Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

World War 3 is nigh!!

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Regensturm
And no matter what the US government says, if the US bombed Iran, they would be doing that, bombing Iran, not the government, Iran, and thus attacking Iran, not the government.


I understand that completely, I just don't think they will ever get those guys out of power by themselves...


How wonderfully condescending of you. America was perfectly capable of undergoing it's own revolution, as have hundreds of other countries, when it was time for significant change and the atmosphere was ready for that change. If the on going struggle in Iraq has shown us anything, it's that you cannot force a country to become a democracy at gunpoint.

And people wonder why the outside world views Americans as arrogant? Here's the perfect example. Iran can't undergo a revolution without our help, because they are like little children, and we are the heros of the world? Trust us, because you don't know what you're doing?




posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Athenion
How wonderfully condescending of you. America was perfectly capable of undergoing it's own revolution, as have hundreds of other countries, when it was time for significant change and the atmosphere was ready for that change.


What exactly makes what I said condescending? America was not perfectly capable of undergoing it's own revolution, I believe we had some assistance from the French, no? And you are talking about a time of muskets and cannon balls, militaries now are just a bit more advanced and capable of killing alot more people at once than they were back then. From my understanding the atmosphere in Iran is that they want change, but I guess I could be wrong.



If the on going struggle in Iraq has shown us anything, it's that you cannot force a country to become a democracy at gunpoint.


I agree. And I don't think we should occupy Iran, or Iraq for that matter and force anything on them. But I also don't think the world should allow more nuclear powder kegs to form, we don't need that, so if a large enough majority of the population wants the radical leadership out, I say we help them.



And people wonder why the outside world views Americans as arrogant? Here's the perfect example. Iran can't undergo a revolution without our help, because they are like little children, and we are the heros of the world? Trust us, because you don't know what you're doing?


And people wonder why Americans could care less and less what the outside world thinks? Because they are so quick to say we're arrogant without at all trying to see the valid point we may be making. The radical leadership of Iran is trying to obtain nuclear weapons, if they succeed, it's gonna be ALOT harder for the Iranians to undergo that revolution than it is now, and the world will be a much more dangerous place. We all live on this planet, and we should be striving for less nuclear weapons, not more. I'm not in favor of any religious fanatics in control of nukes, be it the mullahs or Jerry Falwell. This issue affects everybody, not just the Iranians...



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:17 PM
link   
loads of americans want bush out, are you americans asking for another country to help you out, as bush did not win your elction either. would americans like others to tell them who can run them.



[edit on 7-7-2006 by andy1033]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:18 PM
link   
Mehran had made that comment...
Irans people will make their stand, as soon as their hand is forced, BY ITS OWN LEADERS... not ours...

otherwise, we are truly the meddler... and not helping things at all...

Please dont fall for the arrogant "bringing peace to the world" crap... because Iran doesn't want what we are selling... I dont blame them one bit...

they have a right to prosper, and develop new technology, and if they worked within the national agencies that regulate such tech, then who are we to complain...

fair is fair...



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Why does Iran's or Iraq's problems have to be ours? We live thousands of miles away, are ass deep in our own problems and frankly, I'm sick of the US jumping into everyone's affairs.

Indeed, why should every country have to adopt a democracy just because we think it's the best type of governing body? Let them see what happens if we don't support them or trade or doing anything to help. If they want to spout off at a country that helps them when their people undergo a tragedy, I say let them pound salt. Cut all exports, imports from them and we'll be isolated from all the drama as well. Maybe that's the only thing that will get a decent response from them.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
loads of americans want bush out, are you americans asking for another country to help you out, as bush did not win your elction either. would americans like others to tell them who can run them.


Not just Bush, the whole corrupt bunch of them. We're not at a point though where our leaders will sentence us to death for breaking superficial religious laws. If they were, and they had an iron grip on us using the military in which we could never force them to release us from without our people being slaughtered, then yes, help would be appreciated. As for them telling us who can run us after that, of course not, and I don't think, nor have I ever said we should do that to anyone else...



