It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Talk of Imminent War Against Iran Amid an Attack of 'Coincidences'

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 06:59 PM
JacKatMtn I completely agree with you in that whoever is in charge if and when OBL is caught, will be sitting on probably the largest political gemstone of the past decade or even longer. Maybe since Regan saw the fall of the wall?

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 07:09 PM
The empire built on people's greed is crumbling. Eternal growth driven by eternal consumption of useless "stuff" no longer appeals to people.

Don't know why but I m talking like some preacher

War with Iran or Peak Oil do not seem to matter, people will find a way to live in harmony. All that the rulers of the world do are just attempts to stop people from finding themselves and end this game of today's world

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 07:13 PM
If you want to kick it up a notch, as Emeril would say, consider this. Today on the major networks, they are reporting that the US government is warning that an attack on the US by Al Qaeda could be "only a plane flight away", because Al Qaeda has been successful in recruiting westerners into their camps.

Is this a combined "Red-Flag", followed by a "US response" waiting to happen?

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 07:21 PM
The false flag plan is simple really.

Set off nuke in Iraq, blame it on Iran.

You say...yeah how would we get away with that?

People whom we call "non governmental operational assets" are tasked with providing a supposed small yield nuclear missile to anti American Iranian militants. This missile is ready set and able to impact Baghdad in the US's Green zone effectively crippling our major support infrastructure. The missile is a dud, and while it will impact the US Green Zone and it does give off radiation to thwart a Geiger counter validity test the payload is non explosive but still contains radioactive isotopes.

At the same time other "non governmental operational assets" will be tasked with having Kurdish rebels who we're the folks gassed and decimated by Saddam's regime deliver an unknown (to them) device to a secret location in Baghdad.

Prior to detonation, only the US military is informed by military intelligence that there could be a missile inbound, which only gives the military time to evacuate, as the media will be told that because of Iraq's seriously deteriorated infrastructure, it made it practically impossible for any type of civilian evacuation to be coordinated (this is really true anyways).

What do we get?


The US administration will be able to present facts as to the Iranian origin and involvement in a deliberate and direct nuclear attack on American Forces.

By Iran initiating an attack against Iraq, it will allow the US to petition and show the Iraqui government that Iran is hostile and Iraq needs the US to protect and help stabilize the region.

We will have a reason to invade Iran and remove the regime, take control of the country and install a provisional government. This also will give us a Naval port which logistically allows for much easier support of military and Pro- US civilian contracting operations to take place. (PS, don't forget about the pipeline from Iraq's oil fields to the Iranian ports)

With Baghdad destroyed and uninhabitable due to radiation from the real bomb, we have eliminated a huge drain on our forces from having to patrol the area which allows us to focus on our Iranian invasion as well as ramp up the siphoning off of Iraq's oil reserves.

No destruction or causalities in the continental U.S.

The US administration will have a plausible reason to instigate tighter "anti terror" laws in the US and keep the current state of fear at a level elevated enough to maintain support for their goals while not scaring the population enough that they continue working and providing funding for the US administrations goals.

The big picture is to secure as much of the middle eastern oil reserves under our control, so we can use their oil for our use before we eventually, due to world consumption would have to turn to using domestic oil fields, oil shale and oil sand deposits.

[edit on 6-2-2008 by DisabledVet]

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:01 PM
Well an attack on the US Green zone in Baghdad seems possible but not probable, false flag or otherwise. There are far more likely scenarios that could happen other than that.....

On a side note......Wow I'm gone for a day and my thread is one of the hottest topics. Guess I hit on a good story.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:05 PM

Originally posted by rbaker20
Well an attack on the US Green zone in Baghdad seems possible but not probable, false flag or otherwise. There are far more likely scenarios that could happen other than that.....

On a side note......Wow I'm gone for a day and my thread is one of the hottest topics. Guess I hit on a good story.

Really? Care to elaborate on a better one?

Or at least shoot some holes in mine before you wave your hand and dismiss it.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:18 PM
I'm not dismissing it at all. I find it a well thought out scenario to which might possibly happen but..... realistically we can't dwell on the scenario's of what we think might happen becuase we honestly have no idea what is going to happen. People like you and many others, INCLUDING MYSELF, have been guilty of playing like we are Nostradamus and think we can predict the likely scenario's but we can't.
So my response to you and many others will be, "Whatever happens, happens."

"But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:29 PM
Iran will not strike first.
Why would they? The world can see Iraq for what it is, and will not back America/Israel in another pre-emptive war.

Its win , win for Iran to do nothing

if they keep up the defense and rhetoric, they will out-witt the US and israel, and be shown to be able to stand eye to eye with them.
It will be a great moment for Iran.

If they are attacked, the arab world will not back the US.
The US economy will fail, and ultimately, Israel and the US will collapse.
Iraq will become a extension of Shiite iran...

if Iran attacks first, the world will not stand with them, and will back whom ever they hit.
because the west will force nations through embargo's, financialy penalities etc etc if they dont back them, when clearly they are the victim.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:40 PM
reply to post by rbaker20

Your quote may apply to the final days, but not to man-created events. If there is a red-flag action in the plans, obviously someone knows about it. Certainly, you and I know nothing (well, I don't, and I hope you don't), but the planners know. I hope and pray I'm wrong about the red-flag, but it's hard not to be suspicious. given all that has happened. After all, most of us are at ATS because we are suspicious to some degree, correct?

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:42 PM
Regarding the threat of imminent action, I know of one company that has just issued a detailed contigency report for all of it's various locations in case of a natural or civic disaster. Now, they did not get this detailed - many, many pages of specific instructions - after 9/11. The timing of this new initiative is what concerns me, considering everything already discussed in this thread.

