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.

 

A question I cannot get an answer to....

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 06:43 PM
link   
There have been several threads about Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons recently, in a few I posed a question to everybody, in which nobody would answer. I cannot stand our president. I feel, and have from the beginning, the war on Iraq is unjust and Saddam posed no threat to anybody. And unfortunately, I fear that because of this administration's false claims, we will be less likely to acknowledge a real threat when it presents itself. I found an article that outlines my personal feelings exactly:



Armed only with boxcutters, the 19 al-Qaida hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001 killed 3,000 people and caused hundreds of billions of dollars in damage to New York City, the Pentagon and the global economy.

This toll pales in comparison with the damage that would be caused by a “nuclear 9/11” – a terrorist state or group using a nuclear weapon against the United States or its allies. Detonation of a single small nuclear weapon in a U.S. city such as Phoenix could kill more than 500,000 and cause over $1 trillion in damage.

The risk of a nuclear 9/11 is high and rising. As Harvard Professor Graham Allison writes in his outstanding recent book, Nuclear Terrorism: The Ultimate Preventable Catastrophe: “On the current path, a nuclear terrorist attack on America in the decade ahead is more likely than not.”

In the first presidential debate, President Bush and Senator Kerry agreed that the single most serious threat facing the United States is nuclear proliferation. The Bush administration’s success in countering this threat will turn first and foremost on its handling of the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

The most important action we can take to prevent a nuclear 9/11 is to stop the Iranian nuclear weapons program in its tracks. During the presidential campaign, Senator Kerry characterized the Iraq war as the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Unfortunately, what we were told about Iraq that turned out to be false – that it was a leading sponsor of anti-American terrorists and on the verge of developing nuclear weapons — turns out to be true of Iran.

There is a risk that the American people — having felt “burned” with respect to Iraq — might reflexively dismiss the Iranian nuclear threat. To fail to understand, and act upon, the dangerous nature of the Iranian regime and how close it is to acquiring nuclear weapons would be a tragedy of historic proportions.


So I created my own thread to ask the question again:

Are you willing to gamble the lives of your children on the assumption that this is another false claim?

Or, if you believe Iran should be permitted to have nuclear weapons:

Do you trust the lives of your family in the hands of Iran's fundamentalist regime?




posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Some say bush is still in pursuit of the original weapons from iraq. there just in iran



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Its a tough call you know.

On one hand, we're already busy in two battlefields (Iraq and Afghanistan.) Our supplies are dwindling, our money plummeting, and our troops underarmored, powered, and ill-equiped for a war.

Nuclear weapons aren't really as bad as some people make them out to be aswell. Theres been alot of beneficial products in pursuit of deterrence of wars because of Nuclear Weaponry. It's called MAD, Mutually Assured Destruction. It's prevented WWIII and probably plenty more superpower catfights.

And ofcourse, the problem with Nuclear weapons is obvious, theyre contamination. After all, its not the ammount of death it can cause, we have weapons that can produce the same affect without the nuclear power (MOAB for example.) But the dangerous thing about a country like Iran having it, is theyre extremism and theyre lack of regard for theyre own lives to accomplish a goal. MAD wouldn't work on Iran, because if they die, or blow themselves up to fight us infidels, they win. So it would be guarenteed that if they were looking for a way to destroy us western worlds, they'd gladly use a nuclear weapon.

But ofcourse, that presents us with a problem, doesn't it?

We're not equipped for another war. The UN is too incompetent in situations of these matter (well, of any matter really.) And if we attacked Iran, our hold in Iraq would crumble, leaving many soldiers to die.

It seems theres no solution. There is no choice that would present itself with a solution that would be beneficial.

And this is probably how its goingto be. Unless Iran attacks Isreal, its doubtful we'd invade Iran, seeing we wouldnt physically be able to do it with two wars going on.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:36 PM
link   
27id, what I don't get about your question is that it assumes that the moment Iran obtains nukes, that they will unwittingly fire them at the USA, or fire them at all. I personally believe that this is a misconception, and mostly because of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). Iran may already have a few nukes, as they have claimed "the greatest deterrent". I just have a hard time believing that they would risk utter destruction in order to put a dent in the side of the US or Israel. We, as well as our counterparts, are already living in an extremely dangerous situation, with nukes pointed at all sides.

The bigger danger of Iran obtaining nukes, IMO, is that of proliferation to terrorists. The biggest counter the US or Israel could give to that threat, is a return threat to nuke all of mecca if a nuke is detonated in a US city. There are rumors of such a threat from the US occurring, as has been discussed on ATS before. If it is verified that Iran has obtained them, then add Iran to the list in the event of a nuke attack on the US.

