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.

 

Hostile" Iran Sparks U.S. Attack Plan

page: 2
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   
And on May 14, it's the 60th year anniversary of Israel... it could be the date of the false-flag or the attack on Iran.

A way to ``reaafirm to the arab world and history that the jews have the right to live in peace and will never have another holocaust`` or some BS propaganda line like that... Just watch.

Also, the info inside Bilderberg was a nuclear attack inside Israel as a false-flag in the near future, which was in march 08. Also, the Pentagon was attacked on 911 on it's 60th anniversary.

So I think it may be the date.

[edit on 30-4-2008 by Vitchilo]

MAY 14.

[edit on 30-4-2008 by Vitchilo]

[edit on 30-4-2008 by Vitchilo]




posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 01:49 AM
link   
As much as this sucks, it is the truth. However, they've been doubling the battle groups sending two carriers at a time since last year.. how do I know? My husband is there now and was there last year.. and guess what? They are now not coming back as planned, the only thing he was allowed to tell me was because of 'how china was acting'. It really makes me nervous. The only talk I have heard about China has really been the issues with the Olympics, does anyone have any more details about this?



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ppskylight
 


Do you think that if Iran attacked Mexico, toppled their regime, installed a government friendly to Iran, built several bases along the Mexican / American border and repeatedly made threats to the US, that the United States wouldn't be supplying arms and trying to undermine the Iranians in Mexico?

Sarcastic or not, I think Plucky makes a good point. If we really cared about the welfare of the troops, the last thing we would want is to start a war with Iran. I can't understand how people can think that it would somehow make the region safer for our troops if we attack Iran. That won't make it safer for anyone.

We shouldn't be in Iraq in the first place and the last thing that we need is another war, especially if we are doing it in the name of the safety of our troops.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by galatea
 

More details on how China is acting?

This thread is a nice source of information:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

As to what the heck so many US war ships are doing in the gulf...

They are certainly not there to watch China (however good excuse that may be nowdays). You don't keep your troops in deployment for such a long time without intending to use them. The sheer magnitude of logistic problems (equipping the troops with all the stuff they need every day) can give even the best military a big headache. Not to mention the psychological fatigue, and the drastic lowering of morale of the troops.

Whoever planned the Iraq invasion should be jailed for incompetence, and whoever plans this one (good guesses are Pakistan or Iran) should be hanged for treason. This is from the strictly military point of view, of course.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 04:53 AM
link   
I wish that someone pulls the plug from the carriers and let them sink. Or that they collide and sink nevertheless. Iran has and never will be a threat in the region. There's only one threat around that region, and it is nuclear-armed Israel.



No offense,



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppskylight

Your comparison is irrational, skewed, uninformed, and in my opinion a clear indicator of an anti American/anti Bush bias.


Not this old chestnut again.

Anti bush doesn't mean anti-american - anti-bush means anti-war, for the most part.

For some reason the guy just can't get enough of it - but that's OK, it's not HIS ass on the line, just the thousands of loyal american troops.

Iran is not a threat to the stability of the area, bush is along with with his cronies and israel who apparently can do no wrong, no matter what they do.

If you want to fall for that "axis of evil" garbage, then that's up to you - but tell me where the WMD's were in iraq, and show proven links to al qaeda, which isn't even an organisation, but a database (set up by?) showing a loosely affiliated (maybe) group of supposed terrorists.

If you can prove that iraq/saddam had wmd's in good working order, ready to be fired at israel or show the indisputable ties that saddams regime had to al qaeda then I MIGHT being to believe the current nonsense regarding iran.

Until then, I won't believe a word that comes out of shrubs mouth, or that of his mouthpiece, the MSM.

He's the boy who cried wolf, and the villagers are more than a little sick of it.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


Well said budski, this is my view too

I feel sorry for the troops serving the US out of loyalty to their nation only to be used a disposable politcial tools. But I guess thats what armies always end up being in modern times.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by ppskylight
 


I spent 20 years in, and retired FROM the Military. Please don't go on to preach to these people about how combatants should decry their being pummeled during a time of war.

It shows your ignorance to war dynamics. Caring about our servicemen/servicewomen is not tantamount to being a proponent for war.

If a country as a WHOLE is not engaging in war with another (the Republic Guard in Iran being an entitty out of arms reach of the Iranian Government notwithstanding), then clearly they can not be held accountable but with one exception; an effort to curb the activities of those splinter factions.

Let us not deride other members on here for stating their opinions NOR for not choosing to ascribe to your apparent need to call for war as a sign of patriotism.

AB1

[edit on 30-4-2008 by alphabetaone]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hakii
Sigh, haven't we been moving several ship over that way? i heard a number like 14-17 flying around in one of the thread, Either way this cant be a good sign, I have a feeling the media is preparing the masses for a war with Iran, It was subtle at first, but little by little they keep bringing Iran into media, and how iran is posing a threat to the war in Iraq, and talks about a preemptive strike could be knocking on our door? Not sure what going on anymore, seems like so much stuff is on the table at once


You're exactly right. War with Iran is looming. The second it happens, the US loses whatever credibility, respect and alliances it has in the middle east.

