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 the most powerful (nation) , says Ahmadinejad

page: 5
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 





The US isnt being told everything, your government is hiding the true extent of the problems facing your ...........


You know this,how?Do you have special clearance with the US gov?Bring me proof that backs up that ridiculous claim.

Also you said climate...................I think Global Warming(Im assuming thats what your reffering to)affects EVERYONE......EVERYWHERE.

But really ,I would LOVE to see your "information"that leads you to say my government isnt telling me everything about our "bad situation".By no means do I trust my government completely,I wouldnt be on ATS if I did.......But as far as your statement that they are lying about our "problems" I think is totally unfounded and without evidence.
Every other country is quick to judge the US and evferytime we have a rough spot you all say-"Oh,thats it,you are going downhill and wont recover!"That is to be expected-jealousy and anger towards the planets soul superpower.Why dont you all worry about your OWN country.




posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Easy,

You still beleive things are peachy!

If you were in the know as to the real extent of this war on your economy, bush wouldnt be tellin you things like

'' the economy is sound ''

because its clearly not.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


???


Are you serious?We let Russia take Moscow........if not for us Britain would have fallen,than Germany would have easily defeated Russia.Not only did we win in that theater..but also in the Pacific (BY OURSELVES)

If you want to see America flex its might at a time when we really did fear for our security look no further than Hiroshima,Nagasaki.

Thats what having the "biggest stick on the playground"does.

If I sound American..its cause I AM.We have the history to back it up too.I bet your from France arnt you?



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


Whats he suppossed to say?"OH MY GOD,RUN!THE ECONOMY IS FAILING!!!"Lol.........he wouldnt be much of a leader if he did now would he.I dont support Bush,but that doesnt matter here really.


EDIT to add:I will continue this tomarrow,I gota go to bed,so dont think I am concieding to your beliefs either.


[edit on 4/17/2008 by jkrog08]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Ahmadinejad should be a Scientoligist. He has the same type of Ego and skewed view of reality.

While Iran is powerful, all because of Oil money, it has also got a Nuclear program aided by China (who stole from Russia and US).

The guy is a 'charming' nutcase, and should be dealt with seriously.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


Hold up, the pacific isnt nazi germany.
Britain defeated the airforce too.
The US let Moscow take Berlin true, but Berlin fought the nazis back from the gates of moscow all the way to the rhine.

The USA would not of stood up to Nazi Germany in a 1 to 1 fight.
If there were a thousand American men, against a thousand germans, the germans would of won. Russia, America and Britain all deserve thumbs up for the victory, but to say 1 country was the REASON is flawed.
America helped, but Russia did more, lost more and had more to lose.
I dont remmeber many russian bankers dealing with the germans either.

Nagasaki and hiroshima?

The war was over, Japan was considering surrender.
Also, the US generals told the president that a few more weeks of continued carpet bombing would all but end the war, Japan being so narrow and cities so cramped meant one carpet bombing run took out vast war abilities.

The USA was not backed into a corner, it was coming on top and wanted to flex its muscles in front of russia.

Thanks for the France comment! your what, 15? your the perfect age to back up your pro-american-war stance, 2 more years and you'll be on the front lines fighting those evil terrorists.

As for the economy,

Id expect bush to do, what yuor paying him to do.


1. Lead the country in the interests of the people.
2. Be honest to the people
3. Listen to the people
4. Take care of the people.

To my knowledge, he hasnt performed ONE of those simple steps.

Your economy is tanking, and he's not telling you because its his fault, and because him and his mates are making bucketloads.

Not supporting bush isnt enough, i see those types as appeasers.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Yes, everyone shivers in Irans wake, oh, the almighty Iran and there $3 billion dollar a year military expenditure...


Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 18-4-2008 by Gemwolf]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 


I place a bet Iraqs was much much much less but we're 4000 dead and still shivering.

Id give you an exact figure, but it seems the history of iraq has been re-written, and that figure isnt available.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by West Coast
 


I place a bet Iraqs was much much much less but we're 4000 dead and still shivering.

Id give you an exact figure, but it seems the history of iraq has been re-written, and that figure isnt available.


