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.

 

Iran's Troop Build-up On The Golan Border!!

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by iqonx




are you being serious?

why would syria support jihad or anything islamic?







are you being serious??? syria would jump at the chance to overthrow israel and put an end to the standoff over the golan hieghts, why would they support jihad??? for this very reason! they may not be an islamic government but they are an islamic people, and while I agree that most muslims are not sitting around cooking up plans of jihad terror strikes, there is a faction that is, and possibly in government positions hence the new found treaty with Iran




posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:39 AM
link   
bad for Israel?

look at it in a different light. A base in Syria gives Iran forces on either side of Iraq. The US would attack Iran from the water and from Iraq. Now, with troops on either side of them, they'd be forced to fight a two front battle (if it comes down to a fight) and they would be spreading themselves out to protect from any attacks on either side.

Bad for the US too.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:51 AM
link   
yep, it would be terrible for iran who would be spread so thin on the other hand military planners for the U.S. have stated that two separate theaters of war operations are not out of the question given the technical superiority of our military



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by KhieuSamphan

Originally posted by the_sentinal
He he, sorry, my point was that any significant movement of personnel or hardware would be easily detected and would, inevitably, cause a kerfuffle, to say the least.

If the story you presented is accurate, I would suggest that it is mere sabre rattling, and a suitable response from the US and Israel would be, to quote the cultural icon that is Paul Hogan, 'That ain't a knife...this is a knife'.


your point is well taken, and I love that movie



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   
there doesnt need to be a ground war for iran.. this is what F/22 Raptors, B1 Bombers and F/117 night hawks are for. all stealth all the time hooah



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Syria continued to provide safehaven and support to several terrorist groups, some of which maintained training camps or other facilities on Syrian territory. Ahmad Jibril's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Abu Musa's Fatah-the-Intifada, and George Habash's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) maintained their headquarters in Damascus. The Syrian Government allowed HAMAS to open a new main office in Damascus in March, although the arrangement may be temporary while HAMAS continues to seek permission to reestablish its headquarters in Jordan. In addition, Syria granted a variety of terrorist groups--including HAMAS, the PFLP-GC, and the PIJ--basing privileges or refuge in areas of Lebanon's Bekaa Valley under Syrian control. Damascus generally upheld its agreement with Ankara not to support the Kurdish PKK, however.


Yeah, you're probably right, they just all get together for tea in Syria. It's their favorite 'secular' hangout.
And I consider Israel part of the West!





[edit on 20-6-2006 by HimWhoHathAnEar]



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by HimWhoHathAnEar

Syria continued to provide safehaven and support to several terrorist groups, some of which maintained training camps or other facilities on Syrian territory. Ahmad Jibril's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), the Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ), Abu Musa's Fatah-the-Intifada, and George Habash's Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) maintained their headquarters in Damascus. The Syrian Government allowed HAMAS to open a new main office in Damascus in March, although the arrangement may be temporary while HAMAS continues to seek permission to reestablish its headquarters in Jordan. In addition, Syria granted a variety of terrorist groups--including HAMAS, the PFLP-GC, and the PIJ--basing privileges or refuge in areas of Lebanon's Bekaa Valley under Syrian control. Damascus generally upheld its agreement with Ankara not to support the Kurdish PKK, however.


Yeah, you're probably right, they just all get together for tea in Syria. It's their favorite 'secular' hangout.
And I consider Israel part of the West!





[edit on 20-6-2006 by HimWhoHathAnEar]


that was my point, syria might as well be an isamic government state given all the support they are showing for islamic extreamist's



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
nice to know hatred is alive and well...as long as its against christians and not muslims right nygdan?

Don't have to hate someone to knwo that they're dupped by propaganda. Its ironic that this false propaganda is accepted and repeated by that site, thats all. I don't have any hatred torwards christianity or christians as a class. But something tells me that there's some reason other than being an informed insider in global polititcs that explains why 'Jesus is lord.com' guy accepts this 'story'.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
nice to know hatred is alive and well...as long as its against christians and not muslims right nygdan?

