terrorist camps in PoK Kashmir.

Russia and US, also came to this realization in the cold war, and were forced onto the table. So, it woud appear nuclear weapons have had quite a stabalizing effect universally. They are not called "peacemakers" for no reason.


In an immensely differing situation, do you say we should have continued to allow Japan to use the WMD's they were using on the scale in which I presented to you? Does your heart not bleed for the hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, killed by Japan's bio-warfare tactics before we ended the war? What if Japan was able to gain their objective and use those bio weapons in Europe or (I know you don't care) the US?


Japan had offered a conditional surrender before the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not accepted. The nuclear attacks were not justified, rather they were used to show America's new toy.


You're right then, there is no point discussing geopolitics with me, Israel would destroy Iran from the air. Period. They would not be looking to occupy Iran, so no point in a ground invasion. And Israel would decimate any Iranian army on the move toward Israel with precision guided munitions and air power.


Israel is not America. And Iran is not Iraq. Iran has a potent air force and navy and would cause unacceptable damage to Israel.



I think you have forgotten that Israel and US are currently planning a joint invasion of Iran.



Not a nuclear attack.


It's worse than a nuclear attack. It is the worlds most powerful and imperialist power(America) combining with the regions most powerful and aggressive power(Israel) invading a sovereign nation. It's criminal. It's evil.
And if Iran had nuclear weapons - it would not have materialised.



US has used nuclear weapons since then as well. In the gulf war 1991, it used tactical nuclear weapons and since then hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died from depleted Uranium poisoning. Further, the "fanatics" you say(a term borrowed from western propoganda) have had chemical and biological weapons for a long time. Have they used them? Checkmate.



Checkmate? Whatever bio program they currently have is DEFINETLY not sufficient to completely wipe out Israel, there are a lot of logistics involved in bio-warfare, if they attacked Israel with bio weapons, Israel would nuke them, and rightfully so, I'm sure they know this, they would not obtain their objective


Henceforth, they are not an extremist and fanatical nation. An extremist and fanatical nation with the single-minded objective of Israels annihlation would have long ago showered Israeli cities with chemical and biological weapons. As I told you.

You can apply the same rationale to a nuclear attack. Iran would only have a small number of low yield nuclear weapons in a few years(assuming it is developing them) which would cause as much damage to Israel as a chemical and biological attack would. In response, Israel will completely vaporize Iran.

Finally, Iran is not a single-minded, suicide bombing, terrorist nation. I really must laugh at your highly stupid remarks that Iran is gearing up for a major suicide attack against Israel. Are you a Christian fanatic?


They were after "supposed" weapons programs that Iraq denied, but we KNOW, fully admitted by Iran, that they have a nuclear program. How are you not understanding this?


You're missing the point. Iraq was not invaded because of WMD, that was only part of the propoganda. In the same way Iran is also not being invaded because of WMD. That is just more propoganda.


I was highly against Iraq, I still am, I don't buy anything that is fed to me, I make my own observations and I feel this actually is a threat, not Iraq, not NK, but Iran is a threat to world peace. So my "little mind" is far from confused. But yours will be fried in nuclear fire if things go your way.


You are actually buying what is being fed to you by state propoganda. It's extremely clear how you shout MUST DESTROY EVIL, FANATICAL, TERRORIST, EXTREMIST NUKES OR DEATH TO THE WORLD Do you hear yourself talk? You sound as fanatical as some of those Islamic clerics.

Yet, what is hilarious about it, that Iran does not have any missiles capable of reaching you, and if it did get nukes, they would be so small and few, that they would likely be intercepted and the damage they would do would be minimal to even Israel. You do realize that the nuclear boogeyman is not so scary? The recent Tsunamis did more damage than the bomb dropped in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Iran already had a semi-nuclear bomb tragedy in 2003 in the Bam Earthquake; 30,000 died.


So then you trust yours and your families lives in the hands of Iran's government, that's all you have to say. Why won't you?


Again, you evaded my points that Iran is not what you accuse it off. Iran is not going to do as much damage to the world as US has done and is still doing.


So, you insult and stereotype one group of people, then you cry about how wrong it is to stereotype another? Enough said. I guess Bush was right, as painful as that is to say, those who are not with us, are against us. I'm concerned about the future of my son, if you wish to allow the world to be overflowing with nuclear weapons, in my eyes, you are my enemy.


It's the truth isn't it? Your government lies to you all the time and you accept it. Again listen to yourself agree with "you are with us or against us" and then ask yourself are you brainwashed?


So vested they wish to commit suicide for Iran? Don't think so, mate.


I did not say Russia and China will attack America. What I did say that it will create a lot of tensions that will grow exponentially, causing a chain reaction of events that will erupt into a world wide war. That is how other world wars in the past have been precipitated. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.

