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.

 

Nuclear War Against Iran

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 04:55 AM
link   
The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages & coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in "an advanced stage of readiness"


Global Research

There are ongoing consultations between Washington, Paris and Berlin. Contrary to the invasion of Iraq, which was opposed at the diplomatic level by France and Germany, Washington has been building "a consensus" both within the Atlantic Alliance and the UN Security Council. This consensus pertains to the conduct of a nuclear war, which could potentially affect a large part of the Middle East Central Asian region.

Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of "authoritative" nuclear scientists, the mini-nukes are being presented as an instrument of peace rather than war. The low-yield nukes have now been cleared for "battlefield use", they are slated to be used in the next stage of America's "war on Terrorism" alongside conventional weapons.

Under its new mandate, USSTRATCOM has a responsibility for "overseeing a global strike plan" consisting of both conventional and nuclear weapons. To implement this mandate, a brand new command unit entitled Joint Functional Component Command Space and Global Strike, or JFCCSGS was created. The mission of JFCCSGS is to implement CONPLAN 8022, in other words to trigger a nuclear war with Iran.

CONPLAN 8022 is 'the overall umbrella plan for sort of the pre-planned strategic scenarios involving nuclear weapons. It's specifically focused on these new types of threats -- Iran, North Korea -- proliferators and potentially terrorists too,' he said. 'There's nothing that says that they can't use CONPLAN 8022 in limited scenarios against Russian and Chinese targets.'

So there you have it.

License to NUKE has been realeased and given in the hands of Pentagon.

So, if they find Iran or North Korea a THREAT, then they have the right to use any force needed to remove that Threat.

And the Iranian Situation is Escalating.

Looks like all is going WELL For Cheney's Plan to Nuke Iran.


Nuke Iran?

The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing--that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack--but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

On one side we have all this Threats and all this incredible Military Force standing on the border of Iran - yet their President's mouth does not stay closed. He keeps attacking everything from Isreal, to Holocaust - and all of the words he uses are basicly a DEAD WISH.

I mean okey, if he was the president of China or some far stronger country.

So, why does he do it? Why is he pulling the Tiger by his Tail? As if something is being STAGED yet again. I mean, for a Rogue-Terrorists-Supporter-State Iranian president sure does have a lot of Balls to say and do what he is. I mean, WHY would he start breaking nuclear seals on reactors, when there are Strategic Plans to Nuke Iran, in case of a Threat.

That's just Plain Dumb.

But this Scenaro gains Logic, when you think that President of Iran is a Foreign Agent, a Manchurian candidate, sent to ignite the Iranian conflict with the West.

[edit on 11/1/06 by Souljah]




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Really? Making plans is authorization to nuke? Maybe you should learn a little about how American Strategic Forces work before you claim that making plans is authorization to launch a strike. There have been plans in place for decades to launch strikes on the Soviet Union/Russia, with WORSE propaganda going around than is going on about Iran now, but I didn't see the nukes fly then.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Really? Making plans is authorization to nuke? Maybe you should learn a little about how American Strategic Forces work before you claim that making plans is authorization to launch a strike. There have been plans in place for decades to launch strikes on the Soviet Union/Russia, with WORSE propaganda going around than is going on about Iran now, but I didn't see the nukes fly then.

I suggest you read the Entire Article, to which Link there is provided - maybe it will clear things up a little bit. I am sure that there are PLANS to nuke every single country in the World in US Strategic Forces - but are they also in their Final Stages?

The launching of an outright war using nuclear warheads against Iran is now in the final planning stages & coalition partners, which include the US, Israel and Turkey are in "an advanced stage of readiness"

Well, isn't that Convenient?

And with all the Headlines that Iran is making these days, I am sure that it wont be long, until those plans are made reality.

BOTTOM LINE IS, that

The so-called international community has accepted the eventuality of a nuclear holocaust.

He who says otherwise, is already swallowed by their Immense Propaganda Machine.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:14 AM
link   
And they were in the FINAL PLANNING STAGES against the USSR too. In fact there were two or three times when the bombers actually launched and were on their way to the targets when it came out that it was a computer error. I'd have to call that pretty final, considering they all had targets, and were on the way to them.