Ultimately though, it is in the best interests of all mankind for Nukes and other WMD's to be eliminated completely off the face of the earth. If nothing else, out of the potential, and some scientists claim likelihood, of a bad accident to happen.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:38 PM
link   
I appreciate your replies, but out of three so far, still no answers to my questions. I understand we're currently bogged down with two wars. I never even really said it must be stopped with another US led war. But I feel it should be stopped. How, I'm not sure. I guess if I had the answers, I wouldn't be an armchair quarterback debating all you other armchair quarterbacks out there.


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



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
27id, what I don't get about your question is that it assumes that the moment Iran obtains nukes, that they will unwittingly fire them at the USA, or fire them at all.


No, if that were the case, my question would be, is it worth the assured death of your family at the hands of Iran's fundamentalist leaders.

My question is, are you willing to gamble your family's lives on the hope they won't use them.

MAD would not be effective if Iran decided it was going to carry out the will of Allah, assuring their entry into paradise in death against the great Satan and the zionist pigs. How many extreme religious governments currently have nukes?



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



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Yes.

Are you prepared to risk every child in Iran on the assumption it will make a difference?



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 08:04 PM
link   
No, I would never gamble my life and families on anyone controling nuclear weapons or even the technology, problem is, there is nothing you or I could do about this and that is fact.. So thier is the answer you were looking for.


Sep

posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 08:06 PM
link   
"Are you willing to gamble the lives of your children on the assumption that this is another false claim?"

If they have a nuclear bomb, it is a gamble, it could go either way. They could use it as a deterrence, and bring stability to the ME. They could use it and destroy the world. The odds are that the first statment would come true. Iran would use it as a deterrent. Maybe not bring stability, but it will stop a war.

On the other hand, if you were to attack, there is no gamble. What will happen is: hundreds of thousands of people including children will die.

Now if I were to choose, I would take the first option. It is a gamble worth taking.

"Do you trust the lives of your family in the hands of Iran's fundamentalist regime?"

Nice wording there. I trust them more than some of the governments that possess them now.

[edit on 25-1-2005 by Sep]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Halfofone
Yes.

Are you prepared to risk every child in Iran on the assumption it will make a difference?


Thank you. Finally an answer. And I will in turn answer your question. No. I am prepared to risk no children. I never said war was the ultimate answer here. I'm hoping it does not go there. So then, to be sure no children are ever harmed in a war, do you believe every country and every government should be permitted to build nuclear weapons? Is the ultimate path to peace through a fully nuclear armed world?


Sep

posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
So then, to be sure no children are ever harmed in a war, do you believe every country and every government should be permitted to build nuclear weapons?


I think everyone should destroy them, or if there is going to be any, it should be under a world government. Something like the UN, but without the corroption.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 09:35 PM
link   
I have a family, I am a veteran, and a reality check to boot. With so many oppossing Iraq, what would make you think it will not be the same towards Iran. I usually think what would happen but I go towards my teaching of my mother before she past from this life, HOPE! No matter how worried one will get about the future for our children, we can not stop the prophecies of God. It must be fullfilled according to him. I believe in God and all I can do is live each moment, each hour, each day by loving my family upon this globe. Whatever our people (everyone) has to face in the future, at least we could come together of different cultures to pray under one roof. But we all know the answer to this, no. I wish I did have a good answer to ease your mind of what lies ahead. The only advise I can give, you may think I am a nut case? Always face the wind where you are outside. Close your eyes and let the wind or breeze go by. Type of meditation I do, it is a killer when it is sub below tho.........lol But I do this when stress comes, or something bothers me. Nature has many secrets to show, if we allow Mother earth to do so. We must learn that we can not control everything, just live the best we can as human beings as each situation comes. Worrying never solved those things for coming that has to happen beyond our chose. You are not alone is search of an answer, may be it will come where you least expect it to be. Good luck on your journey.

GI WOLVES



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 09:45 PM
link   
27JD, I am not an American, nor have I seen your previous requests, but I would venture to say by the lack of response you receive, you have your answer. When faced with the critical decision I truly believe that much of the screaching and bravado to; bomb them all, or make the country into a parking lot, or turn it into glass, will disappear. At the time I write this you had 161 views, so it is not that you are being ignored.



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sep
I think everyone should destroy them, or if there is going to be any, it should be under a world government. Something like the UN, but without the corroption.