We can see this already forming on a political level.


Why even bother with joint military excercises, as long as we're having a nuke party, there's no need. The world will end. Game over for us all, even for the mighty Russia and China. But it's all worth it, right? As long as you don't end up in one of our many Nazi/American death camps for muslims and Europeans.


Yep, enjoy the fireworks you ordered. It is unfortunate that the fate of myself and my family relies on people like yourself, who just do not have a clue about what their governments are doing and sheepishly follow. Have you not even once asked yourself the question "why is my leader fighting so many wars one after the other" If the Germans had asked this question, we could have averted WWII.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 09:07 PM
link   

as posted by Indigo_Child
Please provide me hard proof that the Iranian government wants to destroy Israel.


IMHO, Indigo_Child, what you are asking for is unrealistic. It amounts to me asking you to provide "hard proof" that indeed the US goal in Iraq is to commit genocide, etc. It would likewise amount to one asking you to provide "hard proof" that Iran does not want to destroy Israel, correct? "Proof" is relative to mainly the one who brings it forward, as you and I have encountered between our conversations in other topics.

There is no "hard proof" for an ideology or a rarely mentioned agenda. There are sources that will assert and indicate such, but they remain subjective to anyone who reads them. Again, this is like the cliche that what one may view as a terrorist, another may view as a freedom fighter.
Providing such proofs for what your asking for is not something that is easily or readily found on a data research site dealing with military data, or political data, population data, etc. Again, what the member asserted, that you were addressing, is a rarely mentioned understood ideology that is apart of the Oligarchy regime of Mullahs in Iran. The continued instrument in this has been the Iranian born and backed Hezbollah. Hezbolah's goal, as with the current oligarchy regime of Mullahs in Iran, is the utter destruction of Israel. Crossreference Hezbollah with Iran and one will see the relation and thier overall intended goals.

Whether you agree with these articles (below) and what they indicate and say, is a subjective interpretive opinion, but one that cannot be wholly dismissed, though one can assert such.
IRAN DENIES WILLING TO NUKE DOWN ISRAEL
NYT says Iran wants to destroy Israel
What is Hezbollah? Who are its members?

One thing is indisputable, Indigo_Child, Iran hates Israel, so despite "hard proof" being produced to your liking or approval, one cannot fully dismiss that somewhere in that hatred and hate rhetoric they produce concerning Israel, that there is an rarely unmentioned Mullah agenda to destroy or eliminate Israel.




seekerof



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 11:54 PM
link   
Now that things seem to be escalating...what's ahead?
In my perspective,if there is a creator,such a Creator is beyond playing favorites in ideology or assigning any so-called divine right.Nepotism is a human trait,often instinctual, and a grand leveller in comparison to a Creator of such unbounded diversity-observe the vast galaxies,stars,planets,moons, creatures,down to elements,quarks and DNA,each unique in its own way.It is this self-designated egocentric belief in being 'chosen above others therefore entitled to...' that creates distrust, division & contempt in the minds of mankind,perpetuated through the ages,passed down from one generation to the next,etc.,relentlessly forging on the impressionable almost like a built-in population-control device.Like the earliest homosapien that conceived 'it',then sought the acquiescence of 'their' interpretation of 'it' from others through claimed premonition,convenient superstition,punishment or reward,its adherents seek to condition thereby dominate thy neighbor through tyranny of dialectic,rather then embrace them unconditionally as free-will human to free-will human in this small sector of the universe.The belief that an eternal omnipotent being,creating worlds from the dawn of time,with the rising & extinction of uncountable species,now as quietly & omnisciently witnessing history's armies of specks engaging armies of specks-destroying each other over ideology,violation of mind-created boundaries,ephemeral property of 'agreed' upon value,self-gratifying passion of conquest,or the defense of these,like some universal umpire bestowing exclusive authority on past to present self-proclaiming 'king of the mountain' types in their self-convinced moments of triumph on this tiny planet,is a delusion of one's grandeur cloaking itself as justifed right by divine decree in the credulous eyes of their sycophants,who echo it down to their minions,as surely as a prophet yields a profit.By studying the natural laws of phenomena,applying the results through invention,while sharing it in altruistic ways-benefical to all, is how we truly advance as a species,not by seeking or demanding converts of uncertain conclusions.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
Again, read the article. The muncipality knew about the graffiti, and also knew it was common in the city. Nothing was done about it. However, who needs graffiti, when we have state terrorism against Palistine.


