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: 20
0
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2006 @ 11:34 PM
link   
personally i dont believe him, yet i cannot say why i dont call him wrong for doing what hes doing. i guess its because im fed up with being put down and held back that its effecting my political views in away. i know all to well what its like to be the guy on the bottom of the food chain and how helpless it feels. thats probably why i feel like i understand them in a way.




posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 09:52 AM
link   
Israel is ready and trained for an attack on Iran:


www.jpost.com...

IAF pilots have completed their mission training and fighter jets have been prepared for an Israeli attack on Iran, the British Sunday Times reported.

The article reported that "the elite 69 strategic F-15 I squadron" had been equipped with weapons that will be tested in combat for the first time, and that two missile submarines were on standby: one in the Persian Gulf and the second in Haifa Bay.

The Times also said that special IDF forces would be helicoptered into Iran to take out targets that could not be destroyed in an air strike.


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

[edit on 15/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 10:34 PM
link   
i doubt that, there are no Israeli ships inside the Persian gulf because I think you can't get into the Persion Gulf w/o violating someones territorial waters, so you need permission from at least 1 country to be in there legally, if it's going to be a sub launched cruise missile then it will be an American ship not Israeli, what difference does it make, America pays/supplies all their military hardware anyways..



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
You, as with few others, can continue your uses of one way horse vision blinders, but Iran is in violation--non-compliance--with the NPT and that is per the IAEA, not just simply the EU or US.

Now that sure got me Laughing!



Want to check which Domesic and Foreign Violations the current Goverment of the United States is Guilty of?

And in all this Mess they call Democracy, there is still time to Threaten country like Iran?

Ofcourse the FACT that Iran will start selling Oil in Euroes on March 2006 has NOTHING to do with this Rush to invade Iran and yet again Remove the Weapons of Mass Destruction using the Weapons of Mass DECEPTION.

If you people only knew...

[edit on 16/1/06 by Souljah]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   
It looks as if one of the major road-blocks to laying the smack-down on Iran has been removed. For all of you who were counting on mother Russia to come to Iran's rescue, it's over. Russia's new official position is that they will support UN Security council resolutions against Iran, or at least they are all for bringing Iran's non-compliance up for discussion at the UN Security Council.

Of course there's still China to deal with. Who knows what's going on there. US Undersecretary of State Christopher Hill will be having negotiations with China this week and the entire gang, including China, are meeting in London this next week to discuss UN Security Council actions. Selling China will be difficult because of China and Iran's energy agreements, but then we never thought we'd see Russia give in either.



Moscow has already made it clear that it will no longer cover for Iran, which removed the seals from its nuclear facilities yesterday. Kommersant has learned that the Russian military delegation has Teheran, cutting off negotiations on the sale of S-300 complexes to it. An evacuation plan for the Russian specialists working in Iran is being developed in Moscow.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov criticized Iran with unprecedented severity on radio station Ekho Moskvy. He confirmed that Western countries intended to hold an unscheduled meeting of the IAEA to discuss Iran within weeks. Lavrov made it clear that Russia would support the proposal to forward the dossier on Iran to the UN Security Council, even though Moscow had opposed that step until now.

visit source for full article





[edit on 16-1-2006 by dbates]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
Ofcourse the FACT that Iran will start selling Oil in Euroes on March 2006 has NOTHING to do with this Rush to invade Iran and yet again Remove the Weapons of Mass Destruction using the Weapons of Mass DECEPTION.


Just curious, if that's the reason for this situation, why exactly is the EU making as much, if not more noise than the U.S.? Are they worried about Iran switching to euros as well?



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
why exactly is the EU making as much, if not more noise than the U.S.?


- As a European (and a British one at that) I can assure you that our government is not making the kind of aggressive and belligerent noises you seem to assume.
It is not an issue dominating our news night after night at all.

Europe is concerned that this issue is going to be used to start another disastrous ME war.

The fact is that we are sure (like the US intel agencies) that Iran doesn't even have anything like the number of centrifuges required to make enriched uranium to the 'highly enriched' (and that is nothing like the same as the 'enriched' quality required for civil power) quality needed for a bomb.


Iran already has 164 centrifuge machines installed at its pilot centrifuge plant at Natanz, but that is only a fifth of the total it needs before it is fully operational.

The commercial-scale facility could ultimately house as many as 50,000 centrifuges, according to some estimates.

Mark Fitzpatrick, senior fellow for non-proliferation at the IISS, says Iran has another 1,000 centrifuges dating to before it temporarily suspended enrichment in 2003. But these have not been tested to ensure they still work.

