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.

 

If US Attacks Iran, Iran Attacks Israel

page: 8
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Were just the public though, who cares what we think?
The Government is aware of more information than we are, therefore we entrust Bush with the decision.
So chill, wait for the bombs to drop.
Europe is behind the US, maybe not military wise, but they agree so..

Hey think of it this way.. France has ALOT of nuclear subs capable of launching nukes from water.. Iran will be lit up like a cigarette im about to smoke..




posted on May, 3 2006 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
And they did observe all the rules and US didn't.

I hate to break it to you, since this matter has been brought up before--numerous times--in the War on Terrorism forum, but Iran is in VIOLATION of the NPT. Please tell me how Iran "did observe all the rules," cause according to the IAEA, Iran has been in violation for the last 18+ years.




When they saw the iraq invasion + North Korea problem solve when they had a nuke + the UN deliberatly led by the US, they knew that if they did comply to all UN inspections and all this crap, they would be bombed anyway because of the Israël lobby and US dissuation power at UN.

Question: Has Iran been bombed yet? If not, your excuse for Iran is simply that: an excuse.





France with Iraq was against invasion because they were making money over the food for oil program.

You mean like now in the Iran situation where the Russian and Chinese are against severe actions against Iran, eh? I mean golly gee, Russia is selling arms to Iran and China is seeking OIL....





And UK is the follower of the US anyway.

Hardly, but seems to me your jealous.





If Blair wouldn't be that weak politically, he would have push for sanctions as the US.

I will let some British members address this....




Why believe a crazy guy named W Bush since he seems to believe is the god tool to annhilate the infidels or I don't know what... a guy who is member of bilderberg and bohemian grove? A government led by corporations, lead by the WAR industry?

Because they believe what the IAEA is saying? Hello?!





As I said earlier, why the US don't open his facilities to UN? Why Israêl doesn't open their facilities and show how many nukes US gave them?

The US already has and does...yearly. Iran?
Israel does not have to because why, Vitchilo, maybe because Israel is not bound by the NPT being they are not a signatory member? Oops.




Anyway, UN is crap. Nobody listen to it. So if the US really want to attack, they will attack. The best option would be that all countries dismantle nukes but US would never do that as Israël because they know that they would pay for all their crimes.

Hey? Why you keep talking about the US and Israel? Are they the only two with nukes? Will Pakistan, India, Russia, China, France, the UK, etc agree to simply dismantle ALL their nukes, as well?





The american people made a big mistake TWICE in electing Bush.

Tissue? You are aware that this is a matter of opinion, correct?





They will pay for it unfortunatly.

Okie dokie, I suppose now your in the soothsayer business?





Israël elected again people who are dangerous, they will pay for it.

Be assured that Israel can take care of its self quite proficiently.





Iranian elected a leader that don't comply with US, they will pay for it. Palestinians elected a government who is view as a terrorist organisation, they already pay for it.

And?




You don't want a war? Overthrow you're government or do something against war, make HUGE protest and take over the white house, I don't know.

How about simply get Iran to comply?






