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 to Join Other Nations in Alliance Against The West.

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Iconoclast
The American paranoia towards Russia is never ending. Its very frustrating to watch the politics play out. It's also too bad as the United States and Russia could have become great allies not too long ago.


American paranoia?... i guess ex Russian military are also paranoid, I guess Chinese ex-military are also paranoid...

For your information the United States was one of the countries that gave more aid to Russia than any other after Russia alledgedly stopped being Communist. It was the Russian government who never used the money for what was intended, this topic has been discussed in the forums before and I have given links to prove it.



Originally posted by The Iconoclast
To make matters worse, our President has been as uncooperative as anyone can imagine and has forced countries to choose sides. This has forced Russia and China on the same side, and sees India willing to align with their long time ally (Russia). I don't care what technical advantage we have, the Russians and Chinese outgun us in nukes and their conventional forces numbers are nothing to sniff at. Add in the Indians and it becomes even scarier. Too bad our President have the brains to play nice with the other kids. It would be much nicer to have the Russians on our side. But that's the American way. We "always" have to have an enemy to worry about.


Our president uncooperative?... What do you call the Russians giving evidence since 9/11 that Saddam had terrorist attacks ready on U.S. soil, but then claiming to the world that the United States had no reason for ousting Saddan and calling the United States a "criminal government" for ousting Saddam?....

What do you call the Russians giving intelligence about U.S. troops to Saddam's regime?....

What do you call the fact that the regime of Saddam awarded medals and money to ex-Russian officials, who still live in Russia and have connections with the Russian government?

What do you call the fact that Russia, alongside some other countries, have been arming every country which calls itself an enemy of the United States?...

Do you call all of that, or any of it "cooperation"?....


[edit on 20-6-2006 by Muaddib]




posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 10:47 PM
link   
I call it a result of poorly played politics on both sides of the debate. Bottom line is that WE had plenty of opportunities to make decisions that could have easily brought our countries closer together, and OUR government failed to acknowledge these opportunities. WE, the ones that are supposed to be the shining example to the rest of the world, pushed the Russians in another direction. WE encouraged their actions. WE have to assume as much responsibility in that regard as we try and blame the Russians for.

The Russians have just as much right to sell arms to countries as we do. We arm the countries that are opposed to Russia and China, so it seems its tit-for-tat. That's what I love about certain mindset in this country, "do-as-we-say-not-as-we-do". We place unreasonably high expectations on other countries and then punish them when they don't live up to a standard that our government doesn't even care to approach. If our government is to try and hold the world to such an incredibly high standard, they better make sure their closet is not full of skeletons. We know what that rattling sound is behind the doors of the Bush Administration.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 11:23 PM
link   
What do I call intelligence from russia telling the US saddam was going to have a terrorist attack on it, I call it a matter of bringing down the beast. I have no doubt that russia is trying to cripple the current US way of life.

Looking at the situation though, I think in the interest of russia, they would want to. These guys suffered the most because of people like Mussolini and Hitler. These Fascists I would suggest reading up on, espeically mussolini. Its interesting to watch as the quotes of mussolini become more and more relevent in america. As for russia, after watching millions die because of an IMPERIAL FASCIST nation, Id say they would be worried.

When I look at the US in current times, its hard not to look at them that way. 2 countries invaded in 5 years over loose facts, if that doesnt sound like imperialism then I dont know what does. But yes I have no doubt that russia is out to get us, but can you blame them. I dont think its about communism anymore though. I think its more about there first hand experience with fascist states.

You would be suprised how "free" people in italy were, so long as they were politically dissenting toward communism or something to that extent. The only reason we dont execute communists now, is because they arent a threat like they were to the fascists then.

The more right we go, so long as big business is in our country, the more fascist we seem to go. There is nothing wrong with right wing, so long as you dont hand over the power to business rather then lower government. Thats the main problem. Thats what russia is worrying about, with rightful cause.



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 11:28 PM
link   
In all honesty Muaddib, I think you are making an enemy out of people who arent your enemy. These russian people arent out to get you or your way of life, they are out to get your government, who I might add are not one in the same. Our foreign policies and our governments actions are there enemy. Your not going to turn america communist unless the majority of people support it, which they wont.

In most of the communist nations, they had large groups of communist supporters before russia ever touch the nation (had to do with poverty level in those nations). In america, the threat of communism is and always was hype. What you should be worrying about is why they are afraid of our government?



