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.

 

Looks as thought they are trying to scare us into iran….

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2008 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Iran is building nuclear refining facilities. Does everyone remember when Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction” and we “had” to stop them, the invasion of iran is going to happen very soon…

www.iht.com...




posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Yes I agree, you should check out my thread on this subject. I think you will like it.

The Great Oil War



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Yeah, looks like they ARE trying to scare us into Iran.......


Either that, or Iran really IS doing what is reported. At least this time, unlike the Iraq War, we aren't relying on intelligence reports by an intelligence agency piecemealed by Clinton. Do you NOT remember that not only the US thought Iraq had WMDs, but the UN acknowledged that fact too? Can you say "convoys going to Syria" while we opened up our Air Force in the beginning stages of the Iraq invasion?



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I definitely agree there are many people in power who want an invasion of Iran, and recently I've definitely noticed increased media coverage and discussion on Iranians supporting Iraqi insurgents and raiding the Green-Zone.

I think an invasion is being pushed for but I wonder if people would really fall for the old 'They have weapons of mass destruction... honestly!' trick. Thinking about it, I guess it doesn't matter too much if people disagree or not, I'm sure it'll rumble ahead anyway!



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   
i think a pre emtive strike then tougher sanctions, if a retaliation is given then they will give the US all the reasons they need to attack and invade, take out the nuclear stations first and deny them the ability to create a nuclear weapon arsnel.

I'm sorry if i come across a bit strong here but a member of the muslim brother hood with a button on a nuclear weapon doesnt fill me with confidance, its bad enough that the US has them let alone a split islamic state that is hell bent on hating westeners.

I know a lot of muslims and the majority of these people are decent ordinary and real nice folks, i am not getting at them but there are some that give even these muslims something to worry about.

Iran shouldnt play with fire is what im getting at,

Wee Mad Mental



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by weemadmental
 


By that logic, the US and the UK should have been collectively attacked by the rest of the world for invading Iraq. That's "playing with fire" a lot hotter than a peaceful nuclear power program. Iran has attacked a lot less people in the last 100 years than either the UK or the US (hint: they've attacked no-one).

reply to post by CreeWolf
 


Wow. Watch Fox News much? If these magical convoys to Syria existed, we would have had intelligence from assets on the ground and in space, and the Bush admin would have waved it in front of everyone's face. Trying to blame this on Clinton makes as much sense as trying to blame it on Lincoln. The UN didn't think he had WMDs. The rest of the world didn't think he had WMDs. And guess what - he didn't have WMDs.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CreeWolf
Yeah, looks like they ARE trying to scare us into Iran.......


Either that, or Iran really IS doing what is reported. At least this time, unlike the Iraq War, we aren't relying on intelligence reports by an intelligence agency piecemealed by Clinton. Do you NOT remember that not only the US thought Iraq had WMDs, but the UN acknowledged that fact too? Can you say "convoys going to Syria" while we opened up our Air Force in the beginning stages of the Iraq invasion?
If that were true (which it ain't) the U.S. would have videoed those trucks and demanded Syria hand them over, and if Syria didn't then they would have been bombed, why you ask? remember in Oct 2001 USA said any nation harboring terrorists would pay, well convoys with WMD's would have prooven Iraq was also connected with AL-QIEDA, but all this didin't happen, I wonder why, U.S.A. doesn't lie, only other nations do right?.
And now you still believe these stories of Iran going nuke weapons.


[edit on 11-4-2008 by Lambo Rider]



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by weemadmental
i think a pre emtive strike then tougher sanctions, if a retaliation is given then they will give the US all the reasons they need to attack and invade, take out the nuclear stations first and deny them the ability to create a nuclear weapon arsnel.

I'm sorry if i come across a bit strong here but a member of the muslim brother hood with a button on a nuclear weapon doesnt fill me with confidance, its bad enough that the US has them let alone a split islamic state that is hell bent on hating westeners.

I know a lot of muslims and the majority of these people are decent ordinary and real nice folks, i am not getting at them but there are some that give even these muslims something to worry about.

Iran shouldnt play with fire is what im getting at,

Wee Mad Mental
You don't come off strong, you come off as the typical believer in western lies, the U.S. will not win easily against Iran like Iraq it will be a whole lot of KIA's on the U.S. side before victory, remember Iraq in 91 brought down 63 coalistion planes before "DesartStorm" was finished.



posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
I find Bush's ranting against Iran disturbing.
I think as good a argument could be made to invade Iraq and overthrow its government.
Oops, we are already in Iraq!
How many people know we are setting up a Shi,ite government in Iraq?



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join