seekerof

[edit on 4-5-2006 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Low Orbit show some respect and tolerence "Hopefully it teaches you about mathmatics and science not only the Koran." i mean u also offend people like me even though you may have a point. Its called consideeration. I choose not to comment on christian and seekerof and grimreaper..,
Iran is not Iraq for the trilinth time. As an iraqi i never actualy fought for saddam we were forced to fight for an american puppet. I read somewhere in this discussion that the US will turn Iraq into glass by nukes. hahahahaaha
A couple of barbaric insurgents who cant read have blogged down the US, i live in Iraq the americans are depressed tired and weak (morally)
I support there presence and as does 80% of the country. 20% dont and they are driving the americans wild. They are talking of leaving. Now although in iran say 30% dont like the goverment 70% do. ahmadijane and his rival rafsanjani got a record 41 million votes Although from differnet political partys both have similer views on US/Isreali interference in the region. Sory to break it to you Ahmadijane comments on Isreal reflect what 90% of the region thinks. His comments on the holocaust were unappropiate but he had a point when he said the arabs and muslims hould not pay for the crime of hitler an has nazis.
Why should we cop it if Hitler decided to kill them?, we didnt tell him to do so and he didnt like muslims any better..
Out of the blue the US decides to invade Iraq and support "democarcy", then Ironically when hamas is elected they refuse to recognise them. Western demcracy will not work and if america wants its reputation smashed for the sake of isreal.
GO AHEAD BOMB IRAN feel good about it and wow you stopped terrorism.
hahhahahahahahahahah u guys are crazy if you think europe wont be gased allong with Isreal if Iran is bombed. I am not pro iran, we fought each other for 8 years but i wish people would respect other countrys rights.
The american dream will not work in the middle east. Personally I thank them for gettin rid of saddam but i would lose any respect i have for the US if it attacks Iran.
And in regards to the isreali pressure groups in the US, read this, it showed me that its not US citizens fault that there lunatic presdent is trigger happy



This will be my final post in this discussion, Some respect would be nice.
Thought westerners had manners
lol



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Who's calling for war on muslim, also know as war on terror?

Bush has specifically stated that its not a war against islam or muslims, but against radical fundamental islamists. Ahmadinehjad, on the other had, has called for war against the jews.


What they did since 2 years? Which countries refuses the UN to inspect their nuclear installations?

Iran, for one, which carried out a large part of it's programme in secret.


Israël, Pakistan

Neither has signed onto the NPT, and therefore isn't bound by it.




When UN said Iran had a nuclear weapons program?

They don't need to have the UN say that they have a programme in order for them to be in violation of their NPT obligations.


Who have their own sovereign and independant nuke program? (US, Israël, Pakistan...)

Those countries have their own nuke programs because those countries, when offered to sign up with the NPT, opted not to.



1- Because it's their fundamental right.

Fair enough. Still suspicious to the paranoid and apparently 'evil' United States.


3- Why believe the US administration, this time, since they lied so many times?

No one is asking the rest of the world to beleive. The rest of the world didn't agree that military action was necessary vis a vis iraq, but that didn't stop anything. The US president doesn't have to convince the world that Iran is doing anything wrong.


Why not let the UN see if there really is a nuke program?

The UN is seeing if there is such a programme, and Iran requires a clean bill of health from the IAEA, which, so far, it hasn't.


Also, who took away rights from his own citizens?

Iran requires women to wear hijabs. Iran has no ground to stand on when it comes to civil rights.

Who already invaded 2 countries in 6 years and is about to attack a third one?

What does that matter? Other than to show that the US is serious about its own security.



Who sponsor dictatorship?

Iran is run by a military commandry with a religious leader holding supreme authority. The US has supported dictators in the past, when it was expedient, like Saddam. The US is now chanign its position on that, and now is wipping out illiberal regimes in the middle east, hence, the coming Iran War.


Who help the opium industry?

People who buy and sell opium.



Who is bombing civilians?

Iran.


Who is censoring his medias?

Iran.


Who's using chemical weapons

The US hasn't used chemical weapons

and depleted uranium on civilians?

Depleted uranium is only dangerous if you inhale large amounts of it, at concentrations that only exist within and around the vehicles that have been hit by the rounds. Anyone there is already dead.

Who use torture? Who have secret prisons?

Syria. Perhaps we should invade syria after iran, you suggest? What does that have to do with the US's justification for war based upon security concerns?
Are you trying to say that the US aint' as great as it likes to pretend to be? I'd agree, the US has done some nasty things. What does any of that have to do with the US invading, destroying, and occupying Iran? Will it be nasty? Yes. Will it be a great burden upon the Iranian people? Yes. Is that worth 'standing up' to teh US on the issue of nuclear power, thats up to the Iranians. If they choose to not back down, then they're going to have to accept their fate, invasion, destruction, occupation, being hit with depleted uranium rounds, having their economy dismantled, and leaving their sovereignty up to foreign bureaucrats.

