Step 1: Warn Iran, Step 2: Warn UN. Step 3: Attack

If we use Iraq as an example, we are about to enter Step 2: Warn the UN.

www.cnn.com...

"Rice: Iran must halt nuclear program"

"BRUSSELS, Belgium (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Wednesday that Iran must live up to its international obligations to halt its nuclear program or "the next steps are in the offing."

"And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean," Rice told reporters after a meeting with NATO foreign ministers and European Union officials..."

What scares me the most is the "And I think everybody understands what the 'next steps' mean". They arent even trying to hide the fact that they dont care about world support anymore.

I have said it 100 times if I have said it once: Get ready boys and girls, suit up the Kevlar skivies and Ill see you in downtown Tehran soon...




[edit on 9-2-2005 by skippytjc]

This is not looking good.

Oh, and did you see the tv news last night? (uk news) rice said that "US and UK stand sholder to sholder on the issue of Iran"

Prepare to be suited and booted along side the British army.... we'll be there if we like it or not!

The other option:

Step 1: Warn Iran

Step 2: UN warns Iran

Step 3: UN warns Iran

Step 4: UN warns Iran

Step 5: UN warns Iran

Step 6: Iran nukes Israel

Step 7: UN warns Iran

Step 8: US takes out Iran

Step 9: Europe and UN calls US warmongers

Originally posted by junglejake
The other option:

Step 1: Warn Iran

Step 2: UN warns Iran

Step 3: UN warns Iran

Step 4: UN warns Iran

Step 5: UN warns Iran

Step 6: Iran nukes Israel

Step 7: UN warns Iran

Step 8: US takes out Iran

Step 9: Europe and UN calls US warmongers

You forgot the other 12 UN warns Iran..........

The U.N. is a piece of crap. They don't do anything but bitch about stuff. It's corrupted.

Originally posted by junglejake
The other option:

Step 1: Warn Iran

Step 2: UN warns Iran

Step 3: UN warns Iran

Step 4: UN warns Iran

Step 5: UN warns Iran

Step 6: Iran nukes Israel

Step 7: UN warns Iran

Step 8: US takes out Iran

Step 9: Europe and UN calls US warmongers

LOL, I do have to laugh at this one.

You did forvget the last step:

Step 10: UN hastily hides profit from illegal dealings with Iran prior to US attack.

She doesn't even care if they are cooperating with the IAEA, she still wants them to be brought before the Security Council.

Just like Iraq who admitted inspectors, destroyed weapons, gave the report that the security council asked for etc...
It wasn't good enough.

I think there's nothing Iran could do that would be good enough.

Originally posted by junglejake
The other option:

Step 1: Warn Iran

Step 2: UN warns Iran

Step 3: UN warns Iran

Step 4: UN warns Iran

Step 5: UN warns Iran

Step 6: Iran nukes Israel

Step 7: UN warns Iran

Step 8: US takes out Iran

Step 9: Europe and UN calls US warmongers

And what exactly has Israel done for us lately that would warrant going to war for them?

as posted by AceOfBase
I think there's nothing Iran could do that would be good enough.

Five words:
Dismantle and get rid of.




seekerof

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by AceOfBase
I think there's nothing Iran could do that would be good enough.

Five words:
Dismantle and get rid of.

seekerof

Seeker, I think they understand this, and they mean that even that wouldnt be enough to stop an attack. Of course thats how I interpet thier opinion.


PS, ever read that PM I sent you? I guess its moot now...

[edit on 9-2-2005 by skippytjc]

Originally posted by negativenihil
And what exactly has Israel done for us lately that would warrant going to war for them?

Well, I would hope that if Iran nuked anyone, the US would step up to the plate while the UN argues batting order.

I was just going through my video collection and looked and some clips from the buildup to the war.
I had almost forgotten how impatient Bush was to go to war with Iraq.
That guy was just itching for a war.

He didn't care that Iraq had allowed inspectors, he said that was just to buy time. He even called the weapons inspectors "so called inspectors"

2003-01-21 Bush blasts allies, Iraq (CBS).rm

2003-01-23 US facing opposition in the UN, Iraq (CBS).rm

2003-02-10 US vs France, Germany on Iraq (CBS).rm

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I was just going through my video collection and looked and some clips from the buildup to the war.
I had almost forgotten how impatient Bush was to go to war with Iraq.
That guy was just itching for a war.

He didn't care that Iraq had allowed inspectors, he said that was just to buy time. He even called the weapons inspectors "so called inspectors"

2003-01-21 Bush blasts allies, Iraq (CBS).rm

2003-01-23 US facing opposition in the UN, Iraq (CBS).rm

2003-02-10 US vs France, Germany on Iraq (CBS).rm

Ace, you ever read Tommy Franks book? I didnt read the whole thing, but he stated that months before Bush started to publicly rattle the sabers against Iraq he was already taking forces from Afghanistan for Iraq. It was something like 4-5 months If I remember correctly.

perhaps if we let iran bomb israel back into the days of jesus the other arab countries would embrace us for not interceding at the destruction of the jews. we can make friends with all arabs because their worst enemy is gone and we could stop babysitting israel....i really wish i was in charge

Originally posted by skippytjc
Ace, you ever read Tommy Franks book? I didnt read the whole thing, but he stated that months before Bush started to publicly rattle the sabers against Iraq he was already taking forces from Afghanistan for Iraq. It was something like 4-5 months If I remember correctly.

