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.

 

Iran president: Israel flies Satan's flag

page: 7
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91


Am I the only one that notices the US military suicide rate climbing?
Sri Oracle


Not climbing, though the depression rate is. Morality is still a treasured thing.




Among active service members, the suicide rate was 17.3 per 100,000 in 2006, compared to 12.8 in 2005 and 10.8 in 2004. In 2001 the rate was 9.8 per 100,000.


www.news.com.au...

Must I quote everything?

Sri




posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 10:29 PM
link   
well I guess they go through alot worse. THough I never got why, after seeing the worse of the worse on the internet and video games, people want to kill themselves more then if they never saw it at all.

[edit on 19-8-2007 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 10:40 PM
link   
Guys, please try to stay within the topic.

Thanks.



posted on Aug, 19 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Since you are making predictions, have you considered the possibility that the Israelis will launch preemptive strikes on Iran unilaterally, giving US forces in the region no option other than to join the fight, or be sitting targets for Iranian retaliation?

Some people here may be underestimating the Israeli resolve to see the threat of a nuclear Iran eliminated, and soon!

What would this do to your predictions?


Iraq talks a lot of talk but they know what is foolish to do. Their president is western educated and so he will not do what he preaches. Israel will not preemptive full out war. They will not have the US backing them up if they did, and even though they may seem offensive at times they are defensive in nature. They will not start a full out war and none of the countries around them will start a full out war after seeing how fast Saddam was taken out.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   
-We are being pushed towards Hybrid Vehicles, and less Oil and Gas requiring type vehicles, etc. This is not due to trying to save the planet, this is due to the fact that in the pretty near future, the oil in the middle east will be complicated, and oil prices over all will be probably ridiculously high. This would probably be due to the fact that the Middle Eastern part of the world is in so much turmoil. That also there will probably be another major conflict there soon...

-The case for justifiable action is currently being built by the U.S. against Iran. The reports are stacking up on the desk, and it's just a matter of time before there are enough of them to warrant action against Iran.

-Israel and Iran, the only thing keeping these two countries apart are the fact that Israel has Nuclear weapons[or so it is thought], and Iran currently does not. Israel is waiting for the green light from the U.S. to go ahead with their surgical strike on Iran, which they have had planned out for years now... This would probably be the only thing the U.S. and Israel would be in close contact about.

-Iran sees what the rest of the world sees, the U.S. embroiled in a battle in Iraq, that has spirialed out of control. Iran has been sitting back watching this little scenario play out, and knew/knows how it will turn out.
This emboldens them, as it would any other country, to spout threats and take bold actions, their thinking is that the United States can't afford to get into another conflict, especially with a country as large as Iran, so there is really nothing stopping them from behaving the way they are. They are calling the United States bluff.

-Condoleeza Rice out of the picture for almost a year now, she is/was the U.S.'s envoy for a peaceful negotiation, what's happened to her? Well for one Women don't really do much in the countries she tried to deal with, that's how stupid it all is. How is she going to convince those people of anything, when she should be all veiled up over there much less holding any form of authoritative position... heh This is what they see when we tell them about democracy, this form of government would literally mean the end of their culture, their religion, and their race[s]. This is not who these people are, for thousands of years. Islam and Democracy are two completley different things entirely! They would sooner kill themselves than become Assimilated by the Western philosophy of life...

-Iran is contributing to the continuing destabalisation of Iraq, they basically have an open border between the two countries, anyone who doesn't think that the same country that hates the United States and Israel, is not constanly fanning the flames in Iraq, is probably the dumbest person on the face of the planet.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xtrozero

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
Since you are making predictions, have you considered the possibility that the Israelis will launch preemptive strikes on Iran unilaterally, giving US forces in the region no option other than to join the fight, or be sitting targets for Iranian retaliation?

Some people here may be underestimating the Israeli resolve to see the threat of a nuclear Iran eliminated, and soon!

What would this do to your predictions?


Iraq talks a lot of talk but they know what is foolish to do. Their president is western educated and so he will not do what he preaches. Israel will not preemptive full out war. They will not have the US backing them up if they did, and even though they may seem offensive at times they are defensive in nature. They will not start a full out war and none of the countries around them will start a full out war after seeing how fast Saddam was taken out.


Actually your wrong, AFTER seeing how fast "Sadaam was taking out", this basically told them, look if your on the U.S. hit list then sometime in the future your next! That is if you don't have the weapons to state otherwise. If Sadaam did have WMD he would have used them, especially knowing that he death was impending... Now every anti-U.S. country is on the defensive, and that speeds up the positioning of their wanted place in the world.