Regardless of how either one of interprets the article, and even if a few ignorant city workers blinded by the anger of the unfortunate situation there, let the vandalism stand, it does not suggest that the leadership of Israel was anymore aware of it's existance, than the leaders of our countries are of graffiti on the walls in our countries. And yeah, I see alot of Israelis dressing like civilians, getting on buses where mothers with babies and children and going into nightclubs where Palestinian teens are partying, minding their own business, not in any way directly involved in the conflict itself, and purposefully detonating themselves to kill all those unsuspecting civilians. I give you Israel has been a bit too heavy handed at times, but the Israeli soldiers would not just see a Palestinian mother walking with her baby, or a couple of Palestinian teens dancing to music, and kill them.



No, I did read your post. I just don't concur that Iran is an irrational, extremist terrorist nation or is anymore dangerous than others. The facts suggest Iran is a modernizing, relatively peaceful nation. I am willing to reconsider if you can present me the evidence to the contrary.




One of Iran’s most influential ruling clerics called on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".

The speech by former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani failed to catch the attention of the western press but made waves in the Middle East.

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in its possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave anything in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.

Analysts told the Iranian Press Service that Rafsanjani's speech marks the first time a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic had openly suggested the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State.

Rafsanjani advised Western states not to pin their hopes on Israel's violence because it will be "very dangerous".

"We are not willing to see security in the world is harmed", he said, warning that a war "of the pious and martyrdom seeking forces against peaks of colonialism will be highly dangerous and might fan flames of World War III."




I would suggest you don't shout, as it causes your "brain to bleed"(your words, not mine)


No. What's causing the bleeding, is me trying so hard to understand what happened in Europe to cause what I thought were really cool people and most still are, to all of the sudden hate us so much, because of one president who only has 4 more years left in office, that they don't see if Iran gets nukes, the situation could ignite in a big way, without the help of Bush. This problem is beyond Bush.



Please provide me hard proof that the Iranian government wants to destroy Israel.




The Islamo-fascist regime of Iran is the next stop in this global war on terror. Why? Because if Iran acquires nuclear weaponry, Iran's ruling class of radical clerics -- the mullahs -- will undoubtedly target America and Israel.

Since 1979 -- when the Ayatollah Khomeini and his minions ousted the Shah -- Iranian leadership has forged alliances with a number of Islamic terrorist groups, most notably, the PLO and other Palestinian organizations. In the past few years, we've also heard that Iran has been aiding and harboring al-Qaida members. As scholar Michael Ledeen indicated in his book The War Against the Terror Masters, "Iran is the mother of modern Islamic terrorism" -- It's the premier terror state. Ledeen also underscored that, "Khomeini created one of the most dangerous international terrorist groups, Hezbollah, and Assad (Hafez al-Assad of Syria) supported it with many of the same favors." Hezbollah -- which is thoroughly enmeshed with the regimes of Iran and Syria -- is the model for terrorists as surrogates working hand-in-glove with terror sponsoring regimes. And, when enacting death and mayhem, there's nothing like the use of surrogates to help a terror state maintain plausible deniability.

In short, the web of terror seeks to destroy western civilization: America is the Big-Kahuna of the west, and Israel is the out-post of the west in the Islamic world. Vicious anti-Americanism has been endemic to this Iranian regime, with rhetoric such as "Death to America" and "America, the Great Satan" typically bandied about by hard-line fundamentalists. Although America has been dubbed the "Great Satan" by Iranian clerics, Israel is known as the "Little Satan." Moreover, the Iranian regime would like nothing better than to wipe Israel from the face of the earth and strike out against America in any way possible.


www.enterstageright.com...

Not hard proof, and written wih an obviously right tilt to it, but there are some facts in the article.



Just recently, India and Pakistan just mobilized thousands of troops on each others borders. They did not go to war. This was because they were nuclear powers. Realizing their status-quo, they were galvanized into a peace dialogue and have since had the warmest Indo-Pak relations ever.


Now, change the equation, let's say Musharraf was not in power, instead Mullah Omar former leader of the Taliban. Think the results would be the same? Think reason would have won the day, if Mullah Omar felt that India did not have the right to exist, by the wishes of Allah? And knowing if he were to die in the conflict, he would be thrust into paradise as a glorious hero? I ask again and again and again, would you entrust your childrens future to Mullah Omar's ability to make a rational, non-religion based decision?



As for Pakistan, it is a dictatorship, and has a frail nuclear-command structure. It is constantly threatening India of using them, even when India was planning surgical air strikes on terrorist camps in PoK Kashmir.


All the more reason to have more loose cannon nuclear powers, right? They will all just threaten to use them. That'll be nice.



Russia and US, also came to this realization in the cold war, and were forced onto the table. So, it woud appear nuclear weapons have had quite a stabalizing effect universally. They are not called "peacemakers" for no reason.


