Uk Prepares To Attack Syria & Iran

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:03 AM
link   
UK PREPARES TO ATTACK SYRIA & IRAN

"Britain is sending two ships, including an aircraft carrier, to the Middle East... ministry of defence said no "specific tasking" had yet been allotted to HMS Illustrious and HMS Bulwark."
news.bbc.co.uk...


You don't send military aircraft carriers to evacuate people.
This is like the convenient "exercise" Saif Sareea II in Oman just before 9/11 – the Afghanistan invasion force were conveniently already in place thanks to the largest military deployment of all time - which they claimed was just an exercise!
(The name of the operation gave the game away: "Swift Sword". Swift as in immediate as in just before 9/11. Sword as in attack as in killing people.)
www.army.mod.uk...


IN FACT HMS ILLUSTRIOUS WAS ONE OF THE SHIPS SENT TO PREPARE FOR AFGHANISTAN BEFORE 9/11 AND IS NOW BEING SENT TO THE MIDDLE-EAST TO PREPARE TO ATTACK SYRIA & IRAN.
"A notable combat deployment for the ship took place in late 2001. A large British exercise, Saif Sareea II took place in Oman in the autumn of 2001. During the exercise, the World Trade Center was destroyed by Al Qaida. What had been an exercise became a wartime mission... the ship had made a valuable contribution to British options in the conflict, providing a launching point for ground forces, had they been needed."
en.wikipedia.org...(R06)

(The real concern is will they manufacture a pretext for Britain and the UK to attack Syria & Iran? Such as the deaths of UK civilians or rocket attacks on the ships?)


HMS Bulwark is also an ASSAULT SHIP! AN ATTACK SHIP!! (They are BOTH designed for attack operations!)
www.royal-navy.mod.uk...


HMS Bulwark is designed to carry crack assult troops (Royal Marine/SBS/other Commandos) and is also a command and control ship.) It is obviously going to be pivotal to the planned invasion of Syria and Iran!)
The 18,400 tonne amphibious assault ship HMS Bulwark is the Royal Navy's newest Commando Assault and Command and Control ship. It is also County Durham's 'adopted' Royal Navy vessel.
www.durham.gov.uk...


BACKGROUND:


Blair takes his prompt (and his policy) from Israel, blaming Iran &
Syria:


Mr Blair said that countries such as Iran and Syria "do not want this process of democratisation and peace and negotiation to succeed". I don't think anybody really believes that this is just about Hezbollah and Israel. "We are very worried about the influence of both Syria and Iran in respect of this
news.bbc.co.uk...


Israeli Ambassador Dan Gillerman said Israel had no choice but to react to Hezbollah's aggression, describing the group as "merely the finger on the bloodstained and long-reaching arms of Syria and Iran".
news.bbc.co.uk...


Afghanistan. Iraq. Syria. Iran.
The war for oil and Israel continues. Israel must be protected at all
costs.
The oil men who control the US & UK government must get richer.
The oil corporations must make bigger profits.
The petroeuro must not replace the petrodollar or the US economy will
collapse.
The arms industry must make even more profit.
The defense and intelligence communities must get more funding and
power.


These are the real reasons for the war on terror. For the sake of truth and for all that is good please share this warning with others.


[edit on 17-7-2006 by oilwar]

mod edit: caps title

[edit on 17-7-2006 by sanctum]




posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Thats a very big leap saying they are PLANNING to attack.

Id change the title,
it might lead to the POSSIBILITY for UK FORCES if the situation escelates.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:16 AM
link   
hmm, I don't know. There is still scope for anything to happen, and two warships equipped with Fighter Jets and Lynx's could be seen as an odd choice.

However, Illustrious was already at the British naval base in Gibraltar, which is strategically placed to reach the middle east, in short notice. And perhaps this is the reason. Not only does it have the capabillity to defend itself in hostile territories, it can use its helicopter capacity to evacuate people.

The bulwark is a new ship (2004) and can aid an amphibious landing by Royal Marines. But also carries helicopters for evacuation (and attack) purposes. We have already started to evacuate british nationals from lebanon.

Whilst the American carriers are almost excusivley weapons of ''attack"

We Brits only have 3 'light' carriers, and they very much have a multi-task role. Illustrious was previously doing anti-piracy operations, so this is a clear indication of its other capabillities.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:18 AM
link   
If you read the news...

The ships are being sent to place about 10,000 people on board. Marines are their incase they have to go on land to evacute (due to Israel bombing ports). Where do you think they are going to put 10,000? boats are there to house and transport them.