We've already built our 104 acre command central in Iraq. It's only a matter of time before Bush/Cheney decide that going after Iran is the best way to destroy the rest of our Constitution, and keep us embroiled in a never ending, continually escalating sham of a war.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 08:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppskylight

Your comparison is irrational, skewed, uninformed, and in my opinion a clear indicator of an anti American/anti Bush bias.
The problem is it's not just guns, Iraq has plenty of guns. It's specialized ammunition and very powerful explosives (EFP's) and Mortars. Not to mention involvement of Revolutionary Gaurd soldiers/commanders with Shi'ite militias. There are special groups from Iran that train the Iraqis to use mortars effectively and squad level tactics. They also provide the militias with communications equipment. These aren't gun runners, they're government agents trying to expand Iranian influence, and destablize Iraq.


So, in a word, pretty much what the US has been doing within Iran since the early 1950's, when we had the CIA overthrow their only real, democratically elected government, and install the Shah (to get their oil)?

Oh, the hypocrisy...



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:22 AM
link   
How about the nuclear material that is being stopped from bieng shipped to Iran from Russia? Is part of that reason because Russia is paid but there is something in the works that if the delivery was made would onluy complicate the mission plan and possibly contaminate more than if not delivered.

How about the fact that this is not 'gun running' but another country in a Proxy war with the US. Kind of like how we supplied the mujahdeen in Afghanistan when they fought the Russians. That caused alot of issues back then but it is the same thing.

China has its own issues trying to feed its people and bring in the Olmpics this year so they are fine.

I think this was all talked over this most recent trip that Bush took to talk to Putin.

Irans days are numbered if they don't stop the way hey are progressing. It is simple. Stop supplying weapons and developing nuclear weapons.

Also, thinking that IRan is not a threat in the region is pure ignorance. Do a little research into regional conflicts for hte past 40 years.

[edit on 30-4-2008 by esdad71]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
If any of you are wondering what is going on, this might be a clue:

www.iht.com...


ran, OPEC's second-largest producer, has completely stopped conducting oil transactions in U.S. dollars, a top Oil Ministry official said Wednesday, a concerted attempt to reduce reliance on Washington at a time of tension over Tehran's nuclear program and suspected involvement in Iraq.


Iran has dramatically reduced dependence on the dollar over the past year in the face of increasing U.S. pressure on its financial system and the fall in the value of the American currency.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by pluckynoonez
 



I am girl, not a "dude". And let me tell you about middle school, most teen and preteens know Bushy and Cheney are evil as hades.


Does your Daddy know you have that avatar?



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


[edit on 30-4-2008 by elevatedone]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by SystemiK
 



I'm a little tense about it as well, but remember how loud they had cranked up the rhetoric leading up to the Iraq invasion?


We won't see the same level of rhetoric this time around. The rhetoric will be in the form of a mushroom cloud this time. Shock and awe for us to swallow, so Bush can cry "you see, I told you so."



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by promomag
 



And this is what it all really comes down to. Iran is indeed a threat, but not in the way that most people think. By trading in Euros instead of dollars, Iran will begin flooding the world with cheap oil, that we won't get a drop of, and thereby crash the dollar. It's already happening. War with Iran is imminent.

If you doubt what I say, or would like a better understanding of it, you must watch the video that is the subject of this thread...

www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   
I'm not sure if this attack will happen or not, but if you want to hit this country hard and fast without prolonged fighting, it would take an immense amount of strategic planning. If one thing goes wrong, all heck can break loose...

So, if it does happen, they'll take plenty of time...

Everyone looks at Iraq as a failure, but was it? Maybe it was supposed to be this way to create a larger war in the Middle East...



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
reply to post by JediK
 



Everyone looks at Iraq as a failure, but was it? Maybe it was supposed to be this way to create a larger war in the Middle East...


Oh, I have always said that. It was never about freedom, democracy, or nation building. It was about setting up strategic operating bases. Do you really think we care if those people kill eachother?

If we did care about righteousness, we would have helped when Saddam's domestic enemies had their uprising. In fact, we promised we would, and left them hanging, literally. Many of the terrible atrocities we hear about Saddam commiting, were against rebels who tried to topple his regime. The US promised the rebels everything from political to combat air support. And we stood by and did nothing while Saddam slaughtered them.

EDIT to add: Then there is also the time when James Baker told Saddam to go ahead and repatriate Kuwait, that it was of no concern to the US, and now we can see how that turned out too.



[edit on 4/30/0808 by jackinthebox]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by JediK
I'm not sure if this attack will happen or not, but if you want to hit this country hard and fast without prolonged fighting, it would take an immense amount of strategic planning. If one thing goes wrong, all heck can break loose...

So, if it does happen, they'll take plenty of time...

Everyone looks at Iraq as a failure, but was it? Maybe it was supposed to be this way to create a larger war in the Middle East...


I'm pretty sure that the words bush and immense amount of strategic planning can't be put into the same sentence without violating all the laws of common sense.

Bush is a cowboy wannabe - he'll go in there half-assed and leave the next president to clean up the mess.

And what a mess it'll turn out to be.



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unforgiven
Hasn't there been talk of war with Iran ever since America kicked butt in Iraq? I have a hard time believing there will ever be war there

[edit on 4/29/2008 by Unforgiven]


Murdering innocent children and women, destroying a country and a people, I wouldn't call that kicking butt [snip]



Mod Edit - removed insult.


Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 30-4-2008 by elevatedone]



posted on Apr, 30 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by rbaker20
 


not a surprise really, iran has one of the largest reserves of crude oil in the world, alot of it is untapped and this is the main reason for invasion



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join