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Iconoclast
I call it a result of poorly played politics on both sides of the debate. Bottom line is that WE had plenty of opportunities to make decisions that could have easily brought our countries closer together, and OUR government failed to acknowledge these opportunities. WE, the ones that are supposed to be the shining example to the rest of the world, pushed the Russians in another direction. WE encouraged their actions. WE have to assume as much responsibility in that regard as we try and blame the Russians for.


Really...how convinient, blaming the U.S. for what Russia, China and others have been doing...

Again, all of the above is only your opinion, i am dealing with facts, not "biased opinion."



posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Bloody good I say. Come on iran. Take out the stupid unholy western world. They're just as bad as you in a moralistic sense. No, wait that's not true. I forgot. Your countries run by bloody vampires init? Bloody Vampires!!!! Kill the Vampires!!!!! Nuke em all!!!!!



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797

Looking at the situation though, I think in the interest of russia, they would want to. These guys suffered the most because of people like Mussolini and Hitler.


Wrong...Communist regimes have killed more people from their own nations than "people like Mussolini and/or Hitler".... no sort of murder is good, but you should get the facts straight before making statements which are wrong.


In sum the communist probably have murdered something like 110,000,000, or near two-thirds of all those killed by all governments, quasi-governments, and guerrillas from 1900 to 1987. Of course, the world total itself it shocking. It is several times the 38,000,000 battle-dead that have been killed in all this century's international and domestic wars. Yet the probable number of murders by the Soviet Union alone--one communist country-- well surpasses this cost of war. And those murders of communist China almost equal it.

www.hawaii.edu...

And you want to talk about a government trying to go to war with a country for no real reason? China wants to invade Taiwan, because they have said they will never allow a Constitution written, and there is already a set date for the Constitution of Taiwan for 2008.




Originally posted by grimreaper797
These Fascists I would suggest reading up on, espeically mussolini. Its interesting to watch as the quotes of mussolini become more and more relevent in america. As for russia, after watching millions die because of an IMPERIAL FASCIST nation, Id say they would be worried.


Sorry kid, but i am going to dampen your fantasy, the United States is not a fascist nation....and the people who keep claiming president Bush is like Hitler are out of their minds.... Hitler was a Socialist Nationalist, he hated minorities and professed that minorities weakened a nation, and according to him the Jewish people were the cause of all the problems in the world, hence he went after them more than anyone else.

If anyone is similar to Hitler, are all these people now-a-days that keep claiming Israel shouldn't exist, and those people who think like the Iranian president who said all zionists must be destroyed. I have already proved, by the Iranian's president own words, that when he says all zionists must be destroyed, he means all Jewish people must be destroyed. So all these people, even in the west who claim that Israel shouldn't exist, or that Israel is the cause of most problems in the world are more similar to Hitler than anyone in the present administration is.


Originally posted by grimreaper797
When I look at the US in current times, its hard not to look at them that way. 2 countries invaded in 5 years over loose facts, if that doesnt sound like imperialism then I dont know what does. But yes I have no doubt that russia is out to get us, but can you blame them. I dont think its about communism anymore though. I think its more about there first hand experience with fascist states.


Again, you are wrong.... First of all it was a larger coalition which agreed to go to Afghanistan...but how nice of you to claim it is all the fault of the United States... Second, even though there were many countries which were against the war in Iraq, most, if not all of those countries were having illegal deals with Saddam through the Oil For Food Program which killed a lot more people than the war has killed so far...



Originally posted by grimreaper797
You would be suprised how "free" people in italy were, so long as they were politically dissenting toward communism or something to that extent. The only reason we dont execute communists now, is because they arent a threat like they were to the fascists then.


*shakes head* Do you enjoy trying to change history?......


Life in Mussolini's Italy was little different from other dictatorships which existed between 1918 and 1939. Nazi Germany and Stalin's Russia were to use (and expand) on developments that had been in existence in Fascist Italy since the 1920's. People had little control over their personal life and the state controlled as much of you as they could. Those who opposed the state were suitably punished.

www.historylearningsite.co.uk...


Originally posted by grimreaper797
The more right we go, so long as big business is in our country, the more fascist we seem to go. There is nothing wrong with right wing, so long as you dont hand over the power to business rather then lower government. Thats the main problem. Thats what russia is worrying about, with rightful cause.


i just would really like to know where do you get your insight into "what the Russian government really want"?..... Do you have connections with the Russian government that you can make such a statement?...

I have been quoting Russian military defectors who have talked about this plan, and others who also assure this plan is still in the works, and as i have proven with links and facts, they are following the plan to the letter.


