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.

 

Israel presents Iranian nuclear sites to Bush at conference

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 09:38 AM
link   
www.nytimes.com...


www.khaleejtimes.com.../middleeast/2005/April/middleeast_April313.xml§ion=middleeast&col=





Ariel Sharon’s military attache presented aerial photos of Iranian nuclear installations during the Israeli prime minister’s summit with US President George W. Bush, Israeli public radio reported on Tuesday.


I did not hear about this in any media during the trip he made to see Bush.



the images proved that the Iranian nuclear programme was at a “very advanced” stage


The Israelis are now providing their own intel to the US as motivation for the conflict to escalate in the middle east.

The NY Post states more about how there is also a fear that Isreal will again pre-emptively attack Iran as it did in 1981, where as the US feels that Iran is still years away from a workable bomb, but that there is a program in place to achieve that goal.




While they have accused Iran of running a secret weapons program - under the cover of plans to build nuclear power plants for electricity - they have told Congress that any weapon is likely to be several years away. In the most recent public testimony on the subject


I know the Israelis need not ask permission, but could this meeting have been a heads up to the US that they have the proof, more proof than the US for the invasion of Iraq, and that they will move forward? It seems Cheney knows.




While American officials have rarely discussed that possibility openly, Mr. Cheney talked about it in an interview on MSNBC on Inauguration Day. "If, in fact, the Israelis became convinced the Iranians had a significant nuclear capability," he said, "given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards




posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Once again agent Isreal has presented evidenceto big brother U.S.A that another
Muslim country close by has neclear arms..Who next Siria..Jordan..Saudi Arabia..
(Never, They are the best friends of the USA while they have oil) untill all the
neighbouring countries close to Isreal are attacked and occupied leaving the Zionist
state safe andsupreme in its NO 1 position.. How many more lies are we to suffer and
how many lives are we to loose untill someone breaks the circle..



(Edited to fix caps and title)

[edit on 13-4-2005 by asala]



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Greetings and Welcome to ATS and the ATS community, andy1972.
As such, these may prove of vitl interest to you:
The use of All-Caps


This:


4.) You will not use profanity in our forums, and will neither post with language or content that is obscene, sexually oriented, or sexually suggestive nor link to sites that contain such content. Images of or links to gratuitous gore and/or mutilation are strictly forbidden. This applies to material posted to collaborative fiction and member short story forums. You will also not select usernames that contain profanity.

Terms And Conditions Of Use
Vulgarity and The Automatic ATS Censors


Thank you.





seekerof



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 11:09 AM
link   
this just gets more intresting day by day

next it will be a whistle blower that has just ran out of Iran shouting "Nuclear weapons Nuclear Weapons"


question Seekerof?
how is his reply profanity apart from the fact he doesnt know how to use cap lock



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 11:24 AM
link   
point taken...thank you for the photographic help...without people like you life would be sooooooooooooooooooo confusing for the lesser people like my good self. A cordial hello from not so sunny Spain



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Something is going to happen sooner rather than later. The US has troops either side of Iran and before long it'll have to start thinking about pulling them back home. If they want to take action against Iran, they won't want to go through all the time and cost of pulling them all back, only to have to re-deploy them all again next year or the year after. They didn't work their way into this excellent tactical position only to have to start going home.

Also, the US may think Iran won't have "the bomb" for a few years, but they won't let it get that far. Better to stop it dead in its tracks now - just in case Iran finish it quicker than expected, and then you're in a similar siutation to NK.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 11:26 AM
link   
Dear Seekerof...how do you place the groovy photos abd graphics with your name to the left of the screen.....id really like to know...thanks..



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1972
ONCE AGAIN AGENT ISREAL HAS PRESENTED EVIDENCE TO BIG BROTHER U.S.A THAT ANOTHER MUSLIM COUNTRY CLOSE BY HAS NUCLEAR ARMS..WHO NEXT SIRIA..JORDAN..SAUDI ARABIA..(NEVER, THEY ARE THE BEST FRIENDS OF THE USA WHILE THEY HAVE OIL) UNTIL ALL THE NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES CLOSE TO ISREAL ARE ATTACKED AND OCCUPIED LEAVING THE ZIONIST STATE SAFE AND SUPREME IN ITS NO.1 POSITION...HOW MANY MORE LIES ARE WE TO SUFFER AND HOW MANY LIVES ARE WE TO LOOSE UNTIL SOMEONE BREAKS THE CIRCLE..


Andy,

are you implying that the Arab/Muslim world does not have nuclear ambitions? Do you think that Israel is in no way threatened by the Muslim/Arab world?

Syria and Jordan have no oil.
You seem to live in a fantasy that the US fights Israel's wars. You forget the countless wars Israel was pulled into. Incidentally, Israel is no.1 in the middle east in almost everything except oil. So , in light of reality I presented, I think your whole statement is irrelevant.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
You seem to live in a fantasy that the US fights Israel's wars.


Unfortunately, this is a grim reality.



You forget the countless wars Israel was pulled into.


A lot of countries have been. It's not special, you know.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
You seem to live in a fantasy that the US fights Israel's wars.

Unfortunately, this is a grim reality.


Which "WARS" are you referring to?



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi

Originally posted by Aelita

Originally posted by JudahMaccabbi
You seem to live in a fantasy that the US fights Israel's wars.

Unfortunately, this is a grim reality.


Which "WARS" are you referring to?


IRAQ



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Aelita,
Basically what that I am picking up from you and this report is that the British and the US are so stupid that one report supposedly cooked-up by Israel was sufficient to put two major world powers at war against Iraq.
In case you do not know intelligence is generally collaborated and compared by the US air-force, US navy, CIA, NSA and various other organizations, Iraqi defectors are interrogated - this is compared with information received from the british military intelligence (with all it various organizations), the Australian intelligence, Israeli intelligence and from this massive amount of info a decision is reached.

