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.

 

Iranian War Monitor

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Beginning today, this thread will help track the developments that will lead to total war in the middle east.

Who would like to post the first news item?




posted on Jan, 22 2006 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Iran's President sure has me scratching my head. What does he expect to accomplish? Israel will not let them go Nuclear, that seems very clear to me. And his threats to turn-off the oil tap would result in Iran being sacked. The US cannot and would not allow Iran to ruin the World economy. And I would think a war vs Iran would be a world differant then Iraq [US would not fight to perserve the Iran population, this would be real WAR, with full atrosotices and sole purpose to preserve and flow the oil]. Not a pretty sight.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 12:05 AM
link   
I was watching Fox News today and some guest (i didn't catch his name) was saying that Iran already has Nuclear Weapons and all they are trying to perfect is a missle system that can allow the nukes to travel 1000 miles. He said that DR Khan of Pakistan sold them the plans years ago, and that by now the nukes are complete and ready for use once they perfect a delivery system.

Would Iran have the balls to nuke Isreal before Isreal attacks first? I highly doubt it because if they did they would be commiting suicide.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Having the plans is not enough, what they need is the highly enriched uranium necessary to fuel a bomb. That's what the whole brouhaha right now is about, the Iranians broke the seals on some of their enrichment facilities. Uranium is mostly U235, which won't fission. Enriched uranium for use in powerplants is about 3-5 % U238 by mass - highly enriched uranium which can be used in bombs is about 20% U238 by mass. The Iranians claim they only want to produce nuclear fuel for powerplants, the US claims they want to build a bomb.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
the US claims they want to build a bomb.


Why do you want to spin? It's not the US, its the WORLD!

You gotta watch out for people like this guy. He sounds smart, but hes a liar and will lie in order to push his anti-US agenda. Watch out folks.



[edit on 23-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   
'Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has arrived in Damascus for a visit to show solidarity as international pressure grows on both states.'

Link

This happened on 19th January 2005.

It appears that as both states are pressurised by influential nations, in particular the US, the sole superpower, it's perhaps only natural that alliances are formed between the two who face a danger in common.

Whether this will just be diplomatic and would fall apart upon any attack being on Iran remains to be seen.



Originally posted by DaVillen
I was watching Fox News today and some guest (i didn't catch his name) was saying that Iran already has Nuclear Weapons and all they are trying to perfect is a missle system that can allow the nukes to travel 1000 miles.
He said that DR Khan of Pakistan sold them the plans years ago, and that by now the nukes are complete and ready for use once they perfect a delivery system.


Firstly, I would advise you to take anything Fox News says with a rather large pinch of salt. It's very sensationalised and healdline grabbing, and any thing sensational to rake in the viewers is acceptable, whether it has some truth to it or not.

Secondly, there are the neocons who want to see Iran attacked who will sensationalise or fabricate weapon's capabilities. I refer to Iraq as an example.

Thirdly, there are Iranian opposition groups who will be less than trustworthy in attempting to persuade the US and the international community at large that Iran is a threat in their aim of overthrowing the regime.

We saw it with Iraq. Don't be fooled twice, or at the very least, stay grounded and treat all claims with analytical caution.

DR Khan is an easy name to throw around, and linking it to Iranian nukes pointing at Israel will attempt to be the smoking gun of evidence.



Originally posted by DaVillen
Would Iran have the balls to nuke Isreal before Isreal attacks first? I highly doubt it because if they did they would be commiting suicide.


You've just answered your own question. Thus we ask ourselves, are Iran really a threat to Israel if armed with nukes?

[edit on 23-1-2006 by Regensturm]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   
Top Ten reasons Iran has gone off the deep end.....

1. Irans president denounces Israel
2. Suicide bombing in Israel, claimed Palestinian terror group carried it out
3. Irans presindent visits Palestine to commend PAlestine
4. Irans president tells world to take back Jews
5. Irans president gives the world the finger and resumes nulclear enrichment against
6. Threatens to cut of oil
7. When they have a missle, they will use it
8. Expect a weapons test this year
9. He is an ex-soldier, not a career politician
10. Russia and China are backing off



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
Top Ten reasons Iran has gone off the deep end.....

1. Irans president denounces Israel


Iran's hard-line Ayatollahs have been doing that for 20 odd years. Nothing of a catalysmic catastrophe has come from these tired comments.


