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.

 

3 more days lead to UNSC for Iran?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
NR

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 04:41 AM
link   
I noticed that some around Nov.23-24 there will be a resolution than probably a UNSC for us. Now if this happend than it would be a big mistake because we can finnaly kick all the inspectors out and limit all the nuclear checks by IAEA, the second good part is that China and Russia will vetoe it and they no longer would care about all the nuclear inspections or the words that is going to pop out of U.N's mouth. What do you guys think?....




posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
I think if we would have given Saddam more support during the Iraq/Iran War , Iran and it's nukes would not even be an issue today.

So it will be left up to Israel to take care of the problem now because it seems that no one else has the courage to take care of it.


NR

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Classified Info
I think if we would have given Saddam more support during the Iraq/Iran War , Iran and it's nukes would not even be an issue today.

So it will be left up to Israel to take care of the problem now because it seems that no one else has the courage to take care of it.


Support them with what? more chemical/biological weapons so that Iraqi bombers can come and drop it on civilians and soldiers? I think if you didn't support Iraq during the war than all of this wouldn't even happen. Can't wait till we kick them all out and Ahmadinejad is going to give Bush a big nice reward.


[Admin edit] We don't "shoot the finger" on ATS... Springer...

[edit on 21-11-2005 by NR]

[edit on 11-21-2005 by Springer]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 05:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by NR
Ahmadinejad is going to give Bush a big nice reward.

The only "bird" to be thinking of right now.... Is a turkey.


LMAO, that made my day.

In all seriousness, I hope they dont get referred to the UNSC.
Puppet regimes have a habit of turning their backs on you (Saddam for example), its best to just leave Iran be.

Mod Edit: Removed Offensive Image.

[edit on 21/11/2005 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 05:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by NR
Can't wait till we kick them all out and Ahmadinejad is going to give Bush a big nice reward.


He will give Bush a nice big reward? I'm sure he will be hunkered down somewhere nice and safe.

It would be more accurate to say that Ahmadinejad is going to give American woman and children a nice big reward. And if he ever tries that, Iran will forever become a sea of glass.


NR

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 05:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Classified Info

Originally posted by NR
Can't wait till we kick them all out and Ahmadinejad is going to give Bush a big nice reward.


He will give Bush a nice big reward? I'm sure he will be hunkered down somewhere nice and safe.

It would be more accurate to say that Ahmadinejad is going to give American woman and children a nice big reward. And if he ever tries that, Iran will forever become a sea of glass.



That posts doesn't make sense and now your just changing the subject. Why would we care about American people or i say atleast Ahmadinejad? lmao stop changing the subject dude and say with the topic Iran will be a sea of glass or will float in the water etc... If bush wants this for his own good than he wouldn't reccomend putting us into UNSC.

[edit on 21-11-2005 by NR]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 05:55 AM
link   
I think that the US and/or Isreal will blow up your nuclear powerplants if there are no inspections, and there is nothing the inferior Iranian military can do to stop it. No unsupervised nuclear power for you, Iran.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by NR
I noticed that some around Nov.23-24 there will be a resolution than probably a UNSC for us. Now if this happend than it would be a big mistake because we can finnaly kick all the inspectors out and limit all the nuclear checks by IAEA, the second good part is that China and Russia will vetoe it and they no longer would care about all the nuclear inspections or the words that is going to pop out of U.N's mouth. What do you guys think?....


I think.....this is a lose-lose situation for US.

Refering Iran to the UNSC will achieve NOTHING, literally - NOTHING.
There is no way in hell either Russia or China will let sanctions be opposed on Iran, and without them there's no point trying.


Originally posted by Classified Info
And if he ever tries that, Iran will forever become a sea of glass.


If you're suggesting, that USA would Nuke Iran, that I doubt that will happen.

If they do, that will give the justification and go ahead for countries like China to nuke countries like Taiwan.

