It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Anyone been watching the U.K. news ??

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 08:16 AM
Bush should be impeached if he invades Iran. The man is a fool.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Bibliophile
Bush should be impeached if he invades Iran. The man is a fool.

Seems like over half of the American voting populous doesn't agree with you.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 08:27 AM

Originally posted by Lanton

Seems like over half of the American voting populous doesn't agree with you.

One cannot help that those who put him in office are fools as well.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 09:09 AM
Bibliophile - could you save it for P@ATS?

This is an interesting discussion and it would be a shame for it to get side tracked because you or anyone else thinks Bush is an idiot.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 08:40 PM

Originally posted by Relentless
Bibliophile - could you save it for P@ATS?

This is an interesting discussion and it would be a shame for it to get side tracked because you or anyone else thinks Bush is an idiot.

Idiots don't accumulate the sorta political power that Bush now wields. Take Hugo Chavez, for example; he's trying to make himself out to be some sort of erratic and unpredictable individual that the Americans shouldn't even think about trying to reign in (plus a bit of it's for domestic consumption). Chavez may look like some sort of divvy, but he's got the whole anti-USA thing down pat.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 09:03 PM
Lanton, maybe you thought the message from Relentless didn't apply to you , too

Cut the political!!!! This thread is one step closer to belonging in PTS. Not to mentined, being hijacked.

[edit on 11-3-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 09:08 PM

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Aha the bankers are rubbing their greedy little hands right now... money cash moolah debt interest, yeah baby!

Got to add more to this posting here, yeah you hafta wonder how much money it takes to make a really greedy person happy. I'm still waiting for when we have a Trillionaire because being a billionaire is nothing now.

this is scary because Tony was the points man on the war in iraq and he was harping like a baby seal before that war began.

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 10:57 PM
Im not so worried about Iran militarily. They are still in the stone age in comparison, and the US and UK would take that country fairly easily. My concern is what the rest of the world, China, Russia and the rest of the middle east may do as a result. Could plunge us into a very bloody conflict. The only reason I worry is that I hate to see more of our troops die in this mess. Plus the financial burden of taking on a whole new front will take a toll economically. Also sort of scary with all of the nuclear rhetoric being used by several countries in the last few weeks. I do think we would have a lot more support from our allies because they all know what a threat Iran is becoming. So, self preservation will prevail. Worst part is they will probably start recalling discharged ex military, which I would be a part of. Hopefully the situation won't come to a head, but like it or not, I think it's coming.

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 03:40 AM

Originally posted by MadGreebo
Paddy i'm not to start a flame war i'm just saying whats happening to the Nurses and med staff that I know here in oxfordshire and around the southern area.

It may be that your people are not involved with 16 air assault Brigade at all - And the haste these people have been recalled is indecent - How do I know Paddy? I'm married to one of those on a weeks notice. Cheers Paddy, but next time you spout i'll just ignore you and not try to be civil.

I don't deny that there may have been one or two recalls on a small scale, but I know that there is no mass recall of UK med staff at present. I know this because my attached unit dictates the deployment of military med staff throught the UK. 16 Air Assault have been on standby for deployment for the last 3 months, I know this because I have many friends in 16, due to the fact that until very recently my parent unit was 1 Bn R. Irish. 4 of the 11 personnel on standby at my unit are going out with 16, and have been on 3 months notice to move for the last 4 months! their deployment date has been moved constantly. I myself am joining 16 in theatre 3 months later.

I know many of the med personnel in the area that you are talking of, including those at Aldershot/Frimley, Plymouth and Portsmouth, (these are the largest military medical units in the south) and am attending a function with a number of them in 4 weeks. None have mentioned any mass recalls of medical troops. Indeed many of them are grade 1 priority troops, specialising in trauma, burns ITU and A&E, and so would be the first on deployment. So I do have a bit of an idea what I'm talking about.

I'm not trying to flame anyone here Greebo, but I am trying to put things in perspective. Ignore me if you want, but that will simply demonstrate a lack of ability to listen to other views in an adult manner. Sounds to me like your wife has been recalled as replacements due to other troops illness or some other compassionate reason. Sorry about that, but it's the way it goes.

Edited due to cr@p spelling

[edit on 12-3-2006 by PaddyInf]

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 04:47 AM
Latest propaganda is the US gave the green light for Israel to attack Iran.

War Has Already Begun!
Signs of Israel and the U.S. towards the showdown with Iran over the nuclear program
At the same day that Mohammad El Baredei’s report on Iran’s nuclear program was referred to U.N. Security Council retired Israeli chief of staff, Moshe Ya'alon, has said Israel could launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear and defense sites. Ya’alon’s speech, broadcasted on an Israeli TV channel, has angered Israel’s army chief Ehud Olmert who has accused Moshe Ya'alon of disclosing classified military information.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

World Nut Daily echos the same:

U.S., Israel to attack Iran nukes 'before April'
Pre-emptive strike all but inevitable,say military, intelligence sources

[edit on 12-3-2006 by Regenmacher]

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 04:57 AM
How will this bring an effect around the globe?