Originally posted by esdad71
2. Suicide bombing in Israel, claimed Palestinian terror group carried it out


And what has that got to do with Iran?


Originally posted by esdad71
3. Irans presindent visits Palestine to commend PAlestine


Er....no he's not. The only places he has visited outside Iran so far is the UN General Assembly in New York, the summit of the Organisation of Islamic Conference in Saudi Arabia, a visit to neighbouring Azerbaijan and finally, Syria.

And even if he has visted Palestinian authority territory, what's wrong with that? Alot of leaders do it.


Originally posted by esdad71
4. Irans president tells world to take back Jews


In a sense, he was saying that Europe itself should have treated Jewish people better, and should cater for Jewish people more, and should have done so after WW2, instead of encouraging Jewish people to go the middle east instead.

Although the comments are indeed vitrolic, there is certainly credence in the theory that Europe was laden with guilt after WW2, and rather than have people live next to the people they condemned to concentration camps through apathy or colloboration that reminded the condemners of that guilt, instead encouraged the Jewish people's (unsurprising in the circumstances) willing to leave Europe to the middle east which helped to ease European guilt.

If anything, the comments he made were anti-european, telling Europe that it should take responsibility for the events of WW2 and accomodate Jewish people more.



Originally posted by esdad71
5. Irans president gives the world the finger and resumes nulclear enrichment against


Alot of countries have who had leaders of dubious qualities, China, Soviet Union have. Does not mean they will use them. They are not stupid.



Originally posted by esdad71
6. Threatens to cut of oil


Iran is being threatened itself, it's a counter to use.


Originally posted by esdad71
7. When they have a missle, they will use it


Proof?


Originally posted by esdad71
8. Expect a weapons test this year


Proof?


Originally posted by esdad71

9. He is an ex-soldier, not a career politician


As was Eisenhower.


Originally posted by esdad71

10. Russia and China are backing off


Looks can be deceiving.

China buys 12 per cent of import oil from Iran.

Russia and China don't want sanctions on Iran.

[edit on 23-1-2006 by Regensturm]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 12:39 PM
link   


You gotta watch out for people like this guy. He sounds smart, but hes a liar and will lie in order to push his anti-US agenda. Watch out folks.


Excuse me, but screw you too buddy. Call me a liar to my face some time, and find out exactly how much of a pacifist I ain't...

My "agenda" is pro-American, simply anti belligerent idiot.
I've been watching neocon morons drag my country into the mire for the last six years, and I don't like it.

And personally I do suspect the Iranians want to build a bomb - I'm on the record here saying as much - but the fact is so far no-one has offered any compelling evidence to prove it. Certainly not enough to drag this country into another useless & endless Middle East war. How incompetent is our leadership - we lose thousands in a misguided war for oil and then can't even get the damn oil?

As for Israel, if Israel feels threatened, let the Israelis deal with it. Going to war to defend an "ally" that gobbles up billions in defense-aid welfare from our tax money and at the same time sells our defense tech to China is the height of stupidity. The Israelis have made their own bed, let them lie in it.

As for the "imminent threat" from Iran, what a crock. Much like the "imminent" threat from Saddam's Iraq, its a bunch of BS to get people to go along with another botched resource grab.

Iran is governed by a bunch of fundamentalist idiots trying to go back to the 14th century. And while they may be able to defend themselves adequately, offensively they don't stand a chance against any modern country.

As for:



7. When they have a missle, they will use it


Really?

They've had missiles capable of taking chem/bio warheads to Israel for a while now, and still haven't used them. Why? Because for all their posturing, they don't want to get nuked back to the stone age. Even with a few nukes (which will still take them years to make), that's not going to change.

[edit on 1/23/06 by xmotex]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 12:55 PM
link   
Isreal makes the bed, we sleep in it. Hey, it's the same bed and we are all in it.

You don't have to be Nostrodamus to see what's going to happen. This all started back when Iran invaded us years ago. It's too bad we did not do something about it then is it not?



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
How incompetent is our leadership - we lose thousands in a misguided war for oil and then can't even get the damn oil?


Please forgive me if i'm wrong here, but you're not saying that if they did get the oil the war would be justified are you?

Just checking.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by duncanidaho

You don't have to be Nostrodamus to see what's going to happen. This all started back when Iran invaded us years ago. It's too bad we did not do something about it then is it not?


Who did Iran invade?