I believe Iraqs military expenditure prior to the invasion was 3 billion dollars.

How long did Iraqs conventional forces last? Iran would experience the same doom that saw the swift defeat of Iraq in GW1 and GW2.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by West Coast
 

But Iran has subs, cruise missiles, jets a navy etc etc
Iraq had AA guns, 70's russian tanks...

To say they both spend $3 billion cant be right...

Where'd ya find or remember that figure from?



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 10:58 PM
link   
The US economy was attacked on 9/11 causing almost one trillion$ in damages. The Code Red virus (from China) that hit US businesses two weeks before the 9/11 attack caused US businesses an estimated 800 million in downtime.

That's 1.8 trillion dollars.

How do you spur an economy? Unfortunately, the most effective method is war. Saddam was a perfect target having broke 20+ UN resolutions (the UN what a joke!). It also allowed the US to setup shop and get a strong foothold in the Middle East.

Now the Oil demand is higher than ever because of China's boooming economy. US businesses (private trucking and many others) are going out of business because of the increased fuel costs.

During the cold war, Russia's peple were starving because the Russian government was trying to keep up with the US (namely the Star Wars inititive). The US during this time shipped Russia tons of grain to feed their people. Russia never payed the US back and never will. We know that. Eventually Russia could not keep up (and found out later that Star Wars really didn't exist).

The US owes China some money, but these are hollow bonds. They'll never see it. They are getting billions by the trade imbalance anyhow. China has inflicted lots of economic damage to the US through several means

-- Code Red virus early 2001
-- Poisioning of Pet food (just recently)
-- Putting lead in toys (just recently)
-- Poisoning of Chicken and Fish (just recently)
-- War by proxy - funding Iran and Al Qaeda. Helping with Nuke programs
-- Attacking Pentagon computers (staging Pearl Harbor II) Information warfare
-- Staging over 3000 front companies in the US tied to the PLA (these companies transfer sensitive technologies back to China)
-- Replicating US products and selling them for cheaper (i.e. Dodge vehicles etc.)


So you see, much of this is damaging the economy. It is almost surprising how the US economy realy is.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


your comment condoning the use of nuclear weapons for any reason is appalling.

for implying that using nuclear weapons is something to be proud of and a sign of american strength is sickening.

For us to be the only country to use nuclear weapons on humans, then try to regulate who can have them is insane and hypocritical ... though honestly, no one should have them. If anything, the world should have sanctioned us until we had no more nuclear weapons ... and they would be justified by our own twisted political logic to pre-emptively invade us if we didn't. We dropped not one, but two nuclear weapons on civilian targets. Disgusting part of our history, and nothing to gloat about.

I love my country, but I am ashamed at some of its actions ... just as you can love a family member, but if they are a child molester, you are ashamed of them.


I have officially learned that at times, you must start using the ignore button. Hate is unacceptable, reveling in people being vaporized and radiated is unacceptable. Plus the other guy on here budski ignored. Once gone, the thread is much easier to read. Big difference between opposing opinions and thoughtless ignorant ramblings.



The U.S. is a great country, when we are not robbing citizens of their freedoms and minding our own business in the world. We are strong, but not invincible nor infallible.

Iran is strong, and easily defended from a troop surge. A war with them will be like nothing the war loving posters believe it will be. You think 4000 troops in 5 years is bad ... that all the technology will protect us. I would rather not risk you being wrong, thank you.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Agit8dChop
 


...the great depression?

It's a big part of our history. Look it up.

*Edited to add:

And c'mon man. WWII was a team effort, and would have probably been lost of the US didn't join that team.

I understand what you are saying about Russia, but at the same time, you clearly have a jaded view of what the US can do and has done.

[edit on 17-4-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
reply to post by West Coast
 

But Iran has subs, cruise missiles, jets a navy etc etc
Iraq had AA guns, 70's russian tanks...


Which wouldnt put much of a fight up against a vastly superior force, such is the case with Americas. I wont get into the technicality's as I am short of time.


To say they both spend $3 billion cant be right...