It is stupid to assume that with a single report the US and Britain went to war. Give them more credit.

Another flaw in the article is the suggestion that Marc Rich's has association to the LIKUD. Actually he is closely aligned to the Labor (Likuds political rival) and very close to Shimon Peres.

As for the US fighting Israel's wars - Are you forgetting 1948? 1956? 1967? 1974? Air france highjacking of 1976? Lebanon war? and all those other small wars? Did the US fight these wars?
And just for your information Israel played a small but important role in the Gulf war (1991).
www.isayeret.com...



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   


Incidentally, Israel is no.1 in the middle east in almost everything except oil.


The fact that it's a nation of less than seven million people that gets more foreign aid from the US than all other nations combined might just have something to do with this. It's easy to be successful when you have the richest country in the world paying your bills.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Jealous?
Envious?

So what?
Lobby your Senator or Congressman if you want this changed.
It also happens to be the only democratic styled government in that region.

As for the topic: Israel presents Iranian nuclear sites to Bush at conference:

Good. The more intelligence we get the more foreign policy can be planned and shaped. Iran has stated over and over it is not planning or trying to acquire nuclear weapons; that they simply want to enrich uranium, etc. for peaceful means. Chirac is now trying to get the EU to tone down its hardline stance. Whats with that?! Typical appeasement policy. WWII and Chamberlain anyone?

Israel has every right to be worried, and if many of you were in charge of Israel right now, you'd be handing over those intelligence photos showing Iranian nuclear sites, as well. No need to lie, k?






seekerof



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:33 PM
link   
Could someone please go through the technicalities of a country having nuclear weapons? i read on a member of ATS's post that they are basically just deterrents to stop invasions. if anyone actually attacked someone with a nuclear weapon then it would be stupid because they would definitely retaliate with one as well, if they had one, causing devastating effects. is this the case? Also, probabaly a stupid question, but if a nuclear warhead was launched, is it impossible to stop? maybe this would be more appropriate as a new post, anyway...

nice 1



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1972
Dear Seekerof...how do you place the groovy photos abd graphics with your name to the left of the screen.....id really like to know...thanks..


Go to "settings" on the upper left of your screen (in blue), then click edit profile.

Put the adress of the picture you want under "avatar".



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:45 PM
link   


It also happens to be the only democratic styled government in that region.


An apartheid-style "democracy" where only one ethnic group has a say is not a democracy in any real sense.

As far as Israel being concerned, they already have 200+ nuclear warheads, as well as the means to deliver them. This is more than enough to deter any Iranian nuclear threat.

It was Israel that introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East, now they have to live with the consequences of that decision. Cry me a river...



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex



Incidentally, Israel is no.1 in the middle east in almost everything except oil.


The fact that it's a nation of less than seven million people that gets more foreign aid from the US than all other nations combined might just have something to do with this. It's easy to be successful when you have the richest country in the world paying your bills.



Wow. I wasn't aware of this statistic!

Now I know how we could save the Hubble telescope



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by sal88
Could someone please go through the technicalities of a country having nuclear weapons?


Much too complicated for a single post reply.


i read on a member of ATS's post that they are basically just deterrents to stop invasions.


This is a military theory known as MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). The idea was (during the cold war) that the nuclear powers that be would not risk firing the first shot, knowing that the otherside had so many nukes that they could not hope to destroy their retaliation ability.

This is why the US and USSR each produced THOUSANDS of nuclear warheads. In an all out nuclear war, the side that strikes first has a big advantage. Since ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missles) each can carry several warheads, and each warhead can in turn be anywhere in the world in about 45 minutes, the side that strikes first has a chance to take out a large part of the enemies nuclear arsenal.

This is also why there is what is called "the nuclear triad". This is formed of ICBMs, tactical and strategic nuclear bombs (delivered by airplane), and SSBNs (submarines each carrying a dozen or more nuclear missles). With the triad, it is very hard for your enemy to get all the different parts of your nuclear response ability.


if anyone actually attacked someone with a nuclear weapon then it would be stupid because they would definitely retaliate with one as well, if they had one, causing devastating effects. is this the case?


In theory yes. A lot though depends on the number of nuclear weapons the country has, and it's delivery method. For instance, North Korea is suspected of having anywhere from 4-12 nuclear weapons. They only have missles that can reach the US West coast though, and at that range they are probably not very accurate.

So assuming you could take out their missles before they could fire them at you, there may not be a nuclear retaliation.


Also, probabaly a stupid question, but if a nuclear warhead was launched, is it impossible to stop? maybe this would be more appropriate as a new post, anyway...


I am fairly (about 90%) sure that most countries have a sort of self destruct system built into the weapon - at least in missle delivery systems, bombs probably don't once they are dropped.

Also, the US is developing a system to shoot down nuclear warheads. Presently, it is not very reliable, but I have talked to some guys involved and according to them if one or two were launched, we could shoot them down. Of course, a country with 100's of warheads would not be dettered by this system.

Basically, we are probably safe from a North Korea type country, but Russia or China would not be effected.



posted on Apr, 13 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
An apartheid-style "democracy" where only one ethnic group has a say is not a democracy in any real sense.

As far as Israel being concerned, they already have 200+ nuclear warheads, as well as the means to deliver them. This is more than enough to deter any Iranian nuclear threat.

It was Israel that introduced nuclear weapons to the Middle East, now they have to live with the consequences of that decision. Cry me a river...


Just as Iran will for their actions, huh?
Whose crying the river here....?




seekerof




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join