Tehran might possibly have parts for a further 1,000 centrifuges, Mr Fitzpatrick told the BBC News website.

Frank Barnaby, consultant for the UK security think tank the Oxford Research Group, agrees that Iran does not yet have a critical number of centrifuges in place.

"They don't currently have enough centrifuges working - so far as we know - to produce significant amounts of highly-enriched uranium or even enriched uranium. They would need a lot more," he told the BBC News website.

Even if the plant is made fully operational, it is currently configured to produce low enriched uranium (LEU) rather than the weapons-grade highly-enriched uranium (HEU).

So given these limitations, the IISS believes it would take Iran at least a decade to produce enough HEU for a single nuclear weapon.

Dr Barnaby agrees.

"The CIA says 10 years to a bomb using highly enriched uranium and that is a reasonable and realistic figure in my opinion," he said.

news.bbc.co.uk...



Enrichment
The aim of enrichment is to increase the proportion of fissile uranium-235 atoms within uranium.

For uranium to work in a nuclear reactor it must be enriched to contain 2-3% uranium-235. Weapons-grade uranium must contain 90% or more u-235.
news.bbc.co.uk...



Are they worried about Iran switching to euros as well?


- If it provokes more instability conflict and misery in the ME (which 'we' are expected to support, suffer the consequences of and eventually try and clear up too) then probably.

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

[edit on 16/1/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- As a European (and a British one at that) I can assure you that our government is not making the kind of aggressive and belligerent noises you seem to assume.
It is not an issue dominating our news night after night at all.

Europe is concerned that this issue is going to be used to start another disastrous ME war.



I'm American - and I agree with you 100%. It would be another disastrous ME war... However, our leaders are obviously inclined toward invading yet another ME country...apparently the 2nd on the "Axis of Evil" - so at this point what can we do to stop this? I believe our troops are doing the right thing - trying to fight terrorists where they live instead of on our soil, however I believe they are being misled by our leaders... We have a growing resistance in this country to the war in Iraq, but it seems that there is nothing we can do to stop the war march that seems to be continuing in our name... It's like a machine that has run out of control...

What do you think Tony Blair's future holds...sounds like his political career is heading downhill lately??

-rdube02

-----------------------
"I guess it comes down to a simple choice, really: get busy living, or get busy dying."
- Stephen King, Shawshank Redemption



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:02 PM
link   
doesn't Iran have missiles that can hit Europe now??? add to that nukes and Europe is not a happy bunny about that, USA is safe from missile as they cant reach that far yet.

Now add to that what the Iran president is sprouting about Israel must be destroyed and other western nations too???

he either MAD or want a WAR they will never win but will nuke Israel most likely if war started??

even without nukes don't Iran have chemical and biological weapons for missile imagine if they launched missiles into Europe tipped with bio and chemical weapons on them.

Would USA and Europe use nukes you bet we would and i think if a war with Iran happened we would not dither dally like in Iraq it would be open season for bombing and shooting like WW2 style.



[edit on 16-1-2006 by blobby]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey
- As a European (and a British one at that) I can assure you that our government is not making the kind of aggressive and belligerent noises you seem to assume.
It is not an issue dominating our news night after night at all.


The EU so far is taking a UNIFIED stance with the U.S. At this point, everybody agrees military action is the last resort, including most members of Congress here in the U.S., republican and democrat alike. We're not making beligerent or aggressive noises either. But that doesn't seem to stop folks here from assuming the U.S. is chomping at the bit to attack Iran because military plans have been drawn up. I guarantee the UK also has plans, but that doesn't mean they are going to use them. Russia thinks it may be able to pursuade Iran with a new plan to have Iranian techs enrich uranium in Russia, so the enrichment levels can be monitored. Let's hope Iran accepts the offer, they're being given every opportunity to maintain a peaceful nuclear program and not face sanctions, military action, or otherwise. And our news has covered the situation, but at this point it's all about diplomacy.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
Let's hope Iran accepts the offer, they're being given every opportunity to maintain a peaceful nuclear program and not face sanctions, military action, or otherwise. And our news has covered the situation, but at this point it's all about diplomacy.


But don't forget how much "diplomacy" we used while the weapons inspectors in Iraq were screaming that no weapons were being found - meanwhile our great leader went ahead with his war plans anyway. We've been down this road before. Our recent history has taught us one thing about this administration - they use diplomacy as a front and then move ahead with their war plans regardless...

