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.

 

Cheney pushes Bush to act on Iran

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:22 AM
link   

Cheney pushes Bush to act on Iran


www.guardian.co.uk

The balance in the internal White House debate over Iran has shifted back in favour of military action before President George Bush leaves office in 18 months, the Guardian has learned.

The shift follows an internal review involving the White House, the Pentagon and the state department over the last month. Although the Bush administration is in deep trouble over Iraq, it remains focused on Iran. A well-placed source in Washington said: "Bush is not going to leave office with Iran still in limbo."
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 16-7-2007 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:22 AM
link   
Well it seems that like Hitler, when the support for the war at home is destroyed, it's time to open a third front...that may end everything (and it will)... this may bring the US economy to collapse, imagine a blockade of the strait of Hormuz... Buy oil... you'll make money. Bilderberg saw the price of barril by the end 2008 to be around 250-300$... Well I guess they will have what they wishes if this attack happens.

Maybe a false-flag to gather support at home? That's why the Al-CIAda came earlier... to prepare the terrain for an attack then launch an attack against Iran. Bush was always for a war against Iran, the fake diplomacy thing was only to fool the world.

www.guardian.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:43 AM
link   
I really, really hope that news report is biased. I don't see what good would come from a military conflict with Iran. Some how I also tend to think the people would not support it either. However I think the administration has proved that it is not to concerned with approval.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by RedGolem
However I think the administration has proved that it is not to concerned with approval.


Got that right. If "Bush" (Cheney) does the unthinkable, it all changes. Economy goes straight in the dumper, the US becomes even more of an international pariah, the entire Mideast becomes a war zone, oil stops, and I don't even want to think what happens if nukes are involved.

I have this horrible feeling that we won't get away from this administration with just a few cuts and bruises. Really, half of the American public deserves whatever suffering results, but unfortunately we'll all have to share the aftermath. Hope I'm wrong.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 04:17 AM
link   
Yuefo,
well if there is any way to avoid this mabe writing representatives might do as much as anything. Just a thinking of how to possibly avoid this.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 04:24 AM
link   
I honestly do not see Bush leaving office when he is supposed too. There is little doubt in my mind that we will have a new "terror attack" on US soil before the elections at which point Bush will declare Martial Law and thus suspend elections.

There is also no doubt in my mind that we will attack Iran very soon. Then Syria will be next.

We are on the verge of some amazing times and the world as the sheep see it will be changing and then all the C.T.'s will suddenly not seem as crazy as the sheep once thought.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 05:51 AM
link   
Given the current state of congress, who *must* approve a war, it would be hard to forsee a reason for them to consider doing this, which means either a catalyzing event, or a complete takeover by the executive branch.. Which again, would require a catalyzing event. I really can't see any way that this could happen without some motivating event happening, and even then, a "terrorist" attack would have to be specifically seen as coming from Iran, absolutely unequivocally.. Remember, fool me once.. shame on you.. I believe that would be how much of congress would react to any sort of "evidence" that Military action should be taken in Iran, considering the previous mess with Iraq and WMDs..



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 08:23 AM
link   
The economy will not be destroyed in war. Historically the economy thrives in such conditions. And they say history repeats itself. The bigger thing to worry is our brothers and sisters dying in a country we do not belong, for people with ulterior motives.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 08:39 AM
link   
I think it is obvious and it has been for a while now that for the administration to "win" in Iraq it has to destroy Iran first.
Look at all the news reports coming out of Iraq that claim insurgents and weapons are coming from Iran. They say that not only Iran directly but the Iranian funded and supported group Hezbollah (sp?) train insurgents and send them directly into Iraq.
More and more blame is being placed on Iran for the shortcomings in Iraq, so would it not make since for the US to attack Iran to put a stop to it?

Lets also not forget that a growing number of insurgents are Saudi, and that Syria is on board with Iran along with the so called democracy of Lebanon.

Full blown WW3 between the English speaking nations and Israel VS. the Middle East and its other allies can not be stopped. It is not a matter of if, but only of when.

God vs. god, the undoing of man. The time is now to get right with your maker and prepare yourself for death, even if in America because here we will have the NWO of the Bush administration to deal with, as those who do not bow before it will be thrown into camps or killed.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Wow Megadeath you truly have a positive outlook on life.
The reports about Iran arming & helping insurgents in Iraq is nothing more than lies and propaganda. Anyone got proof then please provide it.

