It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A number of political observers and activists today sounded “a red alert” after allegations surfaced this week that Vice President Dick Cheney has ordered Strategic Command (STRATCOM) to make contingency plans for a nuclear strike against Iran in the aftermath of another “9-11 type attack” on the United States.
Cheney’s orders first surfaced in an article by Philip Geraldi in the Aug 1, 2005, issue of American Conservative. Geraldi was unavailable for comment, but excerpts of the article went on to say:
In May a conference of the 188 signatory nations to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) will be held in New York City to put a spotlight on this problem. A huge march is planned for May 1. Advocates of nonproliferation will once again try to draw attention to the immorality and illegality of such weapons. But will the eight nations that possess nuclear weapons-the United States, Russia, the United Kingdom, France, China, India, Pakistan, and Israel-actually take steps toward eliminating their arsenals?
The prognosis is not good. The preparatory meetings for the May conference ended in failure, with nonnuclear nations objecting to the intransigence of the nuclear-weapons states, noting how a world of nuclear haves and have-nots is becoming a permanent feature of the global landscape. The United States insists that the problem is not with those who possess nuclear weapons, but with states, such as Iran and other nations, trying to acquire them. To which Brazil responded: “One cannot worship at the altar of nuclear weapons and raise heresy charges against those who want to join the sect.” Faced with this stalemate, the NPT is eroding, and an expansion of the number of states with nuclear weapons, a fear which produced the NPT in 1970, is looming once more.
...the elimination of such weapons will not be possible without a new architecture of security based on an adequate verification system.
In 1995, on its twenty-fifth anniversary, the NPT (virtually every country in the world except India, Pakistan, and Israel has signed the treaty) was indefinitely extended. In agreeing to that extension, the nuclear powers made three promises: a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty would be achieved; negotiations to ban the production of fissile material would be concluded; “systematic and progressive efforts globally” to eliminate nuclear weapons would be made. None of these promises has been kept.
On November 17, 2004, President Vladimir Putin of Russia confirmed that his country is “carrying out research and missile tests of state-of-the-art nuclear missile systems” and that Russia would “continue to build up firmly and insistently our armed forces, including the nuclear component.” The United Kingdom, France, and China are all busy modernizing their nuclear arsenals. Similarly, NATO adheres to its stated policies that such weapons are “essential.”
The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that at least forty countries have the capability to produce nuclear weapons, and criticizes the failure of export control systems to prevent an extensive illicit market in nuclear items
The word of the Lord came to me; Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal; prophesy against him and say: 'This is what the Sovereign Lord says: I am against you, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. I will turn you around, put hooks in your jaws and bring you out with your whole army - your horsemen fully armed, and a great horde with large and small shields, all of them brandishing their swords. Persia, Cush and Put will be with them,
Originally posted by Rouschkateer
Should we fear the countries without, or with, the nuclear technology?
So are we as bad as they are? Why don't we be the bigger country and relinquish our weapons first as a sign of good faith?
Think of this scenario. What if Israel decides to drop a bomb on Iran's nuclear development center to prevent them from stockpiling nuclear weapons? This isn't a fairy tale what if. Remember that Israel did this exact thing to Iraq back in the early 80's.
Iran would of course retaliate, and to do so it would need to cross over Iraq where we have over 150,000 troops hanging out. We would be literally stuck in the middle of a war between Israel and Iran. We know that Israel has nuclear weapons, and Iran probably has a couple of their own. Israel is likely to ramp up the amount of force quickly due to the small size of their nation. The chance of a nuclear exchange happening is very likely. Again there we are in the middle and Iran might decide to neutralize the US presence in the area with a nuclear weapon.
Presto! You have your nuclear war. While we don't like this scenario, its actually in Israel's best interest to do this very thing. They have the United States forces in Iraq as a buffer, and Iran's current nuclear stockpile is limited. If they wait then Iran could build up a stockpile that would wipe out Israel for sure.
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
lol, sign of good faith?
In theory maybe, but not reality.
1. If say Russia decided to get rid of their weapons do you think we'd follow suit? Don't think so. So why would they do it if we got rid of our weapons?
2. Nuke are the ultimate deterant. It'd be utterly stupid to come against us with nuke when we have nukes to retaliate with. If we don't have nukes, then what's stopping them?
Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Also, Iran and Iraq...eh....they don't necessarily see eye to eye. Not sure they'd be so open to allow the Iranian army to prance through their lands.
also Gomer with all its troops, and Beth Togarmah from the far north with all its troops
think it's accepted by most Biblical scholars (Not me I'm not a scholar) that Togarmah is what we now call Turkey. If you get Turkey involved in the mix then Iran could bypass the whole of Iraq. Turkey is an Islamic state so It's not a stretch to say that they would help out Iran. The route they would then take goes through Syria. A very interesting side-note is the prophecy that Isaiah makes in Isaiah 17:1""See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins. ". If they take the Syrian route then this would be a likely outcome. This chapter also mentions that many of the people in Israel will be killed which would sound reasonable in a war between Israel and Iran and Syria.