Yeah, those were very comforting times I'm sure, and again, neither country run by irrational religious beliefs, just money. No money in a nuclear wasteland. Get it. Nope, I guarantee you don't.



Japan had offered a conditional surrender before the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It was not accepted.




Four days after 70,000 -- 80,000 citizens of Hiroshima died from the atomic bomb blast on August 6, 1945 and many thousands more were injured, and one day after half as many residents of Nagasaki met a similar fate, the Japanese communicated to the United States their urgent desire to surrender, subject only to the condition that they might keep their Emperor.


When you offer a conditional surrender, it does not have to be agreed to, do we know the conditions the Japanese set? Do we know if it was an acceptable offer? I don't think we do. Do you have any copy or reference to the content of the conditional surrender? I would be interested to read them.

As for the US being the only ones to commit the unthinkable, heres another link I will again post, illustrating the "fair" tactics the Japanese used:



Book Exposes WWII Japanese Biowarfare Program in China

A secret Japanese Army unit, dubbed Unit 731, sprayed Chinese villages with bacteria, spiked their wells with diseases and laced their food with germs, perhaps killing up to a million Chinese in World War II, according to a new book just out in the US.

"There could be over 700,000 or even 1 million" lives lost to Japan's biowarfare program, Daniel Barenblatt, author of, A Plague Upon Humanity, said in a recent interview.

The book, published in the United States by HarperCollins, tracks Japan's development of biological weaponry from 1931 to 1945 and its use of the weapons -- bubonic plague, typhoid, anthrax and cholera -- on civilians, many of them in China.

The biowarfare weapons were sprayed by aircraft on villages, or distributed in food, or passed on through bacteria put in wells. Some early weaponry involved dropping ceramic-shelled bombs filled with live disease-carrying flies and jellied cholera emulsion.

"Japan's biological warfare program in China was, as far as we know, the first use of scientifically organized germ warfare in history," said Iris Chang, author of The Rape of Nanking, the acclaimed book about the brutal Japanese occupation of the eastern Chinese city in 1937.

Barenblatt says the number of lives lost to biological warfare has been difficult to determine because the victims and their families, many of whom lived in remote villages in China, did not know why they became ill after being exposed to biological weapons unleashed by the Japanese army.


www.china.org.cn...



The nuclear attacks were not justified, rather they were used to show America's new toy.


Were these Japanese biological assaults justified? Oh, but they were just helpless victims of US aggresion, demonic inhumanity, and lust for carnage.



Israel is not America. And Iran is not Iraq. Iran has a potent air force and navy and would cause unacceptable damage to Israel.


Yeah, in Desert Storm, Iraq had one of the largest highly feared armies in the world, they were a joke. As would be Iran. If you remember Iran and Iraq were pretty evenly matched. They wouldn't stand a chance against Israels technology. You say the aren't America? Militarily the are. Just about all the tech we have, they have. Iran's equipment would be destroyed by lasers and robots in a matter of weeks.




It's worse than a nuclear attack. It is the worlds most powerful and imperialist power(America) combining with the regions most powerful and aggressive power(Israel) invading a sovereign nation. It's criminal. It's evil.
And if Iran had nuclear weapons - it would not have materialised.


And that's worse than a nuclear attack? You're saying, you would rather see countless hundreds of thousands of people die, and unknown destruction to our environment, than to see America and Israel stop an unstable fundamentalist regime from obtaining nuclear weapons? If the rest of the world would pull their heads out of their America hating @sses, this could be an international and likely much quicker campaign with as little lost life as possible. And the UN could run it for all I care, as long as Iran does not get nukes.



Henceforth, they are not an extremist and fanatical nation. An extremist and fanatical nation with the single-minded objective of Israels annihlation would have long ago showered Israeli cities with chemical and biological weapons. As I told you.


As I clearly told you, Iran does not have the delivery means to cause much trouble in Israel at all. That's laughable. How would they shower Israeli cities? Are they just gonna cruise on through Israeli airspace? They have our vastly superior aircraft and likely heavy air defense sytems. The Iranian airforce would not make it near Tel Aviv.



You can apply the same rationale to a nuclear attack. Iran would only have a small number of low yield nuclear weapons in a few years(assuming it is developing them) which would cause as much damage to Israel as a chemical and biological attack would. In response, Israel will completely vaporize Iran.


So you're saying it's not possible, with unfettered clearance and ability to create stockpile low yield nukes, they could create a more powerful bomb? I don't believe you can claim to know why they could not. Are you involved in the field?



Finally, Iran is not a single-minded, suicide bombing, terrorist nation. I really must laugh at your highly stupid remarks that Iran is gearing up for a major suicide attack against Israel. Are you a Christian fanatic?