France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, etc have all sent battle ships to the area, to transport people to Cyprus then back to Europe.....

Your title is misleading.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Perhaps they're being sent in order to break the Israeli blockade so we can evacuate our 15,000 citizens before the Israelis bomb 'em?


But whether the risk is Israeli or Hezbollah attack, with such a major operation we're gonna need some decent firepower!



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Don't take my word for it. Watch this space. Syria and Iran are about to be invaded and it's possible that a terrible pretext will be staged just as 9/11 was staged.

The whole point is that attacking and invading Syria and Iran by Israel, the UK and the US has already been planned. What we are seeing is a buildup and the process of creating plausibility and pretext.

They sent the Afghanistan invasion force even before the 9/11 terror attacks that supposedly led to the invasion. 9/11 was the staged pretext.

They are sending the foundations of the Syria & Iran invasion force now. No doubt the United States is also in the advanced stages of preparations for the next phase of the war on terror. The US has yet to say what they're going to do about their people stuck in Lebanon, which is interesting.

Why would you need commandos to get Brits onto ships? Israel is the one destroying the exits and raining down a holocaust of ordnance on women and children in Lebanon. Israel is supposed to be an ally in the great and noble war on terror so surely we can say, "Hey, Israel can you stop spraying shrapnel and babys' guts around for a few hours while we get the Westerners out safely?


(Does anybody remember who founded Al Qaida in the first place by the way? Check your history books. Al Qaida is Arabic for "The Base." The Base was the main CIA training camp in Afghanistan, where they trained the mujahidin to use SAMs and terrorism, initially to fight the Soviets occupation there at that time.)


[edit on 17-7-2006 by oilwar]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   
OilWar, you do have a point.

The fact that Israel destroyed power stations & infrastructure on the first day of fighting signifies that were/are going to be in it for a while.

The kidnapped soldier story is exactly that - a story.

And an excuse & a pretext to move troops into the area.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:33 AM
link   
as much as Id like to see the US try something so stupid (a 2nd false flag ) I dont think they will do it.
I actually think its more likely ISRAEL will do the false flagging, or Iran will actually use its proxies and stage a BLATANT enough attack on israel.

Tru though, it is getting out of hand and quickly.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
It is entirely possible that a US Special Forces invasion will go in dressed as Israeli soldiers to keep US public opinion happy. If not then a pretext will be provided and US troops will go in with a degree of public support and no doubt a Israeli forces dressed like Americans.

(It's common practice for Israeli forces to dress up as Americans and use American equipment in the war on terror. The official reason for this is that if an Israeli is captured he will suffer terrible abuse at the hands of his Arab captors.)



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 06:55 AM
link   
Mr Blair said the force could "stop the bombardment coming over into Israel and therefore gives Israel a reason to stop its attacks on Hezbollah"

news.bbc.co.uk...


Nobody would dare to suggest Israel stops turning civillians into red paste buried under huge piles of rubble. Instead somehow every Hezbollah man with a rocket should be tracked down and stopped.

Are people really this stupid?

This is clearly a blatant move to:

1) Send UN troops in to fight Israel's immediate battle, helping maim innocent Lebanese families - and

2) Put the troops in place for the already-planned, already-decided invasion of Syria and Iran. (I wonder what the excuse will be. Most likely a lot of people are going to die to get public opinion behind this, just like they did on 9/11.)



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:18 AM
link   
Oil war,shuld I remind you that during WWII BRITISH bombers specificly targeted civilians?

and shuld I remind you that THEY STARTED THE CONFLICT?
or that ISRAELI AIR FORCE SENDS WARNING TO THE CIVILIENS before the attack?
shuld I remind you they are shooting at OUR CIVILIEN TARGETS?
WITHOUT ANY WARNING WHAT SO EVER?
little #...........you europiens keep saying what to do how to do it etc' etc' etc'
but I know that if LONDON or any other major city was under attack,Beyrut would have now turned into a big parking lot.........and nobody in the world media would say anything .......why ? beacus your not Israeli.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:29 AM
link   


Oil war,shuld I remind you that during WWII BRITISH bombers specifically targeted civilians?


That was only near then end of the war, to demoralise the German civilians, and pay back for the blitz on London.