It's not like STRATCOM says "Here's the plan, it's finalized." and the Pentagon says "Here are the codes, stick the plans in a drawer and if we need them we'll be ready." There are a LOT of things that have to happen before an attack is carried out, EVEN IF it is in the "final planning stages" and has worldwide support, or even if it doesn't. There are codes to release the weapons from the lockers, then they have to take the weapons out to the planes, and there are codes to launch the planes, then there are codes to arm the weapons, and codes to drop them. If any one of those codes doesn't check, or isn't received in a certain time frame, everything stops. The number of people that have those codes can be counted on one finger. Even if you think Bush is the antichrist, or satan, or whatever he's being called this week, he's not going to launch a preemptive nuclear strike, even with the world approving it.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:25 AM
link   
You've got to be kidding. Launching a Nuclear war would be the equivalent of political suicide. There is no way any president would have the guts to do that unless the entire world was behind them, not to mention America itself

And just because the president of Iran keeps talking it up doesn't mean what you are saying it does. More likely Iran believes they can win a war with the US (because they know that the US would never use Nukes unless they themselves did) and help further their publicly stated goal of turning the world to Islam. Imagine how many more people would flock to Iran if the US invaded? Iran would love it so my question to you is, why wouldn't Iran talk it up?

[edit on 11/1/2006 by HumanBean]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:26 AM
link   
Nuke would simply not be accepted by the world opinion.

And I think there is more oil that can be drilled for the oilindustry and more money to be made for the MIC if conventional arms are used. And the greatest part is that it is taxmoney that founds it and not rich kids that dies!



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Souljah let me get this right you think the President of Iran is Western agent ?


I think he is a mad man obsessed by his religion and the coming of the Mahdi (twelth Imam) and absolutely hell bent on obtaining Nuclear Weopons.



He often raises the topic, and not just to Muslims. When addressing the United Nations in September, Mr. Ahmadinejad flummoxed his audience of world political leaders by concluding his address with a prayer for the Mahdi's appearance: "O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the Promised One, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."

On returning to Iran from New York, Mr. Ahmadinejad recalled the effect of his U.N. speech:

one of our group told me that when I started to say "In the name of God the almighty and merciful," he saw a light around me, and I was placed inside this aura. I felt it myself. I felt the atmosphere suddenly change, and for those 27 or 28 minutes, the leaders of the world did not blink. … And they were rapt. It seemed as if a hand was holding them there and had opened their eyes to receive the message from the Islamic republic.
www.danielpipes.org...


He is also prepared for war, with a rather deadly Military.


According to a report issued by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in December of 2004, Iran "has some 540,000 men under arms and over 350,000 reserves. They include 120,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards trained for land and naval asymmetrical warfare. Iran's military also includes holdings of 1,613 main battle tanks, 21,600 other armored fighting vehicles, 3,200 artillery weapons, 306 combat aircraft, 60 attack helicopters, 3 submarines, 59 surface combatants, and 10 amphibious ships."

Of all the missiles in Iran's armament, the most dangerous is the Russian-made SS-N-22 Sunburn. These missiles are, simply, the fastest anti-ship weapons on the planet. The Sunburn can reach Mach 3 at high altitude. Its maximum low-altitude speed is Mach 2.2, some three times faster than the American-made Harpoon. The Sunburn takes two short minutes to cover its full range. The missile's manufacturers state that one or two missiles could cripple a destroyer, and five missiles could sink a 20,000 ton ship. The Sunburn is also superior to the Exocet missile. Recall that it was two Exocets that ripped the USS Stark to shreds in 1987, killing 37 sailors. The Stark could not see them to stop them.
www.scoop.co.nz...


The link above is a fantastic read if you have some spare time.


I dont beleive the US will go this alone for so many reasons, its got to be NATO + tag alongs or UN.
Israel may end up doing it herself ?

The Nuclear option isnt as terrible as it sounds, there would be Nuclear contaminents either way with bombing a Nuclear facility and one bomb that penetrates deeply into the buried Nuclear powerplant/Bomb making facility would be only like .3 megaton and quite a centralised blast.

But personally i wouldnt like to see the Preemptive Nuclear option in a World where it seem's Humans are the Endangered species




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Even if you think Bush is the antichrist, or satan, or whatever he's being called this week, he's not going to launch a preemptive nuclear strike, even with the world approving it.

Then I guess it's time to Make the World Belive and Approve it.

And the President of Iran is sure NOT helping his country with his words.

Behold! - yet again, a Vicious, Evil, Islamic, Terrorist Villain Arises, for the Civilized West to remove him.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
I dont beleive the US will go this alone for so many reasons, its got to be NATO + tag alongs or UN.
Israel may end up doing it herself ?