Is it worth it? Again, thats up to them. They're going to have to make the decision. If they choose for war, then war is what they are going to get, its their choice.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Links for my "were did u get that from"

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

www.ifamericansknew.org...

on the halocaust and other HISTORICAL things go to

www.ihr.org...



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iraqi_king
www.ihr.org...

Dude, ihr.org--Institute for Historical Review is the world's leading Holocaust denial organisation.

I would be ashamed to link them or their garbage, but hey, thats just me. :shk:






seekerof



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   
Iraqi, speaking for myself I definately valued your honest opinion and I would like you to continue writing here as this forum does tend to reflect, honestly, the sentiment of patriots from all around the globe.

The reason as far as I can see why the US and Europe aren't supporting Hamas is 1. because of there history with suicide bombers and
2. they are bankrupt right now, If war breaks out with Iran, how stable will Hamas be, where will its funds come from?

If we can get Hamas to rid itself of its Military Wing and Deny Terrorism then, I believe we would start seeing real progress in setting the borders of Palestine as well as finally get to a core cause, not the only one, of terrorism.

Where am I going wrong?



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 02:36 AM
link   
Thankyou low orbit
First of all seekerof, Its true that Ihr.org is the world's leading Holocaust denial organisation, but if they base what they say on knowledge and sources how can we ignore the truth. Now seeking the truth these days has become a problem. As a muslim, when i choose to question certin historical events regarding islamic history i am blasted at, (Historyical events and how we interpret events is the cause of the sunni shiite split)
so when i see historians regardless of them seaching the holocaust archives to the american civil wars to spanish colonisation they should be allowed to research any topic they choose and know that what they are doing is benefitng humanity. the holocaust has some unasnwered questions which ahmadijane gladly exagerated but the aim and purpose of history is reseaching of facts. Ill end this now as give me your email or somfin if you would like me to further explain


Low orbit, hamas represents what the palestinian people want. they want a goverment that can take up arms when it needs to in order to defend themselves against agression as do the isreali people elect leaders to defend them from bombing and terrorism.

Hamas has held a cease fire for the last couple of months and the last sucide bombing in isreal was carried out by another organisation (forgot who).
Denying and oppressing hamas is seen by the palestianian people as a direct threat to there democarcy and belifs and values.
I understand the why the world wants hamas to disarm, but with threats from Isreal to kill their ministers and constant artillary fire (in response to rocket attacks)
which make it impossible and absurd for them to consider disarming. If hamas cease fire continues and Isreal incursions and attacks stop a platform for peace may develop which may in turn start logical negotiations. As ive mentioned earlier both Iran and the US support each others enemies. The US recently gave 70 million to iranian opposition while Iran gave 50 Million to Hamas. Politics nothing new.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:26 AM
link   
iraqi king:
im not sure why you mentioned my name before when you said i wouldnt comment on these people(seekerof, etc.) but i agree with alot that your saying.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo

What they did since 2 years? Which countries refuses the UN to inspect their nuclear installations? (US, Israël, Pakistan) Who's the only country to use nuke? (US) When UN said Iran had a nuclear weapons program? Who have their own sovereign and independant nuke program? (US, Israël, Pakistan...)


[edit on 3-5-2006 by Vitchilo]


Sorry.. I believe that since the US is a signatory of the NPT it is open to snap inspections and visits. The US probably doesn't want to proliferate nukes(now) anyways.
Israel is not a declared N-weapons state. Iran is at a level of N-weapon development that Israel was maybe 20-30 years back.
AT that time N-proliferation was rampant and there was no NPT. So nobody could stop Israel from building N-weapons even if they wanted to. The Arabs tried, they couldn't.
Pakistan (and India) are NOT signatories of the NPT. They do NOT have any obligations towards the IAEA.Nobody could do anything more than slap sanctions on them when they went nuclear. Invading(carrying out pin-point strikes) against either country(esp. India) would just open a can of worms.
Pakistan has more concessions than Iran (though IMHO it fits very much into the so called 'bad boy' image Iran is made to have)because of old ties with the US and the war on terror.
So IMHO if you're(the west) condeming Iran just on a general basis w/o linking it to direct violations of the NPT, then you must condemn Pakistan as well.
Otherwise Pakistan also gets off scott free..



