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.

 

Ahmadinejad says Israel will soon disappear

page: 10
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah
Did you just skip everything I wrote? Here, I'll quote it again:

"The United States is committed to the security of Israel and to
maintaining the qualitative edge that is critical to Israel's security."

Again with stone throwing.

Look, you keep repeating yourself without showing your proof. You said that the doctrine specifically states quote, "The US is forced to protect Israel". I keep asking for you to highlight that but apparently you cannot.

So, really you are interpreting, incorrectly I might add, that statement from above to say, "The US is forced to protect Israel".

Do you know the difference between being forced to do something and deciding on your own to help your friends? We don't have to help Israel but we choose to do so. That is a big difference.

I hope the stones are not hurting you to bad because you have been slapped down with logic and reason. Instead of admitting that perhaps you embellished or interpreted the quote incorrectly, you decided to hold on to something that clearly is not there which allowed 'clarity' to slap you in the face.




posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by bruxfain
 


Hmm the United States hasnt invaded anyone Ok.
Nicaragua wasnt invaded by Regan?
When North Korea invaded the south we went in and instead of pushing them back to the 38th Parallel we invaded them and pushed them all the way to China bringing the Chinese into the war. WE were then pushed back to the 38th Parallel.
We invaded North Vietnam which once again we were pushed back and had to withdraw.
We invaded Iraq during the first gulf war even though our goal was to just liberate Kuwait we sent troops into Iraq.
We invaded them again in the second gulf war.
We invaded Serbia
We invaded Somolia

Yes all in the name of "policing the world" which I am totally against but you can spin the terminology any way you want but the fact is we have been VERY aggressive in the past 60 years.




The Iranians led a violent insurrection against the Shah and has been chasing his followers around the world for the last 28 years commiting all manner of atrocities. They've invaded Iraq. They have no legal support to operate in Iraq as they've been accused. They've invaded Afghanistan, also without legal support. You will notice that the UN body of law isn't sharia. They've invaded Lebanon and Palestine. Iran is currently operating unlawful military adventures in a number of countries within the region.


Who put in the Shah? Our CIA who overthrew a democratically elected gov government to put in our chump the Shah.

Iraq invaded Iran you have it backwards with OUR support not to mention.

Guy you need to check up on some history the persians are not generally aggressive.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   
reply to post by MaterSammichMan
 


I heard that Eliezer of Damacus is the father of Ishmael and not Abraham and that Hagar is a whore. This is the reason that Sarah kicked her and her son out of the house.

This very dark truth is about to be revealed and all Muslims have to fight for their survival because of it. This is the real reason for this war to cover up the truth.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by bruxfain]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
Question how many countries have the US invaded in the past 50 Years and how many have the Iranians invaded?

I am not sure how many the US has invaded but you say it like it's always a bad thing. Sometimes you must invade to protect yourself when threatened. Should the U.S. have invaded all the Japanese islands after they attacked pearl harbor? Of course we should have. Should we have invaded some countries to fight Hitler? Again, of course we should have and did with great success.

As far as Iran goes, let's see....All I can think of is the Iraq/Iran war when they crossed the border to attack Iraq and currently by supplying all the money, arms and men to kill U.S. troops and allied forces.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Originally posted by mybigunit
Question how many countries have the US invaded in the past 50 Years and how many have the Iranians invaded?

I am not sure how many the US has invaded but you say it like it's always a bad thing. Sometimes you must invade to protect yourself when threatened. Should the U.S. have invaded all the Japanese islands after they attacked pearl harbor? Of course we should have. Should we have invaded some countries to fight Hitler? Again, of course we should have and did with great success.

As far as Iran goes, let's see....All I can think of is the Iraq/Iran war when they crossed the border to attack Iraq and currently by supplying all the money, arms and men to kill U.S. troops and allied forces.


Japan attacked us and deserved everything they got. I dont mean to be mean but its a fact. Hitler declared war on us so they too deserved what they got. If Iran declared war on us we would have to put the smack down on them also. If you attack us on OUR land then you deserve a beatdown. But the fact is all of our invasions I listed above NONE of them attacked us we attacked them. You notice I didnt put we invaded Afganistan and that is because they attacked us that is a justified war. That should not be our policy the policy of policing the world and nation building. We need to put that money we save into the best weapons money can buy so if we DO get invaded we can defend against anyone even the whole damn world if they want a piece. Do you smell what Im cooking?