It WILL cause a full out nuclear war.

If Iran laucnhes a nuke at USA, then they will be able to intercept it with either Star Wars or conventional anti-balistic missile missile.


Originally posted by American Mad Man
I think that the US and/or Isreal will blow up your nuclear powerplants if there are no inspections, and there is nothing the inferior Iranian military can do to stop it. No unsupervised nuclear power for you, Iran.


Never going to happen.

Do you have any idea how heavily guarded the nuclear reactor in Iran is?

No NATO planes will get within a hundred, many hundreds of kilometres near it without getting 10 missiles shot at them.

And don't forget, Russia has an AF base with Mig 29OTVs fairly close to Iran.
I'm sure they would love nothing more than to prove their newly upgraded birds in combat.


Now getting back to what I was saying, this is a lose-lose situation for USA.

They really truely have no power over what will happen.

This leaves Israel.
What are they going to do? They have Iran's allies between them and Iran, and an air strike won't work as I already said.


All the talk is just that - talk.

They may launch some efforts, but they will not succeed.


Iran WILL have their nuclear power, and I'm confident they will prove that it is for civilian purposes, and not for making nuclear warheads



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 07:08 AM
link   
The thing with China is we have trade talks coming up at the end of the month. And if enough countries in the UN are concerned with it the US could(and I do mean hypothetically) use these trade talks to convince China to change their position. And that well could bring Russia along as well.

And as far as no NATO aircraft being able to get within 100 kilometers withough getting 10 missiles shot at it. There is more to an airstrike than just sending in your planes, first you take out those radars with strike aircraft with radar homing missiles and jaming pods. After that way is clear then send in your attack aircraft to take out the targets you so desire. What I'm saying if NATO wanted it destroyed it would be.

And Russia wont go to war with the US or any other country for that matter over this, granted they have money involved but if they were to attack a NATO country, they would be commiting political and military suicide, I mean, a declaration of war on NATO was scary during the cold war, and they are nowhere near the power they used to be.

And which allies does Iran have between them? Why try and go through Syria when I'm sure that the U.S. would gladly grant them an nice air lane to fly right through in Iraq? And I dont think the Jordanian Airforce would try to stop it at all. But then agian I will doubt an Israeli airstike just because of the political ramifications and besides that the US has much better access, but the Syrian of Jordanian airforce could not stop the Israeli airforce if they wanted to, Israel has proven that before.

I do agree that it is all just talk though, this one will be decided through diplomatic channels. Lets hope anyhow. Oh and keep in mind I'm not calling any of this fact, but my opinion based on historical observation.

[edit on 11/21/2005 by ludaChris]

[edit on 11/21/2005 by ludaChris]

[edit on 11/21/2005 by ludaChris]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:44 AM
link   
NR, I realize you love your homeland or fellow brothers but you have to be realistic.

If the issue is sent to the UN Security Council Iran should comply with everything demanded of them. If they kick out all inspectors, they are just going a long the same lines that Iraq did in 1998.

Let's remember what happened to Iraq when Saddam Hussein kicked out all inspectors:

President Clinton ordered Airstrikes on military targets in Iraq. Not that many people remember this.

If Iran kicks out inspectors, they can almost certainly expect airstrikes against their strategic military buildings and nuclear plants.

So either Iran complies, or they get a number of airstrikes. Iran won't be invaded by troops, but they will be bombed.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
If Iran kicks out inspectors, they can almost certainly expect airstrikes against their strategic military buildings and nuclear plants.

So either Iran complies, or they get a number of airstrikes. Iran won't be invaded by troops, but they will be bombed.



Then there must be a reason why they do it anyway knowning full well this could happen, half the time we never know what governments are up to.

We can just wait and see what happens after the resolution is passed (if at all).



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
If the issue is sent to the UN Security Council Iran should comply with everything demanded of them. If they kick out all inspectors, they are just going a long the same lines that Iraq did in 1998.


