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.

 

U.S. sees need for "tangible action" on Iran: Israel

page: 9
2
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 20 2008 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I'm sorry but you are hateful and ignorant, for the simple reason you want to attack Iran killing god knows how many innocent civilians without justification and you don't have one shred of evidence to back up any of your claims.




posted on May, 20 2008 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by DimensionalDetective
www.informationliberation.com...

It's Iraq, round 2, all over again...And the cycle keeps repeating and repeating and repeating....

Sorry, I am not buying what you are selling.
The cycle appears to keep repeating because there will always be lunatic dictators who are hell bent on destruction and not because of some elite conspiracy.

There will always be lunatic dictators that bring their nations to war by propagating fear, making false statements, and exagerating threats. This is the era of the anti-war war. If you are truely concerned with your security i'd be worried about the southern border that lets any number of South american threats enter freely. It was an american i recall arrested with a vial of ricin. There are four kinds of people in the world, those that like you for the wrong reasons, those that like you for the right reasons, those that dislike you for the wrong reasons, and those that dislike you for the right reasons. Corcern yourself with the latter. Iran is the least of the threats to the US. Id be more worried about the failures both intentional and unintentional in the intelligence communities. The looming food crisis will only magnify logarithmicly in years to come. Regardless of other risk factors. "K" A MATHEMATICAL SYMBOL FOR THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF THE EARTH WILL SEAL OUR FATE. HENCE A HUGE NEED TO REDUCE POPULATION. THE MEANS BY WHICH THIS IS DONE WILL BE DECIDED BY THOSE WE HAVE ENTRUSTED TO GOVERN US. SCAREY !!!



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
You mean besides the men, money and arms they are supplying in Iraq right? And I guess you also mean besides the border fights during the Iraq/Iran war right?



Have you found any news articles yet dated after May 8th, 2008 that supports this?

I guess you still haven't found any to refute that all those weapons weren't Iranian! Or did I miss your post?

The Bush Administration's Bogus Claims About Iran's Weapons Smuggling


Then the Bush administration's campaign on Iranian arms encountered another serious problem.

****SKIP****


But when U.S. munitions experts went to Karbala to see the alleged cache of Iranian weapons, they found nothing that they could credibly link to Iran.

The U.S. command had to inform reporters that the event had been cancelled, explaining that it had all been a "misunderstanding". In his press briefing May 7, Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner gave some details of the captured weapons in Karbala but refrained from charging any Iranian role.

The cancellation of the planned display was a significant story, in light of the well-known intention of the U.S. command to convict Iran on the arms smuggling charge. Nevertheless, it went completely unreported in the world's news media.



US plot to nail Iran backfires

Still waiting for those news articles that will show that this isn't true!

Oh, and here's a link on what US intelligence agencies have concluded about Iran's nuclear weapons program back in December!

U.S. Says Iran Ended Atomic Arms Work


Published: December 3, 2007

WASHINGTON, Dec. 3 — A new assessment by American intelligence agencies concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and that the program remains frozen, contradicting judgment two years ago that Tehran was working relentlessly toward building a nuclear bomb.



Thought you might have missed that one! Or are just ignoring it.

[edit on 5/21/2008 by Keyhole]



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by flice
This thread is a waste of time...

Good, then this should be your last post right?


When you don't even wanna counter our proof and links with your own proof instead of just writing "that's not true", why even bother continuing this thread?

Do you mean like your post when you only wrote "FACT" without any links?
Oh, because you THINK you are correct somehow the rules don't apply to you. Got it....



posted on May, 20 2008 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
I'm sorry but you are hateful and ignorant, for the simple reason you want to attack Iran killing god knows how many innocent civilians without justification

Now you are showing your true colors. Hateful and ignorant because I don't believe what you think. Got it.

Without justification?
Please......



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
Have you found any news articles yet dated after May 8th, 2008 that still support this?

What is it with you and the May 8th date?
Look, for starters your link only references the article from a persons blog. In fact, all the stink seems to be because of this one article from an idiots blog. Sorry, but I don't trust some dudes blog.
Secondly, why would you believe this one persons blog over the numerous of other official stories claiming the opposite?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole
Oh, and here's a link on what US intelligence agencies have concluded about Iran's nuclear weapons program back in December!

First of all, the NIE report in question did say that Iran prior to 2003 did indeed have a nuclear weapons program. So if you are going to believe that it was halted, then you must also believe that they did actually have a nuclear weapons program. So everyone saying that Iran only wanted nuclear power plants instead of nuclear weapons is totally bogus right?

Also, before this latest NIE report the same group said they were developing nuclear weapons. And now after the report, they are changing their tune again. Basically, the NIE and those who wrote it don't know what they are talking about and cannot be trusted.

Reshaping the NIE report

If Iran is not currently attempting to build nuclear weapons (and we know they did in the past) then why did the UN just slap Iran with a third round of sanctions.

3rd Round of Sanctions



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 03:53 AM
link   

WhatTheory
Now you are showing your true colors. Hateful and ignorant because I don't believe what you think. Got it.
Without justification? Please......


