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.

 

US will invade Iran in '06

page: 13
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Not to mention Iran's past with other nations that they attempted to overthrow in the name of Islamic revolution in their view.
And of course their main objective to destroy Israel which has failed for the last couple of decades. I guess the nukes is considered plan B.




posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:23 PM
link   


Pat Buchanan

Time to talk to Tehran

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 4, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern

Does President Bush intend a preventive war, early this year, to effect the nuclear castration of Iran? Or are we rattling sabers?

What makes the question urgent are German reports that CIA Director Porter Goss has been in Ankara, Turkey, negotiating for U.S. use of bases for air strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Over the weekend, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said time is running out on diplomacy to deal with the Iranian nuclear threat.

The Israelis are warning that if diplomacy fails, and we do not haul Tehran before the Security Council for sanctions, Israel will denuclearize Iran herself. The end of March is said to be the deadline for when Israel decides whether the West is serious.

www.wnd.com...


Mod Edit: No Quote/Plagiarism – Please Review This Link.

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: WOT Posting Conduct – Please Review Link.

Mod Note (This Appears On Every New Thread/Post Reply Page): MEMBERS: Do not simply post news articles in the forums without comment. If you feel inclined to make the board aware of current events, please post the first paragraph, a link to the entire story, AND your opinion, twist or take on the news item.


[edit on 10/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Not to mention Iran's past with other nations that they attempted to overthrow in the name of Islamic revolution


What nations would those be?



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by deltaboy
Not to mention Iran's past with other nations that they attempted to overthrow in the name of Islamic revolution


What nations would those be?


For example Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, etc. Of course that was back in the past. Don't know exactly what Iran's true intentions are under this new president. Only what we get from his blunt speeches.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:49 PM
link   
I don't think the US will go it alone, we are walking a fine line here today, if the US gos it alone i bet alot of other nasty stuff will go down, including China dumping its entire 1 trillion reserves and we may see a recession and interest rates not unlike the 1930,s.

Israel may go it alone ?

But it needs to be 1/ U.N or 2/NATO and coalition of the willing ...

Or simply wait until they have Nukes and refuse to sell Oil to certain people and deal with it then.

Can the US afford to do another Trillion Dollar War ?

If War starts with Iran expect over $100usd per barrel of oil.

I can see US world financial dominance waving precariously in the wind atm.

Not to mention World Peace.

Scary times ahead.

Peace.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by deltaboy
Not to mention Iran's past with other nations that they attempted to overthrow in the name of Islamic revolution


What nations would those be?


For example Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, etc. Of course that was back in the past. Don't know exactly what Iran's true intentions are under this new president. Only what we get from his blunt speeches.


When exactly did Iran try and overthrow the above mentioned countries? Sources, please?



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
If War starts with Iran expect over $100usd per barrel of oil.


Scary times ahead.


If I were the next presidential hopeful, I'd promise to deliver a comprehensive national energy stragegy to ween us off of foreign oil. I don't know how; but, if we could send men to the moon, there's no reason we couldn't move into the next phase of our existence smartly, and more efficiently. With less bloodshed, to boot.

If you say we can't do that, you might as well say we never really landed on the moon.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
When exactly did Iran try and overthrow the above mentioned countries? Sources, please?



explanation-guide.info...

Iran's relations with many of its Arab neighbors were also strained by Iranian attempts to spread its Islamic revolution. In 1981, Iran supported a plot to overthrow the Bahraini government. In 1983, Iran expressed political support for Shi'ites who bombed Western embassies in Kuwait, and in 1987, Iranian pilgrims rioted at poor living conditions and treatment and were consequently massacred during the Hajj (pilgrimage) in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Nations with strong fundamentalist movements, such as Egypt and Algeria, also began to mistrust Iran. Iran created Hizballah with the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. Furthermore, Iran went on to oppose the Arab-Israeli peace process, due to it seeing Israel as an illegal country.

Iran also concerned European nations, particularly France and Germany, after its secret service executed several radical Iranian dissidents in Europe.


reference.allrefer.com...

Although the Iran-Iraq War continued to preoccupy the GCC until the belligerents agreed to a cease-fire in 1988, the focus of security concerns had shifted from Baghdad to Tehran by late 1981, when it became obvious that Iraq would not be able to defeat Iran. Even before the Iran-Iraq War had begun, the Saudis and their allies believed Iranian agents fomented demonstrations and riots among the Shia population living in the countries on the Arab side of the Persian Gulf. Renewed alarm about Iran was aroused in December 1981, when Bahraini police announced the arrest of a clandestine group of Arab men associated with the illegal Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, based in Tehran. The Saudis and most other GCC rulers believed that the group, which had a large cache of arms allegedly provided by the Iranian embassy in Manama, planned to assassinate Bahraini officials and seize public buildings as part of a plot to overthrow the regime. This incident convinced Saudi Arabia that Iran sponsored terrorist groups and inclined the kingdom to support the Iraqi war effort more openly.