Even Russia is now acting up again, so there you have it. If you think Iraq sent the right message, your 100% wrong. heh



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 03:26 AM
link   
You guys do realize that Iran is a democracy, right?
Certainly a very limited democracy in some ways, but a democracy nonetheless.

Democracy & freedom are two different things, and don't always go together.
People will often vote for leaders who promise to restrict individual freedoms: freedom is a scary thing.

Iran is not very "free" by any standard, but it is a democracy: it's leaders are elected by the citizenry from multiple competing parties.

It is a repressive theocracy, but it isn't a dictatorship.

Thus we might want to consider that Ahmadinejad, while a demagogue and prone to rash pronouncements, 1] does not have absolute power to make war on his own and 2] is still subject to the will of the Iranian people.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Are you sure that Israel will not launch preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities? Bear in mind that Israel did that exact thing in 1981 in Iraq, in a highly secret mission, they took out Iraq's nuclear facility, the mission was successful.

From a web article, worth giving a full read:


In Israel, planning and rhetoric appear to have progressed quite a bit further[3]; it appears that some in Israel are seriously considering a preemptive attack similar to the June 1981 attack on Osirak that destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor.[4] Meir Dagan, the Chief of Mossad, told parliament members in his inaugural appearance before the Israeli Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Iran was close to the "point of no return" and that the specter of Iranian possession of nuclear weapons was the greatest threat to Israel since its inception.[5] On November 11, 2003, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom said that Israel had "no plans to attack nuclear facilities in Iran."[6] Less than two weeks later however, during a visit to the United States, Israel's Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz stated that "under no circumstances would Israel be able to tolerate nuclear weapons in Iranian possession"[7] and just six weeks earlier, Mossad had revealed plans for preemptive attacks by F-16 bombers on Iranian nuclear sites.[8] This report will examine the following: The Iranian nuclear facilities most likely to be targeted and their proliferation risk potential; the likely preemptive scenarios involving Israel or the United States; and the possible consequences of any preemptive action.


Full Article Source Link (must Read): cns.miis.edu...

Once again, I suggest you not underestimate the Israeli resolve to remove the nuclear threat from Iran.

With or without U.S. support, which if Israel did take unilateral actions on Iran the U.S. being already in the region would have little choice other than to join them. Then again that may be by design.


[edit on 20-8-2007 by UM_Gazz]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Thus we might want to consider that Ahmadinejad, while a demagogue and prone to rash pronouncements, 1] does not have absolute power to make war on his own and 2] is still subject to the will of the Iranian people.


Iran may have a specific version of democracy, and among middle eastern nations can be considered more moderate than most. However the point most miss is the control the top Shi'ite religious leaders have over all aspects of Iranian government. And their rhetoric and threats tend to make those from Ahmadinejad seem rather tame.



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Well as I understand it, several of Amhadinejad's statements have landed him in hot water with the Council of Guardians, the Iranian therocracy's 12-member council of religious leaders, sort of an Islamist Supreme Court.

As for an Israeli preemptive strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, I think Israel might be tempted, but it would be a much more challenging effort than the strike on Osirak.

For one thing, unlike Iraq, there is no one target that will set the program back, it is spread around the country, in several locations, most of them underground. For another thing, it would be a much longer-range mission than Osirak, and Israel has no true long-range cruise missiles like the Tomahawk, so it would probably involve strike packages refueling in hostile territory, an extremely risky prospect.

So while Israel may want to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, it's by no means certain that they are actually capable of doing so effectively. The IAF is an extremely competent force, but their options are quite a bit more limited than the US's.

Interestingly enough, the article you linked puts forward a similar argument about the difficulty of a preemptive strike, and also points out how the Osirak strike ultimately proved ineffective, as it caused Saddam to accelerate his weapons program, and disperse it to multiple hardened locations:


Israel -- actually, what Israel [did] is that it got out the immediate danger out of the way. But it created a much larger danger in the longer range. What happened is that Saddam ordered us - we were 400... scientists and technologists running the program. And when they bombed that reactor out, we had also invested $400 million. And the French reactor and the associated plans were from Italy. When they bombed it out we became 7,000 with a $10 billion investment for a secret, much larger underground program to make bomb material by enriching uranium. We dropped the reactor out totally, which was the plutonium for making nuclear weapons, and went directly into enriching uranium.... They [Israel] estimated we'd make 7kg of plutonium a year, which is enough for one bomb. And they get scared and bombed it out. Actually it was much less than this, and it would have taken a much longer time. But the program we built later in secret would make six bombs a year.