Don't have to hate someone to knwo that they're dupped by propaganda. Its ironic that this false propaganda is accepted and repeated by that site, thats all. I don't have any hatred torwards christianity or christians as a class. But something tells me that there's some reason other than being an informed insider in global polititcs that explains why 'Jesus is lord.com' guy accepts this 'story'.



I'm confused, why is debkafile an unacceptable news source ???



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
SOMETHING tell's me it's a bias related to the origin of the news source.

God's people are like a litmus test IMO. Be they Jew or Christian. The reaction to them speak's volume's to me.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Debka is run by a russian guy named
Igor A. Lepechin his credentials are not overly imppressive but he is employed full time by the Moscow Times newspaper, you can read his personal information at this site;



www.gogi.procentr.org...

I dont see anything about this guy that would suggest he's not a legitimate journalistic source maybe you just dont like what he says so that makes him illegitimate



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   
I hope they do "build up" their forces, all in one location, yeah bunch them up go ahead. And watch the drone bombers have a field day.

Iran, China, Russia and all the world combined would not stand a chance. If they did they would have done some thing by now. Conventional warfare is not the way to fight the US, history has proven that. Soon even unconventional means will falter and lose what little manipulation it has.

It's not bragging if it is true.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Drone bombers? I thought unmanned aerial vehicles could not fly as high as manned stealth aircraft, leaving them very vulnerable to Anti-Aircraft guns and Surface to Air missles even. They are not anywhere near as fast as a commercial airliners. A large number of infantry watching the skies with stingers could probably shoot down a considerable amount of UAV's.

I am sure their fighters would be waiting for any stealth bombers entering the skies, and their satellites will be watching for the F-22's that will escort the bombers. Overall I beilieve we could launch a successful pre-emptive aerial strike on any major supply lines and roads/bridges which will slow the buildup and replenishment of ground forces. Cruise missles launched from the Mediterranean would be able to pick out a significant number of ground tanks and infantry movements. The Iranians have poorly performing tanks with weaker armor as far as I have noticed. If I am wrong please correct me.

I believe as long as we strictly defend only the land borders of Israel, we would be able to hold off any invasion by a Persian assault. There is absolutley no need for China to respond directly against American forces as long as our forces do not attack Iranian infrastructure of oil/gas production. Battling 1/4 of all of Earth is not going to gain anything for our system, nor would it be for the big 5 of the UN security Council.

Any offendor would have to rethink their strategy before coming through such a small strip of land. Every movement will be seen by the country who owns and operates more than half of all satellites in space.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 09:41 PM
link   
This building up of the troops is rather weird to me i mean what are they going to do bum rush israel ?? it doesnt make any sense to me what they are trying to do here, i'm with you on this one Advisor we will put the shock & awe on them once again



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 10:57 PM
link   
1. America and China aren't going to go at it over Israel or Iran. It simply doesn't make any sense for either of us. If China sponsors actions against Israel, we'll make it a standard proxy war and keep it in theater, fighting against their chosen proxy. If we go after Iran, they'll stay out, supplying weapons if anything, and that's it.

2. An Iranian attack on Israel is not imminent. Why start now? Why give Israel carte blanche to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities? Iranian presence in Syria is perfectly logical and believable in relatively small volume as a matter of limited strike capability and early warning.

3. For Iran to move enough forces to Syria to be decisive in a war with Israel, Iran would have to do two things.
#1: Acquire such hardware. God knows they aren't going to overrun Israel with T-55s and BMP-1s.
#2. Move it to Syria in complete secrecy.
#3. Acquire the airpower to sustain such a force without US Forces in Iraq cutting their supply lines.


If Iran was going to make a play, given what has worked for them in the past and what they have seen work against them, and their somewhat limited manueverability, they'd be likely to move on Iraq before making any noise at all with Israel- they need the US out of the equation. They'd probably rely on the Basij, hoping to simply inundate and horrify us until we called it quits. I give the Basij very poor odds in most circumstances, but there are a few mistakes they should hope we'll make.

For Israel, they'd want to fight mainly with strategic bombing and ballistic missiles to make Israel come to them. The problem is that to do that they need the ability to outmatch Israel's airforce in order to protect their missile forces and also carry out their bombing.