[edit on 21-6-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 12:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by grimreaper797
In all honesty Muaddib, I think you are making an enemy out of people who arent your enemy. These russian people arent out to get you or your way of life, they are out to get your government, who I might add are not one in the same. Our foreign policies and our governments actions are there enemy.


I have no quarrels with the Russian people, I have some Russian friends who live in the U.S., my beef is with the Russian government, as well as other governments, and those people who are trying to bring the world under a Communist regime once again.



Originally posted by grimreaper797
Your not going to turn america communist unless the majority of people support it, which they wont.


Large groups of people support "true socialist ideals" in the United States, some of them don't know because they have never lived in a Communist nation, some don't care, as a few members around here have claimed, and some know it and embrace it. They all have something in common, they are embracing the same old propaganda, with a few changes, to try to disuade people into a new "worker's revolution" or "permanent revolution"....



Originally posted by grimreaper797
In most of the communist nations, they had large groups of communist supporters before russia ever touch the nation (had to do with poverty level in those nations). In america, the threat of communism is and always was hype. What you should be worrying about is why they are afraid of our government?


Wrong...they had large groups of "true socialist supporters"... Every Communist nation started as a Socialist nation, some changed faster into a Communist state, while others took a bit longer.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 12:57 AM
link   
I knew this was your submission, Muadibb, you're so predictable.



Here we have it folks, finally they are showing what the SCO is really for, all those countries which are members, or are seeking full membership on the SCO, have one goal in common as can be read from the article, and I quote..

quote: Iranian President said that the SCO could “ward off the threats of domineering powers to use their force against and interfere in the affairs of other states”.


So, this is the only goal they have in common, eh? Nice propaganda. By the way, what's the significance of saying they are going to ward off threats from those that try to use force to determine the course of their states?

Honestly, it seems like what you are saying is..."How dare they not bow down to the United States and the West! I can't believe they would actually try to defend against any force we use! The arrogance of a country to believe they have the right to defend their own sovereign nation! *Scoff*"

Are you really surprised by this? Do you think the US has a monopoly on idealogy? Do you think the US has the right to determine the course of any sovereign nation? If they want to fight against the global hegemon of the US, they are right to do so. Not country should have a monopoly on thought. They have as much right to defend themselves as the US does. There is no moral high ground in this argument Muadibb, no matter how you try to spin it, it's still all politics.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 05:18 AM
link   
The Russia is the same threath to world peace as U.S.!They have never give up the world domination plan!!And that is not only in goverment,but also in the simple people,they think(it is based on experience)that they are the greatest,and only thanks to them allies have won WW2.And if you think that Soviet Union fall apart,I really doubt it!!In goverment there are still working the same peoples as in SU!They changed only the title.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by swesais]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 06:06 AM
link   
probably the wrong thread but...
this seems alot like the ten nation army mentioned in biblical prophesy
kinda scary, these days in which we live



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I knew this was your submission, Muadibb, you're so predictable.



Here we have it folks, finally they are showing what the SCO is really for, all those countries which are members, or are seeking full membership on the SCO, have one goal in common as can be read from the article, and I quote..

quote: Iranian President said that the SCO could “ward off the threats of domineering powers to use their force against and interfere in the affairs of other states”.


So, this is the only goal they have in common, eh? Nice propaganda. By the way, what's the significance of saying they are going to ward off threats from those that try to use force to determine the course of their states?

Honestly, it seems like what you are saying is..."How dare they not bow down to the United States and the West! I can't believe they would actually try to defend against any force we use! The arrogance of a country to believe they have the right to defend their own sovereign nation! *Scoff*"

Are you really surprised by this? Do you think the US has a monopoly on idealogy? Do you think the US has the right to determine the course of any sovereign nation? If they want to fight against the global hegemon of the US, they are right to do so. Not country should have a monopoly on thought. They have as much right to defend themselves as the US does. There is no moral high ground in this argument Muadibb, no matter how you try to spin it, it's still all politics.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Jamuhn]


the problem is that they are not seeking defence, they are seeking offence
all a nuclear weapon does is create fear of it being used and terror if it is used
therefore anyone that uses a nuclear weapon is by deffinition a terrorist, one who creates terror

therefore, since they are attempting to become a potential terrorist threat they must be stopped
so far president cookoo bannannas hasnt moved out troops there from iraq, but i believe that's why were still in iraq, just incase we're needed

disclaimer:
nagasaki and heroshima were attacked by the us to rapidly force japan out of the war, thus saving some estimated 10 million lives and sacrificing less than 1 million
greater good and what not



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by wondernut
the problem is that they are not seeking defence, they are seeking offence
all a nuclear weapon does is create fear of it being used and terror if it is used
therefore anyone that uses a nuclear weapon is by deffinition a terrorist, one who creates terror


I haven't seen any evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon or plan on using it for offense. But, wouldn't your definition and position towards nukes make the US a terrorist nation.

