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.

 

The American Civil War of 2005 as predicted by John Titor

page: 110
31
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by exsmokingman
that is just so ridiculous. u.n shuffles it's feet and talks peace. u.s.a attacks people,unfortunately.

There's definately a chance that US planes will carry out any attacks, but it'll be under the UN flag.

What do you mean ridiculous? Us going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2003 are the only times in recent memory that I can recall the US doing something big like that on their own and not under the UN or NATO flag or at least with their endorsement. And the UN certainly didn't object to us going into Afghanistan, so that really just leaves Iraq in 2003-present...

[edit on 25-1-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]




posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   
first i dont think it would be the UN bombing either, i think it would more likely be like israel, terrorist nuke=nuke enemy country. in this case it would def be pakistan for india or india for pakistan. UN isnt going to bomb anyone, maybe the US or britian or another country fighting, but i doubt it will be under the UN flag.

pakistan and india could go nuclear real quick. 27 knows it, that was one of the 6 scenarios in the end of the world scenarios from nuclear war wasnt it?



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
first i dont think it would be the UN bombing either, i think it would more likely be like israel, terrorist nuke=nuke enemy country. in this case it would def be pakistan for india or india for pakistan. UN isnt going to bomb anyone, maybe the US or britian or another country fighting, but i doubt it will be under the UN flag.

The only thing I could understand out of that is that you doubt it'll be a UN action (the rest I have no clue what you're trying to say).
Yet, you give no reasons why it won't be a UN action. The UN is the one warning Iran, trying to make sure they won't develop nukes. The UN is threatening sactions. The UN is condemning all the talk coming from Iran, etc.

Now tell me again why this won't be a UN action?


pakistan and india could go nuclear real quick. 27 knows it, that was one of the 6 scenarios in the end of the world scenarios from nuclear war wasnt it?

1. What does this have to do with Iran?
2. What does this have to do with Titor?

Why can't I get a straight answer!?
Just tell me! How will a UN action against Iran's nuclear facilities cause a nuclear war between India and Pakistan!?



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   
you might not be able to get straight answers because your reading level isnt beyond 4th grade. that is the only explaination of why your so cofused when everyone with an opinion different then yours, you cant understand.

i dont believe the UN will do the attackin, i believe part of the UN might, but china and russia are part of the UN and they arent going to do any attacking. there it cant be any simpler then that, if the entire UN were going to attack then yea it would be a UN attack, i dont believe this will be, i believe countries from the UN will and not the entire UN....so unless the entire UN fights its not a UN attack.

i cant believe this. you must serious have a hard time connecting any dots when a person talks. if we were in a topic about obesity and i were to say "mcdonalds food is bad for the human body, tests have shown many people have problems because of the type of food they eat. tests have also shown that people who eat mcdonalds usually or in worse condition then a similar person who doesnt. mcdonalds food also has high amounts of calories and salt." then you would proceed to say "what does this have to do with obesity?
" so then some one would say "he said mcdonalds food is bad for the body, and is a cause of obesity because of amounts people eat of it as well" then youd say something to the other person "you havent given any facts of why it is, so how can you say something like that?"

you are either so close minded you refuse to connect the dots in an attempt to make the person your debating with look stupid like they arent making sense when they are, or you truely cant comprehend what people are saying.

ive just watch you debate of why pakistan and india wouldnt get nuclear, then when i state why you ask me what it has to do with the topic...are you serious? if you cant make the inference when i said "israel would nuke its enemies" and was refering to iran and arab nations then i am clueless as to why you bother to come on here when you cant connect simple dots like that.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
first i dont think it would be the UN bombing either, i think it would more likely be like israel, terrorist nuke=nuke enemy country. in this case it would def be pakistan for india or india for pakistan. UN isnt going to bomb anyone, maybe the US or britian or another country fighting, but i doubt it will be under the UN flag.


if your could read you see that i said it couldnt. yet you even fight me on that. i said the only way pakistan and india would go nuclear would be from a terrorist attack where they go nuclear in retaliation. but you cant even get that!! im on your side that it wouldnt happen by a UN bombing and you STILL fight me....you confuse me to all hell.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
if your could read you see that i said it couldnt. yet you even fight me on that. i said the only way pakistan and india would go nuclear would be from a terrorist attack where they go nuclear in retaliation. but you cant even get that!! im on your side that it wouldnt happen by a UN bombing and you STILL fight me....you confuse me to all hell.