The chain of events following this could result in a huge uproar!

Would the US/Israel/UK thought of this? Havnt we seen communial riots around the world, due to a cartoon image?

Could this be a possibility?

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 06:35 AM
well the iran oil exchange goes live on march 20 so i've been thinking anytime before then would be when the sh@$ goes down.
kinda interesting to see the news as of late more and more talk about iran and tonight fox had a special on iran called Iran and the bomb, or something close. In the report there were lots of talk about israel's options and the fact that they took out iraqs nuclear facilites in 81. And how some of the 911 hijackers went through iran. Basically the same kind of smearing that happend right before the iraq war....err i mean liberation. All thats missing is the catylist. Whats it gonna be? nuclear bomb in israel said to be from iran and that they were farther along in their progam than we thought?( despite nuclear inspections) a nuclear bomb in iraq, nuclear bomb in america? who knows, but no matter what happens it is guaranteed to be irans fault.

the war drum beats a little louder

i know this for sure if war breaks out i'm buying oil
and halliburton stocks

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 07:10 AM
U.S., Israel to attack Iran nukes 'before April'

Even one nuclear weapon, used in an EMP-style attack on the U.S., would prove catastrophic to the nation, a congressional panel studying the vulnerability of America to electro-magnetic pulse weapons concluded last year.

Such an attack would not require Iran to use long-range or intercontinental ballistic missiles, which it does not possess. But a simple Scud missile, with a nuclear warhead, could be fired from offshore and detonated above the U.S. wreaking near total devastation on the country's technological, electrical and transportation infrastructure. It would also have the advantage of offering Iran a degree of plausible deniability, given that "terrorists" armed with one nuclear weapon could achieve the same results.

You would have to be a complete idiot to buy into the propaganda talked about in that article. The only evil we need to be worried about is Bush and his minions.

I very much doubt Tony Blair will be supporting this venture, if he does, I guarantee it, he will be hung from the nearest tree by his balls.

Most of Irans Nuclear facilities are built well underground. I imagine only a Nuclear Bomb would guarentee there destruction and I certainly wouldn't rule out the use of Nuclear weapons by Psychotic Bush. The consequences are imaginable.

A conventional attack on Iran wont change anything, except maybe set them back a few months and it will also make the world an even more dangerous place, as the whole muslim world would be outraged.

For an indepth look into the consequences of attacking IRAN, I recommend you read this article.

Your reap what you sow, Sow evil and you shall reap it.

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 08:11 PM
On the top of price of crude oil, there could be an impact. Though not an expert in this area, this is some information,