I'm with you 100%, and for a brief period, the world was on the track of reducing nuclear weapons. Now, we've veered far off course, and countries nobody would have ever been comfortable obtaining nukes, it seems, are being permitted (in principle, because nobody here on ATS makes the decisions) to obtain them just out of spite of the US and Israel, even by American citizens who it almost seems would invite attack, just to see Bush fall, I can't stand him, but I can wait four more years. What worries me genuinely, not out of brainwashed fear or propaganda, is the fact that perhaps the most hostile nation toward my country, will soon have nuclear weapons.

These are documented facts, read this, and tell me this country will act responsibly:



There are growing indications that Iran may be planning an attack on American soil. These indicators are not secret — they appear in speeches,newspaper articles, TV programs, and sermons in Iran by figures linked to the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and other government officials, all discussing potential Iranian attacks on America, which will subsequently lead to its destruction.

A report on May 28 in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat reported that an Iranian intelligence unit has established a center called “The Brigades of the Shahids of the Global Islamic Awakening.”The paper claimed that it had obtained a tape with a speech by Hassan Abbassi, a Revolutionary Guards intelligence theoretician who teaches at Al-Hussein University. In the tape, Mr. Abbassi spoke of Tehran’s secret plans, which include “a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization.” In order to accomplish this, he explained,“There are 29 sensitive sites in the U.S. and in the West. We have already spied on these sites and we know how we are going to attack them.”

It was reported that America expelled two Iranian security guards employed by Tehran’s U.N. offices on June 29, after the mission was repeatedly warned against allowing its guards to videotape bridges, the Statue of Liberty, and New York’s subway system.This was the third time the Iranians have been caught in such activities, which could be connected to the sites mentioned in potential plans to attack America.

Mr. Abbassi’s speech further detailed that “[Iran’s] missiles are now ready to strike at their civilization, and as soon as the instructions arrive from Leader [Ali Khamenei], we will launch our missiles at their cities and installations.” In fact over the past few months, Mr. Khamenei has been vocal about the impending “destruction of the U.S.” In May, he was quoted in the Iranian paper Jomhouri-Ye Eslami as saying that “the world will witness the annihilation of this arrogant regime.” On July 5, in front of a crowd chanting, “Woe to the enemy if Khamenei commands me to wage jihad,” Mr. Khamenei said, “If someone harms our people and invades our country, we will endanger his interests anywhere in the world.”

Other Iranian religious leaders have also called for the destruction of America. The secretary general of the Guardian Council, Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati, appeared on Iran’s Channel 1 TV on June 4 and said, “Every Muslim and every honorable man who is not a Muslim must stand against the Americans, English, and Israelis, and endanger their interests wherever they may be.” When he added “They must not have security,” thousands in the audience repeated chants of “Islam is victorious, America will be annihilated.” On June 25,Mr.Jannati also led prayers and promised, “Anyone who confronted the revolution, the Imam [Khomeini], and our dedicated people eventually collapsed. America is the last one, and Allah willing it will collapse...”The following week Ayatollah Mohammad Emami-Kashani delivered the Friday sermon live on Channel 1, saying America will collapse like Genghis Khan’s empire, “I say to you the American people…you will collapse, America will collapse.”

“Time bombs within America” is how Iranian lawmaker Hamid-Reza Katoziyan described Muslims within America, who could be behind future terrorist attacks here. Speaking on Iranian TV channel Jaam-E-Jam 2 on July 27, Mr. Katoziyan warned: “The whole group of people belonging to the Arab community and…Muslims living in the U.S. are currently, in my opinion, in a special situation. Perhaps they do not walk the streets with weapons in their hands or attach bombs to themselves in order to carry out a suicide operation, but the thought is there.”

Just as statements from Iranian religious and political leaders, as well as TV programs, have focused on attacking America, so has the print press. An editorial in the July 6 edition of the Iranian daily Kayhan, the conservative paper affiliated with Mr. Khamenei, issued another warning for the future: “…the White House’s 80 years of exclusive rule are likely to become 80 seconds of hell that will burn to ashes…That very day, those who resist [Iran] will be struck from directions they never expected. The heartbeat of the crisis is undoubtedly [dictated by] the hand of Iran.”

The report by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States asks: “September 11 was a day of unprecedented shock…The nation was unprepared…How can we avoid such tragedy again?”Taking seriously Iran’s threatening words and actions is an important first step.


daily.nysun.com...



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 10:22 PM
link   
The U.S. is already gambling with the lives of its children in this tragedy, or do soldiers not count? Not to mention the free spending on the lives of non combatant muslims who just happen to get in the way of the bullets and bombs thrown to take out the combative types.