No, you've got it mixed up
I wish Vit, who I was originally talking to, answered and not all of you. Because now you're mixing things up. When I was talking about the UN doing anything, I'm talking about Iran. That has nothing to do with Pakistan and India.
Vit said that an attack on Iran would cause a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. I'm still waiting for an answer on how.


i dont believe the UN will do the attackin, i believe part of the UN might, but china and russia are part of the UN and they arent going to do any attacking. there it cant be any simpler then that, if the entire UN were going to attack then yea it would be a UN attack, i dont believe this will be, i believe countries from the UN will and not the entire UN....so unless the entire UN fights its not a UN attack.

lol
When I said the UN will do it, I don't mean every country in the UN!! lmao!
The U.S. has the best technology to carry out such an attack so they'll probably do any attack, but it wouldn't be a US attack. They would be doing it because of a UN resolution or something. And since it would only be an attack on their facilities, I doubt China and Russia would use their veto powers (especially since they too are telling Iran not to make nukes).


ive just watch you debate of why pakistan and india wouldnt get nuclear, then when i state why you ask me what it has to do with the topic...are you serious? if you cant make the inference when i said "israel would nuke its enemies" and was refering to iran and arab nations then i am clueless as to why you bother to come on here when you cant connect simple dots like that.

What are you talking about?
I asked you to name the scenario in which Pakistan and India nuke each other because the UN decides to stop Iran's nuclear production.
That's all I asked, because that's what VIT had suggested will happen.

So tell me, one of you (peter, vit, or you) tell me.
WHY WOULD INDIA AND PAKISTAN NUKE EACH OTHER BECAUSE OF ANY UN ACTION IN IRAN?

That's all I'm asking. Vit said that would happen. You all are seemingly agreeing. I'm asking why.
Please answer.
Before you go through any more of my post, please answer the question.

And also answer the question, what does this have to do with Titor.
Vit brought that into a Titor discussion, so he obviously feels there's a connection. So, tell us the connection.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Because it's an action not against Iran, it's a nuclear action against nuclear plants were millions of muslim live. It's a racist action and from Israël and the great satanic America.

And will not be a UN action because China and Russia will veto it or not accept it so UN wouldn't be able to make sanctions (possible economics sanctions) but no war against it. If it is all what I said on Pakistan/India is false or have almost no chance of happening.

So the people will overthrow Musharraf and mullah extremist will take the lead and India will not tolerate this and nuke em!

PLEASE THATJUSTWEIRD, READ ON THE SUBJECT!!!

And I think that one cause that could lead to civil war, it's because Bush is the WORST president in the america's history and he could very well let explode a nuclear weapon in the USA and blame who he wants.

When people will know that 9/11 and the next 9/11 is something from the Bush's administration against his own people, what do you think will happen?

[edit on 26-1-2006 by Vitchilo]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 03:00 PM
link   
Finally an answer!
Though not a very good one



Originally posted by Vitchilo
Because it's an action not against Iran, it's a nuclear action against nuclear plants were millions of muslim live. It's a racist action and from Israël and the great satanic America.

1. The UN doesn't have nukes as it's not a country, so no nukes would be used against Iran.

2. How would an action sanctioned by the UN be considered a racist action from Isreal and the US?

3. Never mind, you answered my question. "the great satanic America"?
Your hatred of America is clouding your judgement and because of that you're not making rational comments or being realistic. We live in a real world, not your own little world.


So the people will overthrow Musharraf and mullah extremist will take the lead and India will not tolerate this and nuke em!

You're still not doing a good job explaining why would the people overthrow Musharraf?
He's not that unpopular, and there is no evidence at all that any mullah are prepared or trying to take over.

And why did you pick Pakistan? There are other muslim countries out there, will the governments of those countries be overthrown as well because of any action against Iran?


And I think that one cause that could lead to civil war, it's because Bush is the WORST president in the america's history and he could very well let explode a nuclear weapon in the USA and blame who he wants.


Look, I don't necessary like Bush either, but where do you come up with this stuff?


When people will know that 9/11 and the next 9/11 is something from the Bush's administration against his own people, what do you think will happen?

Not going to happen.
1. It would take a miracle for Bush to have planned and carried out 9/11 in just 9 months. Especially since he's not the brightest one on the block.

2. If it's ever found out that he did have something to do with it, it would be dozens of years from now.
Do we know for sure who killed JFK?
Do we know for sure what happened at Roswell?
No. And we may never know.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   


1. The UN doesn't have nukes as it's not a country, so no nukes would be used against Iran.

2. How would an action sanctioned by the UN be considered a racist action from Isreal and the US?

3. Never mind, you answered my question. "the great satanic America"?
Your hatred of America is clouding your judgement and because of that you're not making rational comments or being realistic. We live in a real world, not your own little world.


