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.

 

U.S. Makes Case for Action Against Iran

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Defense Secretary Robert Gates says that Iran is providing bombs to Iraqi Militias. Iran's Revolutionary Guard machined and tested parts that ended up killing 170 Americans. These Iranian forces are said to report to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The parts are known as EFP's or explosively formed penetrators. Needless to say, this is a very serious accusation when the US and Iran are on a path to war.
 



www.chron.com
BAGHDAD, Iraq — U.S. military officials on Sunday accused the highest levels of the Iranian leadership of arming Shiite militants in Iraq with sophisticated armor-piercing roadside bombs that have killed more than 170 American forces.

The deadly and highly sophisticated weapons the U.S. military said it traced to Iran are known as "explosively formed penetrators," or EFPs.
The experts, who spoke to a large gathering of reporters on condition that they not be further identified, said the supply trail began with Iran's Revolutionary Guards Quds Force, which also is accused of arming the Hezbollah guerrilla army in Lebanon. The officials said the EFP weapon was first tested there.
The officials said the Revolutionary Guard and its Quds force report directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


America is laying down the proof to support action against Iran. Bush feels that this threat must be dealt with on his initiative to spread democracy in the Middle East. He is saying that if we don’t do something about Iran, Iraq will never be solved.
This report on Iran was the stringing together of many months work that draws a negative picture on Iran. Could this be the new WMD? When I read this story I couldn’t help but think back to when Colin Powell was talking about scary white powder’s and mobile chemical weapons labs before the UN. This report shows clearly our intentions with Iran.
However, the U.S. will probably not invade Iran solely by itself. I think that Israel may start a war that we get dragged into. I think it will be easier for Bush to sell this war to the American people if he first says that we are only supporting Israel as it takes action against Iran. Before you know it, there will be US planes dropping ordinance over Iran and we’ll be into a full on war with the country. Buckle your seatbelts.


Related News Links:
www.alertnet.org
www.smh.com.au
abclocal.go.com
www2.ljworld.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Is The War With Iran Now Starting?
Is The War With Iran Now Starting?
Escalation Against Iran The Pieces Are Being Put in Place
British Government now claims Iran training Basra Killers

[edit on 11-2-2007 by radio_radio]




posted on Feb, 11 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
It's just like that old song:


"How ya gonna keep 'em out of Tehran, after they've seen Mosul..."



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 09:48 AM
link   
Why would the U.S. even need to make this case. Iran has been proving it themselves ever since 1979, this has been coming for a long time, unfortunately now is the time when we need to set it back again.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
"Before you know it, there will be US planes dropping ordinance over Iran and we’ll be into a full on war with the country. Buckle your seatbelts."

Yep; and I have the 30 year-old scotch waiting to be cracked open in celebration of the day we take down this terrorist-sponsoring menace to the middle east!!



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Fortunately for us, these bombs that killed the 170 troops have English writing on them, so they're easy for us to read...



And...



Modern Iran uses a solar Hijri calendar that is 621 years less than the Western solar calendar, so if this munition were really made in Iran. the date should read 1385, rather than 2006!


Source

From the Original Post:



When I read this story I couldn’t help but think back to when Colin Powell was talking about scary white powder’s and mobile chemical weapons labs before the UN.


Yeah... You should be thinking back to that.
So am I.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:25 AM
link   


Yep; and I have the 30 year-old scotch waiting to be cracked open in celebration of the day we take down this terrorist-sponsoring menace to the middle east!!

HAHAHAHA. Watch Saudi Arabia instead, Ben Laden is from there... of course if you believe the 9/11 propaganda.

Iran is supporting groups who opposes the US/Israël imperialism. Hezbollah and Hamas. Hezbollah was created because of the Israëli invasion of Lebanon and Hamas was created by Israël to counter the PLO... so who's the bad guy here? Who's creating problems? Yeah, Israël.

Great find Benevolent Heretic! And one of the reasons the US wants to go in Iran is because their little bankers don't control Iran.

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Vitchilo]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:42 AM
link   
With over 12billion dollars in cash missing, 1billion in Oil hijacked, a few thousand tons of American explosives stolen...duhhhh lets blame our failure on the Iranians. Oh and don't forget they want to kill all the Jews.


12billion in cash. This is Hilarious

[edit on 12-2-2007 by ThePieMaN]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I would agree with the “date” on the alleged weapon but...

These indigenous weapons are sold/given to other nations/groups that do not recognize the same Iranian calendar. Eg. the Chinese do not only produce weapons stamped with the dates corresponding to the 4700’s…(next week turns to 4705).


mg



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   
MG but uh aren't these muslims that have these weapons and wouldn't they know a muslim calender date? I hardly think muslim Iraqi terrorists know how to read english LOL



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 10:59 AM
link   

The "machining" on the weapons could only have been completed in Iran, the officials added.


Urrrm, Why?