[edit on 3-6-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lethil
No i personally from what i have read do not think they are building weapons...but as for my post you so blatantly took out of context.In which i said *say im wrong* and they are building nuclear weapons,i hope they do and i hope America and Israel leave them alone to prosper and become a better nation.Although lets be honest...its not going to happen...China has too much interest in Iran,if America even dared bomb Iran you would be severely punished.And even before you had the chance you would also be punished by China...so its not going to happen EVEN if they are building nukes.


[edit on 3-6-2008 by Lethil]


China is only a regional power. While the largest, They can not project power like we can. India can keep them home as they have kept them in their borders before. China can not risk loosing its largest penny bank. We would set them on fire if they tried to hurt us in any way.

Many prophecies have been made and many of them say that the U.S. and Russia together will utterly burn China to the ground.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
Japan attacked us and deserved everything they got. I dont mean to be mean but its a fact.

If that is addressed to me then don't worry about it being mean because we agree that they deserved everything they got.


If you attack us on OUR land then you deserve a beatdown.

See, we agree again. Hmm, there is some hope for you.


All I was saying is that invasion is sometimes warrented.


That should not be our policy the policy of policing the world and nation building.

Again, I agree. I don't believe the U.S. should be the police of the world and I disagree with some of the invasions you posted like Serbia and Somalia.

Has the U.S. made some errors? Yes.
But there has been no other country on Earth which has done more good with all the power and weapons we have at our disposal and at the same time not abusing the power.

I think we split when it comes to pre-emptive invasions. If it's warrented, I believe it's the right thing to do especially when there is high probability that one of our enemies are about to strike or something similar like helping one of our enemies directly which are about to strike.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


Well our first instinct like I said SHOULD be to let the local region handle it themselves we can supply them with weapons and money and all the intelligence they want. Lets keep our troops out as long as we can kind of like WW1 and WW2. If the local area cant handle it and it looks to be getting out of hand once again like WW2 then we can do in. Lets talk Serbia we should of let the Europeans handle it..I know we are in NATO but they should of handled it. Think about it those same europeans that begged us to help there turned their back on us when we needed them didnt they? Vietnam again another case where we went in to help the French who begged for our help. Were they there for us? This is what Im talking about let the local areas handle this crap same with the middle east. We should not be buying ANY oil from the middle east and should not be getting into their crap. They should of handled Iraq once again where are our "allies" in the middle east when we need them?

No instead they are now depegging the oil from the dollar and doing business with Russia and China...yeah real great allies. We need to stay out of other peoples wars and keep that money here to ourselves.

BTW theres hope for YOU Ill get you over to the darkside just give me time. A true libertarian non intervention all about america and screw everyone else mentality. BUT you have to get out of this notion what the government tells you is always right because like you said above we have screwed up and I agree but the sad thing is instead of learning from the mistake we keep getting into the same crap pile.

But this is why we need to stay out of Iran let the region handle them it is their issue not ours. Let Saudi Arabia and Israel handle it. We can supply them with weapons and supplies and if Iran kicks their butt or things get out of hand maybe just maybe we can go help but that is a last resort. All that money we would be saving we can build more F-22s and subs and carriers.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ats1629
OK.. Just to put this into perspective.. What if the US said that about IRAN.. What if BUSH said IRAN will disappear very soon..


Then i would be worried as we actually know the US national security state people to both have the ability to carry out such threats. Since we know that Iran wont be able to make good on any of it's threats without Russian or Chinese aid ( presuming Iran actually made the threats) i am just not concerned.


The US always gets labeled as the bad person when it comes to these things.. but really.. did we lay out the American Flag in IRAQ and start telling the locals to move out..


Well ever since the US sponsored violence against Iraq started 1-2 million Iraqi's have died with another 4-5 million becoming internal or international refugees. Given a pre first gulf war population of around 25 million that's a significant amount...


we are not making Iraq the 51st state... No... We could have taken over the world after WW2.. but did we?


Since the US , and all other imperial powers, did very well at stealing states, territories and entire countries long ago there is now little reason , and certainly little public support, for occupying foreign nations when their wealth ( which has almost always been the motivation for conquest) can be extracted by other means.