1. As I said, UN will not attack Israël. It will be either Israël either US.

2. It will not be seen as an action sanctionned by the UN. It will be like Irak.

3. The great satanic America, was a cliché that I took to make you see how people think that muslim consider America as great satanic. (IMO i don't consider americans as satanic, only his government and a few ones.



You're still not doing a good job explaining why would the people overthrow Musharraf?
He's not that unpopular, and there is no evidence at all that any mullah are prepared or trying to take over.


1. Because it's a pro-US dictatorship.
2. Because they are trying to exterminate the Boutchou's people.
3. Because it would be a sign that Pakistan will not be anymore a pro-US country.
4. And you're right that any mullah are prepared for a take over but surely they want. Who don't want more power?




And why did you pick Pakistan? There are other muslim countries out there, will the governments of those countries be overthrown as well because of any action against Iran?


1. Because Pakistan is a pro-US and a muslim country.
2. Also there is Saudi Arabia that could be overthrown or that the government change policies against US.
3. Also there is Japan,China, India, Russia, Pakistan and also others countries such as Bahrain that will not like the radiations that will fly over their heads with the winds of monsoon.
4. Bahrain changed their capital 200 miles up north because of those winds.
5. There could be also fight back from chiites in Irak, in Koweti, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and in Afghanistan against US troops.
6. Also Iran will fight back with their missiles against Israël, US troops in Irak, US troops in Qatar, US troops in Bahrain, US troops in Koweti and US troops in Afghanistan.

So in fight back, Israël would turn Iran into a big glass desert.

Do you understand now the implications of such a war? It's not like we bomb Iran, nobody moves, everyone applause! Thousands of death and probably millions just because US want to save their currency!


[edit on 26-1-2006 by Vitchilo]



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   
if europe went in without the US china and russia i wouldnt call it a UN attack, id call it a european attack or a britian/france/germany attack. to me unless every nation in the UN agrees its not a UN attack, just an Allied attack. they arent the United Nations if they arent united on the cause plain and simple

please, TJW, please just read a bit. i said the UN could in no way directly cause a nuclear war between pakistan and india. anyone that says differently they are mistaken, unless the UN could suddenly control its own nukes. the US or israel could cause it, doing something stupid like another attack on pakistan soil, which indirectly causes it. but not the UN, to me the UN is worthless. and its not really the UN unless every nation agrees, which wont happen so its worthless.

i didnt mix anything up, i said a nuclear war could happen, just not because of the UN. thats my 2 cents and i am aloud to put it down whether you like it or not.



posted on Jan, 26 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
1. As I said, UN will not attack Israël. It will be either Israël either US.

2. It will not be seen as an action sanctionned by the UN. It will be like Irak.

3. The great satanic America, was a cliché that I took to make you see how people think that muslim consider America as great satanic. (IMO i don't consider americans as satanic, only his government and a few ones.

So the fact that Europe is leading the way in calling for UN sanctions means nothing right? The fact that Europe is the one bringing Russia and China aboard means nothing right?

You give absouletly no evidence that this won't be a UN action.
The UN and EU are doing more talking than the US!



1. Because it's a pro-US dictatorship.
2. Because they are trying to exterminate the Boutchou's people.
3. Because it would be a sign that Pakistan will not be anymore a pro-US country.
4. And you're right that any mullah are prepared for a take over but surely they want. Who don't want more power?

Stuff like that just doesn't pop up.
If that didn't happen when the US attacked Iraq and it was only the US and Britian doing the attacking, what makes you think something like that will happen when the UN is the one sanctioning the attack?



1. Because Pakistan is a pro-US and a muslim country.
2. Also there is Saudi Arabia that could be overthrown or that the government change policies against US.
3. Also there is Japan,China, India, Russia, Pakistan and also others countries such as Bahrain that will not like the radiations that will fly over their heads with the winds of monsoon.
4. Bahrain changed their capital 200 miles up north because of those winds.
5. There could be also fight back from chiites in Irak, in Koweti, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon and in Afghanistan against US troops.
6. Also Iran will fight back with their missiles against Israël, US troops in Irak, US troops in Qatar, US troops in Bahrain, US troops in Koweti and US troops in Afghanistan.

So in fight back, Israël would turn Iran into a big glass desert.

Do you understand now the implications of such a war? It's not like we bomb Iran, nobody moves, everyone applause! Thousands of death and probably millions just because US want to save their currency!

