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.

 

US Poised For Attack On Iran!! Has The Final Count Down Begun?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 12:02 AM
link   
Battle Indicators

To go to war, there has to be a raison d’etre. And Washington is busy inventing one.

At least one former White House official contends that some Bush advisers secretly want an excuse to attack Iran. "They intend to be as provocative as possible and make the Iranians do something [America] would be forced to retaliate for," says Hillary Mann, the administration's former National Security Council director for Iran and Persian Gulf Affairs.

But whatever the excuse to attack, there are certain ‘battle indicators’ that clearly warn of an impending action. What are these indicators?

1. A second Navy carrier group is steaming toward the Persian Gulf, and NEWSWEEK has learned that a third carrier group will likely follow. One carrier group has been moved to the western Pacific, just a few days' steaming from the Indian Ocean

2. Kidnapping of Iranian officials in Iraq by the US.

3. Killing of US troops by "terrorists" supplied with sophisticated Iranian armaments with Iranian government complicity (alleged by the US).

4. The recent unannounced visit of U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Baghdad last Saturday to assess the security situation in Iraq.

5. The appearance of Undersecretary of State Nick Burns and Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England at a security conference in Israel with pro-war elements of the Israeli military.

6. The US administration has armed Iran's Arab neighbors with Patriot missiles. The Pentagon halted all sales of spare parts from its recently retired F-14 fighter jet fleet because of concerns they could be transferred to Iran.

With Iran shooting off a few missiles in the same tense waters in which American naval assets are operating, some days ago, in a highly publicized test and with Americans and Iranians jousting on the chaotic battleground of Iraq, the chances of a small incident spiraling into a crisis are higher than they've been in years.




posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 01:09 AM
link   
There's a lot of hardware floating around in a relatively small pond at present...much of it armed to the teeth. The tension on Gulf waters must be extreme. Commercial vessels aside, the US Naval flotilla alone includes; nuclear carriers, nuclear battleships, nuclear sub escorts, minehunters, minesweepers, destroyers, frigates, transport ships etc, etc. You can scroll this page to get an idea of the scale of these Strike groups: /nbu2d

All it takes is one mine explosion...false flag, or otherwise, and the potential repercussions would be massive. Iran has advanced military capabilities...and if attacked...they'll launch. The regional threat to both the US, and our allies is obvious...What isn't understood by many, is Iran's capability to threaten US interests domestically, as well as globally. Those that are unfamiliar with the highly sophisticated Iranian intel agency; MOIS (Ministry of Intelligence and Security) and it's connection to successful terrorist operations abroad, may want to google it sometime.

Personally, I still believe that the odds are against pre-emptive action. For the sake of the children...I hope I'm right.

Peace &
Good Fortune
OBE1



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludaChris

Originally posted by mel1962

ludaChris,

While I understand where your coming from, I believe you are being a bit naive about the sitution. I think its all a matter of time, especially after President Bush's comment that "Money trumps Peace" IMHO!


No not naitve, just going on past experience with dozens of threads on this subject over the past year and a half i've been a member of these boards. They all say the same thing, they all end up the same way. WRONG!!!! I dont think that naive at all. Do you?


They haven't been wrong. Maybe ones predicting a date. But threads saying we are going to war with Iran are right. Theses thing don't start overnight. Not everyone understands that. America will attack Iran within the next two years, and every week now we are seeing the media propaganda escalate accordingly.

Get a clue brother.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Repercussions Of War Between The US/Israel and Iran

The repercussions of such a move would:

1. Cut the last frayed ties between the US and many of its allies.

2. Destroy all American moral authority and convince the world that they are a super-power to be contained, not an international leader that can be relied upon to behave rationally, resulting in changed global equations.

3. Quickly destabilize every state in the Middle East and allow them to fall prey to open source war like Iraq, resulting in the birth of failed states, torn apart by tribal guerrillas, jihadists, and criminal gangs, as in Iraq.

4. Oil prices would go through the roof, touching $150 a barrel plunging the stock markets around the globe, resulting in a complete meltdown with many economies going bust leading to a world wide economic collapse. (This may be a trifle alarmist, but it could happen).

5. American assets around the world would be under constant threat from protracted terrorist strikes.

There are right-wingers in Israel — and in the US — who embrace the scenario that if the other nations in the Middle East collapse, Israel will be left to dominate the region!!