Alot of Americans have died defending the world from the wacko people out there...


A great many Americans have died but very rarely in defense of worthy causes and most certainly not in comparison to the millions of people all around the world that have given their lives to fight the American invaders that came under the guise of 'liberators'.


But we have not declared any new land.. Any new soil.. which is what the wars long ago were all about..


So how did the US came to possess all those former Spanish, Dutch and or British territories in modern times?


The UN gave Israel thier land back.. Not the US...


They did not and did not even exist to make such decisions.


Imagine if the US just left the Middle East.. do you think they would all live in harmony and just get along?


I don't believe there harmony MUST be the result but at least the majority of the oppressed might have a fairer chance of gaining their freedom. I am all for protecting minorities but NOT at the cost of majorities.


No.. Russia would go rolling in there and take over...


Russia could have done that at any point since the mid or early 70's if they were willing to risk it all and have taken it without risking much since the early mid 80's. The fact that they have not invaded their neighbours in recent memory speaks to the fact that they have always been arming for self defense and not world domination as was the US aim.


Not that I am for a war with Iran.. but I am sick and tired of how people are apologizing for Ahmadinejad....


Who is apologising for him? What we are suggesting is that Iranians can't really choose other type of candidates as those tend to get assassinated or invite foreign nations to attack them.


The dude is wacko... You dont say stuff like that.. he wants a fight... too bad the people of Iran will be the ones that suffer...


That 'dude' does not seem wacko to me as a real 'wacko' doesn't do reasonable things such as seeking peace according to the best international traditions. Iran is not seeking war and Iranians will not support a aggressive war any more than most citizens of the world has. He is saying the things politicians do and if we read trough Bush and the gangs transcripts you will find worse given the fact that the US actually possesses the means to accomplish such goals.

Stellar



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:11 PM
link   
Oh please.....Iran cant even win a war against Iraq, let alone against Israel. Arent people forgetting that Israel beat three other countries at once a few years/ decades ago?

Besides everyone in Israel is in their military, its mandatory that they serve two years. Israel is one country that I wouldnt f*ck with.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


So how would you feel if a 'couple of punk-seeking missiles' were sent into the White House?

That's a pretty intolerant thing for you to to say.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by StellarX

The UN gave Israel thier land back.. Not the US...


They did not and did not even exist to make such decisions.



Wow steller, did you learn anything going to those Soviet schools back in the day?

www.mideastweb.org...


Partition - The United Nations Special Commission on Palestine (UNSCOP) recommended that Palestine be divided into an Arab state and a Jewish state. The commission called for Jerusalem to be put under international administration The UN General Assembly adopted this plan on Nov. 29, 1947 as UN Resolution (GA 181), owing to support of both the US and the Soviet Union, and in particular, the personal support of US President Harry S. Truman. Many factors contributed to Truman's decision to support partition, including domestic politics and intense Zionist lobbying, no doubt. Truman wrote in his diary, however, "I think the proper thing to do, and the thing I have been doing, is to do what I think is right and let them all go to hell."

The Jews accepted the UN decision, but the Arabs rejected it. The resolution divided the land into two approximately equal portions in a complicated scheme with zig-zag borders (see map at right and see Partition Map and detailed partition map of UNSCOP Proposal and final map: UN Palestine Partition Plan Map - 1947). The intention was an economic union between the two states with open borders. At the time of partition, slightly less than half the land in all of Palestine was owned by Arabs, slightly less than half was "crown lands" belonging to the state, and about 8% was owned by Jews or the Jewish Agency. There were about 600,000 Jews in Palestine, almost all living in the areas allotted to the Jewish state or in the internationalized zone of Jerusalem, and about 1.2 million Arabs. The allocation of land by Resolution 181 was intended to produce two areas with Jewish and Arab majorities respectively. Jerusalem and environs were to be internationalized. The relatively large Jewish population of Jerusalem and the surroundings, about 100,000, were geographically cut off from the rest of the Jewish state, separated by a relatively large area, the "corridor," allotted to the Palestinian state. The corridor included the populous Arab towns of Lod and Ramla and the smaller towns of Qoloniyeh, Emaus, Qastel and others that guarded the road to Jerusalem. (Click for Large Detailed Map)


Funny that you say the UN did not exist to create Isreal when I have very clearly shown it did.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 



I am not sure how many the US has invaded but you say it like it's always a bad thing. Sometimes you must invade to protect yourself when threatened.