I doubt they are going to have a vote as to whether they initiate the destruction of Israel. The mullahs will make the decisions, if they decide that the time has come to destroy the Zionist abomination, there's not a damn thing the rest of the country can do. As you have no doubt read in my above quote, that is their universal goal, whether they actually have the nuts to act on it or not, I don't want to the world to be in the position to find out. And I'm agnostic, by the way.



You're missing the point. Iraq was not invaded because of WMD, that was only part of the propoganda.


I agree on that, Iraq was a personal vendetta between Bush and Hussein and a tad of oil. We were lied to. I never believed it. I knew Saddam was no threat. He was an ego-maniac dictator who's worst fear was losing his empire. But Iran has an active nuclear program, admitted, no propaganda there. Iran is being deceptive in regards to UN inspections, similar to Hussein, only again they do have a nuclear program, admitted. I've heard this song before, the North Korea song. They dodged and dodged, buying themselves time until they were ready to proclaim they have nukes. That's what's gonna happen in Iran, only instead of another ego-maniac like Kim Jong Il who also would never give up his empire, he doesn't do god's bidding, he pretends to be god, and his people believe him, he loves it and doesn't want to lose it. But these religious fanatics, there intentions are much harder to know, but we do know they're beliefs and position on Israel. That's enough for me.




You are actually buying what is being fed to you by state propoganda. It's extremely clear how you shout MUST DESTROY EVIL, FANATICAL, TERRORIST, EXTREMIST NUKES OR DEATH TO THE WORLD Do you hear yourself talk? You sound as fanatical as some of those Islamic clerics.


I don't think I ever said that. Please show me where I ''shout MUST DESTROY EVIL, FANATICAL, TERRORIST, EXTREMIST NUKES OR DEATH TO THE WORLD'', please, show me. And I'm fanatical? Because I do not want to see anymore countries stockpiling nuclear weapons? I would like to see ALL nuclear weapons decommisioned, everywhere. Because I'm aware allowing everybody to obtain nukes will result through the law of averages in a astronomically higher chance of nuclear conflict on Earth? And I'm fanatical? Do you her yourself talk?



Yet, what is hilarious about it, that Iran does not have any missiles capable of reaching you, and if it did get nukes, they would be so small and few, that they would likely be intercepted and the damage they would do would be minimal to even Israel.


I unlike you are not just worried about my own country, I worry about yours and everybody elses, including Iran and their people who will die in Israels retaliation. I know Iran cannot reach us, do you think I'm stupid? I never said I fear them attacking us. I fear nuclear conflict breaking out anywhere. But I'm just a self-absorbed, super patriotic brainwashed American, right?



So then you trust yours and your families lives in the hands of Iran's government, that's all you have to say. Why won't you?




Again, you evaded my points that Iran is not what you accuse it off. Iran is not going to do as much damage to the world as US has done and is still doing.


Can't answer the question, huh? Keep dodging away.



It's the truth isn't it? Your government lies to you all the time and you accept it. Again listen to yourself agree with "you are with us or against us" and then ask yourself are you brainwashed?


I never accept it. Never have. Why don't you look at my countless other posts on many issues on ATS. I despise this administration. I always knew they lied in Iraq. But the threat of a nuclear Iran is clear to even me. As for my "with us or against us", it's the personal anger I feel, when Europeans insult and demonize my country because of one redneck idiot temporarily in office. It's like the anger of losing what you thought was a friend, in this case Europe, finding out that when you're going through tough times (in this case the Bush administration who I fought tooth and nail not to see re-elected), they quickly turn on you. I hate Bush. But the threat of nuclear conflict that a nuclear Iran poses is too clear for even me not to see.




I did not say Russia and China will attack America. What I did say that it will create a lot of tensions that will grow exponentially, causing a chain reaction of events that will erupt into a world wide war. That is how other world wars in the past have been precipitated. Those who do not learn from history are condemned to repeat it.


Let's hope not. Because no matter what any of us think, I believe there will be action against Iran.



We can see this already forming on a political level.


Political turmoil will always exist in the world somewhere, that's why I'm against allowing more nuclear powers in the world, there are enough already.



Yep, enjoy the fireworks you ordered. It is unfortunate that the fate of myself and my family relies on people like yourself, who just do not have a clue about what their governments are doing and sheepishly follow. Have you not even once asked yourself the question "why is my leader fighting so many wars one after the other" If the Germans had asked this question, we could have averted WWII.


I didn't order anything. I don't have that power and would not want to face such decisions. If you knew me at all, you would know I sheepishly follow nobody, again check out previous posts of mine. I don't want my leader to start another war, instead I would like to see a unified world front against further nuclear armament of the world. With equal involvment from all concerned nations. Hopefully a unified front would prevail without a single shot fired.