Exactly. If Iran carries out its suicidal plan of kicking out all inspectors if referred, Russia and China will not be able to veto. And even if they did, the U.S./Europe/Israel may act on their own initiative anyway.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manincloak
Never going to happen.

Do you have any idea how heavily guarded the nuclear reactor in Iran is?

No NATO planes will get within a hundred, many hundreds of kilometres near it without getting 10 missiles shot at them.




Yeah, OK.


B-2's could invade their airspace at will. Beyond that, AIRCRAFT ARE NOT NEEDED.

Cruise missles have both the range and the accuracy to take out a nuclear powerplant.

You were saying?


And don't forget, Russia has an AF base with Mig 29OTVs fairly close to Iran.
I'm sure they would love nothing more than to prove their newly upgraded birds in combat.



HAHAHAHA!


Yeah, thats just what Russia wants to do - start WWIII over Irans nuclear reactors.




Now getting back to what I was saying, this is a lose-lose situation for USA.

They really truely have no power over what will happen.

This leaves Israel.




Yeah, cause the US with troops and aircraft nearly completely surrounding Iran with the greatest military technology in the world can do nothing to Iran, but Isreal - a US military leach which shares no boarder with Iran - can.




What are they going to do? They have Iran's allies between them and Iran, and an air strike won't work as I already said.


First of all, just because you say an airstrike wouldn't work doesn't make it true. Both the US and Isreal could invade Iranian airspace at will and complete such a mission.

Secondly, Irans allies?

Last I checked, Jordan and Saudi Arabia were allies of the US, not Iran. Not that Isreal would automatically be allowed to enter their airspace, but they are in no way shape or form Irans Allies.



All the talk is just that - talk.


I believe Bush has proven that he is anything but just a talker.


They may launch some efforts, but they will not succeed.


Please tell me exactly what detection systems Iran has that could detect and track a US B-2 Spirit strategic bomber. Please tell me how Iran would stop a Tomahawk missle attack.




Iran WILL have their nuclear power, and I'm confident they will prove that it is for civilian purposes, and not for making nuclear warheads


They will only get it if it is under supervision the US deems adequate, otherwise every power plant will be destroyed. Bank on it.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 05:34 PM
link   
NR:

mark my words....if iran gets referred to the security counsel and it gets vetoed by china/russia.....it will die down until....the state of the union by our beloved George W. Bush. where he will lay out the case for war......then israel and american fighter jets will be en route to Iran. iran will be
burned by the good ole' usa and israel. I support israel's move if they attack first, because something needs to be done about dangerous terrorist sponsoring countries with WMD!!


NR

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Seems like people on my ignore list can't seem to be getting enough, you can post whatever you want but i won't even be seeing a dam thing. Goes for others on the list...

redmage
skippytjc
American Mad Man
Murcielago



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by NR
Seems like people on my ignore list can't seem to be getting enough, you can post whatever you want but i won't even be seeing a dam thing. Goes for others on the list...

redmage
skippytjc
American Mad Man
Murcielago


I guess thats why you know we are posting... Because you can't see our posts.


Lighten up buddy. Ignoring people that present contrary views to your own will only keep you close minded and uneducated.


Sep

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by nb25
something needs to be done about dangerous terrorist sponsoring countries with WMD!!



Good to see that we agree. The US has created some of the biggest terrorist organizations in the world, responsible for deaths in the thousands and currently has all types of WMDs. So in order to deter them from attacking countries with different views these countries have to have the ability to defend themselves.

[edit on 21-11-2005 by Sep]


Sep

posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rickey Gerard Perez
NR, I realize you love your homeland or fellow brothers but you have to be realistic.

If the issue is sent to the UN Security Council Iran should comply with everything demanded of them. If they kick out all inspectors, they are just going a long the same lines that Iraq did in 1998.