IMHO such a "preemptive" strike would backfire, and produce multiple unwanted results (likely retaliatory moves aside):


  1. Increase Iran's determination that they require a nuclear deterrent.
  2. Increase domestic support for the theocracy in general and the nuclear program specifically.
  3. Cause Iran to invest considerably more in air defense, as well as hardened facilities.


The only truly certain methods of stopping an Iranian nuclear weapons program are:


  1. A "preemptive" nuclear strike (politically not realistic.)
  2. Invasion, occupation, and regime change (Israel is incapable of this, and for the US it's not a realistic option.)


Thus it seems likely to me that if the Iranians want nuclear weapons badly enough, they will get them.
Preventing that scenario is probably best handled by lessening the motivation to get the bomb, rather that attacking the capability to build it.

[edit on 8/20/07 by xmotex]



posted on Aug, 20 2007 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Preventing that scenario is probably best handled by lessening the motivation to get the bomb, rather that attacking the capability to build it.


The only problem with "lessening the motivation to get the bomb" is that every effort diplomatically at both U.S. and international levels have failed to come close to producing such a result, leaving the threat in place and perhaps given even more room for advancement.

The tiny nation of Israel, is faced with a serious dilemma, the very terrorists they have been attacked by and fought with over the years are also allied with and in some cases funded by Iran. The possibility of a "terrorist nuke" being detonated in Israel is now a more 'real' and immediate threat. Thinking from an Israeli perspective. Something must be done, if all other options have failed. Some in Israeli government have claimed that this is the greatest danger they have ever been faced with.

Good post by the way xmotex.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

Originally posted by xmotex
Preventing that scenario is probably best handled by lessening the motivation to get the bomb, rather that attacking the capability to build it.


The only problem with "lessening the motivation to get the bomb" is that every effort diplomatically at both U.S. and international levels have failed to come close to producing such a result, leaving the threat in place and perhaps given even more room for advancement.


EVERY EFFORT DIPLOMATICALLY???

What an absolute joke.

What about promising and fulfilling absolute nuclear disarmament ourselves?

Why is that one always off the diplomatic table?

How can a nation lead the world to nuclear disarmament... and yet keep the ever present threat of global nuclear annihilation in their own pocket?

If you want to lessen the motivation for your neighbor to have guns... stop stockpiling guns yourself.

THAT ALONE is leadership diplomacy.

I am,

Sri Oracle

...reporting from the country with all the bombs; do as I say not as I do...



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz
The possibility of a "terrorist nuke" being detonated in Israel is now a more 'real' and immediate threat. Thinking from an Israeli perspective. Something must be done, if all other options have failed. Some in Israeli government have claimed that this is the greatest danger they have ever been faced with.


The presence of "dirty bullet" debris is everywhere in Iraq. It is, right NOW, a REAL AND IMMEDIATE threat.

Google video: Depleted Uranium Alert

You are speaking of suspicion and fear that some terrorist, might, maybe get a "nuke" from Iran, but as you speak Iraqi children are being born with deformities because of radiation alreay on the ground due to the coalition.

I am,

Sri Oracle



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by UM_Gazz

Originally posted by talon
what has iran got that the US want?


A large portion of the world's oil reserves, a huge strategic advantage for the USA, possible elimination of a radical Islamic regime with nuclear weapons potential, a new front and land to propagate western doctrine and democracy, a next step in conquering the world?

If the USA ultimately gains a strong hold on both Iraq and Iran in the future, from a purely business perspective... Imagine the possibilities!
More than that Gazz.The US has not been happy with radical iran's capability to close off the Straight of Hormuz.Nor happy of any other power doing so as its the main route of the oil that keeps our society running.Im sure they would love an excuse to have troops there and the iranian president is almost openly inviting them with his ridiculous rhetoric.


[edit on 21-8-2007 by Xfile]



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by douglas2k4

You will even find Jewish people who don't agree with the Zionist philosophy, so are they considered "Jew-haters"? No, they are not.


That happens to be my title. I was born in Israel and was taught how we were always right, can never lose a war, etc. Pride was BIG back in late 80's early 90's.