[edit on 25-1-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by cryptorsa1001

Put down the bong for a while and wake up and confront reality.


i have and it sucks with pricks like that in power



Originally posted by cryptorsa1001

There is no comparison. Hitler truly was evil bush is just protecting america.



[sarcasem]protecting america that means hitler must of been protecting germany[/sarcasem]

waging war and killing people based on natural assets is good enough for me to compare that tyrent to him



Originally posted by cryptorsa1001

When has bush ever said america was gods chosen people. I have listened to the majority of his speeches and have not heard it once.



its just something i picked up when watching the news




Originally posted by cryptorsa1001
Point out where I have made up anything. Like I said earlier put the bong down and use your brain for a change.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by bodrul]


harsh words

my brain seems to switch to standby each time it comes to you


[edit on 25-1-2005 by bodrul]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:42 AM
link   
Indig child I would have lost respect for you as a result of this thread, that is if I had any in the first place. The US did not use nukes in gulf war 1. get a clue.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:49 AM
link   
It is wrong to fight iran
it will 3 vitnam
stopped this mad
all people in the islamice country hate u
stop this new crime for oil
iran hasnot any thing agianst u
dont lie anew
we must say peace only peace



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:51 AM
link   
It is wrong to fight iran
it will 3 vitnam
stopped this mad
all people in the islamice country hate u
stop this new crime for oil
iran hasnot any thing agianst u
dont lie anew
we must say peace only peace




posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Can i ask you people here a question, how can you be for war?
How can you support the killing and bloodshed?



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Can i ask you people here a question, how can you be for war?
How can you support the killing and bloodshed?



I am not for war. I do not support killing and bloodshed. I hope this can be worked out peacefully, in which everything works out for Iran, and the rest of the world. But I do not want to roll over and expose my belly like a submissive dog if they continue to dodge inspections and buy time so they can pull a North Korea, saying "it's only for energy", until they develop enough weapons to finally say, like NK, "we have the bomb now, what are you going to do about it?" Iran is the one nation IMO, that would not act responsibly with nuclear weapons. I could be wrong I guess, but can we afford for me to be right? I don't trust my destiny in the hands of Iran's mullahs.

[edit on 25-1-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 01:51 PM
link   
27id:

But I do not want to roll over and expose my belly like a submissive dog if they continue to dodge inspections and buy time so they can pull a North Korea, saying "it's only for energy", until they develop enough weapons to finally say, like NK, "we have the bomb now, what are you going to do about it?" Iran is the one nation IMO, that would not act responsibly with nuclear weapons. I could be wrong I guess, but can we afford for me to be right?


Smacks of cowardice to me. You don't want to take the chance that Iran will try and nuke you without provocation and for no reason? So instead of POSSIBLY leaving yourself open to attack, you would rather DEFINITELY kill Iranians in order to protect your own people?

Because why? Because Americans contribute more to the world than Iranians? Because Iranians are all evil and Americans are all the paragons of goodness?

Racist, cowardly and stereotypical.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:07 PM
link   
I was just in the process of responding to each one of your points, and my computer crashed! I guess it is for the good, I am getting tired of quote for quotes. Let's just look at the main points:

Your contention that Israeli government does not endorse the "Death to the Arabs" graffiti appearing all over Israeli cities.

The graffiti actually echoes the animosity held by Israel for the arabs. This is demonstrated by Israel's continuous, brutal and vicious attacks on Arab countries. As well human rights violations by Israeli soliders against Palestianians, which are as barbaric as purposefuly killing for recreation. One such instance of this was recently reported in the media and discussed on ATS, where an Iraqi solider killed a little girl for "hunting"

Your frail evidence for Iranian Fundamentalism and extremism:

Whenever I ask you for evidence, why is it, that you link me to anti-Iran propoganda web sites? One of your sources is "Iran-press-service" which is a collation of anti-Iranian claims. Do you expect me to take it seriously? No, I don't think you didn't, that is why you left out the source.

However, I think there probably is an element of truth to them. It is no secret that Iran does have it's fair share of over-zealous religious fanatics. It also no secret that Iran/Syria and Israel hate each others guts and are constantly attacking each other with rheotric.

However, it appears you seem to be insinuating this is one-sided. It is not. In fact, not only are Israel's threats more venomous and fanatical, but it constantly threatens nuclear war, to not only Iran, but everyone and even does it at the highest level of government. Further, it is not all rheotric, Israel has constantly used military force against the Arabs and has deployed a triad of nuclear forces against them. Iran's stance is only reactionary and defensive, the actual aggression is being perpetuated by Israel. Here is the evidence:


* Israeli Prime minister, Ariel Sharon "Arabs may have the oil, but we have the matches.