Despite all that, Iran's speech takes a definitive defensive posture, and refers more to just threat of military force from the West, but other forces and influences as well, such as economic, cultural, ec.


disclaimer:
nagasaki and heroshima were attacked by the us to rapidly force japan out of the war, thus saving some estimated 10 million lives and sacrificing less than 1 million
greater good and what not

Yea, sounds good until someone tries to rapidly force us, eh? Any benefits of such a move were outweighed heavily by all the consequences. See, the Cold War. As well, it sounds like you are saying that the US terrorized Japan.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
I knew this was your submission, Muadibb, you're so predictable.


and you don't think you are predictable? I have never hid my thoughts on this issue, and I have never been lacking of evidence to prove my point......



Originally posted by Jamuhn
............
Are you really surprised by this? Do you think the US has a monopoly on idealogy? Do you think the US has the right to determine the course of any sovereign nation? If they want to fight against the global hegemon of the US, they are right to do so. Not country should have a monopoly on thought. They have as much right to defend themselves as the US does. There is no moral high ground in this argument Muadibb, no matter how you try to spin it, it's still all politics.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



Riiight.... i forgot, Russia, China and specially Iran, among some others, are the bastion of defense and peace in the world....

The Russian president has said more times than i can count that he misses the old times of mother Russia when the whole world knew it was Communist.... Then we have China trying to negate another country, Taiwan, their right to have a Constitution.... Taiwan has never threatened to use terrorists, nor war against China...but I guess according to you the CCP is a lot better than the U.S. government...


and then you have Iran.... of course you have forgotten that officers from the Revolutionary guards have stated they are ready and have 29 targets in the western world ready to attack, they are just waiting for the word from Khomeni. Then you have the senior mullah from Iran who stated that it is alright for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons and even to use them... (don't try to spin around what he meant when he stated this, the conclusion of that speech is that they should get their hands on nuclear weapons, and use them) Then you have the Iranian president saying that the goal of his regime is paving the way for the 12th Imam, when supposedly it is known that the 12th Imam will return when the world is in chaos and the final days are at hand.

You want to talk about "no country should have monopoly on the ideologies of other countries"... Yet I guess it is fine and dandy that these countries and others are trying to destroy the present world economy and replace them with their own.... I mean, we all know that Russia and China have the best economies in the world right?.... They have always been thinking what is best for their people....


[edit on 21-6-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn

I haven't seen any evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon or plan on using it for offense. But, wouldn't your definition and position towards nukes make the US a terrorist nation


Right...


Iranian fatwa approves use of nuclear weapons
By Colin Freeman and Philip Sherwell in Washington
(Filed: 19/02/2006)



Iran's hardline spiritual leaders have issued an unprecedented new fatwa, or holy order, sanctioning the use of atomic weapons against its enemies.

In yet another sign of Teheran's stiffening resolve on the nuclear issue, influential Muslim clerics have for the first time questioned the theocracy's traditional stance that Sharia law forbade the use of nuclear weapons.
..................

One senior mullah has now said it is "only natural" to have nuclear bombs as a "countermeasure" against other nuclear powers, thought to be a reference to America and Israel.

..................
Rooz reported that Mohsen Gharavian, a lecturer based in a religious school in the holy city of Qom, had declared "for the first time that the use of nuclear weapons may not constitute a problem, according to Sharia."

He also said: "When the entire world is armed with nuclear weapons, it is permissible to use these weapons as a counter-measure. According to Sharia too, only the goal is important."

www.telegraph.co.uk.../news/2006/02/19/wiran19.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/02/19/ixportal.html



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Sure Muaddib, our President has been the most cooperative person on the planet. You're either with us, or against us, right? Get serious. Other nations have been in reaction mode in regards to the United States for quite some time. That is fact, no matter how big a spin you would like to put on the subject.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Maudibb the only thing I got from what this Fatwah issue is the same policy the Pentagon or any other nuclear armed government has stated, nuclear deterrance or Mutual assured destruction. There was nothing in that source indicating they justified using nukes on innocent civilians or first strike weapons. They said it is a counter-measure against nuclear armed nations as stated in your referance.

Yes both America AND Isreal are indeed armed with nukes.



