Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

White House denies Iran attack report

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   

White House denies Iran attack report


www.jpost.com

"All options are on the table," he said, but, "Of course you want to try to solve this problem diplomatically."

Asked whether the Iranians would be deterred from their nuclear drive by the time he left office, Bush told the Post: "What definitely will be done [before I leave office will be the establishment of] a structure on how to deal with this, to try to resolve this diplomatically. In other words sanctions, pressures, financial pressures. You know, a history of pressure that will serve as a framework to make sure other countries are involved."
(visit the link for the full news article)


Mod Edit - Headline: Please use the original story headline from your source.

[edit on 5/21/2008 by JacKatMtn]




posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   
I actually got it from this Digg...

digg.com...

seems really interesting, he only has basically a little bit more than half a year to attack iran...will he do it?

www.jpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:39 AM
link   
WARWARWAR!! Everything war. When this going to end. This bush will never shut up. Just sit down at ur office and zip ur big mouth and continue do ur administrative work



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Bush has to do it, because if Obama gets in (which he won't), he won't do it.

It has to be done.

Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons = Out of Control

Solution: Bomb back to Stone Age



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   
It may apply to this, it may not. I have a friend who is an active reservist. He says he was told to be ready to deploy to an undisclosed location by the end of the year. His unit has not seen ANY action in Afghanistan or Iraq yet. Many of his fellow reservists believe they are going to Iran or Syria for a new offensive.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Wait... the first sentence of the article says, and I quote, "The White House on Tuesday flatly denied an Army Radio report that claimed US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term." In fact, the article's title from the Jerusalem Post is, in fact, "White House denies Iran attack report" Why did you take creative license with the title of the article? It was a worthy breaking news item using the original title, but now you've turned it into an op-ed piece by yourself via attempting to taint the reader's view before (s)he even clicks on the article link. Sheesh!

Furthermore, how in the blue hell do sanctions, financial, and political pressures equal an attack on Iran? If that's the case then the UN is the most warmongering entity on planet Earth because all those fools do is apply sanction and rebuke after sanction and rebuke. As for the "nothing is off the table" quote, would you prefer we start a great experiment to see how well our international relations against our enemies go if we preface our interactions with "but don't worry, we have no intention of utilizing any military force against you, regardless of your response to our requests and demands?" Here's a hint for you, it wouldn't go well. My God, does anybody ever actually stop and use their brain before they criticize every single thing George Walker Bush says and does? Yeah, he's screwed some stuff up... just like every president before him did and just like every one that will follow will. Him taking an openly hardline against Iran and not simply saying "Oh well, I'll just step away from this and let the next guy deal with it" isn't amongst the stuff he's screwed up.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 02:20 AM
link   
The bigger question is: If he does, how will the American populace react? The war in Iraq is the most unpopular war of the current age...I seriously doubt that an offensive in Iran will go over smoothly - even if they do find nukes considering the previous lies we've been force fed. And it also reminds me, the USA has been the only country to ever use Nuclear/Atomic force on its enemies.
Makes me wonder if we'd truly risk doing it again.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetxnet
Bush has to do it, because if Obama gets in (which he won't), he won't do it.

It has to be done.

Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons = Out of Control

Solution: Bomb back to Stone Age


What does Iran have to gain from using nuclear weapons against anyone? They have nothing to gain and everything to lose, so why would they attack another nation?



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetxnet
Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons = Out of Control

Solution: Bomb back to Stone Age


Meddling Foreign Policy + World Police = Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons

Solution: Stop meddling in other country's politics attempting to control their policies and their people, placing sanctions which kill hundreds of thousands of people and invading their lands to steal their resources.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by NovusOrdoMundi
 



Stop meddling in other country's politics attempting to control their policies and their people, placing sanctions which kill hundreds of thousands of people and invading their lands to steal their resources.


Bush43 is at last a LAME DUCK president. Did you notice when speaking with PM Olmert you could hear the hammers in the background adding more settlements? Did you notice that King Abdul, Bush43's OLD friend, said NO to Bush43 when he supposedly asked for Saudi to raise production of oil? Hey, let's face it, the world has had enough of Bush43 to last TWO lifetimes.

War in Iran? Only the stupid Bush43 and his behind the scenes manipulator VP Cheney wuuld entertain such lunacy. Our Armed Forces are busted. It will take 3-4 years of concentrated effort to restore the men, women and equipment used up by the Triple Threat to the World Bush43, VP Cheney and Herr Oberfuhrer Rumsfeld. We couldn't even bomb Kennebunkport but that is not a bad idea! Attack Iran? Not in this century.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetxnet
Bush has to do it, because if Obama gets in (which he won't), he won't do it.