What is it about these munitions that specifically say
'' Hey,we are iranian bombs ''

And whats with STAMPING them at all?
Are they using some sort of sophisticated filing system in the trucks?

If they were made in 2006, just put them in a box, ship them to the militia, and boomb.. nothing that says nothing about nothing.


Its all very convenient 'again' isnt it....

We have no proof of Iranians bringing these in, or planning with them, or providing them to anyone.
we just have them...


If this is the proof they deliberated and decided to 'show us'
Why have they shown something 'again' that doesnt implicate Iran,
Yet expect us to believe they are keeping secret the stuff that actually 'does' implicate Iran.

Bush must be getting frustrated... they are looking for reasons to begin attacking them.

Does he HONESTLY believe, the world.... the arab world specifically is going to allow him to start action against Iran based on this sorta stuff?

I surely hope not, because he will be BADLY mistaken.


[edit on 12-2-2007 by Agit8dChop]

[edit on 12-2-2007 by Agit8dChop]



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Pie…

I'll bet they can read Arabic numbered watches too...

But what is even funnier…what you say could be true if the Islamic calendar was consistent internationally especially relating (in this case) to manufacture dating. Lol.

Rules for the Islamic Calendar in Different Countries

mg



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I have to disagree with the title of this thread. I don't see anything in the article that imples that the administration is using this to spur war. Furthermore, I think that the last sentence of the summary belongs in the opinion section.

I agree that there may be something in the works, but it is not enough to warrant putting it in the .lines just yet and is speculation.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Togetic
I have to disagree with the title of this thread. I don't see anything in the article that imples that the administration is using this to spur war. Furthermore, I think that the last sentence of the summary belongs in the opinion section.

I agree that there may be something in the works, but it is not enough to warrant putting it in the .lines just yet and is speculation.


I agree with you Togetic, this is not argument for war this is an argument to "interdict and interfere" with Iranian operations in Iraq. I think this is the administrations way of saying we are starting to look for Iranians in Iraq because they are acting as some of the supply lines.

It's too early for war, and hopefully the US and friends argument will be much stronger than this if action is ever needed against their country's nuclear sites.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:49 PM
link   
If Iran is indeed supplying weapons, doesn't it seem like they would take some precautions to make them a little more untraceable? (especially since they are denying the allegations)

Who knows. Maybe this another "slam dunk" case for eventually going to war. God help us.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Why have these supply lines not been cut off by now? You're telling me that with all the levels of sophistical the U.S Army is capable of in regards to satellite imaging, U2 spy planes and all of this sort of technology, that they are not able to even capture some damning images of Iranians shipping large quantities of munitions to Iraq? U.S weaponry shows up in Africa all the time, yet the U.S is not damned for the countless of slaughter of millions..

This is nonsense, this is not evidence of anything other than conditioning for a future attempt at a much stronger case for war. The Casus belli is being conjured or has been, it's simply convincing the public beforehand.

Luxifero



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
Terrorists in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Africa use AK-47's, RPG's, and shoulder fired SAM's made in Russia. Does that mean Russia is supporting terrorists? Should we go to war with russia?!???



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 03:22 PM
link   
This is hardly surprising news that Iran are supplying weapons. If anything, Iran has more rights to meddle in Iraq than the US has, seeing that what happens in Iraq will directly affect the average Iranian citizen far more than your average American.

As a pre-text to war, I am not sure. The US has already made one mistake by mishandling post war Iraq and may make another by stirring up a hornets nest of religous zeal by attacking Iran.

To Luxifero - The US cannot stop Mexicans illegally crossing into the US so why do you think that the mighty US will be able to cut off Iran from supplying Iraqi insurgents?



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 04:51 PM
link   
This is the exact kind of rhetoric that the administration was spewing to dupe us into a conflict in Iraq. Now they are doing the same thing to get us into Iran. I think that they are trying to push Iran's buttons so much that they retalliate, and give us reason to attack. I think we will be involved in another endless conflict by mid-year. Anyone else see this happening?



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   


To Luxifero - The US cannot stop Mexicans illegally crossing into the US so why do you think that the mighty US will be able to cut off Iran from supplying Iraqi insurgents?

Sorry, but it's not the same thing at all. The mexican border is not protected because the US government want it that way, for the NAU and other obvious reasons.

If they would want to secure the border, they could do it. And the borders are not the same lenght... US-Mexican border: 3326 km Iran-Iraq border: 1458 km...



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   
To Vitchilo

Fair point, but I was just trying to draw a comparison to make it easier for people to understand how difficult the task of closing the border is. The bottom line is that it is virtually impossible for the US to close the border between Iran / Iraq.

Iran are playing a dangerous game themselves. There are many reasons why they want the US to fail in Iraq but how long will they interfer in Iraq for? Who will get out of the way first in this political game of 'chicken'.



[edit on 12-2-2007 by ShadesofGrey]




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join