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.

 

Abizaid: World could abide nuclear Iran

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Abizaid: World could abide nuclear Iran


news.yahoo.com

WASHINGTON - Every effort should be made to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, but failing that, the world could live with a nuclear-armed regime in Tehran, a recently retired commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East said Monday.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 05:50 PM
link   
I know most threads right now on ATS are about how we are certainly going to war with Iran, but I thought I would counter that train of thought and offer an example of how the world can deal with Iran and why a nuclear Iran is not the end of the world.



news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by AnAbsoluteCreation
 


wow a general that has common sense
someone get this man a drink


Iran has stock piles of bio and chemical weapons and never used it
what makes people think Iran would use nukes.



(copy and paste from closed topic)



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
I would counter the General's ~Relativism~
with the real life situations that exist right now...


Iran is using it's proxy 'Hizbollah' to both gain control of the nation Lebanon and to maintain a constant armed force ready to pounce on Israel
at the drop of the hat.

Now, if & when Iran acquires nuclear arms,
then Iran itself will distance itself by having another 'proxy',
be it Hizbollah, or the Revolutionary Guard, or Jihadists, even AQ-in-Iraq,
be the weilder of the WMD/dirty-bomb...

creating the appearance of just enough seperation between Iran & their agent...
to make it seem that their nuclear safeguards were broken into...
i.e. deniability by Iran


Gen Abizaid is just a dependable mouthpiece, his stance is a scripted
message to the masses...
because the neocon planners want even the mention of the word 'Nuclear'
as it pertains to Iran- - to be linked as meaning 'WMD arms,
and not nuclear in the sense of a Power plant, i.e. Bushehr,
that Iran is adamant that their enrichment facilities are for...
fuel for the nuclear power plant.

(the Russians are ready to deliver enough enriched uranium for the Bushehr plant as soon as Iran pays, the IAEA has signed off on the plant, and the Russians say it will take 6 months for the plant to crank up after Iran gets the enriched uranium. )
see: www.asharqalawsat.com...



allthe propagandists are busy clouding our minds, "Iran+Nuclear=bombs"



posted on Sep, 17 2007 @ 06:42 PM
link   
It's good to see some commen sense.However one retired commander verse all of the whitehouse and its cronies =were going to war with Iran.

[edit on 17-9-2007 by Project_Silo]



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 02:11 AM
link   
I think there are many considerater and deliberate people in the US armed forces. This guy appears to be one of them.

What he is saying is exactly what many ordinary people think, at least those who are not let astray by the the propeganda and fearmongering.

Why do the US have the sole right to chose what others can do, when no one can tell the US what they're allowed to do? They do the heck, as they please.

You can tell them what you think, or how you think they should do, but darn me if it's not in their book. You'll get punished.

Concerning Iran, as this general points out, there is no reason to presume their interntion is attack.

Of course it is security. so why shouldn't they be allowed, when -for instance- Israel are ? - you've seen more suicidal politics from them, than from Iran.



posted on Sep, 19 2007 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by bodrul
wow a general that has common sense
someone get this man a drink


Iran has stock piles of bio and chemical weapons and never used it
what makes people think Iran would use nukes.


Well, he is a retired one. I think they give them their brains back after service.


And yes, I agree. There is no reason why Iran couldnt have nuclear weapons. The USA view of them as rabid insane terrorists is getting old. Im tired of seeing them attacking country after country in the name of "peace" when its not really about that at all.

I could live with Iran having nuclear weapons, just like I can live with USA, Russia and China having it.


Originally posted by St Udio
Iran is using it's proxy 'Hizbollah' to both gain control of the nation Lebanon and to maintain a constant armed force ready to pounce on Israel
at the drop of the hat.


And USA is using CIA to do the same thing in other countries. CIA even installed Saddam Hussein and probably created bin laden as well. And they have armies in Iraq and is about to enter Iran. Now, which one is more dangerous to world peace?


[edit on 19-9-2007 by Copernicus]




top topics



 
0

log in

join