GCC concerns about Iranian involvement with regional terrorism remained high for almost three years following the Bahrain incident. Between 1982 and 1985, a series of assassinations, detonations of explosives-laden automobiles, and airplane hijackings throughout the Middle East, as well as the outbreak of the tanker war in the Persian Gulf, all contributed to reinforcing the strong suspicions about Iran. From a GCC perspective, the most unsettling example of terrorism was the 1983 truck bombing of several sites in Kuwait, including the United States embassy. The Saudis and their allies generally disbelieved Iranian denials of complicity. Nevertheless, GCC security forces failed to obtain conclusive evidence directly linking Iran to the various Arab Shia groups that carried out violent acts. The lack of tangible proof prompted Oman and the UAE to improve their bilateral relations with Iran and to mediate between Riyadh and Tehran. These efforts actually led to a limited rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran. For about a year, from 1985 to 1986, the two countries cooperated on several issues including oil policy.


www.shsu.edu...

Khomeini's revolutionary regime initiated sharp changes from the foreign policy pursued by the Shah, particularly in reversing the country's orientation toward the West. In the Middle East, Iran's only significant ally has been Syria. Iran's regional goals are dominated by wanting to establish a leadership role, curtail the presence of the U.S. and other outside powers, and build trade ties.

In broad terms, Iran's "Islamic foreign policy" emphasizes:

-- Vehement anti-U.S. and anti-Israel stances; -- Eliminating outside influence in the region; -- Exporting the Islamic revolution; -- Support for Muslim political movements abroad; and -- A great increase in diplomatic contacts with developing countries.

Despite these guidelines, however, bilateral relations are frequently confused and contradictory due to Iran's oscillation between pragmatic and ideological concerns.

The country's foreign relations since the revolution have been tumultuous. In addition to the U.S. hostage crisis, tension between Iran and Iraq escalated in September 1980, when Iraq invaded Iran. Much of the dispute centered around sovereignty over the waterway between the two countries, the Shatt al-Arab, although underlying causes included each nation's overt desire for the overthrow of the other's government. Iran demanded the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Iranian territory and the return to the status quo ante for the Shatt al-Arab as established under the 1975 Algiers Agreement signed by Iraq and Iran. After eight punishing years of war, in July 1988, Iran agreed to UN Security Council Resolution 598, which called for a cease-fire. The cease-fire was implemented on August 20, 1988; neither nation had made any real gains in the war.

Iran's relations with many of its Arab neighbors have been strained by Iranian attempts to spread its Islamic revolution. In 1981, Iran supported a plot to overthrow the Bahraini Government. In 1983, Iran expressed support for Shi'ites who bombed Western embassies in Kuwait, and in 1987, Iranian pilgrims rioted during the Hajj (pilgrimage) in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. Nations with strong fundamentalist movements, such as Egypt and Algeria, also mistrust Iran. Iran backs Hizballah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command--all groups violently opposed to the Arab-Israeli peace process.

Relations with Western European nations have alternated between improvements and setbacks. French-Iranian relations were badly strained by the sale of French arms to Iraq. Since the war, relations have improved commercially but periodically are worsened by Iranian-sponsored terrorist acts committed in France.

Another source of tension has been Ayatollah Khomeini's 1989 call for all Muslims to kill Salman Rushdie, British author of The Satanic Verses, a novel many Muslims consider blasphemous. The United Kingdom has sheltered Rushdie, and strains over this issue persist.


www.biu.ac.il...

In addition to instability generated at home, the Gulf states have faced active meddling by a number of foreign powers and movements. Iran has repeatedly supported militants in the Gulf, and radical groups such as the Lebanese Hezbollah also have ties to Gulf militants.