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Sory grimreaper misunderstod one of your comments.

I got this from the associated press

A thought....

"Olmert's remarks were quickly endorsed by Israeli opposition leader
Benjamin Netanyahu, who has called for an Osiraq-like preemptive strike on Iran"

Now lets stand back and place ourselves in Irans postion. Here is an Isreali I think hes a oppostion minister, saying that is calling for pre-emtive strikes agaisnt a soverign nation such as Iran. If I or we were Iranian nationals how are supposed to view this threat?
An act of war ?
An act of terrorism?
On the political stage Isreals comments make it differet to Irans threats in one way. Isreal is calling for pre- emtive action while Iran is saying if we are striked by either the US or Isreal we will retaliate. Who wouldnt.

www.forbes.com...

Intresting article on Iran in regards to its influence and aims in other nations.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
What I want to know is how is it now that someone stated Iran can't hit Israel with anything, now where did they get that from. The Iranians actually can hit Israel and since Israel is calling for their nation to be bombed why wouldn't they at least consider it.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Iraqi,

"Hamas has held a cease fire for the last couple of months and the last sucide bombing in isreal was carried out by another organisation (forgot who)."

If I remember correctly the last suicide bomber to strike Israel happened a few weeks ago and although he was not a member of Hamas at the time, he use to be a member and then about 3 months before his attack he switched political/military parties so that Hamas could be seen as the PC(politically correct) party for the Palestinian people unfortunately that in the western world backfired.

Although I cannot find a link, I do remember how events played out.(if anyone else could locate a link that be a huge help)

As long as anyone even close to the Palestinian Leadership is affiliated with suicide bombers the West will continue to turn its back to Hamas.

Was it not Hamas that started the suicide bombings?



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:06 AM
link   

MSNBC

UNITED NATIONS, May 3 — The Iranian military on Wednesday rejected a statement from a top Revolutionary Guards commander that Israel would be Iran's first target in response to any U.S. attack, an Iranian news agency reported.

Brig. Gen. Alireza Afshar, deputy to the chief of Iran's military staff, said the statement by Mohammad Ebrahim Dehghani ''is his personal view and has no validity as far as the Iranian military officials are concerned,'' according to the Entekhab News Agency.

Apparently Iranian Military does not share this Statement at all.

It was "Only" a personal view of mister Ebrahim Dehghani and it does not reflect the view of the Iranian Military.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:25 AM
link   
low orbit your speculation is nothing more then opinion and speculation.

iraqi king its fine. my stand point is we were wrong to go into iraq and even though i feel like iran is a ticking time bomb, it will be the war we dont go into that may in fact be the most important one. Iraq i disagree with completely, but Iran im still borderline right now, it really could go either way. If they started enriching 50% uranmium and such and tried to go higher and higher i think it would be safe to say civil purposes isnt their only go and we may need serious action to stop it. I am very much against israels nuclear arsenal as well. Im not a fan of the history of israel either.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I dont know what nation you live in Low Orbit but ill give you a description of bombs falling on an civilian. As an iraqi there were times when b52s were raining bombs on us. You dont have a clue how far to sucide that drives you. bombs falling screams, shouts crys. Do you how hard it is to lose familys to these bombings?
Isreals incursion into gaza forced the palestinians into a two way choice face isreal or death. For informations sake huzbullah was the first group to carry out suicide bombings. It is one of the most effective tools against a large and organised army.
For the palestinanas thats there only choice. that suicide bombing happened but when you look at the life of a bomber you must realise that something more then fanatism drives a person to blow himself up. Suicide bombers dont come out of the ground, terrorist come from the ashes of defeat, oppression and humiliation. Isreal itself was created by isreali terrorists that carried out bombings against the British.
www.deiryassin.org...
read this artice tell me if this is not the sort of acts that would inspire others to fight.
Hamas has become a effective party with a military branch AND social branch that is free from corruption

Isreali military news. If you were iran wouldnt you be worried by such actions?read thiss article
observer.guardian.co.uk...