But don't worry, we can justify that invasion as well once we remove yet another dictator from power. Is that worth countless lives of American soldiers?



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by rdube02
But don't forget how much "diplomacy" we used while the weapons inspectors in Iraq were screaming that no weapons were being found - meanwhile our great leader went ahead with his war plans anyway. We've been down this road before. Our recent history has taught us one thing about this administration - they use diplomacy as a front and then move ahead with their war plans regardless...

But don't worry, we can justify that invasion as well once we remove yet another dictator from power. Is that worth countless lives of American soldiers?


The first MAJOR mistake many are making here is comparing Iran to Iraq. This is a completely different issue, and one we should have dealt with long before Hussein. Hussein was not a religious fundamentalist by a longshot, I would have been more comfortable with him having nukes than Iran, Pat Robertson, or Jerry Falwell.

Another difference is there are no weapons inspectors screaming that no weapons are being found in this case. Besides Iran of course, do you notice that no other government seems to be disputing Iran's intentions? I agree 100% Iraq was wrong, I always have. But I have a very bad feeling about what will happen if Iran get's nuclear weapons, and that's exactly what they're after. While so many seem to be calling Iraq a "boy who cried wolf" fiasco, they seem to forget the end of that story, the wolf ate him. Unfortunately, in this analogy involving nuclear weapons, the "boy" will be the whole world, not just Bush.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd
The first MAJOR mistake many are making here is comparing Iran to Iraq. This is a completely different issue, and one we should have dealt with long before Hussein. Hussein was not a religious fundamentalist by a longshot, I would have been more comfortable with him having nukes than Iran, Pat Robertson, or Jerry Falwell.


I couldn't agree with you more there. If you ask anyone what country in the world would be the most likely to attack Israel if they had Nukes - I believe Iran would be the most likely choice. They want Israel off the map.

But I also believe that if diplomacy is truly employed here - it will work. If you squeeze a country enough with sanctions, they will cave. The military solution is not the right option - and I'm just afraid that we have a President who prefers the military option over anything else.

-rdube02



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by rdube02
But I also believe that if diplomacy is truly employed here - it will work. If you squeeze a country enough with sanctions, they will cave. The military solution is not the right option - and I'm just afraid that we have a President who prefers the military option over anything else.


I truly hope diplomacy does work. And it very well may, Russia is working very hard to diffuse things, but they will only let Iran humiliate them so much. Another mistake being made is that most folks here on ATS, not the governments, are not giving diplomacy a chance. The war is all but started already in the minds of alot of members here. John McCain very recently said military action should be the absolute last resort, and we're nowhere near that yet. The American people, and Congress will not be rushed into another conflict. If that's what Bush prefers, too bad, cuz he's not gonna get it.

[edit on 16-1-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:42 PM
link   
They will build the nuclear threat until most of the people agree that military action must take place. Just like Iraq, except we arent flyin solo. The world sees this as a very grave issue, so the US should have lots of support in ousting this wacko.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
I have seen congressmen in America deny that there was a concentration camp in New Orleans. The people who were in it were sitting right in front of them. People believe what they want. The holocaust to some an ordinary war to others almost like the Darfur region in the Sudan. Just like slavery to some and the middle passage were millions of Africans died.

There are over 160 Nuclear power stations in America. To date America is the only person to detonate a nuclear weapon. And if I remember America is the reason why this Islamic government is in power in the first place. CIA in the 60’s supported a coup of a democratically elected government in Iran. I say let them have the power plant and the bomb if the want it. Do YOU honestly believe that these people will blow up the holy lands to liberate it from the Israelis? If they do they will have to walk around it in radiation suits.

I pray and hope they will not start bombing Iran. First of all they cannot have a nuclear weapon for another 10 years. And doesn’t Iran have the right to have Nuclear power & weapons like America India, China, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan? Until I see UN inspectors in America Inspecting our Nukes Then I would give total judgment over to the IAEA. But The Funny thing is when the IAEA was talking about Iraq and the US did not listen. Why should the IAEA listen to the US? Before the war the US called the UN irrelevant.

Also talk of invasion once again of another country with huge amounts of oil. Ok Venezuelan Coup, Iraq war, and Iran pre invasion plan. Do I see a Pattern? Israel is a country that discounts people because of their religion and is currently taking land from people who were there before them in modern times. I think that is a bigger problem than Iran, Iraq, and all the other ME countries.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackThought
I have seen congressmen in America deny that there was a concentration camp in New Orleans. The people who were in it were sitting right in front of them. People believe what they want. The holocaust to some an ordinary war to others almost like the Darfur region in the Sudan. Just like slavery to some and the middle passage were millions of Africans died.