In sum, it is a disastrous strategic move on virtually all levels that only someone with a puerile "might makes right" strategic vision would even contemplate. But unfortunately, such puerile minds (neo-cons) in the US are a dime-a-dozen!!

And hell! They’re running the show!



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 04:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
2. Destroy all American moral authority and convince the world that they are a super-power to be contained, not an international leader that can be relied upon to behave rationally, resulting in changed global equations.


i understand your points, and even if alarmist, may be possible. i have heard these rumours about getting usa into trouble showing that they are an uncontrolled state. it just all depends what happens in the war, and does it spread.

once the first shot goes of, maybe this domino effect is something they will not be able to control. but the war with iran, was stamped as soon as they went into iraq, and america have no way out of it.

if america leaves iraq, they will be blamed, and if america stay they will be blamed. so america may as well saty and at least that way they have some control on the outcomes.

This thread title should read, America has no way out of war with Iran.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 06:03 AM
link   
Just for your information:

www.jpost.com...

Somebody has an other non-jewish source of this?

Greetz



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
... Iran has not been sitting idly by, rather cultivating alliances to assist them, and I do believe probably making deals, both economically and arms wise with other nations. I think it will not go as predicted by the US government, especially since we have very little on the intelligence of what they are capable of. The current state of US politics, will not bear another front, even if it is part of the War on Terror.

Just my thoughts.


The guessing at what the underground installations might be and there most probable locationing in somewhat concerning.
Add that during the recovery attempt of the Am. hostages in the '70s an uprising of militants among all classes of the Iranian population swelled, it's a boiling pot.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 07:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by tom463
Just for your information:
Here
Somebody has an other non-jewish source of this?
Greetz


Good link!



The Revolutionary Guards will begin three days of ground maneuvers, dubbed Eghtedar, or Grandeur, the official Islamic Republic News Agency reported Sunday. "The guards will practice various kinds of fighting tactics including tactics of asymmetrical warfare," the report said without elaborating.


Note 'Tactics of asymmetric warfare'. This is nothing but a copy of the old Chinese tactics whilst fighting against a much superior force. This implies not only conventional war which will be fought in stage one, but transiting to Low Intensity War (Insurgency) and on to unconventional (Guerrilla) warfare at some stage depending on the progress of the war.

Needless to say, if the guerrilla warfare stage is reached, it will be pretty hellish for American troops to operate in the hostile environment.

But American planners are not fully gone as yet! If there is going to be action, it will be in the form of a quick surgical strike against Iran's nukes and the military industrial complexes.

In other words, Iran would be bombed back to the stone age! No part of Iran would be occupied except contiguous buffer zones along the Iran-Iraq border.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:25 AM
link   
Not that i think that Iran has been a beakon of righteousness.

But Syria and Iran have an stone hard alliance pact. If you attack one of us, you have to take us both on at the same time. Are you sure you can do that? Look what iraq has done to you.

Your government must be in a suicidal mood. I suggest you don't let them take the rest of you with them.

[edit on 18-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 09:57 AM
link   
We may see some developments this week, because I think the UN security council is set to discuss Iran's response to the sanctions it imposed. Iran has not quit uranium enrichment, so it is still in violation, but I doubt China or Russia will want stricter sanctions.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
Not that i think that Iran has been a beakon of righteousness.

But Syria and Iran have an stone hard alliance pact. If you attack one of us, you have to take us both on at the same time. Are you sure you can do that? Look what iraq has done to you.

Your government must be in a suicidal mood. I suggest you don't let them take the rest of you with them.

[edit on 18-2-2007 by Syrian Sister]


Please consider doing a little research. I admit Iran is a handful, but Syria is a military joke, the Israeli tanks would be in Damascus within 48 hours.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 10:20 AM
link   
Right, because Israel did a really good job against the hizbullah right?

Not a military but a militia, and with all israel's tanks, they still got their behind wooped.

LOL you really think they are in a position to take on syria?

That's another thing you have to contend with if you bring israel to the mix, Lebanon.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I bet a 12 pack of beer the U.S. doesn't attack Iran...? Any takers?



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsloan
I bet a 12 pack of beer the U.S. doesn't attack Iran...? Any takers?


Come to think about this....Hey.Wouldn't be cool if we could wager ATS points on these type of forums so those who insist on beating the same bush can put up or shut up?



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by tsloan

Originally posted by tsloan
I bet a 12 pack of beer the U.S. doesn't attack Iran...? Any takers?