All this fighting is just tit-for-tat.
If the middle east really wanted peace they could have it.
They both believe God gave them that land, so thats the root to all this.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:42 AM
link   
Personally I would not support even a mention of the US sending aid to Israel, be it financial, supply, or troops, its their war let them fight it. They’re talking about attacking Syria, well let them, the US shouldn’t get dragged in the conflict no matter how hard the Jewish lobby in Washington presses. They’ve tried to drag us in one their wars before with the USS Liberty incident and I wouldn’t put it past them to try something like that again.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:50 AM
link   
I must agree with oilwar, I also see this as rumblings of a far bigger campaign. The story banded about is total garbage, there is an agenda and as of yet it isn't clear what it is. I would bet that this goes a whole lot deeper than the current conflict.

There is no doubt in my mind that Britain calling for a UN "peacekeeping" force to be sent in is the telltale sign that this is going to run and run; and sending warships and forces underlines that for me.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by oilwar
You don't send military aircraft carriers to evacuate people.


Yes they do it is done all the time to evacuate people. The very first ships sent to the tsunami were what? Aircraft Carriers with support ships. There is nothing in the story to support the misleading title of the tread at all, it should be changed




[edit on 7/17/2006 by shots]



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Blair is scaring me with his posturing. This morning with the press, he kept going on and on about 'international intervention' and then later on in the 'secret' conversation with GW, he kept nodding and saying 'international intervention' over and over again and agreeing with Bush that something had to be done about Syria.

Along with the two UK ships being sent off for reasons undisclosed and Blair's adamant insistence that the rest of the world needs to be involved, it doesn't do much to reassure me that he is trying to bring about peace, rather than add fuel (ha) to the fire.

Blair is either acting as wingman for Dubya (surprise surprise) or clearing the way for some other unholy alliance.

And what is with the horribly oxymoronic phrase 'Peacekeeping' Force that is being batted around by everyone? Isn't this Javier Solana's pet project? And why is Blair so keen to get the international community involved, when this almost certainly includes Solana and friends in some capacity of the WEU, EU or NATO?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 08:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheObserver

There is no doubt in my mind that Britain calling for a UN "peacekeeping" force to be sent in is the telltale sign that this is going to run and run; and sending warships and forces underlines that for me.


Something Israel is against, Olmert already rejected such an intervention force, indicating Israel does want this war. If they really cared about their people they would support such an intervention.

According to Israel the Lebanese infrastructure had to be destroyed to prevent Hezbollah from blablabla, not for the release of the abducted soldiers.



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Such a statement made '' by accident'' on open cameras and microphones

Don,t you think this could be a leak to put the wind up Syria that they are prepared to move in?



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Personally I would not support even a mention of the US sending aid to Israel, be it financial, supply, or troops, its their war let them fight it.


I'm afraid you're a bit too late on this front as the US already provides billions of dollars in aid to Israel every year - in fact, it's debatable whether or not Israel is a remotely viable country without US aid. - the US and its citizens are already fighting this war whether they approve or not.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...



posted on Jul, 17 2006 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Dear BombLord,

Israel always likes to pretend that history started just after their act of provocation.

Israel and of course its puppet Presidents and Prime Ministers and the world's media keep telling us that this all started when Hezbola fired rockets at Israel. But Hezbola exists only because Israel illegally occuplied Palestinian land and continues to oppress people, regularly bulldozing homes and shooting civilians and even peace protesters.

In this case Hamas and Hezbola had been holding a ceasefire, then Israel started massacring civilians again with renewed vigour. Most notably they fired heavy artillery at families sitting on a beach. Take a good long look:

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

"Hamas ended an informal ceasefire ... amid escalating tensions following the beach killings ..."
news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...


HISTORY DOES NOT BEGIN WHEN ISRAEL SAYS IT BEGINS.

THERE ARE TWO SIDES TO EVERY STORY. ISRAEL STARTED THIS AND NOW THEY CLAIM THEY WERE ATTACKED FIRST WHICH IS NONSENSE.

The US sends an awful lot of weapons and billions of dollars in mostly military aid to Israel every year. The US is heavily involved. That's why so many people are angry.

It's time for the killing and the lies to stop. The ordinary people in Israel have been used by crazed Zionist extremists for too long, not to mention the growing lake of Arab blood and gore. And not to mention the knock-on effects of hatred and terrorism, staged terrorism and the "War to Promote Terror"

Get ready for the "International Intervention". People just like you and I are seeing their loved ones torn apart by hot metal and the pieces of their family homes. This is just the start.

[edit on 17-7-2006 by oilwar]





new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join