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.

 

WAR: U.S. Official Says Iran, Syria 'Against All of Us'

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   
Speaking at a luncheon, Frances Townsend, homeland security adviser to President Bush, indicated that since Syria and Iran have allied themselves with the terrorists, they are against all of us. The comments come at a time when the U.S. is trying to exert pressure to withdrawal from Lebanon. It also comes in the backdrop of both Iran and Syria announcing that they will unite on issues of common concern.
 



story.news.yahoo.com
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States kept up the pressure on Iran and Syria on Wednesday as a senior White House security official urged the international community to demand that Tehran and Damascus stop supporting terrorism.

"State sponsors of terrorism such as Iran and Syria are with the terrorists and therefore against all of us," said Frances Townsend, homeland security adviser to President Bush.

"From this day forward the community of nations must be united in demanding a complete end to the state sponsorship of terrorism," she told the Club of Madrid, a group of former government leaders, in a luncheon speech.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The administrations seems to be trying to box in Iran by and large. Syria is already boxed in and world opinion is against them. An attack on Iran on the the other hand may truly be a go it alone strategy for the U.S. I doubt highly that even the U.K would support a war, and nor can you reliably bomb thier nuclear program into ashes either. I think that the people of Iran should be given time to reform thier own government. The signs are there and the youth of Iran are growing increasingly unhappy under the Religious Ruling Councils draconian policies.




posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:09 PM
link   
Does the Bush administration have a tad bit of schizophrenia? In my opinion we should just wait for an attack before attacking. We've already shown our ability to kick terrorist arse, now we need to focus on domestic terrorism without becoming Orwellian. We should should focus ourselves domestically to enable a effective organization against terrorism. War, trash talkin nations, and all the other stuff is not needed.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   
Although I can see the long-term good in this. We establish a democracy in Syria and Iran while routing out terror will enable the process of the Israeli/Palestinian peace talks which will lead to peace establishing an end to hatred in the middle east. Toss in a little American propaganda, and the extremist will fade away and they will be known as a fad, many will still stay but won't be very involved because of their limited resources.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Hmmm. " "State sponsors of terrorism ...are with the terrorists and therefore against all of us," said Frances Townsend, homeland security adviser to President Bush. "


Someone needs take Frances on a tour here School of the Americas



.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
The United States makes decisions for the best interest of its peoples. Certain people must be assassinated for the survival of many. Your humanitarianism is at work in assassinations, the means are crude but the end result justifies the means in the long run.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:39 PM
link   
National security agency, by your assumptions it seems that we should just assassinated more than half of our worlds leaders, just for the well been of the few.


We have in our "newest agencies" the best minds in the world, they way they talk is just what some ears wants to hear.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Wasn't there a movie out about this a few years ago with Tom Cruise in it?

They would go out and arrest people because they were going to commit a crime in the future?

Maybe Bush saw that movie one too many times.


And, why are we just targeting the middle eastern countries? What about all the other countries that support terrorism? Are they to big for us? Do we just like beating up the countries that we know we can beat up?

Maybe Bush was bullied a lot when he was a kid too...

[edit on 2-3-2005 by elderban]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
National security agency, by your assumptions it seems that we should just assassinated more than half of our worlds leaders, just for the well been of the few.


Actually no. In many ways it benefits not only the United States but also all democracy. Democracy is a franchise. In order to insure the survival of that franchise in third world nations assassinations must take place to keep those from gaining power that are corrupt. Sometimes we actually support corrupt people such as the Mahjadeen, Saddam Hussein regime, and others to insure the success of democracy. Just as communism must spread communism to insure its survival. Communist must assassinate Democracy-minded leaders in nations that communism is possible in. The world is a huge chessboard.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   
"State sponsors of terrorism such as Iran and Syria are with the terrorists and therefore against all of us,"


Oh yeah, really Mr. Townsend? I guess you should be commended for finally saying it but I'd add the rest of the middle east to that list as well. The whole place is one big den of vipers.




top topics



 
0

log in

join