Iraq never threatened the US nor did it attack the US. The world was told that Saddam Hussein had ties to 9/11 by Bush's top government officials. This lie was the basis for our war with Iraq.

LIE 1: U.S. intelligence says there is no evidence linking Hussein to the September 11 - Source

When it was proven that Saddam was not responsible in any way for September 11, and that Saddam in no way financed the terrorist network Al Qaeda, the United States' government administration began its third lie to justify war with Iraq: weapons of mass destruction.

LIE 2: After searching all of Iraq, no weapons of mass destruction were ever found. On Thursday, October 7, 2004, CNN reported that "Saddam Hussein did not possess stockpiles of illicit weapons at the time of the U.S. invasion and had not begun any program to produce them". - Source

The fourth justification for occupying Iraq was "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Yet we are still in Iraq when Bush him self proclaimed that the "Mission was Accomplished".


Should the U.S. have invaded all the Japanese islands after they attacked pearl harbor?


It is widely considered with facts and evidence that the Government had prior knowledge of the attacks of Pearl Harbor. The LIED once again in saying that had "no idea" about the attacks and it came to them as a surprize attack.


Should we have invaded some countries to fight Hitler?


There is also evidence to suggest the big US bankers backed Hitler yet the same backers also supported the USA. These same banks are the ones funding the war efforts now.


As far as Iran goes, let's see....All I can think of is the Iraq/Iran war when they crossed the border to attack Iraq and currently by supplying all the money, arms and men to kill U.S. troops and allied forces.


There is absolutely NO evidence to suggest Iran is supply weapons, money and even men to Terrorist groups within Iraq. No evidence has ever been produced in support of this.

We know US officials said they have evidence that Iran is supplying weapons to Iraqi extremist groups. They also said they have proof showing that orders to these militant groups come from the highest levels in Iran's government. This evidence has NEVER been shown, infact the british military even refuted that claim. You see these are the same bunch of people who fed the public with all the above lies i have mentioned.

NIE Report: "Iran is NOT likely to be a major driver of violence or the prospects for stability"

Seems like a constant pattern here and you would have to be absolutely ignorant to not see the pattern of lies.

Peace

CR



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   
It would be interesting to see Islamic prophecy vs Christian and Jewish Prophecy at work to see who is right. Not saying war is good but if its going to kick off then lets see.

I have this article I once read and will post half to see if people are interested.

__________________________________________________________

Iran, Israel and
Armilus-the Jewish Antichrist
By Stephen Yulish PhD


By Stephen Yulish PhD
Much has been written of late concerning the Iranian President, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad’s claim that he had a mystical vision of the return of the 12th
Islamic Imam, a child who disappeared in the year 941, who will be the Mahdi,
the Islamic Messiah. When this Mahdi returns, he will reign for 7 years and
then bring final judgment and the end of the world. Many Christians believe
that he actually will be what the New Testament calls the Antichrist who will
rule and reign for seven years during the Tribulation. It makes us all see
more clearly not only how those left behind after the harpazo (rapture) will
be deceived to believe that those Christians who disappeared to be with Jesus
in the clouds were actually abducted by the mass of UFOs all over the skies,
but also how those left behind will believe that the Antichrist who appears is
actually the Messiah.

False prophets and messiahs have always been with us and the Bible warns us to
be aware of them whether they are a Jim Jones or a David Koresh or the great
Matraiya, or a Rev. Moon or the Lubuvitcher Rabbi Shneerson or the coming
Mahdi. This warning is however especially important when it comes to Islam and
Judaism because these are the very people who have rejected Christ and will be
left behind to suffer together through these terrible yet deceptive times of
Jacob’s trouble, the so called Tribulation. Satan has deceived the Muslims to
believe that their Messiah will come in the end times and rule for seven years
and then will bring final judgment and the end of the world. We know from the
word of God that it will be the Antichrist that will rule for 7 years and then
be defeated by the return of Jesus Christ who will bring final judgment and
the end of the world. Muslim doctrine on this Mahdi, which is not part of the
Koran but actually is part of oral tradition, is the work of Satan to deceive
them and not bring them to the saving grace of Jesus Christ.