I wasn't in NO at the time, were you? I wouldn't really know. But as far as I know, a concentration camp is a place where people are detained under harsh conditions. I was not aware anybody was detained, I thought they were free to leave the harsh conditions of the shelters and enter the probably harsher conditions of the city. The government screwed up big there, but concentration camp? I would call it a shelter of neglect.

As for the troubles in Africa, I know a quick way to end them all! Let's give the factions in the Sudan nuclear weapons! Why don't they "have the right to have Nuclear power & weapons like America India, China, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan?" Don't you think that would be a great way to bring peace?



To date America is the only person to detonate a nuclear weapon.


Many have detonated nuclear weapons, we were just the only ones to use them in a conflict. I'll bet you weren't even slightly aware of the numbers of innocent civilians Japan purposely slaughtered with biological and chemical weapons in China, the Phillipines, etc. before we used those weapons to stop them.




I say let them have the power plant and the bomb if the want it.


And everybody else too, right? As long as we're being fair. Iran has other enemies so we gotta be sure they get a piece of the nuclear pie too. I can't wait to live in such a peaceful new world! I'll finally get to see a nuclear detonation live and in person, just like I've always wanted! Yipee!




Do YOU honestly believe that these people will blow up the holy lands to liberate it from the Israelis? If they do they will have to walk around it in radiation suits.


Depends on what they think their god desires. Yes, personally I believe there is a fairly high chance they will. Can YOU guarantee that they will not?



I pray and hope they will not start bombing Iran.


So do I. I hope Russia is able to bring them off the ledge.






[edit on 16-1-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Yes All of them should have the weapons they want. If they want them they can get them . I do not want to give anyone anything. Let them get they capitalism works right? I know in living in america if they know you have weapon they tend to leave you alone and talk about the problem instead of strong arm.

On the CC on NO testamony of the survivors Nuff Said!!!

Yes detonated them and yes America is the only one that used it in a War against a country that was using kamakazi bombers. Honestly i am more afraid America will use small nuclear devices in the ME not them We use DU shells aready .

I cannot gauantee anything dealing with politcs in the world but you cannot gauantee on invading them will "solve" the problem.

on Gods desires GW bush has those same desires also what makes his right and theirs wrong. It would be stupid to dystroy what you want I really dont think people are that "gone".



27jd you should not hate these people they just want to live in a world that is safe just like you do right? they have a right to live safe and not listen to you on how to live dont they?



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by BlackThought
Yes All of them should have the weapons they want. If they want them they can get them . I do not want to give anyone anything. Let them get they capitalism works right? I know in living in america if they know you have weapon they tend to leave you alone and talk about the problem instead of strong arm.


Not at all, they just come at you with bigger weapons. Remember Waco? They knew they had weapons.




27jd you should not hate these people they just want to live in a world that is safe just like you do right? they have a right to live safe and not listen to you on how to live dont they?


Hate?! Who said anything about hate? Somebody seems to have a pretty big chip on their shoulder living here in Amerikkka, huh? I guess you've also not read any of my previous posts where I stated a main concern of mine is the deaths of millions of innocent Iranians and Israelis. If I were hateful, I would adopt your position and advocate nuclear weapons for all, so Iran could hit Israel and Israel could destroy Iran and all the other muslim capitals. If I were the type of person you seem to think I am, I'd be happy being as there would be that many less Jews and Ay-rabs around, right? (I know Iranians are persian, but ignorant rednecks like myself here in Amerikkka aren't supposed to be that smart)

Hate. What a joke.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797

i aint worried about them nuking eachother. as long as they keep it over there i dont care what they do. they arent my concern. my concern is me my family and friends who are over there in harms way to fight a war the most of us dont believe in because it was based on lies. thats what i know.


I've been quietly reading this thread, but finally had to respond to this post.

Duh! If iran and everybody else has nukes, what on earth makes you believe they will "keep it over there" and not where you live? Ever considered sneaking them into a country on a ship or truck?
And that's just the first of many problems with your utopian view of the world and how everyone should "just get along". The world, as you view it, simply does not exist, and won't for quite awhile, unfortunately. Turning the other cheek (appeasement) will not accomplish what you dream of. It will more likely hasten the end of civilization as we all know it.

No, vagabond has it right on this subject in my opinion and I have voted him a WATS award for his series of posts on this thread.




top topics



 
0
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join