Where'd ya find or remember that figure from?


It was around that, it could have possibly been 2 billion dollars. Its all estimates, the highest estimates of total US military related expendtures currently exceeds 600 billion dollars.

In contrast to Irans budget, that is more money than Irans entire GDP. THe US military expenditure for research and development alone is 70.3 billion dollars, which doesnt take into account black budget spending.

If Iran was stupid enough to get into a conflict with the US, conventionally speaking, Iran wouldn't last a month against US forces in all honesty.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Russia had one front to fight on America fought in Africa, The Pacific, and in Europe there is no doubt that without Pearl Harbor and US getting in the war all of europe would be speaking German right now that is just a fact. With that being said I need to chime in on this...

who care what Ahmad...says he is a putz and the only reason stuff like this is hitting the airwaves is for propaganda to start a war with these people. They have not attacked us and I really hope we dont start dropping bombs..

As far as problems if the bombs fly yes these guys are more formidable than Iraq but not to terribly much.. keep in mind Iraq and Iran fought for like 10 years and got no where. We went into iraq in 90 and won in a month and with ease...and same with 2003 ....politically we are getting our asses handed to us..but you know something if Iran had the military budget we had Im sure they would have a huge military too but America these days instead of putting all our money back in the country it is all going to the military...



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Current update on Iran and why the democrats will cut and run will mean defeat for the US:

Night Watch: rfn=BU MUHAMMAD- As London-Washington and elements of the Iraq Army concentrate on the increased fighting in Baghdad/Sadr City, Basra and the south against Shia militia units, Teheran is now directing Sunni al-Qaeda to increase its suicide attacks in the north. Al Jazeera/AFP report at least sixty people have been killed by a suicide bomber in the village of Bu Muhammad, near Tuz Khurmatu, Diyala province, 120 miles north of Baghdad. The attack targeted the funeral of two leaders of the Awakening Council, local groups working with Washington against al-Qaeda. It is the desperate hope in Washington these local councils can fill the vacuum of destruction the London-Washington are leaving in their wake. Owen Fay, Al Jazeera’s correspondent observed, “Diyala is top of the list of provinces where al-Qaeda in Iraq has operated in the past, and where it seems that it may be returning right now. And it more or less shows that they maintain that ability to strike whenever and wherever they like.” It is quite possible Teheran may have action resume near Syria’s border which would stretch the new Iraq Army beyond its limit.

rfn=Bandar Abbas - That is no exaggeration as I have often written Teheran is having the lost alliance of London-Washington chase the Jihad all over Iraq. At the same time there is still fighting in Sadr City and it could erupt again at any moment in the south around Basra as Iran has this new wave of fighting gradually erode the new Iraq Army. The linked Haaretz article provides an excellent, rare look into the branch of Iran’s military responsible for training and equipping Islamic units in West Asia (Middle East) and beyond, the Revolutionary Guards al-Quds Brigades and its leader Brigadier General Qassem Suleimani. What is especially revealing, and it shows just how much in the dark governments in the West are, Brigadier General Suleimani is now being portrayed by analysts in the West as a peacemaker, since he temporarily ended the fighting between the Iraq Army and the Mahdi Army, fighting which of course has since resumed. He and Iran are able to do so since they have excellent contacts with both, trapping the UK/US.

Suleimani was born in Qom, Iran’s Shia religious center, in March 1957 and has spent his entire professional career as a member of the Revolutionary Guards and has headed its al-Quds Brigades for the past five years. The Guards were established in 1979 by the Ayatollah Khomeini to enforce the principles of the Islamic revolution he headed and to be a buffer between him and Iran’s Army whose loyalty was doubtful until Washington had Iraq invade Iran in 1980 due to the hostage crisis at the U. S. Embassy in Teheran. Khomeini called the invasion a “gift from Allah” because instead of collasping the invasion re-united Iran and solidified the loyalty of Iran’s armed forces to the new Khomeini government, a new unity of Iranian nationalism coupled with Islamic fundamentalism, which has been repeated in every Islamic country in the region. The al-Quds Bridgades were formed in the early 1980s and during the eight year war with Iraq (1980-88) they specialized in operations behind enemy lines and began to establish their regional network including Hezbollah which Iran formed in 1982 during Lebanon’s civil war from 1975-90.