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Truthwillsetyoufree
Why does Iran's or Iraq's problems have to be ours? We live thousands of miles away, are ass deep in our own problems and frankly, I'm sick of the US jumping into everyone's affairs.

Indeed, why should every country have to adopt a democracy just because we think it's the best type of governing body? Let them see what happens if we don't support them or trade or doing anything to help. If they want to spout off at a country that helps them when their people undergo a tragedy, I say let them pound salt. Cut all exports, imports from them and we'll be isolated from all the drama as well. Maybe that's the only thing that will get a decent response from them.


it probably has to do with americans wanting to control all countries and there intelligence agencies. some countries will not buy into this new world order stuff, and we see them being vilified by the media and america call them rogue thats.

many believe israel wants america to take over the middle east so israel can run all those countries, so they can control all those people in the future.


[edit on 7-7-2006 by andy1033]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
they have a right to prosper, and develop new technology, and if they worked within the national agencies that regulate such tech, then who are we to complain...

fair is fair...



And that's fine, of course they have that right. But nobody needs doomsday weapons to prosper, in fact I think the world would prosper alot more without their shadow constantly looming. The religous fanatic leaders will not allow themselves to be regulated. I don't buy into the crap (bringing peace to the world) you speak of, but I do think we all have a right to say enough is enough, we don't need any more nuclear weapons on earth, there are already balances and counter balances....all of which need to be destroyed IMO....

[edit on 7-7-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
they have a right to prosper, and develop new technology, and if they worked within the national agencies that regulate such tech, then who are we to complain...

fair is fair...



And that's fine, of course they have that right. But nobody needs doomsday weapons to prosper, in fact I think the world would prosper alot more without their shadow constantly looming. The religous fanatic leaders will not allow themselves to be regulated. I don't buy into the crap you speak of, but I do think we all have a right to say enough is enough, we don't need any more nuclear weapons on earth, there are already balances and counter balances....all of which need to be destroyed IMO....


yep but there is no counter balance in mid east, no arab country is said to have nukes yet, while israel has loads. so the balance is not there. iran knows to keep its way of life it needs nukes to counter balance israels nukes. will it get them in time. but until they do get them, israel can push arabs any way they wish, and obviously israel will never want arabs to have nukes.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
yep but there is no counter balance in mid east, no arab country is said to have nukes yet, while israel has loads. so the balance is not there. iran knows to keep its way of life it needs nukes to counter balance israels nukes. will it get them in time. but until they do get them, israel can push arabs any way they wish, and obviously israel will never want arabs to have nukes.


No, but Iran has allies that do counter Israel, and why would Israel just up and nuke Iran? They wouldn't, especially if Iran did nothing to them. But I believe Israel should be forced to give up their nukes as well, if I was in charge I would push that as hard as i push for Iran not to develop any. India and Pakistan almost went nuclear just recently, do we really need nuclear weapons in the middle of so much bad blood and religious fanatacism on both sides? It will almost certainly lead to a nuclear war between Iran and Israel....

[edit on 7-7-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:35 PM
link   
sorry double post

[edit on 7-7-2006 by 27jd]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:47 PM
link   
no but you see the americans and israel do not want iran to have the power that nukes give a country over its neighbours. you will never get israel to get rid of there nukes, and did they not even sign treaties to do with nukes and say they have none.

having nukes for themselves would give iran power over others and make sure no one would invade them. they could run the country how they liked(but of course israel and america would still try to get there version of whatever government they want there)

nukes would give arabs some power and the west and israel would never want arabs to have that power.

two sides in a conflict make nuclear war less likely(like the usa soviet cold war where we had that term MAD). the propaganda in the west will make sure we westerners will not want irans people to have those weapons, as it would mess up there global plans.

[edit on 7-7-2006 by andy1033]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
they have a right to prosper, and develop new technology, and if they worked within the national agencies that regulate such tech, then who are we to complain...

fair is fair...