Satan is alive and well in the mosques of today as he once was in the Catholic
Church of the Inquisition and pogroms and the Lutheran Church of the Nazis. In
both instances, Satan convinced the willing to persecute God’s chosen people
and to try and destroy them. Satan hates the Jews because the Messiah came
through them and the word of God was written by them. Also, if he can destroy
Israel then where will the end time Temple be rebuilt and where will Jesus
Christ return to rule and reign for 1000 years? Islam speaks of the prophet
Isa (Jesus) returning in the last days to help the Mahdi defeat the evil one.

Thus Islam has the two major players involved in the end times, Christ and the
Antichrist, but has them terribly mixed up and jumbled. They will be deceived.
Unfortunately, this discussion of the Messiah (Christ) and the Antichrist is
not only limited to Christians and Muslims. Jewish tradition also speaks very
clearly about the person called the Antichrist. Neither most Christians nor
most Jews have ever heard of this concept. An excellent summary of all the
Jewish literature relating to this concept can be found in the Encyclopedia
Judaica under the name Armilus. Armilus was the legendary Jewish name of the
Messianic antagonist or anti Messiah.


[edit on 3-6-2008 by The time lord]

[edit on 3-6-2008 by The time lord]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:26 PM
link   
From what I know about future events, all of what he said is going to happen; Israel and Iran going into a huge war (nukes being used), the US going bankrupt with civil wars breaking, and the seven years of tribulation (2012-2019) with the appearance of the Second Coming, probably around 2015.

The problem is that what he said about the new profet who's going to end this tyranny is all a huge lie.
Remember, the time when they are going to implement true fascism is the time when they will make you think that anti-fascism is in place.
It's all part of the bigger plan of the elite to ultimately rule the world.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Estess]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 07:49 PM
link   
this is a pointless debate... us citizens are going to stand up for their country and the people from other countries are going to side with iran. In my opinion if the dirtball wants to start a war in the attempts to bring about islamic prophecy then the only thing he'll get is a swift ass kicking. Whether it be from isreal, the US, or the UK.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by darthdescendent
this is a pointless debate... us citizens are going to stand up for their country and the people from other countries are going to side with iran. In my opinion if the dirtball wants to start a war in the attempts to bring about islamic prophecy then the only thing he'll get is a swift ass kicking. Whether it be from isreal, the US, or the UK.


Know one is starting a war except for the lies conducted by our current Government (Bush Administration) to try and convince the American public that Iran is indeed a threat. Judging by your response its working.




You have obviously not read any of the above posts. You may discover facts that maybe of interest to you from media manipulation to lies from the current administration. Keywords: LIES & MANIPULATION.

I urge you to do some research before spewing out such nonsense.




Peace

CR



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mad_Hatter
War between Iran and Israel is inevitable...its been in the making since we (The US) gave Israel back to the Jews after WWII....tsk tsk... and yep...I'm sure the U.S. will get involved for 2 reasons...a)United States backs israel and b) United States likes to play "Team America: World Police"

[edit on 6/2/2008 by Mad_Hatter]


Hmm, I'm sure that if you read your history books you'll find it was the Brits that had the responsibility for giving the Israeli's their homeland back. And helping police it for a good few years too



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by JSR
so, if the president of Iran says he wants the "Zionist regime" removed, how do you suppose he intends to to do that?

Contrary to popular belief:

-When a world leader says they want something changed, it doesn't always mean that they intend to change it themselves. Sometimes they just need their people to know that their leaders want the same things they want. Bush makes many statements about political change in India and Pakistan, for example, but none of us really expects him to invade either of those countries.

-There are in fact other methods of bringing about political and regime change besides a military invasion. Just ask the CIA. It doesn't get talked about much, because if everyone talked about it then it wouldn't be nearly as successful as it is. In truth, I can't really see that stuff working in Israel because the Mossad are better at that kind of stuff than the CIA, but it was worth pointing out that there are other avenues for regime change.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by WatchRider
 


I suggest you read the link I provided to get a clearer understanding of how things went down. The Brits were there, but walked away before Israel became a Nation once again.




top topics



 
14
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join