Israeli foreign minister, Shimon Peres; "acquiring a superior weapons system (read nuclear) would mean the possibility of using it for compellent purposes - that is forcing the other side to accept Israeli political demands, which presumably include a demand that the traditional status quo be accepted and a peace treaty signed."



Economic adviser to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, Amos rubin(1987); "If left to its own Israel will have no choice but to fall back on a riskier defense which will endanger itself and the world at large... To enable Israel to abstain from dependence on nuclear arms calls for $2 to 3 billion per year in U.S. aid." ....



During the 1973 war, Israel used nuclear blackmail to force Kissinger and Nixon to airlift massive amounts of military hardware to Israel. The Israeli Ambassador, Simha Dinitz, is quoted as saying, at the time, "If a massive airlift to Israel does not start immediately, then I will know that the U.S. is reneging on its promises and...we will have to draw very serious conclusions...



Director of the Israeli Institute for the Development of Weaponry, Munya Mardoch(1944); "The moral and political meaning of nuclear weapons is that states which renounce their use are acquiescing to the status of Vassal states. All those states which feel satisfied with possessing conventional weapons alone are fated to become vassal states.



Israel's current President, Ezar Weissman said; "The nuclear issue is gaining momentum (and the) next war will not be conventional.



In April 2002 Jewish academic David Perlmutter in the Los Angeles Times inferred Israel under some circumstances would launch revenge attacks against targets worldwide: "Israel has been building nuclear weapons for 30 years. The Jews understand what passive and powerless acceptance of doom has meant for them in the past, and they have ensured against it. Masada was not an example to follow--it hurt the Romans not a whit, but Sampson in Gaza? With an H-bomb? What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens?
"For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?"



Israel Has Nuclear Weapons and MUST Use Them and All Those Arming the Arabs Must Share the Pain!
Israel must notify each of the Arab nations and their Western backers that, if Israel is attacked or is about to be attacked with unconventional weapons (or overwhelming conventional forces), there will be a "Share the Pain" response...
Therefore, Israel would be wise to notify each country that, either pre-emptively or as a vicious second-strike option, Israel will hit all hostile parties with nuclear weapons, regardless of who launched the first attack. Israel will hold all collectively and severally responsible - as if they had met and conspired together.

...One hundred or 200 nukes will reduce the hostile cities and army sites of the Middle East to rubble in minutes. Of course, the ensuing debris would also envelope those nations who sold the Arab world the weapons of nightmares. After all, they enjoyed the money and clearly understood that what they were selling was to be targeted at Israel.
Perhaps with a dedicated and credible deterrence, the Europeans selling weapons will make some effort, along with American Arabists, to have the Arab nations stand down their plans which call for the destruction of Israel and its replacement by an Islamic State....
Prof. Martin Van Crevel, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, recently put it this way... “Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. Israel has the capability of hitting most European capitals with nuclear weapons. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that this will happen before Israel goes under.”

In further context, Martin Van Crevel told interviewer Ferry Biedermann in Jerusalem in a widely quoted interview: "We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets of our air force".... Asked if he was worried about Israel becoming a rouge state if it carried out a genocidal deportation against Palestinians, Crevel quoted former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Dayan who said "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother." Crevel argued that Israel wouldn't care much about becoming a rouge state. "Our armed forces are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that this will happen before Israel goes under.



TEHRAN TIMES -- A high-ranking Israeli officer threatened that the Zionist regime would launch nuclear attack on Islamic holy sites in the Middle East, an Israeli newspaper said Sunday.

In case Israel was attacked by states or groups, the Jewish state would respond by dropping nuclear bombs on Islamic cities such as Mecca and Medina in Saudi Arabia and Qom in Iran. The Haaretz newspaper quoted an unidentified high-ranking officer a s saying.

It is an irony of our time Iraq has been suffering for a decade because it is accused of having some capabilities of unconventional weapons, while Israel announces that it possesses nuclear weapons, but there is not any international action against it.

The officer, a guide in the Israeli military academy, was quoted as saying that Israel possesses hundreds of nuclear warheads along with their delivery systems, including long-range ballistic missiles, long-range bombers and nuclear submarines.

Indeed, while is Iraq under the pressure, Israel is the only entity in the Middle East to possess a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, including a sizable nuclear arsenal.


Recent Threats:


Isreal threats against Syria and Palestine(2004)

Israel is mounting a sustained and bloody military assault on the Gaza Strip that has left more than 20 dead.

The pretext for the latest offensive was provided by the August 31 suicide bombings of two buses in Beersheba, which killed 16 people and was claimed by the Islamic fundamentalist group Hamas. But, as so often in the past, such suicide bombings allow the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to implement pre-existing plans for attacking Palestinians.