I very much doubt anything will happen unless it has the full support of the UN and America's allies which are all against military action, as they have the sense to see that it would be an absolute disaster to attack Iran. Just look at the mess that is Iraq and now Dick wants to start another war.

It's high time someone gave Dick a push - off a high roof
If that what it takes to save millions of lives. so be it.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by kindred]



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by section8citizen
I honestly do not see Bush leaving office when he is supposed too. There is little doubt in my mind that we will have a new "terror attack" on US soil before the elections at which point Bush will declare Martial Law and thus suspend elections.

This is why I believe that Congress should stop fillibustering about the Iraq War (for enhancing public viewpoints for their own elections coming up next year) & keep pushing those subpoenas over the whole Libby affair & push for Inheirent Contempt charges on Meirs (As Justin Oldman mentions on page 4 in this linked thread).

From there, it should be quicker for Congress to revoke their permission for the war...Then also call for suspension of authority (ie: removal from Office) pending legal investigations (as part of Impeachment proceedings according to Article 2, Section 4 of the Constitution) on this & a whole lot of indictable charges (related to Bush's elimination of Constitutional "checks & balances", illegal surveilance, etc) on both Bush & Cheney. If the Impeachment process kicks in soon enough, Bush won't have time (or the authority) to declare Martial Law to suspend elections.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   
I think that action against Iran right now is a bad idea. On the other hand, I have to wonder if there is ever a time when such action might be justified and necessary. For example, is it justified if Iran is trying to build a nuclear weapon? Immediately before they tighten the final screw? After they have finished it?

I am concerned that a nuclear weapon might embolden them and cause them to start threatening their neighbors, and I don't know if we can or should wait for that.

What do other people think?



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Remember people that Cheney is the Representative of the profiteers of war pushing in Washington while abusing his status as Vice-president.

We all know what another war will do to our nation economy but do any of you think that any profiteer of war cares about anybody in our nation?

Why should they, they are only there to reap profits, cause mayhem, death and destruction all for money.

Cheney has not delivered his promise of a submissive and profitable middle east oil producing countries that are still hostile to foreign investors from our nation, ( I mean oil barons of the US), so his time is almost over and after all the amount of resources to create a 9/11 came with a very high price and this people wants business not promises.

Our nation should be very afraid of what this monsters ruling our nation may do to finish the job.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by marg6043]



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Megadeth
I think it is obvious and it has been for a while now that for the administration to "win" in Iraq it has to destroy Iran first.
Look at all the news reports coming out of Iraq that claim insurgents and weapons are coming from Iran. They say that not only Iran directly but the Iranian funded and supported group Hezbollah (sp?) train insurgents and send them directly into Iraq.
More and more blame is being placed on Iran for the shortcomings in Iraq, so would it not make since for the US to attack Iran to put a stop to it?

Lets also not forget that a growing number of insurgents are Saudi, and that Syria is on board with Iran along with the so called democracy of Lebanon.


So, if I get you right, since BushCo dragged us into this ungodly mess and invaded a country we all know they shouldn't have, and now it's turned out to be the exact disaster everyone who had a functioning brain in their head said it would be, we should now double down on that monumental strategic catastrophe and start WW III with Iran? Run by the same bunch of liars, madmen and incompetents?

Maybe we should just get out of Iraq before that too goes to melt-down and save ourselves and much of the world more and greater agony of pointless destruction.

Sheesh.

edit to add: BTW, there's a guy in the Midwest driving around right now with a car that runs on salt water. He's only the latest in along line of inventors from Tesla onward who offered this world free, clean energy on a platter, only to be squashed like bugs from vested interests in the energy sector. The nukes, the WMD, they're all just propaganda tools to this lot of oil vampires.

[edit on 16-7-2007 by gottago]



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   
Personally, I feel there are two solutions to this dilema.
I'd also like to point out that - the insurgents in Iraq are getting their weapons, ammo, food and supplies from somewhere. This much is pretty obvious. I mean, unless WE are giving them their supplies (which, even for the Bush admin, is pretty crazy), they have got to be getting them from somewhere. Their closest supporter is Iran.

