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 and North Korea Collaborating on Prapaganda?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
In a world of conflict over which nations will and will not have nuclear weapons, Iran and North Korea share many things. In the news media it seems there could be some collaboration on what is reported from both nations.. It is all in the timing and words.. Take these two following breaking news items:




Iran threatens to end nuclear spot-checks

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran threatened on Sunday to halt spot checks of its nuclear sites after the U.N. watchdog passed a resolution requiring Tehran to be reported to the Security Council over its atomic plans.

Some commentators in the Islamic country expressed surprise over how some countries that had voiced support for its nuclear stance had voted at Saturday's meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

China, Russia and South Africa, which had supported Iran, abstained from the vote, while India surprised all by voting for the resolution against traditional ally Iran and backing fellow nuclear powers, the United States, France and Britain.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.





North Korea says it has powerful 'deterrent'

SEOUL (AP) — North Korea warned Sunday it had a powerful "deterrent" against a U.S. nuclear attack, criticizing moves in Washington to authorize pre-emptive use of atomic weapons against states or terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction.

The communist nation's government did not elaborate on the deterrent, but a commentary in North Korea's official Minju Joson newspaper said that "nuclear weapons are no longer the monopoly of the U.S."

"The army and people of (North Korea) are proud of having built such a self-defensive deterrent, strong enough to protect the national dignity and security from the U.S. nuclear threat," said the commentary carried by North's Korean Central News Agency.

In February, the North publicly claimed it had nuclear weapons, but it has not performed any known tests that would confirm it can make them. Experts have said they believe the North is capable of building about six bombs.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


The timing seems suspect to me, almost as if both North Korea and Iran are reacting to something.

But what? Sanctions?

Could these two nations be forming an alliance against the USA? I think it is obvious at this point. Which has me wondering, at some point if action is taken by the USA to remove one of these threats, it would seem that both will have to be addressed in the same manner.




[edit on 25-9-2005 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Sep, 25 2005 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I'm not to sure about a timing link; but their policies are certainly responding to one thing, whose destiny affects them equally.

America (the "Christian's Great Satan") is currently engaged in delivering Iraq’s Muslim fundamentalists (mostly Shia people), a representative 60% majority over the New Iraqi democracy.
This has been at the expense of Iraq’s secular Muslim minority (almost completely Sunni) who used to be in power before we invaded them. (It happened after they had unilaterally disarmed their country of WMD’S). (Stupid I know; given we want Iran and Korea to do the same).

Now the Secular Sunni population aren’t too happy about being invaded; losing power, and now being ruled by vengeful Muslim fundamentalists. So (despite being a minority) they have apparently formed the bulk of the insurgency.
For some reason this insurgency resists our “friendly” troops as “the occupying foreigners”. Therefore because these troops belong to the “CGS” the Christians Great Satan has been “forced” into fighting, killing, and “bringing to justice” a people whose version of Islam actually accepts Christians as equals.
Meanwhile we remain committed to getting the “job done” (i.e. giving Christian hating Muslim fundamentalists, a democratically representative Iraqi democracy).

But that’s just the background; Iran and North Korea should also consider that…
1. The Iraqi government is beginning to show signs of turning against the British in Basra.
2. The Iraqi police and military have been infiltrated by insurgents from across all of Iraq’s ethnic groups.
3. The Shia insurgents are becoming an even greater than the Sunni insurgents (a long way to go too given they make up the bulk of the population!).
4. The Shia are adopting even more barbarous techniques than Sunni Muslims (I tell you their attitude to an enemies family, woman and children makes the Sunnis look like saints).
5. Even more of the Iraqi populous wants us out their country
6. We have reconfirmed our commitment to staying in their country.
7. America has been dealt two blows by god or global warming
8. The economy isn’t looking too good, and the unstable price of oil is a deterrent against a war for now at least.
9. Iran and Syria have successfully maintained their strong military alliance against invasion (formed some months ago).
10. Military recruitment is at an unsustainable low (admittedly the least important of all ten points).

Now we are so nicely tied up fighting the Secular Sunnis, and giving power to the Muslim fundamentalists (including terrorists) surely now is the time for Iran and North Korea to “flee a man when he’s down”.
Therefore no matter how rebellious against the U.S, Iran or Korea intends to be within the next decade; surely it is now that their rebelliousness should be at its peak?
I mean you would have thought that would make sense wouldn’t you?
So maybe that’s why there’s a link between these two countries behaviour? Maybe it’s because (in his old age), stupid Uncle Sam invaded the wrong country.
(Though he’s about to go into a nursing home run by China). I think Uncle Sam should be in a high security mental asylum because he invaded a country which had unilaterally disarmed, and had a leader who had brought stability for 34 years. This war may cost more lives than Saddam’s “relative brutality”. After all; the 1st Gulf War killed 250,000 but this war? Let’s just say we lack the respect to count the Iraqi civilians we kill.
Because if we didn’t even more Iraqis would reject our “gift” of anarchy, invasion, and some grand version of democracy. In all probability they would send even more of our troops back to their home country in body bags-they don’t belong.

So with a president like George Bush who started all this and a people like the Americans who actually think they democratically re-elected him (I say “think” because many people in Democrat areas where still queuing when the polls closed).
Now is not just am opportunity for Iran and North Korea to take advantage of our own stupidity, but a matter of urgency. Otherwise I bet that (for starters) we invade Iran anyway, Korea following year? I wouldn’t laugh it of.



new topics
 
0

log in

join