All things considered, Iran is most likely to take their time until they've got the nukes and the US is out of Iraq on its own accord. Then they can think about Israel if they really want to. I have a hard time believing that a war in Israel is in the cards for the near future. Iran will want more time. They do have a strategic interest in cooperating with Syria, but they won't put themselves out to help Syria get back the Golan. Islamic republics don't generally do as well as they should with Secular Ba'athists, especially since the Islamic republic in question is a Persian one rather than Arab, and Ba'athists support Pan-Arabism, which can only be bad for Persian aspirations to regain their former size and might.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond


All things considered, Iran is most likely to take their time until they've got the nukes and the US is out of Iraq on its own accord. Then they can think about Israel if they really want to. I have a hard time believing that a war in Israel is in the cards for the near future. Iran will want more time. They do have a strategic interest in cooperating with Syria, but they won't put themselves out to help Syria get back the Golan. Islamic republics don't generally do as well as they should with Secular Ba'athists, especially since the Islamic republic in question is a Persian one rather than Arab, and Ba'athists support Pan-Arabism, which can only be bad for Persian aspirations to regain their former size and might.


I could believe that this is the way that this story will play out but for two glaring reasons I dont think that it will, first the Israelis have stated publicly that they will not allow Iran to aquire nukes so with this in mind I believe that there will be some type of pre-emptive strike from Israel or possibly the U.S. unless Iran has a complete and total change of heart and accept the incentives package being offered at this time (which I highly doubt ) Iran seems to be playing the clock game acting interested in the package but in reality thumbing thier nose at it behind the media's back just to buy a few more month's of preparation time, Time to move the planned resources to syria for the counter attack that will follow the strike made by Israel or U.S. (whoever strikes first)

secondly, the loose cannon called Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his dreams of the 12th Imam, his heart is that of an extreamist and he IMO cannot be counted upon to act in a rational manner, extreamist's are risk takers and Ahmadinejad is no different he will push the envelope to accomplish his holy war .



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 05:10 AM
link   
The Golan Heights are strategically vital for Israel. Control of the heights would give access into northern Israel, allowing Syrian forces to swing south to the Sea of Galilee, or head west to the Med. But the main reason why Israel wants the heights is that before 1968 the Syrians used to have a lot of guns dug in there, and they used to randomly shell the farmers on the kibbutzim on the plains below them. No reason for this shelling, they just liked harrassing fire.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkmind
The Golan Heights are strategically vital for Israel. Control of the heights would give access into northern Israel, allowing Syrian forces to swing south to the Sea of Galilee, or head west to the Med. But the main reason why Israel wants the heights is that before 1968 the Syrians used to have a lot of guns dug in there, and they used to randomly shell the farmers on the kibbutzim on the plains below them. No reason for this shelling, they just liked harrassing fire.


The Golan Heights is due to be given up by Israel in accordance with the roadmap to peace, What a name for this piece of propaganda( Roadmap To Peace ) It's more like the roadmap to HELL because thats what Israel is in for if they give up the Golan Heights. I agree with you darkmind conrol of the heights is vital for the strategic ability of Israel



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
This is prophetic, I googled the quoted opening statement from the article to try find corroborating sources. This is it:

"Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog"
worshippingchristian.blogspot.com...


I think that says a lot.

Yes that Christian website does say alot
Are they Christians? are you sure? LOL looks like a hate site to me. Hate Gays, Hate Muslims


This is the security Israel got in return for evacuating their territory. Also, who in their right mind is going to believe a slimy pali terrorist anyway?



Muslims are notorious for killing people who make these types of claims.


One of the Titles to one of their Posts there should give you an idea of what they are about.


NSA “Spying” May Save Your Life


Nygdan if these are the people you are basing things on I don't know what to say.
Maybe these Al-queda guys are right and this is a holy war. Thankfully Im not religious but its just a damn shame so many people had to die for the ideals of people like this that you use to corroborate stuff with. IMO the people that run that website are no better then their fanatical counterparts on the Muslim side of the border.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   
pieman, nygdan posted that link trying to be cute IMO it was obviously intended as a put down to the credibility of the debka site which is not even in the same catagory IMO



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join