Hamas
Palestinians voted for Hamas because of our refusal to give up their rights. But we are ready to make a just peace
Khalid Mish'al
Tuesday January 31, 2006

"Our message to the Israelis is this: we do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture. Jews have lived in the Muslim world for 13 centuries in peace and harmony; they are in our religion "the people of the book" who have a covenant from God and His Messenger Muhammad (peace be upon him) to be respected and protected. Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us - our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people."

As i said before politics is the problem. note: Iran has a seat in the parliment reserved for jew, and they enjoy full rights and protection in Iran.

This is not a muslim/christian_Jewish war. Its a political war that uses and exploits religion. keep this in mind when reading varius articles



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:40 AM
link   
The link on hamas (where i got my quotes from)

www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   
grimreaper
Irans pursuit of nuclear technology is the best option its got. Its lagging behind in the region in regards to nuclear technology. Pakistan and India, with pakistan having a dictator both posses nukes, and America has said little about it. to irans left and right american bases are on stand b. so iran is surrounded by nuclear powers. For iran nuclear technology has allowed it to come closer to being able to one day build a bomb.
I belive it has the right to do so, because if the US allowed pakistan a renegade dictatorship goverment have nukes, why should iran be treated diffeerently. Iran took a leaf out of north koreas book.
N.Korea made threats worked on nuclear technology and is still standing. Iran has a better card then Korea becasue it has in its reach the persion gulf where 35% of global oil comes from. Any form of attack will nake the great depression seem like a joke. Oil is irans best deterent and as an country would its using it as a stick to keep america a bay.
If america or isreal attacks i belive the world economy will collapse no matter what the us does.
Iran has missiles that can hit Saudi Oil feilds. If that happens well be using bikes to get to work for a very long time



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 11:00 AM
link   
This may sound nuts, but I just thought "What if Iran had Nukes?" Maybe they would be less paranoid and defensive? The US would back off and most if not all the dust would settle all the while the focus shifts to another oil rich, non-nuclear region.

Just a 'what if' scenario that makes sense IMO.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Bain:

The U.S. has made a lot of mistakes but that doesn't mean we do not protect the rights of people around the world. We are also hated because we are a nation of God - moral values that others despise. Moral values, that I will admit are a dying breed in the U.S. and around the world.


Hated because you are a nation of God? You have high moral values that others despise? ?!

Grim's post says it all, and with an American perspective you might appreciate more. Otherwise, I'm afraid you are living in an America I have never seen.



Seeker:

Hey? Why you keep talking about the US and Israel?


Because those are the two countries pushing hardest for Iran to "disarm", even though they have no nukes. And Israel doesn't follow the NPT and you somehow seem to think Iran should. Who knows why.

Iran should feel threatened, and they have the right to defend themselves. Bottom line.

Nygdan:

Bush has specifically stated that its not a war against islam or muslims, but against radical fundamental islamists.


Yeah, except nobody believes a word that comes out of his lying mouth.


The US hasn't used chemical weapons


White phosporus. They've admitted to it. Nice try though.


Depleted uranium is only dangerous if you inhale large amounts of it, at concentrations that only exist within and around the vehicles that have been hit by the rounds.


Link?


The US president doesn't have to convince the world that Iran is doing anything wrong.


Because why? I didn’t elect him... He can’t make decisions that impact me, my family, and humanity.

And if he does, and you support it, will you be surprised when people who SUFFER because of his decisions, decide to inflict some suffering back at you? They can’t get at him, but they can sure inflict some death on the U.S. population, don’t you think?


Other than to show that the US is serious about its own security.


If you would kindly explain how invading Iraq somehow made the US more secure, I’m all ears.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join