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
The Iranian president was invited to address a meeting of the Shangai Co-operation Organisation, which was founded by China, Russia and the Central Asian republics ten years ago to fight terrorism, religious extremism and separatism.

Why in the world would they invite Iran, one of the world's biggest sponsors of terrorism, to join a group which was founded "to fight terrorism, religious extremism and separatism"?? It is to laugh, if anybody thinks that this is anything more than an alliance of extremists.


from subz
Countering aggressive American foreign policy brings about balance.

What "aggressive American foreign policy"? The fact that we went into Afghanistan to get those responsible for 9/11?


from subz
I dont doubt for one moment this group exists. I also dont doubt that they are concerned with current US foreign policy. That concern is shared amongst NATO countries as well as America's traditional allies. That a group would form with the explicit intent of curbing the excesses of American international influence does not equate to an anti-Western alliance.

What facts do you have to support your contention that NATO countries are more worried about America than terrorism?


from The Iconoclast
The American paranoia towards Russia is never ending. Its very frustrating to watch the politics play out. It's also too bad as the United States and Russia could have become great allies not too long ago.


Allies? Do you have any idea who/what has been in control of Russia for the past 15 years? Hint: It isn't the people. The Russian criminal element is firmly in control over there.


from The Iconoclast

I call it a result of poorly played politics on both sides of the debate. Bottom line is that WE had plenty of opportunities to make decisions that could have easily brought our countries closer together, and OUR government failed to acknowledge these opportunities. WE, the ones that are supposed to be the shining example to the rest of the world, pushed the Russians in another direction. WE encouraged their actions. WE have to assume as much responsibility in that regard as we try and blame the Russians for.

Oh yes, the big bad Americans are always responsible for the way every other country acts.
Always our fault.


from Jamuhn
So, this is the only goal they have in common, eh?

What do you think their purpose is?


Do you think the US has the right to determine the course of any sovereign nation?

Which country are we trying to dominate?



I haven't seen any evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon or plan on using it for offense. But, wouldn't your definition and position towards nukes make the US a terrorist nation.

Despite all that, Iran's speech takes a definitive defensive posture, and refers more to just threat of military force from the West, but other forces and influences as well, such as economic, cultural, ec.

Iran is most assuredly seeking nuclear weopanry. To deny that is pure naivete'.

Remember, their "culture" includes beating women activists:

www.feminist.org...



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

from Jamuhn
So, this is the only goal they have in common, eh?

What do you think their purpose is?

Their purpose is multi-faceted and is not restricted to concerns about the US dominant influence, but about their own domestic problems as well.



Do you think the US has the right to determine the course of any sovereign nation?

Which country are we trying to dominate?

Economically and politically...most countries in the world. To deny that is pure naivete.




I haven't seen any evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon or plan on using it for offense. But, wouldn't your definition and position towards nukes make the US a terrorist nation.
Despite all that, Iran's speech takes a definitive defensive posture, and refers more to just threat of military force from the West, but other forces and influences as well, such as economic, cultural, ec.

Iran is most assuredly seeking nuclear weopanry. To deny that is pure naivete'.

Like I said, produce evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon and that they plan to use it as pre-emptive strike. I'm sure the US government and Israel would like your evidence as well so they can use it to bomb them to the stone age.


Remember, their "culture" includes beating women activists:

Well that proves it, doesn't it?! No, it really doesn't prove they have nukes. That proves they have a restrictive government towards their own populace. I really hope that's not your proof of them having nukes because I know you can do better than that. I'm sure WND has some nugget for you.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by Jamuhn]



posted on Jun, 21 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   
The presidency of George W Bush will be remembered as paranoid, hysterical, reactive, regressive, pandering and using religion to achieve financial and political goals.
And the sheep that follow along blindly will be remembered as sheep that followed along blindly.


This administration mishandled every issue placed upon its desk. We are 7 trillion in debt as opposed to 3 trillion surplus just 6 years ago, the world support we had after 9/11 was stupidly managed and now the world eyes us suspiciously.
In 4 years FDR rebuilt the Pacific Fleet, kicked Japans armies back to japan, and helped Allies in Europe win the war.
In 4 years George Bush took more vacation than any president in history, and cannot find a single 6 foot 2 terrorist terrorist named bin laden, probably due to the fact his family has recieved hundreds of millions of dollars from the royal house of Saudi Arabia, of whom the Ladens are major stakeholders

And you wonder why the rest of the world doesnt trust the US...?

I dont trust this Government, anyone that does should study world history alittle more, and reread the Constitution of the United States.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join