First, many corporations contract with risk management companies and security firms to assess threats to their interests, so that in and of itself is not unusual. However, due to poor fiscal performance in 2007, I know this company would not have taken on the expense of the review and implementation of these initiatives unless the cost was mitigated by the threat of actual losses.

Secondly, the over-all business sector that this company is in has had several specific threats from Al Qaeda before, yet, up until now, no real contingency instructions have been given by the company. So, why now and not 6 1/2 years ago?

And, before anyone asks, this company is of no significant importance, particularly it is in no way related to oil, airlines, healthcare, finance, etc. Marginal but economically vital industry.

So, again, I have to wonder - why now?

[edit on 6/2/08 by kosmicjack]

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 08:59 PM
reply to post by Sky watcher

I'm not a big follower of Nostrodamus, but according to him, Russia will be on OUR side, contrary to most current speculation.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:00 PM
It gets curiouser and curioser..........and scarier and scarier. But why worry, the way the Fed and the government have destroyed our financial well-being and freedom, who needs a red flag. They've done a very good job of destroying the country already, haven't they?

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:02 PM

Originally posted by FredT
I have the belief that Iraq was simply supposed to be a stepping stone and Iran was the ultimate agenda of the neo cons.

It would in essence put a stranglehold on the entire ME oils supply with Iran, Iraq, and Saudi, basically pacified.

That was the plan, the reality is that we owe Donald Rumsfield a huge debt of thanks. He botched the post invasion so badly that it in essence stalled the entire agenda.

Take Bahgdad for example. We have a bare minimum of controll after all these years and its taking alot of troops to do it. Teheran on the other had has 3 times the amount of people, and Im pretty sure the welcome matt will not be out. How the heck are they going to control that?

Winning the war with iran will be easy for the most powerfull military the world has ever seen. Winning the peace may be beyond our ability if we invade Iran.

I went along with the claims one time. i for one am simply unwilling to take the Mossad and the NeoCons at face value about thier dire predictions regarding Iran and its nuclear program.

I know having our head in the sand seems safe, and THAT is exactly what Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the commie-libs in the Democratic Party in Congress want you to believe.

Unfortunately, those same kind of minds thought something similar before Hitler invaded Poland, before Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and before 9/11, and that didn't work out too well

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:05 PM

Originally posted by pai mei
The empire built on people's greed is crumbling. Eternal growth driven by eternal consumption of useless "stuff" no longer appeals to people.

No disrespect to you personally Pai Mei or to anyone here that isn't guzzling oil but I have this to say on the subject.

If this 'stuff' no longer appeals, then why are SO many Americans still buying 4WD's, SUV's, Hummers and the like? Then there's a dozen shows like Pimp My Ride... "Hey Dude, Lets put a big old Hemi in that baby!" Any of this sounding familiar?

Someone PLEASE Explain this Logic:

"Were running out of oil - I know - Lets' manafacture and market more fuel guzzling, climate destroying SUV's!" "That will show the world how 'on-top' of this 'Oil Crisis' we are and at the same time, increase consumer confidence in the Oil Markets". "WooHooo, I'm giving myself another payrise"!

To be honest, I wouldn't want the USA coming into AUS and pumping oil (if we had it) to fuel their SUV (Bigger is Better and We Got The Bombs to Prove it ) Mentality. I can understand the Middle East in this respect. Just be objective and HONEST for a second - flip the coin and see if the US would like the Arabs coming into their country and doing the same to them!

Thought Not!

If America change - So will the World. Think About It!

InfraRedMan Out!

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:06 PM
Does anyone know what countries' economies are not dominated by Rothschild controlled central banks?

There are supposedly only seven of them, and one is Iran. If this is true, conquering Iran is about a lot more than oil. It is about completing the NWO.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:27 PM
reply to post by jackinthebox

There are now only 5 nations on the world left without a Rothschild controlled central bank: Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya.
Source | The History of the House of Rothschild

And that was circa 2005

And, according to this thread, About This Axis Of Evil Thing, maybe Venezuela.

The Iranians refuse to be caught up in the international bankers game of eternal debt, i.e. compound interest.

That's why they've been targeted for assimilation by the tools of the elite.

[edit on 6-2-2008 by goosdawg]

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 09:53 PM
reply to post by goosdawg

Excellent research. I guess we really know why we have to overthrow those governments now, don't we?

Thanks for this info.

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 10:00 PM
reply to post by goosdawg

A most gracious thank you to "goosdawg."

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 10:16 PM
reply to post by flashback

reply to post by jackinthebox

The credit for the Rothschild link should go to twitchy, thanks.

Not to toot my horn but I posted a thread last November concerning the link between compound interest, the banking elite and the coming war on Iran:

Behind the Drums of War with Iran: Nuclear Weapons or Compound Interest?

It sure puts a different spin on things...

posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 10:34 PM

Originally posted by DisabledVet
The false flag plan is simple really.

Set off nuke in Iraq, blame it on Iran.

[edit on 6-2-2008 by DisabledVet]

That may well be one of their plans, but I think your government intends to nuke one of its own cities in the continental USA as the false flag par excellence.

They were so successful after 9/11 destroying your Constitutional rights and liberties in the name of "protecting you from terror" that I think they intend to run some variation on that scenario but with a nuke this time.

So if they nuke Kansas City or Cincinnati or Indianapolis, they could further enslave and control the populace during a time of national hysteria. And they would employ the same propoganda device of claiming to protect you from terrorists by further regulating and controlling your lives with forced bio-chips, forced medications, various internment, relocation, and reeducation camps. All pages right out of Goebbels and Stalin.

[edit on 6/2/08 by Pellevoisin]

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in