I haven't read it but it wouldn't surprise me.
I think they started preparing the public for war in August of 2002.
Rumsfeld publicy stated that the US policy was for regime change in Iraq back in August 2002 and don't know if there was any mention before then.

2002-08-09 Secretary Rumsfeld says containment policy against Iraq has not done the job.ram (defenselink.mil)



[edit on 9-2-2005 by AceOfBase]

Exactley! Iraq did EVERYTHING they were told to do and Bush still attacked them. No WMDs, no mass graves, no threat to America, they were following orders from America, and Bush still invaded them! WHy the hell would Iran listen to Bush when it is clear nothing you do is good enough, he will still attack you.

This analysis from www.freerepublic.com... [dated Dec 30th, 2004]:

Iran's nuclear program, if unchecked, could well lead to further proliferation. The most obvious concern would be among Iran's neighbors. Mustafa Kibaroglu of Bilkent and Harvard Universities warns, "voices are starting to be heard from within Turkish society promoting the idea of going nuclear" in response to developments in Iran (Kibaoglu, "Iran's Nuclear Program May Trigger the Young Turks to Think Nuclear, " Carnegie Endowment Non-Proliferation Project, December 22, 2004). A September18, 2003, report entitled "Saudis Consider Nuclear Bomb" in the British Guardian newspaper was based on serious Saudi thought about the implications of Iranian developments, as analyzed in PolicyWatch 793 ("Toward a Saudi Nuclear Option" by Simon Henderson, October 16, 2003, exploring the substance behind widespread rumors Pakistan might help Saudi Arabia on nuclear matters).

[...]

Russia holds a particularly powerful instrument for influencing Iran. Moscow strongly supports Iran's nuclear power program. Disagreements about the 1995 contract for the construction of the Bushehr nuclear power plant and related facilities -- initially to include enrichment facilities -- were a major issue in U.S.-Russian relations all during the Clinton years, despite several U.S.-Russian agreements to limit Russian nuclear cooperation with Iran to just that one power plant. The Iranian leadership has placed great political importance on the completion of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, which -- after many delays from the original completion date of 2000 -- is now due to be fueled and begin operations in mid- or late-2006. If Russia were to quietly inform Iran that Bushehr cannot be fueled if the talks with Europe break down, that would be a strong incentive to Tehran to reach agreement with the EU. Such a Russian position would be a logical outgrowth of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin's agreement to the G-8 statement on Iran at their last summit in Sea Island, Georgia, last June.
[...]

The West could provide Russia with additional reasons to reinforce the G-8 common position about Iranian nuclear activities if it were to address Russian commercial interests about nuclear fuel. In theory, Iran's enrichment program should be a worry for Russia, in that if Iran can enrich its own fuel, it would not need to buy Russian fuel. But in fact this has not been a potent factor in Russian thinking. Iran has been prepared to commit to take Russian fuel for at least ten years -- not surprising, since the Iranian enrichment program is much more suited for producing the smaller amount of highly enriched uranium (HEU) needed for nuclear weapons than the much larger amount of low enriched uranium needed for a power plant.

It seems to me that we will soon see some complicity in this Iran-war plan from the soviets. The question boils down very simply. Either they are (A) against proliferation, and therefore will stand behind their G8 position in regard to Iran, as the author mentions, or (B) they are not worried about several mideast nations (Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia) going nuclear.

Why is Putin never mentioned when Iran is mentioned? If the Bushehr reactor goes online, it will be the capstone on a process which was never mentioned to the American public all the time Slick Willy was president.






[edit on 9-2-2005 by smallpeeps]

Blix, durring that period, was not doing his job an the US saw it.

"Why did they conduct themselves as they did throughout the '90s? Why deny access if you are not hiding something? What I am groping at now is whether pride was at the root of it." (Hans Blix, from The Washington Post)

Hans Blix was not only performing an inspection, but was assessing the political reasoning by Saddam and was letting his own personal beliefs impact his inspection. He knew that if he discovered something big, a war would result more than likely, but he is a pacifist. As a result, he downplayed any attempt to block them from inspecting areas (after all, it was just pride, not hiding anything) and weapons violations were not mentioned in his addresses to the UN and burried in his report. And those reports were huge. Thankfully, people did go through his reports with a fine toothed comb and discovered these violations. I'm glad he had the integrety to mention it, but disappointed that he tried to hide this from the public who was watching the UN debate.

well either way iran is an enemy, you cant expect us to leave things the way it is for much longer can you?

Iraq, Iran, NorthKorea.....were the countries that bush called "The axis of evil" , does anyone remeber his dilusional speech? Does anyone know that he intends on finishing the job that he said he would do in that speech. Does anyone now have any doubts that Iran is next on the "list". Just rember his Axis of evil speech, and then you will have no doubt as to who will be attacked..Remember the speech!!