Living outside of Israel for the past 20 years, I can see how corrupt this current government looks to everyone else. They have been many allegations of corruption from some members. They also messed up by going into Lebanon by assuming we were the best and nobody can stop us. I think now, from what I hear of family and friends in Israel, most citizens in Israel accepted the fact this current administration is just useless.

Again, not dissing Israelis (because I am still one of them) but yeah, their government is not as straight and righteous as I was taught to believe.

Peace.



posted on Aug, 21 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sri Oracle

How can a nation lead the world to nuclear disarmament... and yet keep the ever present threat of global nuclear annihilation in their own pocket?

If you want to lessen the motivation for your neighbor to have guns... stop stockpiling guns yourself.



It's all about trust isn't it. The US isn't going to disarm all of it's nuclear weapons when Russia is still stockpiling them, and vice-versa. And besides, having nukes practically gives a country immunity from being invaded, most superpowers would like that.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by malganis
It's all about trust isn't it. The US isn't going to disarm all of it's nuclear weapons when Russia is still stockpiling them, and vice-versa. And besides, having nukes practically gives a country immunity from being invaded, most superpowers would like that.


It is all about trust. Love is FREE giving, born in trust. Faith, that your actions will be recipricated; and truth be known... everything is recipricated.

If you stockpile nuclear weapons... other nations will stockpile nuclear weapons and point them at you. Reciprication. Rajas acting upon Tamas.

If you decide that there is no winning a nuclear war and you disarm... and then use the money, now being spent on maintaining a nuclear weapons system, to benefit peaceful global causes, watch as others follow in your footsteps. Reciprication.

trust I am,

Sri Oracle



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 09:09 AM
link   
but back on topic...



"It was an illegal activity, a desecration of the dead and I applaud the destruction of this building, which was destined to disappear in flames."


That comment was made today by Yehud Meshi Zahav regarding the destruction of a cremetorium in Israel by arsonists. Orthodox Jews bury their dead.

news.bbc.co.uk...

When reading the article, I couldn't help but think that quote is about how Ahmadinejad feels about the Zionists.

In context...

I believe the Iranians would say that the militarization of the Holy Land by the Zionists was an illegal activity; to substantiate doing so because of the Holocaust is a desecration of the dead and they would gladly applaud the destruction of the buildings representative of the zionist regime in power, which was destined to disappear in flames, aka wiped off the map, aka the regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).

I am,

Sri Oracle



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by quintar

Originally posted by douglas2k4

You will even find Jewish people who don't agree with the Zionist philosophy, so are they considered "Jew-haters"? No, they are not.


That happens to be my title. I was born in Israel and was taught how we were always right, can never lose a war, etc. Pride was BIG back in late 80's early 90's.

Living outside of Israel for the past 20 years, I can see how corrupt this current government looks to everyone else. They have been many allegations of corruption from some members. They also messed up by going into Lebanon by assuming we were the best and nobody can stop us. I think now, from what I hear of family and friends in Israel, most citizens in Israel accepted the fact this current administration is just useless.

Again, not dissing Israelis (because I am still one of them) but yeah, their government is not as straight and righteous as I was taught to believe.

Peace.


look..I have been raised in Israel most of my life ..I've been taught
to look at things in an objective way..Israel is not always right
but also is not wrong..I've been taught that no is perfect even though
he/she thinks so.and there's quite a lot of people that would agree with me.

About the corruption ..yes this administration is a corrupt one..but the
problem is that you don't have a good choice when the election's time comes
..you have to choose between a candidate (who's accused of being corrupt
to some extent ) and other one that's very much as the fist one..
The only difference is that one is from the right and the other is from
the left.



posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sri Oracle
I believe the Iranians would say that the militarization of the Holy Land by the Zionists was an illegal activity; to substantiate doing so because of the Holocaust is a desecration of the dead and they would gladly applaud the destruction of the buildings representative of the zionist regime in power, which was destined to disappear in flames, aka wiped off the map, aka the regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e eshghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).


Perhaps you should apply as a speech writer for the Iranian leaders?

Is this what YOU believe, or what you believe the Iranians would say?

Zionists, Jews, Israelis, no matter how you name it, or what agenda drives the line of thinking, a poor excuse for antisemitism is the perception I have.

You don't have to like the Jews, or be in favor of them, only recognize the fact that they are there, it is their home, they to this day struggle to exist in, surrounded by enemies, and growing international criticisms. If the world again abandons the Jews in a new darkest hour, perhaps history will indeed repeat itself.

[edit on 23-8-2007 by UM_Gazz]



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in

join