Crude-oil futures rose Thursday, ending a three-day drop as traders returned their attention to market uncertainties surrounding tension between Iran and Western nations.
Iran's threat to the United States Wednesday, as well as a more than 3 usd-a-barrel drop in crude prices since Friday, likely contributed to oil's strength Thursday, according to James Williams, an economist at WTRG Economics.
Iran said that it can cause "harm and pain" on America if Washington recommends that the United Nations tackle the Middle Eastern nation's nuclear issue, news reports said Wednesday.
"We can expect to hear news out of Iran that, on one hand, says they continue to produce, and on the other hand, threatens dire consequences," said Williams.
All in all, "this will have a very measured pace in the Security Council with no big surprise like a total embargo."
Even so, "the market will remain very volatile until the nuclear problem is resolved -- then we can start worrying about hurricanes again," he added.
The April crude contract fell to a low of 59.55 usd a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange Thursday, then bounced to a high of 60.90 usd. It closed up 45 cents at 60.47 usd a barrel.
Among petroleum products, April unleaded gasoline gained 6.99 cents to close at 1.7201 usd a gallon, while April heating oil added 2.59 cent to finish at 1.72 usd a gallon.
On Wednesday, April crude fell to 59.25 usd, touching its weakest intraday level since Feb 15, on hefty US crude-inventory levels and a decision by key oil producers to leave output limits unchanged.
The Energy Department reported that last week's crude inventories stood at 335.1 mln barrels -- the highest level for US stockpiles since the end of May 1999.
At the same time, the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries passed up a chance to cut member production ahead of an expected second-quarter slowdown in oil demand.
Tension over Iran's nuclear program remained a key focus in the oil market.
Iran has been adamant about continuing its nuclear research, saying the program is for purely peaceful purposes. Western nations fear that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons.
The International Atomic Energy Agency ended its three-day meeting in Vienna on Wednesday. The UN's Security Council will debate Iran's nuclear issue next week, according to the Associated Press.
Elsewhere on Nymex, natural-gas futures closed slightly lower Thursday, but held their ground above a one-year low.
"Traders are essentially writing off this winter season and are now focusing on the summer, which will need the additional storage to offset an active hurricane season," said Agbeli Ameko, a managing partner at First Enercast Financial.
US natural-gas stocks fell by 85 bln cubic feet for the week ended March 3, the Energy Department reported earlier Thursday.
Analysts at Fimat said that market estimates ranged from a decline of 80 bln to 140 bln cubic feet, with Fimat looking for a drawdown closer to 123 bln cubic feet and UBS expecting a drop of 110 bln to 120 bln. A year ago, supplies fell 134 bln, Fimat said.
Against this backdrop, natural gas for April delivery fell 4.7 cents to close at 6.601 usd per million British thermal units. The Nymex session's low of 6.48 usd was above Wednesday's one-year intraday low of 6.45 usd.
Total stocks now stand at 1.887 trln cubic feet, up 393 bln cubic feet from the year-ago level and 664 bln cubic feet above the five-year average, the government data said.
"This week essentially marks the death knell for winter, and we are entering spring with near-record levels of inventory," said Rakesh Shankar, an economist at Moody's, in a weekly report.
Still, he remained convinced that natural-gas prices will hold above the year-ago levels.
"As the focus shifts to summer heating demand and the injection cycle kicks in, the market will likely be reminded of the production shortages we persistently suffer in the Gulf Coast," added Shankar. That "will help bring prices back up through the summer months from current lows."
Meanwhile, "the destruction of exploration and drilling rigs in the Gulf, which will limit replenishment capacity, will help keep natural-gas prices above last year's levels," he said. "Almost 10 pct of natural-gas production will likely remain shut-in" ahead of the 2006 hurricane season, which early forecasts warn could be an active one.
Whether that happens or not, "the fear of such a season will add a premium to natural-gas prices for the next few months," according to Shankar.
In energy equities Thursday, benchmarks tracking the oil and gas sectors fell, with the Amex Oil Index losing the most ground.
At the same time, gold futures closed higher for the first time in five sessions.
Taking a broad measure of the commodity-futures markets, the Reuters/Jefferies CRB Index was up 0.7 pct at 319.94 points on the New York Board of Trade.

The impact in Asia,

Oil prices rose in Asian trading hours after Iran dug in for a confrontation with Western powers over moves to halt its nuclear program, dealers said.
Prices had fallen below 60 usd a barrel yesterday on news of healthy US crude oil inventories, but fears that the Iranian nuclear dispute could escalate reversed the trend.
At 12.00 pm (0400 GMT) here, New York's main contract, light sweet crude for delivery in April, was up 0.13 usd at 60.60 usd from its close of 60.47 usd in the US overnight.
"The market is reacting to some rhetoric regarding the Iranian situation," said Victor Shum, a Singapore-based analyst with US energy consultancy Purvin and Gertz.
"Traders are moving to cover their short positions and so the market is rebounding, even though market fundamentals are really quite conducive for lower prices," he said.
"This illustrates how edgy the market is, how reactive it is to geo-political events."
Western powers, led by the US, want to curb Iran's nuclear activities amid fears the country aims to develop nuclear weapons, but Tehran has insisted that its research is for peaceful purposes.
A defiant Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared yesterday: "The time for bullying is over."
He said the West "cannot do a damn thing" against his country.
The UN Security Council was scrambling to agree a united, firm but gradual response to Iran's defiance.
The US said yesterday it will seek a "strong" UN Security Council statement against Iran's nuclear program, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Iran Washington's biggest challenge.
If market fundamentals are considered, prices should be going down, Shum said, referring to US crude oil reserves, which are about 10 pct higher than at this stage a year ago, and are at their highest level since May 1999.
OPEC also decided Wednesday to keep output at a near 25-year high of 28 mLN barrels per day.
"But over the next few days, the saber-rattling will continue over the Iran nuclear issue and so a price fall, if any, won't be very significant," Shum said.
"At this moment, the rhetoric is winning, over market fundamentals."

I am sure there will be more articles out there with various types of analysis, but at the end the consumer will be at the end of the barrel paying the increased price.

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 08:35 PM
Getting back to the topic of the UK news, kinda, has anyone been watching telly in the UK?? it seems like every ad break at the moment contains an advert for the armed forces

posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:17 AM
In the US it seems programming on many channels is back to a disproportionate amount of war related shows and movies again.

posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:26 AM

Originally posted by Tommio
Getting back to the topic of the UK news, kinda, has anyone been watching telly in the UK?? it seems like every ad break at the moment contains an advert for the armed forces

You mean the british army and RAF, thats because of low numbers of recruits and because both get more money than the RN.

<< 1   >>

log in