Iran tried to create and organize a Bahraini Hezbollah organization before and during the recent spate of violence. To this end, the Revolutionary Guard's Al-Qods Force trained several Bahrainis studying in Iran as a local leadership cadre and provided the group with limited financial support. Bahraini Hezbollah actively spread propaganda against the Al Khalifa, but it was not linked to any actual acts of violence or to the larger demonstrations that occurred. (36) In 1996, Bahrain arrested 44 citizens accused of acting on Iran's behest. Today Bahrain Hezbollah probably retains limited organizational capabilities in Bahrain itself, and it almost certainly has some organizational capacity in Iran. (37)

Iran's effort to foment unrest was particularly strong in the 1980s. Iranian-backed radicals tried to initiate a coup in Bahrain in 1981. The Iranian-supported Da'wa group, which originated in Iraq but became affiliated with what later became Lebanese Hezbollah, carried out six bombing attacks in Kuwait in 1983 with personnel, weapons, and explosives smuggled from Iran. Throughout the mid-1980s, Iranian-backed groups attacked U.S., French, Kuwaiti, Jordanian, and other targets associated with perceived backers of Iraq in order to dissuade these governments from supporting Baghdad. (38) Iran has also used political violence to discredit the Saudi regime. Throughout the 1980s, Iran orchestrated demonstrations at the hajj that spilled over into violence; in 1987, hundreds of Iranian pilgrims died in riots in Mecca. In 1989, a bomb planted by a Hezbollah offshoot killed one person in Mecca. (39) During this time, the Iranian government repeatedly called for Gulf residents to overthrow their governments.


There are some more. But these are some of the sources that I have viewed and used.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
If War starts with Iran expect over $100usd per barrel of oil.


Scary times ahead.


If I were the next presidential hopeful, I'd promise to deliver a comprehensive national energy stragegy to ween us off of foreign oil. I don't know how; but, if we could send men to the moon, there's no reason we couldn't move into the next phase of our existence smartly, and more efficiently. With less bloodshed, to boot.

If you say we can't do that, you might as well say we never really landed on the moon.


Theres a fantastic product that can literally be "grown" called bio deisel, ive read alot about it lately, with such high Oil prices its a justifiable and easily renewable fuel you may find this of interest,( im seriously thinking of putting my money where my mouth is and having a crack at this infant industry) .. heres a interesting link. journeytoforever.org...

Its not the complete answer but it can go a long long way to releiving the burden.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Thanks for the link NumberCruncher.

Hey Deltaboy, while you're doing research, look into our CIAs involvement with Iran. I warn you, though, its sticky.



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:41 PM
link   
The CIA's involvement with everyone is sticky. Intelligence aint the business to go into if you want to keep your hands clean. One of my professors was involved in intelligence and he told us if you want to be effective you should be prepared to get your hands dirty.(not an exact quote but this is basically what he said.) But he also said they wouldnt be getting their hands dirty if it werent necessary and for the sake of national security. I personally think that if the CIA and NSA deem it necessary, then it should be done. While it may be a dirty job, someones gotta do it. Its just like the trashmen and janitors, if no one was there to do it, where would we be? In a mess!



posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 11:52 PM
link   
Yeah, that's true.

Personally, I'm glad I was young and dumb when I was in the Army and went and did what I did. If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn't be a happy camper.

I will never again go try and kill someone 'cos someone tells me I should. And for pay.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:14 AM
link   
how did israel become a nation again in the first place? why is iran so angry that israel took that land? do some research into the reasons behind the reasons, dig to the center of it all, more then the first couple layers, find out how it all started.

also anyone notice that on CNN everyday theres another new article about Iran, and everyday it mentions the possibility they are creating nuclear weapons. theres no doubt in my mind they are manipulating the media on this issue. iran was on 8 of the 10 headline new articles when i checked cnn. they are making everyone know iran is the target of the middle east, and they are making everyone believe that iran will get nuclear weapons. even when the quotes say something like we are restarting research but no enrichment programs its followed by a quote like much expect that they are going to enrich small amount of nuclear energy and be able to have a nuclear weapon within months.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:19 AM
link   
You almost sound surprised.
remember this:
Iraq HAS WMDs.
Iraq is seeking to USE WMDs.
Saddam WANTS to destroy america.
If left unchecked, Saddam will orchestrate, or take part in an attack on the US.

Sounds like they are playin the war drums again...

Jeez I hope I am wrong



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
how did israel become a nation again in the first place? why is iran so angry that israel took that land? do some research into the reasons behind the reasons, dig to the center of it all, more then the first couple layers, find out how it all started.

No, actually you need to do more objective research, grimreaper.
You spew that Israel stole something that they did not. Read up on the Balfour Declaration and the United Nations Partitions.

Regardless, Iran keeps sticking their nose in Israel's business and Israel is going to pound that nose into a pulp. Then maybe Iran will learn to deal with Iran other than thru words of stupidity, history revisionism, and pointless rhetoric. Iran knows what would happen if they went to war against Israel---hence their pursuance of nuclear weapons---so as to even/balance the playing field a bit.




seekerof

[edit on 11-1-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
VEGObond keeps saying that if Iran has nukes then all these bad things are going to happen; has it ever occured to him that the mere suspicion that Iran may already have nukes already gives Iran the strategic and diplomatic advantages he claims they might obtain.