The United States has already entered into two wars and taken over both countries based upon the September 11 2001 attack. An event which has so far brought no living persons allegedly involved in that attack to justice through convictions. It has also brought us the extreme tragedy of the Iraq WMD non-threat which not only sees the daily destruction of innocent muslims caught in the crossfire of this hell that has been given to them over a "mistake", but has no visible end in sight to the violence.

No leaders on this planet can be trusted, especially not the current U.S. administration who actually is engaging in hostilities at this point in time. Hostilities which are leaving Iran's leaders on edge concerning this war being taken to their country.

IMO, its just a matter of who shoots first at this point. I'm not sure how big the first shot will be, but it will be taken by one side. The U.S. is dead-set on the fraudulent War on Terrorism, and Iran is already in its sights. The only thing you can do is hope the body count won't be too high, but thats not going to be the case due to modern military lethality.

[edit on 25-1-2005 by Frith]



posted on Jan, 25 2005 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
The U.S. is already gambling with the lives of its children in this tragedy, or do soldiers not count?


Soldiers are not children. They are young adults. They are well aware of what their job entails. Those "children" are pretty effective in combat as well.



Not to mention the free spending on the lives of non combatant muslims who just happen to get in the way of the bullets and bombs thrown to take out the combative types.


Would you say more innocent lives spent than if the rulers of Iran decide to make good on their beliefs against Israel, and Iran is vaporized?



IMO, its just a matter of who shoots first at this point. I'm not sure how big the first shot will be, but it will be taken by one side.


I agree, I hope we're wrong.



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 12:19 AM
link   
IMHO: I think that Islamic fundamentalism/ Islam has been the problem since its inception. Muslims can claim that ,because of their barbarity and lack of respect for human lives, they have brought many civilisations down. Well guess what they are still at it! people in western Europe especially north western Europe and Us have been lucky as because of their geographical location they were not affected much by Muslim in the past centuries, however, end of 20th century and start of 21st century are very different as the world we live in is not that big anymore! I mean given the technology available to us and of course the terrorist too, they can directly target some of the civilisations that were not in a camels reach before!

I think people need to stop being PC and the futile attempt to logically communicate with these fundamentalist as it is not possible.

They used to kill their own daughters alive 1500 years ago, burry them to be precise! OK would that have made sensee then? and now they are hell bent on spreading their religion everywhere and they believe that they are entitled to by their holy book.

of course now I can see many people coming out and calling me racist but I assure you that I am only stating facts as I have seen them.

I am sure people would argue that there are millions of Muslims that are out there which are not active or terrorist and I agree but that doesn't mean anything as the problem is with the Majority of Moslem leaders and activists.

they have blocked reform by sheer brutality. Anybody who opposes Islam is condemned to death especially if they come from a Muslim back ground.

The fight is with Islam ,call it fundamental Islam if you want. As we move into a global village we need to agree on some standards which some call human rights and enforce them everywhere. Freedom of speed or religion can not be allowed to confuse things. Muslim should not be able to enslave their wives! they should not be able to publicly behead someone or cut their hand off! The practise of stoning someone to death doesn't even belong it past let alone future! I mean why is it that everybody understands when we say that Nazism can not be practiced but when one mentions Islam (read fundamentalist if it makes you happier) we get all these cries of foul speech or racism?



Iran is not the enemy, Iran is just another victim of Islam! we got conquered by them 1400 years ago and have not recovered yet. Ayatollahs running Iran are not originated from Iran but Arabia(black turban is testimony to that).


Iran was on its way to freedom and civilisation till 1979 and then something happened! what? I have no idea but we got conquered again by Islam



just keep this in mind when you are fighting "Iran". some of the people in there might be on your side so use that.

anyway my point was that I think somebody needs to be brave enough out there and mention the true enemy. Plus what is this talk of US military being run down? most of the battle will be fought by Navy and Air Force and I don't see them hard pressed!

out.


Sep

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:39 AM
link   
"Iran was on its way to freedom and civilisation till 1979 and then something happened!"

You could say prosperity for a few, or building up a good military, or something in that line, but saying that we were moving towards freedom under the Shah, is not quite accurate to say the least.


Sep

posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 01:40 AM
link   
"They used to kill their own daughters alive 1500 years ago, burry them to be precise!"

Get your facts straight, Muslims stopped people from burrying their children



posted on Jan, 26 2005 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sep
"They used to kill their own daughters alive 1500 years ago, burry them to be precise!"

Get your facts straight, Muslims stopped people from burrying their children


so...whats your point? What they were doing 1500 years ago has no relevance whatsoever now!

We used to hang draw and quarter people , we used to burn or drown people to see if they are a witch and we have done terrible and horrific things in the name of christianity!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join