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
reply to post by ufoorbhunter
 


I remember the Iraqi Minister of Disinformation. He was so insistant, that we were nowhere near Bagdad at one of his "briefings" and you could hear our tanks just a few streets over. It's kind of sad though if ya really think about it - because he was only trying to rally his people.

I remember watching the beginning of the Iraqi war, live footage on CNN and we're rolling tanks straight up through the center of their country and suddenly a small, pink, pickup truck with a mounted machine gun in the bed of it comes out of nowhere to take on the forces that be. I laughed and then I felt sorry for them.

biggiesmalls - Iraq was no match for us and neither is Iran. The only reason you are not seeing what our military is really capable of doing is because of the value, that people like you and I, tend to put on others lives. There are too many innocents to use "shock and awe" on a constant basis, but we are very capable of doing so. You know that and I know that.

The Iranian President's comments sound delusional. There are a lot of powerful nations on the earth today, and I would strongly suggest he get a ticket and head to the back of the line. A better lesson for him would be to wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which gets filled first.









[edit on 17-4-2008 by Myrtales Instinct]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonhb
Current update on Iran and why the democrats will cut and run will mean defeat for the US:


You lost me at "cut and run".

"Thanks for choosing last months buzz word"
-Media Conglomerate



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:36 PM
link   
To sit there and type your ignorance and say that Iran is the most powerful nation just because of this and that is absurd!! You look back in history and millions would have said that Hitler and the German army was well equipped and the most powerful but until the fight is on, how can anyone say who is the best


I've watched to many fights to bet on the little guy or the big one. It's all about strategy, heart and the will to know you can defeat your enemy no matter what the odds may be. I believe America has weapons that no civilians know about and could never know about because you have people saying crap like this. If American civilians knew about all the weapons we really had then I could pretty much guarantee that the enemy would know about them too. I thank my lucky stars for some top secret projects.


[edit on 4/17/2008 by Solarskye]



posted on Apr, 17 2008 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
condoning the use of nuclear weapons for any reason is appalling.


It arguably put an end to WW2.



For us to be the only country to use nuclear weapons on humans, then try to regulate who can have them is insane and hypocritical ...


The US used weapons to help end a conflict that involved the world. The world is much more stable today then it was some odd 60 years ago, there for, it is not comparable, nor is it hypocritical.


though honestly, no one should have them. If anything, the world should have sanctioned us until we had no more nuclear weapons ...


Whilst Russia went on making theirs? You are aware that Russia does have more nuclear stockpiles then the US currently does? You also are aware of the fact that Russia continuously updates their nuclear warheads in a more rapid succession then the US does?


and they would be justified by our own twisted political logic to pre-emptively invade us if we didn't. We dropped not one, but two nuclear weapons on civilian targets. Disgusting part of our history, and nothing to gloat about.


On manufacturing sectors which propped up the imperial Japanese.

I agree, what a horrible time in our history. However, America was not responsible for the start of WW2 which resulted in the bomb being dropped in the first place.





The U.S. is a great country, when we are not robbing citizens of their freedoms and minding our own business in the world.


Robbing citizens of their freedoms? It seems you have the US confused with the USSR.
Please explain how Iraqis, as well as afghanis are "less free" after toppling two inhumane governments? Also, explain how Saddams Iraq was a freer iraq.



Iran is strong, and easily defended from a troop surge. A war with them will be like nothing the war loving posters believe it will be.


I never said I loved war, I just happen to know the facts.



You think 4000 troops in 5 years is bad ...


Actually I dont, I think thats quite good considering the US is fighting the most difficult type of warfare.


that all the technology will protect us. I would rather not risk you being wrong, thank you.

Again, Iran more then likely would not be a conflict, but more of a war. Aerial, as well as Naval bombardments would take place, you would not necessarily need troops on the ground to crush Irans economic, and military infrastructure.


[edit on 17-4-2008 by West Coast]



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join