Let's remember what happened to Iraq when Saddam Hussein kicked out all inspectors:

President Clinton ordered Airstrikes on military targets in Iraq. Not that many people remember this.

If Iran kicks out inspectors, they can almost certainly expect airstrikes against their strategic military buildings and nuclear plants.

So either Iran complies, or they get a number of airstrikes. Iran won't be invaded by troops, but they will be bombed.


The Iraqis at the time had no way of striking back against the US. However if US decides to bomb Iran, Iran has many different ways of retaliating. Many people have not heard of the Badr Corps, one of if not the most powerful militias in Iraq, working with the coalition forces in order to keep southern Iraq in peace. If Iran is attacked their considerable recourses may be used against the coalition. Further more, Iran may support the Mahdi army. Also one must know that the most influential man in Iran, Grand Ayatollah Sistani, is an Iranian national who has shown himself to be pro-Iranian by meeting the Iranian foreign minister while refusing to meet any US official. His reaction would be crucial. And one must also remember that the majority of the Iraqi parliament is controlled by the pro-Iran United Iraqi Alliance. The party, which is a colation of many parties, such as the Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and Dawa, are backed and funded by Iran. The US would lose much credibility if the elected Iraqi government opposes the use of its airspace in an attack against Iran but the US goes ahead anyway. So the comparison between Iran now and Iraq in 1998 is very much irrelevant.



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by NR
.....the second good part is that China and Russia will vetoe it and they no longer would care about all the nuclear inspections or the words that is going to pop out of U.N's mouth. What do you guys think?....


Might want to reconsider your thinking, at least in regards to that assured Russian veto you keep referring to, as I indicated to you yesterday, NR.


Russia's growing anger at Iran's reluctance to compromise on its nuclear activities could help the United States and other nations seeking to refer Tehran to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats said Thursday.

Along with China, Russia is a key Iran ally and veto-wielding member of the Security Council that has opposed referring the Islamic state to the world body. But frustration in Moscow could swing the Russians closer to the U.S.-European position _ and indirectly pressure Beijing to join the mainstream, one diplomat told The Associated Press.

Iran's Nuclear Maneuverings Irk Russia


As for that assumed UNSC resolution(s) concerning Iran and its alleged peaceful intent nuclear program, again, you might want to reconsider your thinking.


VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Washington and its European allies will forgo pushing for Iran's referral to the U.N. Security Council later this week, giving Russia more time in persuading Tehran to give up technology that could make nuclear arms, diplomats and officials told The Associated Press on Monday.


The article further indicates:


But if the Russians fail to win over the Iranians, Washington and the Europeans hope Moscow and other key board members of the International Atomic Energy Agency now opposed to Security Council referral will moderate their opposition.

U.S., Europe Won't Push for Move on Iran


And as I again eluded to yesterday, NR, if the Russians fail to persuade Iran, Russia will be persuaded to side with the opposition: Washington and the EU.





seekerof

[edit on 21-11-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Nov, 21 2005 @ 07:49 PM
link   
I think in order for us to truly win the war on terror we will to make a strategic alliance with Iran similar to how we had a strategic alliance with China during the cold war. There are recent signs that the west is softening its stance on Iran's nuclear program which I think is a good move because if Iran kicked out the inspectors it would be a disaster for the US and Iran. There are several reasons we need to soften our stance on Iran. Because Iran is a predominately Shiite non Arab country who also dislikes Al-Qaeda mainly because they are Sunni Arab who kill Shiites they would be an invaluable ally against Al-Qaeda. I believe the only reason Iran has allowed Al-Qaeda to operate on its soil is because of our hard-line stance toward their nuclear program and regime. If they wanted to they could put a serious hurting on Al-Qaeda since they have no real love for them. I have even read recent articles from good sources saying that the Bush administration is thinking about possibly forming an alliance Iran in the future. That would be a win/win scenario for the US and Iran. I know many of you would think that crazy but I think it makes all the sense in the world.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join