MUUAAHHHHH!!! Oh yeah, I've so full of hatred.
I guess that's why I'm here wasting my time trying to explain to why there's no justification in killing innocent Iranians. It appears, you are not interested in the truth. Plenty of members, including myself have debunked everything you have said. I back up my claims with genuine news sources and articles & yet the only thing you offer as proof, is your own ignorance or propaganda. You have more or less, completely ignored everything that keyhole has posted and I'm sorry but any source that comes from the Bush admin or those nutty Neocons has absolutely no credibility whatsoever, unless of course you happen to be naive and gullible. You claim that the Iranian president is a loose cannon and yet offer no evidence of this. He may have a big mouth, but I've yet to see any evidence that makes him more dangerous than either Bush or Cheney.



A plan to show some alleged Iranian-supplied explosives to journalists last week in Karbala and then destroy them was canceled after the United States realized none of them was from Iran. A U.S. military spokesman attributed the confusion to a misunderstanding that emerged after an Iraqi Army general in Karbala erroneously reported the items were of Iranian origin. When U.S. explosives experts went to investigate, they discovered they were not Iranian after all.


www.cbsnews.com...

latimesblogs.latimes.com...






[edit on 21-5-2008 by kindred]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 06:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by pepsi78
WhatTheory Russia and China are shiping weapons in IRAN , why don't you invade Russia and China?

What weapons?
And who said anything about invading Iran?

Then allrighty, let me rephrase, Russia has shiped missle tehnology to Iran, why don't you do some air strikes on Russia? Since Russia is building nuclear reactors for Iran you should attack Russia.Is it too much of a deal to drop a few bombs over Russia? Or does your goverment only pick on little guys like a coward bully?





[edit on 21-5-2008 by pepsi78]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by Keyhole
Have you found any news articles yet dated after May 8th, 2008 that still support this?

What is it with you and the May 8th date?
Look, for starters your link only references the article from a persons blog. In fact, all the stink seems to be because of this one article from an idiots blog. Sorry, but I don't trust some dudes blog.
Secondly, why would you believe this one persons blog over the numerous of other official stories claiming the opposite?


Please read my post stating that this isn't just "some dudes" blog. Tina Susman is a writer for the LA times. The article is much more recent than the ones you have posted.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by b4christ15
Please read my post stating that this isn't just "some dudes" blog. Tina Susman is a writer for the LA times. The article is much more recent than the ones you have posted.

Sorry, but it is still just some dudes blog.
All of you have put all your hopes in one story from a dudes blog instead of all the numerous other official statements to the contrary.
I need more than one individuals blog before making a logical and sensible decision regarding this issue. Some of you should do the same instead of jumping the gun on a little crumb from one dubious source.


[edit on 21-5-2008 by WhatTheory]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
Then allrighty, let me rephrase, Russia has shiped missle tehnology to Iran

Link?


Since Russia is building nuclear reactors for Iran you should attack Russia.

Why?
Nuclear power plants are for producing electrical power right?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
MUUAAHHHHH!!! Oh yeah, I've so full of hatred.

Good, I'm glad we agree.

And regarding your links. Sorry, but I am not taking the word of some dudes blog. All of you have put all your hopes in one story from a dudes blog instead of all the numerous other official statements to the contrary.
I need more than one individuals blog before making a logical and sensible decision regarding this issue. Some of you should do the same instead of jumping the gun on a little crumb from one dubious source.

[edit on 21-5-2008 by WhatTheory]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Reality check....I very much doubt the Bush admin is going to hold a press conference anytime soon, announcing it blatantly lied about Iranian weapons being supplied to insurgents in Iraq.


[edit on 21-5-2008 by kindred]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
Reality check....I very much doubt the Bush admin is going to hold a press conference anytime soon, announcing it blatantly lied about Iranian weapons being supplied to insurgents in Iraq.

So because they would not do this IF it were true means to you that it is true and would believe some obscure article on someone's blog.
Now that is funny because you are basically saying it's true with no proof.


[edit on 21-5-2008 by WhatTheory]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by kindred
Reality check....I very much doubt the Bush admin is going to hold a press conference anytime soon, announcing it blatantly lied about Iranian weapons being supplied to insurgents in Iraq.

So because they would not do this IF it were true means to you that it is true and would believe some obscure article on someone's blog.
Now that is funny because you are basically saying it's true with no proof.


[edit on 21-5-2008 by WhatTheory]


I think what the poster was saying is that one should judge events and people by the fruits or results.

A couple maxims ...follow the money...who benefits. It requires thought and effort it will not be spoon fed to you by the MSM.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 03:34 PM
link   
Mybigunit.

Look at the persona you are giving to the internet world and ask your self why anybody gives a toss? You are advertising your prejudice so strongly that I believe arguing or debating with you is pointless.

Grow up.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Sorry WhatTheory, I'm not saying that at all. (You should be on Bush's propaganda team with the way you try to spin things).
Your the one who completely ignores the evidence and would probably only believe it, if it came from the Bush admin, who like I said don't have any credibility whatsoever....



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   


Why?
Nuclear power plants are for producing electrical power right?

Then why attack iran, it means they are building power plants, right?
Uranium enrichment is also used for power plants, right? So why are you so unhappy?



[edit on 21-5-2008 by pepsi78]



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by kindred
Sorry WhatTheory, I'm not saying that at all. (You should be on Bush's propaganda team with the way you try to spin things).
Your the one who completely ignores the evidence and would probably only believe it, if it came from the Bush admin, who like I said don't have any credibility whatsoever....

Look, I am in no way a Bush lover. I disagree with Bush on most things but regardless the issue, I need to have some credible evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join