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.

 

Iran is indeed not Iraq - And arrogance has always led to the fall of the greatest empires...

page: 8
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Wait....you want to invade iran to stop another 9/11?

Bush was briefed by the CIA about terrorists going to use planes as missiles before hand...weeks before infact I believe.

You relise brazil a country far closer to you than iran is makeing its own nuke? Right?


What is wrong with you? Did you read any of my posts? Go back and read the pages prior to your posting. You cant come to a discussion without being briefed about what took place before hand. Don`t feed into the arrogance that is so potent.




posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Loooossseeeennnuupp! You should never enter a door that may swing around and boot you in the butt! If you were more educated in the ways of the good ''ole U.S.A., you'd know we have the best equipped, best supported, and meanest Armed Services in the world. They also exercise the utmost care in going to great lengths to insure minimal civilian causualties in any conflict we have ever been engaged in; in the past, and for the future to come. I wonder if you can say that about the country of your origin?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1wintermute1
HAHAHA!

The USA is a dying nation.

And the funny thing is, it's citizens are soo dumb due to 5o years of horrible public education, that they can't even see this fact. Hell we think columbus discovered America,we think we won WWII, and we are so stupid we actually think we can control the world.

And the sad thing is we deserve every last bit of it.

All nations rise.......all nations fall.


Ok, now do you have anything intelligent to add to the debate at hand?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
What is wrong with you?

Nothing thank you very much, how about yourself?


Did you read any of my posts?

Yes, it took damm long as well I might add...


Go back and read the pages prior to your posting. You cant come to a discussion without being briefed about what took place before hand. Don`t feed into the arrogance that is so potent.

Done that before I posted, cant you just answer the question?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by csulli456
What is wrong with you?

Nothing thank you very much, how about yourself?


Did you read any of my posts?

Yes, it took damm long as well I might add...


Go back and read the pages prior to your posting. You cant come to a discussion without being briefed about what took place before hand. Don`t feed into the arrogance that is so potent.

Done that before I posted, cant you just answer the question?


You obviously missed a whole lot then. My whole thesis on the matter at hand is that there will be no Iran US war, period. Also there is no need to invade Iran. I think you missed a few key points in the posts.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
We did not expect September 11th, it was such a shock and sent the nation into mourning.

This is an untrue statement...you the people might not have not known but the USA gov did is what I am getting at...





You refuse to believe the truth that the American government is trying to prevent another 9/11. That is the main goal here. You can rant and scream and kick all you want but the facts are facts. In the end there will be no Iran US war and that is why I wont get into the specifics of any particular outcome to such a war, but the facts are facts and the answer need not be debated as it is as clear as light who would win such a conflict.

Sorry my eyes are betraying me....stupid tiredness...what I meant to ask was, how do you think the US is "trying to prevent another 9/11." by presuring iran?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by csulli456
We did not expect September 11th, it was such a shock and sent the nation into mourning.

This is an untrue statement...you the people might not have not known but the USA gov did is what I am getting at...






While the threat may have been real and known I do not honestly believe anyone new exactly where when and who would be involved. No specifics were known as per targets and methods. There were lots of threats known at the time but to think that this could have been averted and wasnt is proposterous. The bigger question is why didnt our intelligence know more so that we would of had a real chance to avert this tragedy.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
While the threat may have been real and known I do not honestly believe anyone new exactly where when and who would be involved. No specifics were known as per targets and methods.

They didnt know the target but knew the methods.
The CIA briefed bush several weeks before the attacks of a possible terror attack by USB using planes...



There were lots of threats known at the time but to think that this could have been averted and wasnt is proposterous. The bigger question is why didnt our intelligence know more so that we would of had a real chance to avert this tragedy.

They did know more...but...read up on NI and you'll get an idea of how hard it is to get info...from the little I have read about NI they have opened my eyes to the intel services...



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:07 PM
link   
Yes in essence that is truth. By pressuring Iran not to create nuclear bombs our safety is a little bit more ensured. It is only a small part of the larger goal. And before you comment on this, by stating what others have already, read all the posts. I dont want to re-debate what I have already, you can see my opinions and views, they are already posted. They can have their nuclear power plants just no bombs.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
They did know more...but...read up on NI and you'll get an idea of how hard it is to get info...from the little I have read about NI they have opened my eyes to the intel services...


What is NI?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
Yes in essence that is truth. By pressuring Iran not to create nuclear bombs our safety is a little bit more ensured. It is only a small part of the larger goal. And before you comment on this, by stating what others have already, read all the posts. I dont want to re-debate what I have already, you can see my opinions and views, they are already posted. They can have their nuclear power plants just no bombs.

I have read all the posts...except all of siros's...

Your safety is increased marginally but the USA does seem to specifically be targetting third world countries with this "no nuke" thing....I mean come on there are lots of second and first world countries trying to make nukes but I see no threats against them...also the US shouldnt really have nukes because its a threat to world safety....