I agree with both these statements NumberCruncher. Iran has a far more powerful military than Iraq and if the US were to invade then they would have to be prepared for stiff resistance. By that I mean, lots of casualities. You can't shock and awe the sort of opposition they will find in Iran. I believe the US knows this and are desperately looking for a reason to go to war with Iran but they will not find one because the world does not really want to deal with this problem

As for Israel going it on their own, absolutely. They did it before and since most of the world already hates them they will do it again. The unfortunate thing here is that Israel is suspected by many countries to already posses Nuclear weapons and between it and the US, if any country were going to use them, I think it would be Israel.

So, apparently we have four players here:

* The US which I don't think is crazy enough to launch a pre-emptive Nuclear strike. They clearly want to take some military action against Iran
* Israel who is definately crazy enough to launch a pre-emptive strike, just more likely a conventional one rather than Nuclear
* Iran who is hostile towards the west and Israel in particular. From what I can tell they are as eager for a fight at the US but they want the US to launch it so they can appear to Islam as being righteous and call for holy war
* The United Nations, for which there is nothing about it that is united, will do nothing as it always does

[edit on 11/1/2006 by HumanBean]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Report: Israel Accelerates Iran Strike Plan

A preemptive airstrike by Israel against suspected nuclear weapons facilities in Iran could come as early as March, a report in the Glasgow Herald claimed Tuesday.

"The Israeli raids would be carried out by long-range F-15E bombers and cruise missiles against a dozen key sites and are designed to set Tehran's weapons program back by up to two years," the paper said.

"Pilots at the Israeli air force's elite 69 squadron have been briefed on the plan and have conducted rehearsals for their missions."

So, March it is!

I remember reading a German Article in Der Spiegel, which suggested that US and Allies are planning a Military Strike on Iran as early as SPRING 2006.

Well...



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Even ISRAEL isn't dumb enough to use nukes. And how does an ISRAELI CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS attack equal a US NUCLEAR ATTACK?



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:57 AM
link   
dont forget NATO and especially the 'EU Three" UK,FRANCE,GERMANY they have been extremely vocal towards Iran and the escalation of this "stand off".

You just got to think what would you do if you where Israel, the more i think about it the more sure i become, are you going to wait around for strike 2 at being marched off to the Gas Chambers?

Irans president is a hardline fanatical and obsessed by Mystical Islam, he says Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth, he has the technology to make that dream a reality, i know what i would do if i was Israel, theres only so long they can wait. And as each day gos by less and less options.

Maybe Iran will just have a wee "accident" while messing about with Nuclear mixtures ?



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by HumanBean

So, apparently we have four players here:

* The US which I don't think is crazy enough to launch a pre-emptive Nuclear strike. They clearly want to take some military action against Iran
* Israel who is definately crazy enough to launch a pre-emptive strike, just more likely a conventional one rather than Nuclear
* Iran who is hostile towards the west and Israel in particular. From what I can tell they are as eager for a fight at the US but they want the US to launch it so they can appear to Islam as being righteous and call for holy war
* The United Nations, for which there is nothing about it that is united, will do nothing as it always does


There is always the chance that one of these groups could help Iran to have a Nuclear accident of course. Then simply say, “Well I guess they shouldn’t have been playing with their reactors like they were”.



Edit to add:
NumberCruncher

Ok, when two of us see the same thing, and post that close, then that is what I will bet happens…




[edit on 1/11/2006 by defcon5]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Nah, there's gonna be a big accident, and some country somewhere is just gonna say "Whoops".



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 05:59 AM
link   
Because a news article says they can launch airstrikes in March doesn't mean they will. Prudence demands thay they have contingency plans in place for a country that has publicly stated that it wants to wipe out Israel, and privately appears to be grasping for the means to do so

Mind you, if I was a voting member of the government of Israel and they handed me intelligence showing that Iran was very close to getting Nuclear weapons then I would vote for a strike of some sort without a second's hesitation

Boy, this line of thought is getting scarier and scarier. Hand me a poll asking if I believe we're well on our way to WWIII and I'll tick the big Yes box

[edit on 11/1/2006 by HumanBean]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:02 AM
link   
Crap make that three of us saying the same thing, a minute apart…

Yikes….


[edit on 1/11/2006 by defcon5]



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
Crap make that three of us saying the same thing, a minute apart…

Yikes….


Do You Guys Know Something We don't?




posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:09 AM
link   
I think its just the logical conclusion.



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
I think its just the logical conclusion.

You mean to send James Bond instead of a full scale Miliatry Attack on Iranian Nuclear Fascilites?



posted on Jan, 11 2006 @ 06:15 AM
link   
Defcon
Defcon 005..

A martini shaken, not stirred please…




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join