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.

 

How long till iran is invaded

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2006 @ 08:08 PM
link   
When or if do you think iran will be invaded

i think by christmas of this year




posted on May, 14 2006 @ 08:35 PM
link   
Invaded, no, not 4 a while. However, if the question becomes when will Iran be attacked-my guess is within 3 months.



posted on May, 25 2006 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Well i hope it never happens, its very scary, I think it will be the start of WWIII



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I actually did a research project for english on Iran. I don't think we'll invade. too risky, we have a good vantage point in Iraq as it is. Thats actually why I think we're there. I'd post the paper on the site if someone could tell me how...(it's a word doc.)



posted on May, 26 2006 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I did a 10 page research paper on it for my "peace and war in the nuclear age" class as well, invasion: no, limited airstrikes:very likely. ask 12m8keall2c about the paper, he uploaded my HAARP research paper in a .pdf format so that I didnt have to link it.

[edit on 26-5-2006 by ben94gt]



posted on May, 28 2006 @ 08:42 PM
link   
I think war with Iran is atleast two years away. If it happens at all, it will be started by the next U.S. President. Or, it might start if the Iranians see any advantage in making the first move. Either way, that's at lest wo years out.

The United States has not achieved the necessary mobilization in the region that they would require for an offensive push in to Iran. You certainly won't see them doing it with hte forces they now have in the region.

You'll know it if/when they start the build-up. Look for troop levels to peak at around 500,000 or more before they jump off. It's more likely to be the case thatthe next U.S. President will step down the American presence. In purest miitary terms, the fight with Iran is coming whether anyone likes it or not. Giving up their military presence in the region would be the worst thing the Americans could do just now, so you should look for that to happen. the next President will want popularity, and a withdraw from Iraq will seem to be the easiest way to get it.

Three to five years from now, we may see the Iraqis lay host to a large military force as the Americans and any coalition partners begin the buildup. they won't even try to hide that build-up. the UN will want to use the growiing force presence as "leverage" to try and influencethe Iranians, which won't work.



posted on May, 28 2006 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Interesting prediction Justin, I'm interested to find out why you say..


In purest miitary terms, the fight with Iran is coming whether anyone likes it or not.


To me i'd say there will be no conflict what so ever. I'd like to think the world (especially Europe) has learnt from Iraq. It certainly seems Russia and China will not sit back and watch any kind of military action without some kind of interjection.

Any kind of air strike will surely leed to full blown conflict, and any kind of full blown conlict will not be pretty.

To me it seems like a lose lose situation.



posted on May, 28 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
A nuclear 'accident' may occur inside Iran while it is busy looking for trouble outside. That stuff should not be messed around with 'ya know.

Seriously, I hope Iran stops playing its game of 'nuclear chicken' with the US and its allies. If it truly wants peace like it says then why play the game?

[edit on 28-5-2006 by signs]



posted on May, 28 2006 @ 11:14 PM
link   


If it truly wants peace like it says then why play the game?



So it should give up its right to generate Nucleur power because the US says so?

I can understand Irans' attitude towards typical American Bullying in this situation.

Try and tell me that America's reasoning in this situation is unbiased and impartial. I dare ya!



posted on May, 29 2006 @ 01:15 AM
link   
The American position against nuclear proliferation is a losing battle. As more and more nations become economically affluent, it'll be harder to keep the nuclear genie in the bottle.

Nobody can keepthe Iranians from having the bomb at this point. Once you can generae nuclear power, it's only a small leap to the bomb. If the Iranians kept quiet about their desire to pave Irsael, they might get away with it. Trouble is, they've made it loud and clear exactly what they'll do with a bomb when they get it.

Most countries that have pursuedthe bomb did so quietly and with much secrecy along the way. Even now, those nations that have nuclear capability only refer to it in defensive terms. When the Iranian Mullahs talk about the bomb, they refer to it is a polic yinstrument with a decidedly offensive goal. If they dropped that rhetoric and made the claim that their bomb would only be used for defense...even if that were not true...they might get away with it.

From the Western perspective, this conflict can only have one end.



posted on May, 29 2006 @ 03:24 AM
link   


If the Iranians kept quiet about their desire to pave Irsael, they might get away with it. Trouble is, they've made it loud and clear exactly what they'll do with a bomb when they get it.


Ok, to my knowledge Iran has never stated that it wants to nuke Israel and frankly, i think people need to give more credit to the Iranian regime, nukeing Israel would surely sign their own countries death warrant. Even the crazy mullahs realise this.

Iran already has one of the biggest inventories of Bio and chemical weapons in the ME, that it could have loaded onto any of its substantial supply of missiles bound for tel-aviv. They havn't done this though.

What ever extremist drivel their regime might rant, actions are another thing altogether, and to be fair Iran does not have a recent history of beligerant military confrontations.

I see no points you have brought up to show that confrontation is inevitable. However everyone is entitled to their own opinion.



posted on May, 29 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   
The current leader if Iran, Ahmed Amedinajaad, has sworn repeatedly that his nation would destroy Israel. This rant began last year.

Iranian threats

Even if the leadership is just playing to the home crowd, the fact remains that they have sworn openly to destroy Israel.

Recent Iranian threats

I'm willing to agree that Iran has no past history of military agresssion. That doesn't mean that the Western powers are just going to ignore these guys.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join