It has to be done.

Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons = Out of Control

Solution: Bomb back to Stone Age


Hmm.

North Korea:

Radical, Aggressive Communist Dictatorship + Nuclear Weapons = ????

Why haven't we bombed North Korea?

Oh yeah. They don't have oil resources to exploit. You forgot that in your equation.

I'll fix it for you:

Radical Islam + Nuclear Weapons, carry the 1 (Oil) = our next Number One Enemy.

I'm continually amazed how many cowards are so afraid of "terrorism" they're willing to watch the political, economic, and social fabric of this once-proud nation put through a tree shredder for a false sense of security through endless war and suspension of Constitutional freedom.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Policing the world is not our Governments business especially at the cost of the American People.

For those of you that think we "have" to bomb Iran...are you really ready for our country to die a convulsive death? These endless wars are doing nothing but draining the economy while raising the price of every thing and making the people who start this crap rich.

Give me a break!!



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Wait... the first sentence of the article says, and I quote, "The White House on Tuesday flatly denied an Army Radio report that claimed US President George W. Bush intends to attack Iran before the end of his term." In fact, the article's title from the Jerusalem Post is, in fact, "White House denies Iran attack report" Why did you take creative license with the title of the article? It was a worthy breaking news item using the original title, but now you've turned it into an op-ed piece by yourself via attempting to taint the reader's view before (s)he even clicks on the article link. Sheesh!

Furthermore, how in the blue hell do sanctions, financial, and political pressures equal an attack on Iran? If that's the case then the UN is the most warmongering entity on planet Earth because all those fools do is apply sanction and rebuke after sanction and rebuke. As for the "nothing is off the table" quote, would you prefer we start a great experiment to see how well our international relations against our enemies go if we preface our interactions with "but don't worry, we have no intention of utilizing any military force against you, regardless of your response to our requests and demands?" Here's a hint for you, it wouldn't go well. My God, does anybody ever actually stop and use their brain before they criticize every single thing George Walker Bush says and does? Yeah, he's screwed some stuff up... just like every president before him did and just like every one that will follow will. Him taking an openly hardline against Iran and not simply saying "Oh well, I'll just step away from this and let the next guy deal with it" isn't amongst the stuff he's screwed up.


i felt like adding a little spin to the article, actually it was what a person posted on digg so i thought i was correct.

And as for the sanctions, well just think of them as a mosquito flying around you and trying to suck your blood...eventually you are gonna retaliate and smack that mosquito to death!

the sanctions dont do anything except create more problems



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Yep. Sanctions never work.

Remember that, Sanctions Do Not Work.


When you place a sanction on a country, the only people you are harming are the people who are already being harmed by their government in the first place.
Is it going to take money out of the politicians pockets? No. They will always have whatever they want... if there's a scare, they will just tax the people more.

The US needs to finally get this through their thick heads... placing sanctions on a country hurts the people, does nothing to the government, and creates an entire nation of people who want to see the US suffer for what they did to them.



posted on May, 21 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Everyone who thinks this is about weapons are feeding on media/propaganda. There is only one reason Iran is a target. Money.

The United States have traded dollars backed by gold to dollars backed by oil. All countries who want to buy oil from OPEC HAVE to use US dollars to do so. Its in a pact between U.S. and OPEC.

Iran earlier announced that it will only sell oil in Euro's and is threatening to sell oil cheaper then OPEC. U.S. won't allow this.

How about everyone who thinks Iran needs to "be bombed back to the stone age" do some research. Henry Kissinger and Richard Nixon arranged a sweet little deal on a little known organization back in the early 70's named OPEC. Their deal was arranged on 2 main factors:

1 - Only sell oil in U.S. dollars.

2 - Use profits to buy U.S. national debt.

I don't get bothered often by what I read or hear to a point of sharing it with others, but this has got me really bothered and feeling helpless. Everyone needs to read this thread. But please don't take his work for it, so research and read it for yourself.

Here are some starting points. Educate yourselves and don't rely on the media to do it.

Source
source
source
source

Action needs to be taken so this cycle of control and war and power needs to be stopped.

Okay I am done.




Edit my mistakes (shesh)


[edit on 21/5/08 by Rhain]





new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join