Ps NI is Northern Ireland...

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456

Originally posted by 1wintermute1
HAHAHA!

The USA is a dying nation.

And the funny thing is, it's citizens are soo dumb due to 5o years of horrible public education, that they can't even see this fact. Hell we think columbus discovered America,we think we won WWII, and we are so stupid we actually think we can control the world.

And the sad thing is we deserve every last bit of it.

All nations rise.......all nations fall.


Ok, now do you have anything intelligent to add to the debate at hand?


Everything I said is true.

The fact of the matter is, we have planned on invading Iran for years now. We plan on having access to and controlling all resourses not only in the middle east but around the globe. If you must make me post links I will. I however assume that you are familiar with the project for a new American century, and other philosophies that are more than influential in our government at this time.

Iran has a right to Nuclear energy jsut as we do. We are using that as a smokescreen just as we did with WMD's and Iraq to fool the ignorant American public into support for another war. Just like the ignorant public was fooled into believing(and still do) that Saddam had WMD's, and/or anything to do with 9/11.

If you had any knowledge of military tactics, and geography you could clearly see that what we are doing is a classical cordon move.We have secured Afghanistan on the east flank of Iran, and are currently trying to secure the west flank which is Iraq. In the middle is Iran, our next target. I have supplied a map if you are not familiar.

We need Iran because we have been sucking oil from the sudis for years, it is almost gone. We must procure new sources

It is our arrogance and our need for resources that is driving this. Otherewise known as "American interest's". If you listen closely that is all we ever say we are protecting.

Was that intelligent enough for you or do you need some links so you can go read some?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:16 PM
link   


Classic Cordon move.

dictionary.reference.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp


Your safety is increased marginally but the USA does seem to specifically be targetting third world countries with this "no nuke" thing....I mean come on there are lots of second and first world countries trying to make nukes but I see no threats against them...also the US shouldnt really have nukes because its a threat to world safety....


Ps NI is Northern Ireland...
[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]


Third world countries are constantly in transession and pose a greater threat to the rest of the world. That is why they need not possess nuclear weapons. It is a greater danger to all because the authority is constantly changing, and with that I dont mean the heads of state but the people at the lower ends of security and such. It is quite real that it would be much easier for a terrorist to gain control of a nuclear weapon from N.Korea or Iran rather then say India or the USA.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456

Originally posted by devilwasp


Your safety is increased marginally but the USA does seem to specifically be targetting third world countries with this "no nuke" thing....I mean come on there are lots of second and first world countries trying to make nukes but I see no threats against them...also the US shouldnt really have nukes because its a threat to world safety....


Ps NI is Northern Ireland...
[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]


Third world countries are constantly in transession and pose a greater threat to the rest of the world. That is why they need not possess nuclear weapons. It is a greater danger to all because the authority is constantly changing, and with that I dont mean the heads of state but the people at the lower ends of security and such.


You assume because a nation is not secure is will use nuclear weapons?Then how do you explain the fact that the ONLY nation on earth to actually use a nuclear weapon IS the USA(against an already defeated foe might I add)



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
Third world countries are constantly in transession and pose a greater threat to the rest of the world. That is why they need not possess nuclear weapons. It is a greater danger to all because the authority is constantly changing, and with that I dont mean the heads of state but the people at the lower ends of security and such. It is quite real that it would be much easier for a terrorist to gain control of a nuclear weapon from N.Korea or Iran rather then say India or the USA.

Every country is a threat to the rest of the world...
It would also be much easier for them to gain a nuke from brazil and get it to the US with ease.....



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Your theoriess are totally conspiratal and thus fit well within the borders of this site. However I do not agree with one of your ideas and also respect the opinions of all as I do not set out to insult others. Dont insult my intelligence I`ve seen more maps then the almanac.



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Every country is a threat to the rest of the world...
It would also be much easier for them to gain a nuke from brazil and get it to the US with ease.....


Every one is always out to get the usa huh? Paranoid schitzophrenia on a national scale !

Perhaps that's because we know we have our due coming?Guilty consceience?



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by csulli456
Your theoriess are totally conspiratal and thus fit well within the borders of this site. However I do not agree with one of your ideas and also respect the opinions of all as I do not set out to insult others. Dont insult my intelligence I`ve seen more maps then the almanac.

He does put a good question forward though...why should the US get nukes?
Because its a democracy?
Its as curruptable as ANY regime...



posted on Mar, 25 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1wintermute1
You assume because a nation is not secure is will use nuclear weapons?Then how do you explain the fact that the ONLY nation on earth to actually use a nuclear weapon IS the USA(against an already defeated foe might I add)


I never ever claimed a nation that is not secure would use a nuke. Are you reading the material, all the material or just seeing what you want. Dont twist my words.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join