Sharon has made clear that he intends to inflict maximum damage against Hamas before implementing his supposed “unilateral disengagement” plan, which involves withdrawing the relatively small number of 7,000 Zionist settlers from Gaza while seizing vast swathes of the much larger West Bank and its more populous settlements and permanently annexing them to Israel. Israel will also maintain control of Gaza’s borders, coastline and airspace—making it a glorified prison camp.

Hamas carried out its Beersheba bus bombings in retaliation for Israel’s assassination earlier this year of two of its top leaders, Sheikh Yassin and Abdelaziz al-Rantissi.


Recently, it was reported by the mainstream media that US and Isreael have collaborated to arm the US harpoon cruise missiles with nuclear tipped war heads. Israel said 'harbouring terrorists' are legitimate targets.

In light of all of this evidence, who do you think is more dangerous? Is it Iran that does not have any nuclear weapons and has not been aggressive towards any nation for a long time, or is Isreal, that is overly aggressive, dangerous, hostil and blackmails using threats of nuclear war. Not only that, but is even arming conventional missiles with nuclear tipped war heads - for "terrorists"

Sources:

observer.guardian.co.uk...
www.carolmoore.net...
www.wsws.org...
tbrnews.org...

[edit on 25-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jakomo
Smacks of cowardice to me. You don't want to take the chance that Iran will try and nuke you without provocation and for no reason? So instead of POSSIBLY leaving yourself open to attack, you would rather DEFINITELY kill Iranians in order to protect your own people?


Smacks of cowardice to you? You obviously are talking out your @ss, like always Jakomoff, Osama Bin Canook. You hate everything America does, no matter what. If you read anything I posted, you would see I CLEARLY stated I would like to see a peacful resolution. And Iran would not be able to nuke the US, so we would be open to nothing. I'm worried about EVERYBODY, including the Iranians, in the Middle East when nuclear war breaks out there. But you wouldn't know about that would you, you seem to be an arrogant, selfish individual, who only cares about himself, and bashing America, your LARGEST trading partner.



Because why? Because Americans contribute more to the world than Iranians? Because Iranians are all evil and Americans are all the paragons of goodness?


I said Iranians are all evil? Show me where, please. I said the religious fundamental leaders there were too irrational to have nukes. But make things up all you want, it only makes your point that much more irrelevant.



Racist, cowardly and stereotypical.


Racist? Advise how having strong reservations about the ability of ONE REGIME (not a race) to be responsible with nuclear weapons makes me racist? Cowardly? Because I want to assure my child has a stable future in a nuclear fallout free world, hopefully without having to resort to war? Stereotypical? Well, you are. You fit the stereotype of the cowardly Canadian who is the dog I was speaking of, rolling over exposing your belly to religious fanatics, afraid to confront them, so you just hope they don't harm you. Hope in one hand, and $hit in the other, see which one fills up first. I know not all Canadians fit your mold, as my father and entire family on that side, is Canadian.


[edit on 25-1-2005 by 27jd]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Indigo_Child
In light of all of this evidence, who do you think is more dangerous? Is it Iran that does not have any nuclear weapons and has not been aggressive towards any nation for a long time, or is Isreal, that is overly aggressive, dangerous and blackmails using threats of nuclear war. Not only that, but is even arming conventional missiles with nuclear tipped war heads - for "terrorists"


Indigo, I am also tired of the quote wars. And I'm not trying to side with Israel here. They also should be forced to give up their nuclear weapons. Either way, whomever is right or wrong, how is it in the interest of peace anywhere on Earth to further increase the odds of nuclear conflict? Please, I say please, answer my question I posed, but I will adjust, would you stake your childrens (if you have any) future on Iran and Israels ability to both act rationally? Israel needs to get rid of it's nukes. America needs to press that aggresively. We need to get back on the track of reducing, not increasing nuclear power on Earth.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Finally, we are arriving at reason. Now to go on from here. You need to realise that American intentions are not for the stability and peace of the Middle east, by the very fact, that it is collaborating with Israel and has been weaponizing it to destabalize the Middle East. You could say America has sponsored state terrorism.

America always knew Israel had nuclear weapons and signed a deal with Israel under Nixon, that it would turn a blind eye to it's nuclear program. America's intentions are hostile and selfish. It has nothing to do with Iran 's non-existent nuclear weapons. It has everything to do with conquest and oil.

You have said yourself that the Iraq war fought for illegal reasons. This means an administration that wages illegal wars and tells lies to it's people over and over again is guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Why would you ever want to support such a regime or trust it?

This is neo-imperialism mate, and are you really going to support neo-imperialism? Is there a good moral, ethical or logical reason too?

[edit on 25-1-2005 by Indigo_Child]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join