Firstly, if you going to go to war, do it right. Get proof that Iran is smuggling weapons / sups / food, etc. Then call a draft (I'm sure many of you hate that idea), and GO TO WAR. Conquer the contry, occupy it, and turn it over.

Secondly, we could simply wrap up Iraq and withdrawl, and count it as a loss.

I'm on the fence with both ideas honestly. I think All out war could, and very possibly would work, but do we REALLY want another freaking war? I guess it would depend on the falibility of what Bush is saying about their "WMD's" and proxying of arms/supplies to Iraq insurgents. Given his prior track record (WMD's in Iraq), I would certainly be hesistant. If they (the administration) could show us proof Iran smuggling arms into Iraq that are arming insurgents...well I'd say that qualifies (just so we can end both wars and move on).

Please please please! not another Iraq. If he decides to go to war, let's all hope it's carried out correctly and swiftly.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 01:56 PM
link   
I know that starting a war with Iran is a horrible idea, but the truth is that it has already begun. The current administration of the United States has put us in this situation and did so knowingly.
I was watching the presidents speech just the other day and he is so dead set and determined to let nothing stop him from completing 100% victory in Iraq, and anyone who doubts that needs only to listen to his words.

Speaking of proof that Iran is sending insurgents and weapons, only yesterday I saw on the news a US Military leader claiming that over 300 rockets found pointed at us troops were marked "made in Iran".
Every single day the case is made for Iran's involvement, so with a president so dead set on victory, how long will it be before he turns his army towards Iran?
Its seems to me that it is unavoidable.

Even with the US/Iran situation excluded from the picture, we have Iran threatening to destroy Israel and racing to complete a nuclear bomb. Israel has plans drawn up to eliminate Iran's nuclear threat, so war between them would involve the US anyways and everyone else for that matter.

That is why I say that the time to get ready is now, and its not a matter of if, but a matter of when.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Another thing to remember is that those of you who speak with a sane mind and speak of war in a bad way do NOT speak the same as the president!!

He simply does not think the same way you do or look at things the same way.
You can't assume that he does, because he is a madman with a destiny to fulfill.
He and his cohorts have put the world on its path and they will see it through.
What you see as too much and wrong he sees as necessary.
Your logic is not the same used by him.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Take action before befuddled incumbent takes office.

Wait the meaning of incumbent.

Forget it, no JFK is going to appear to end any conflict..

we know now you have to derail it, stop the planning institutions

and it ain't worth dying for.

But we can't ask JFK now can we.


Now Nixon was a gutless so and so who would have never ever

stopped Nam unless under order from the Illuminati.

But why Nixon ended Nam is ???



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by zeeon
Firstly, if you going to go to war, do it right. Get proof that Iran is smuggling weapons / sups / food, etc. Then call a draft (I'm sure many of you hate that idea), and GO TO WAR. Conquer the contry, occupy it, and turn it over.

Did we forget the last time we "proved" something?


Secondly, we could simply wrap up Iraq and withdrawl, and count it as a loss.

That's my vote. Pullout, let them learn how to deal with it the hard way. The U.S. fought for her own freedom, if they want it, they can fight for it.



posted on Jul, 16 2007 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Megadeth
Speaking of proof that Iran is sending insurgents and weapons, only yesterday I saw on the news a US Military leader claiming that over 300 rockets found pointed at us troops were marked "made in Iran".


MegaDeath, seriously... You believe everything you hear on the "news"? The missles were marked 'Made in Iran'? Do you actually believe that weapons are stamped like consumer goods? Come on.

There's every likelihood that weapons are coming from Iran. As well as every other source that can find a way to get them there. There are people out there who are making massive fortunes by selling arms. They could care less who they sell them to. We're talking about very powerful, very wealthy privateers that see an opportunity to make a great deal of money.

There is absolutely no margin in expanding the wars into Iran. First, our military is stretched way too thin as it is. Imagine telling the troops that their tours are being extended indefinitely? Second, BushCo has proved it can't run a war. Third, the economy is hanging by a thread (and don't point to the stock market --- that's not the economy). We're spending $12B/mo currently on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That will more than double if we were to go to war with Iran. Throw in the closing of the straights (an absolute guarantee) and we're talking economic freefall in the United States. Iranian nuke or not there is not upside for us this time. GWB has painted us into a corner. Let's all pray that he's just stupid and not suicidal.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join