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   


Please forgive me if i'm wrong here, but you're not saying that if they did get the oil the war would be justified are you?


No, but then I might at least think they were competent.

As it is, they're both belligerent and incompetent, not a promising combination.

For all it's huge & glaring faults, the last administration was at least marginally capable of doing what it set out to do... these jokers are so blinded by their demented ideology that they really believed they could bomb and invade a country and be greeted with flowers.


[edit on 1/23/06 by xmotex]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:30 PM
link   

xmotex


Than why the calculated effort to paint US as the sole country concerned with Iran? If you were truly objective, you would point out that it isn’t only the US. By failing to do that, you are spinning facts to suite your agenda.



As for the "imminent threat" from Iran, what a crock. Much like the "imminent" threat from Saddam's Iraq, its a bunch of BS to get people to go along with another botched resource grab


Who is saying Iran is an imminent threat besides the US? HOW ABOUT EVERYONE? The way you frame your argument, this is another Bush misadventure to get oil. Which I might add, not even most liberals use this as a legitimate argument anymore. All of your rhetoric adds up to spin and lies.



For all it's huge & glaring faults, the last administration was at least marginally capable of doing what it set out to do... these jokers are so blinded by their demented ideology that they really believed they could bomb and invade a country and be greeted with flowers.


By whose standards??? During the Clinton administration we had 5 terrorist attacks, we lost nuclear secrets to China, We bombed an asprin factory that was supposedly a bomb factory and the list goes on. So tell me sir, exactly what about Clintons 2 terms was compitent?

Oh, and we were greeted with flowers and kisses in Iraq. This is yet another lie told by your side in order to rewrite history. Unless of course those days and days of video that showed Iraqis celebrating and happy were really just a halucination.



[edit on 23-1-2006 by Dronetek]

[edit on 23-1-2006 by Dronetek]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Iran invaded us. Remember our Embassy! That was US soil folks. Just stop and think how much crap could have been stopped if we acted then.

The Oil barrons want high oil prices. If the powers that be wanted the oil it would be ours folks. They want a balance of power and people buying and consuming.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex

No, but then I might at least think they were competent.


Competent in terms of achieving a strategic objective yes, competent in terms of having a streak of humanity in them, no.


Originally posted by xmotex
As it is, they're both belligerent and incompetent, not a promising combination.


Agreed.


Originally posted by xmotex
For all it's huge & glaring faults, the last administration was at least marginally capable of doing what it set out to do... these jokers are so blinded by their demented ideology that they really believed they could bomb and invade a country and be greeted with flowers.


Indeed.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 02:01 PM
link   
Here is something I posted in another thread.

Iran is indicating that if they are referred to the security council they will proceed with full enrichment programs.

I admit I am unsure what exactly this means or how it is different from their current enrichment program.



Iran will immediately retaliate if referred to the U.N. Security Council next week by forging ahead with developing a full-scale uranium enrichment program, a senior envoy said Monday.





Iran to move ahead with full enrichment



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 02:30 PM
link   
Humanity? Being humane is keeping your enemy at bay! Once you let your enemy determine your actions you are setting yourself up for casulties. They are playing us because they know our desire for peace.
It's time to stop with this "Bush is the Enemy" and time to face the facts that we are at war with the Islamofacist. I don't agree with the way we do things some time, but I do know who our enemies are. We are at war! It's time to declare war and stop with this half donkey way of doing things. It gets too many people confussed about who the enemy is.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 06:33 AM
link   
It now appears that the attack on Iran will begin before April 1st. If Iran doesnt preempt the attack first.

U.S., Israel to attack Iran nukes "before April"

THis website takes a hard right. Its a conservative, hawkish, right wing, Republican site. However, last time I checked, the Pentagon wasnt run by liberal, doveish, left wing, Democrats so take it for what its worth.........

And if your in the mood for doomsday headlines, check this website out.

All in all, these sites "predict" war before April 1st. As much as I'd like to make some wild speculations, I prefer to stick to the "facts" as much as possible.

Most important everybody, have a nice day.

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Genfinity]

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Genfinity]



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   

THis website takes a hard right. Its a conservative, hawkish, right wing,


No way! Seriously?



Genfinity


I'd like to give you a little advice. The internet is full of websites that are nothing more that a national enquirer. You should really take anything you get off sites like that with a grain of salt.

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Dronetek]




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join