Come to think about this....Hey.Wouldn't be cool if we could wager ATS points on these type of forums so those who insist on beating the same bush can put up or shut up?


Well, it may be fun for you to think of this as a game as you sit at home watching the events on television BUT I have someone that I care about that may have to go and fight for his life.

Your post is offensive to me - even if you are joking.



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
Right, because Israel did a really good job against the hizbullah right?

Not a military but a militia, and with all israel's tanks, they still got their behind wooped.

LOL you really think they are in a position to take on syria?

That's another thing you have to contend with if you bring israel to the mix, Lebanon.


Let's see, Syria has 4600 tanks, all old Soviet Models and Israel has 3600 tanks, but 1/2 are Merkava, the rest of their stock is about the same as Syria's.

Israel has over 11,000 other armour vehicles compared to Syria's 4700.

Syria and Israel both posses about 6,000 pieces of artillary of varing types.

Syria has about 215k compared to Israel's 350k.

I have links for the air forces, while Syria is one of the largest it is one of the most poorly trained especially compared to Israel and US.

Israeli Air Force

Syrian Air Force

Syria is no match for Israel, as far as Hezbollah they won nothing but death and destruction of their homes. But in reality I don't expect Syria to do anything if Iran is attacked other than protest at the UN and than shutter in fear that they are not attacked!



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 11:15 AM
link   
if iran has syria as an ally

do either of theese countries have close pacts with either china or russia

[edit on 18-2-2007 by cpdaman]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 11:32 AM
link   
hello everyone[since this is my first post]
Apart from the iraqi -[coming] iran conflict.. the Sunni-Shia conflict got my attention for some time, i had some discussions even about whether or not the us brought iraq in this civil war for the reason to distract the attention from terrorisme to the west to the internal conflict within the Islamic world itself, what would happen if the us withdraw? and Iran will claim parts of Iraq[as a satellite state within Iraq like Libanon], Saudi arabia will support the sunni and so on..
But off course what would happen if they attack Iran?, will that be the final stage of the controlled chaos theory and plumbs the whole middle east into the Sunni-Shia schisma
We already see [sunni] Al quada attacks in Iran, i am also very curious about the role of Pakistan[ as the only islamic nuclear power] if the war expends to Iran, for how long will they stay a western ally?will they support Iran after a coup would happen, or support Al quada?[as some groups are already doing] and intervene more and more in Iran.
After all it wouldn't make the US more populair[and probably much more weaker] but interesting is what would happen if Iran turns into chaos like in Iraq..



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   
as for the raison d'etre..
we have had the EPF weapon delivery accusations.

www.washingtonmonthly.com...

Now report of Al Sadr for a "visit" to Iran

donsingleton.blogspot.com...

and off course the assault on the iranian consulat..
The funny thing is these things[except for the latter] happened all the time in the past years, why now they're coming to our attention?
Still i think Iran will sit and wait for the us to attack since they can build up their defenses, and maybe to deploy their first bomb[they'll need time].Surely the want America to be the agressor and themselves to be the victim to get sympathy and supprt throughout the world and even to justify their own terror.
The most reasonble thing is for Israel to attack first since they're a little less sensitive to the public opinion, in the sense their people will understand an pre-emptive strike to defend against their most greatest threat since Nazi-germany..the americans will follow and justify their attack of supoorting their ally

[edit on 18-2-2007 by Foppezao]

[edit on 18-2-2007 by Foppezao]



posted on Feb, 18 2007 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syrian Sister
Right, because Israel did a really good job against the hizbullah right?

Not a military but a militia, and with all israel's tanks, they still got their behind wooped.

LOL you really think they are in a position to take on syria?

That's another thing you have to contend with if you bring israel to the mix, Lebanon.


Umm.. Yeah actually Israel decimated the entire nation within days, killed an unknown thousands of militant and thousands more civilians? ... Israeli air forces could annihilate anything Syria has before Syria could mobilize, let alone if America where to go in? .... Iraq has killed 3,000+ troops.. making it the LEAST bloodiest war America has ever engaged in... with 300,000,000 people in the nation and the worlds most powerful industry complex and most advanced army, even if we did loose alot of men we are not at full military power right now, hell in past wars America would loose 10k in a single battle. Thinking you can take America on is not good for your health. Though I don't want to see us go in, please think logically.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join