So you're giving worst case scenarios. Ok, I can play along.
WSC (worst case scenario):
1. UN sanctions Iran.
2. To protest sanctions, Iran says it will not support the Russia deal which it was considering
3. More evidence is gathered and presented to the UN suggesting Iran is trying to make nukes
4. Sorry this may be a little long, but I like details

5. The US joins France Germany and the UK in presenting a resolution to the UN saying Iran must stop or else
6. Russia and China aren't willing to support such a resolution yet, but do continue to urge Iran to stop
7. Isreal moves to high alert and issues warnings to Iran
8. Iran is still talking tough and saying any evidence that we have is fabricated
9. After more evidence is presented, Iran is given a deadline to halt and allow the IAEA to put the seals back on
10. Russia and China say urge Iran to do so and suggest thtat they will support any more UN resolutions after the deadline
11. Ok, I'm just going to skip ahead to the good parts

12. The US sends four fighters and Britian sends two to destroy Irans known nuclear facilities
13. Iran is pissed
14. Iran launches missles (non nuclear) into Iraq and Isreal. The ones aimed at Isreal however aren't aimed that good. 1 hits Isreal, 1 hits the Isreal-Syria border, 3 hit Jordan.
15. Jordan is pissed.
16. Iraq is pissed as only a handful of US troops are killed in the missle strikes while hundreds of Iraqis are killed
17. Iran continues the build up of troops at the border
18. skipping ahead some more
19. Most of the world is now dead or dying from all the nuclear fallout
20. Time travel is discovered



posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I just have one thing to say: LOL!

Iran doesn't have nukes. If they do, they bought them from Russia or North Korea. Any other way, they are far from building nukes. Even if they have one, they must test it as NK did.

And against what the US and Israël will present as proofs will be false, like in Irak.

And for the radiations, it's not the worst case scenario. It will happen if the us bomb the nuclear plants with nuclear weapons or not. It will be like Tchernobyl.

Anyway, we'll see in the next few weeks.

[edit on 27-1-2006 by Vitchilo]

[edit on 27-1-2006 by Vitchilo]



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Here we are in the beautiful year of 2006, and I dont really remember the American Civil War ever coming by, just for a sec I would like to voice my opinion. If any christians read these threads about John Titor and read his predicitons ( which I have ) remember what the word says, and it says NO man will know the end of days. I do see sense in some of the things that he has said but if it doesnt line up with the word then it it not worth reading. I am sorry for any offence but that is just my opion.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by GuessWhat
Here we are in the beautiful year of 2006, and I dont really remember the American Civil War ever coming by, just for a sec I would like to voice my opinion. If any christians read these threads about John Titor and read his predicitons ( which I have ) remember what the word says, and it says NO man will know the end of days. I do see sense in some of the things that he has said but if it doesnt line up with the word then it it not worth reading. I am sorry for any offence but that is just my opion.



Correct me if I am wrong, I haven't paid my Christian dues for some time ... but isn't the "end of days" supposed to be about when the world is over and god and his peeps then judge the souls of mankind, or something like that.

So, there would be no more humans on earth after judgement day... well, IF you actually took the time to read what TITOR wrote you would find out that life is still going strong in 2038, several years after the Nuke War.

Are you confusing the END of DAYS with a Nuke War? They are 2 different things. A nuke war will kill hundreds of millions of people...but there are BILLIONS of people on earth. Life will go on.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 01:24 AM
link   
Read what he says about the wars and what they will bring, he says life as we know it will be forever be changed. The point of my post and of the thread was the wars and what didnt happen in 2005. Not trying to debate, making an opinion.



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by GuessWhat
The point of my post and of the thread was the wars and what didnt happen in 2005. Not trying to debate, making an opinion.



Thanks, but I am more focused on what DID happen in 2005, than what it says in a 2000 year old book!

BTW, TITOR says that Religion will become a bigger part of everyday life and a topic of coversation after the Nuke war...sure that makes you happy!



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Its really sad people in this world cant say there opinion with out someone triing to verbally attack another. Iwill not happy because if what he says IS true then million upon millions will die, how can that make any human happy. Agian, I was not triing to debate or get a snide remark for just talking.



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 11:33 AM
link   
pssst....check this out......ever wonder where JT got those images for his time machine ? .......



www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
pssst....check this out......ever wonder where JT got those images for his time machine ? .......


www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Well? Tell me... because there's nothing to see there.

I have checked your link and there is absolutely nothing that clarifies anything. There was a little story about a hard case that supposedly could have been used for Titor's time-travel machine images.


The seperate hard cases simply don't match.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

UnExpecte



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 03:45 PM
link   
what are the chances a time machine from 2036 that holds two mini black holes would look exactly like a radiation detector from 2006 ?


its ok to admit your wrong,go ahead, try it. Its not so bad



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join