And that's fine, of course they have that right. But nobody needs doomsday weapons to prosper, in fact I think the world would prosper alot more without their shadow constantly looming. The religous fanatic leaders will not allow themselves to be regulated. I don't buy into the crap (bringing peace to the world) you speak of, but I do think we all have a right to say enough is enough, we don't need any more nuclear weapons on earth, there are already balances and counter balances....all of which need to be destroyed IMO....

[edit on 7-7-2006 by 27jd]


And also, from the pentagon's documents, there is no counter-balance to US nukes force in the world. This is a BIG problem because they think they can win a nuclear war with both China and Russia. And that is very dangerous because if they want to keep this advantage, they'll need to nuke China soon enough because they'll be able to counter-balance USA and US military leaders don't want MAD, they want superiority.



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
nukes would give arabs some power and the west and israel would never want arabs to have that power.


Nobody should have that kind of power. Nothing any of us say is gonna change whatever direction things are headed, so as far as the discussion goes, I say there should not be any nukes. And Iranians are not Arab, so you're maybe saying Islam should have nukes (besides Pakistan), again I say religious fundamentalists should not have nukes, they may actually believe it's god's will to wipe out a country or start the end of the world....



two sides in a conflict make nuclear war less likely(like the usa soviet cold war where we had that term MAD).


Only if both sides are run by greed instead of god (like the usa soviet cold war). Neither side felt it was god's will that the other be destroyed. Do you understand my concern at all?



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
And also, from the pentagon's documents, there is no counter-balance to US nukes force in the world. This is a BIG problem because they think they can win a nuclear war with both China and Russia. And that is very dangerous because if they want to keep this advantage, they'll need to nuke China soon enough because they'll be able to counter-balance USA and US military leaders don't want MAD, they want superiority.


What documents are you referring to? Russia has a crapload of nukes, and heavier ones than we have....I don't know of any delusional Pentagon document saying otherwise...



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   
i guess when i turn 18 im going to canada!

no not really, if there is a draft ill go

but this is some scary stuff man, the world is getting worse and worse





and i just noticed, the ATS symbol on the top of the page is upside down. anyone know why?


(havent been on in a while so sorry if it was already said why its upside down)



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by blackhumvee113
but this is some scary stuff man, the world is getting worse and worse


Maybe it can all be turned around, never give up hope....



and i just noticed, the ATS symbol on the top of the page is upside down. anyone know why?


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Vitchilo
And also, from the pentagon's documents, there is no counter-balance to US nukes force in the world. This is a BIG problem because they think they can win a nuclear war with both China and Russia. And that is very dangerous because if they want to keep this advantage, they'll need to nuke China soon enough because they'll be able to counter-balance USA and US military leaders don't want MAD, they want superiority.


What documents are you referring to? Russia has a crapload of nukes, and heavier ones than we have....I don't know of any delusional Pentagon document saying otherwise...


It's the last report they wrote about the China's threat and Russia threat. I don't remember the name, maybe someone could help?

They were saying they could wipe out all nuclear weapons of Russia and China in a first strike, so they could actually win a nuclear war. They believe their own propaganda.. and this is dangerous.

[edit on 7-7-2006 by Vitchilo]



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by blackhumvee113
but this is some scary stuff man, the world is getting worse and worse


Maybe it can all be turned around, never give up hope....



and i just noticed, the ATS symbol on the top of the page is upside down. anyone know why?


www.abovetopsecret.com...




thanks 27jd



posted on Jul, 7 2006 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
It's the last report they wrote about the China's threat and Russia threat. I don't remember the name, maybe someone could help?

They were saying they could wipe out all nuclear weapons of Russia and China in a first strike, so they could actually win a nuclear war. They believe their own propaganda.. and this is dangerous.

[edit on 7-7-2006 by Vitchilo]


Any such reports written are written by experts. But are only theoretical at best. There are so many variables that could be in such a situation that its impossible to predict the exact manner forthcoming events could play out. These are theoretical papers, based on the manner in which the weapons systems we have in the US are SUPPOSED to work, but nothing is definitive.






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join