[edit on 11-1-2006 by jajabinks]

[edit on 11-1-2006 by jajabinks]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
If I were the next presidential hopeful, I'd promise to deliver a comprehensive national energy stragegy to ween us off of foreign oil. I don't know how; but, if we could send men to the moon, there's no reason we couldn't move into the next phase of our existence smartly, and more efficiently. With less bloodshed, to boot.

If you say we can't do that, you might as well say we never really landed on the moon.


Dude, that is the smartest thing I'll read all day. I couldn't agree more.

Unfortunately, it's a little more complicated than that because a lot of the current and past US presidents have links to oil companies that their family or friends own. In addition, if the US were to announce tommorow a new, viable energy source world markets would crash as people tried to dump there shares in oil companies. I'm talking a MAJOR crash here. Nothing's ever easy is it?

Anyway, your idea is still great, it just means that there would have to be a gradual transition. I for one would rather see all the money that currently goes to NASA redirected to energy research and the like. Exploring space is important but we have to clean up our own back yard first



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by jajabinks
VEGObond


Oy... here we go again. What in the (sanctified fornication) is so difficult about my name? Now in this case at least somebody has seen fit to highlight the fact that they're doing it in purpose, but it would have been nice to do it in a more clever fashion. (secretly I chuckled when one member started calling me "vagabanned"- at least that one had a meaningful implication.)


has it ever occured to him that the mere suspicion that Iran may already have nukes already gives Iran the strategic and diplomatic advantages he claims they might obtain.


Suspicions don't give you the ability to shatter an opposing army if they defeat your conventional forces. Suspicions are not enough to chase America out of the gulf. Suspicions are not enough to make moderates in the region start distancing themselves from America for fear of backing the wrong side.

If you think the chatter that they might already have a few weapons is a big deal, wait until they've got sufficient weapons and means of delivery to hold UAE, Iraq, Saudi, Turkey, Israel, and eventually Europe hostage.

If the Taepo Dong 2 can do what it's supposed to and ends up in Iranian hands, we're going to be dealing with something completely unprecedented. We're talking about hardliners without much to lose having a defacto veto over any action by any nation or even the UN in Southern Asia, North East Africa, the Middle East, etc. Diego Garcia, Israel, Parts of Europe: these are just a few noteworthy locales where survival will become contingent upon cooler heads prevailing in a radical theocracy which loves to threaten genocides.

I'm not saying that Iran will launch them the minute they get them. I'm not saying they'll launch them for no good reason. What I am saying is nothing done by Iran or any group allied to Iran will be subject to international law unless the security council is willing to risk a nuclear confrontation.

If a viable and far-reaching Iranian nuclear program is tested and confirmed, Iran will have the leverage to set OPEC's prices virtually unilaterally, and nobody who isn't willing to risk a missile crisis can do anything to stop it. Can you contend with any hint of seriousness that a nation like Iran, which god knows has not gotten a fair shake from the Western World, and which above and beyond that is politically dominated by religious fanaticism, would hesitate for one moment to take actions which can nearly ruin the global economy, starve and freeze millions, and turn any semblance of order in this world on its head, if it gives them a chance to get back at those who have raped them?

Now I admit there is no moral highground to be had for the Western world. I've often liked to joke that the reason Europe has dominated the last 500 years ago, despite being johnny-come-lately in terms of having the ability, is because most powers which had the opportunity in the past just weren't as vicious or as greedy.
Be that as it may, there is no coming back with the argument that Iran has a right to arm itself and prepare itself to do widespread harm to invididuals who had no direct role in hurting them earlier.

Nuclear proliferation is dangerous. A nuclear Iran is in a position to be particular dangerous. They have every motive to do it and very little motive not to. Things have not come anywhere near as bad as they have the potential to be in a worst case scenario, and that makes this the best possible time to exhaust every peaceful alternative and do it sincerely, and then, but only then, if necessary, resort to force before the worst case scenario draws near.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:58 PM
link   
I would say the USA has a couple years before it starts another war. Either that or they open up the national debt and put a war on "credit".

It would have to be an alliance of nations this time just to fund the war. So it might happen, just not like Iraq. I feel the USA will be taking a smaller role.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Ive been reading up on this Iran and really think this post is right on the money and will happen this year.This post could be real



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join