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: 9
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by dariousg
You don't see all of the fuss? How does doing what that docterine proposes keep us from becoming what we supposedly oppose? Such as, the Nazi's? It's a way for the U.S. to be the world rulers and to step on and prevent any other nation at all to rise above themselves?

No it doesn't. You are reading to much into it. There is nothing wrong with protecting yourself by using pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations. You realize this does not mean you attack other nations only because you don't like them. There has to be a real threat.

And as far as the superpower part of the doctrine, why should we let one of our enemies aquire military superpower status? That makes no sense.


That's a pathetic point of view to take.

You are entitled to your wrong opinion but it's better than having one's head in the sand and ignoring obvious threats.




posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory

Ok, I read the Wiki link you provided and what does this have to do with the point of the poster in question?
He said, "We are fighting them because Israel (The Zionists that control Israel that is) wants us to."
This statement has what to do with the Doctrine? I don't see the connection.


Quoted from the Doctrine itself, the US is forced to protect Israel at all costs, at even the lives of its own countrymen:


The April 16 release was much more circumspect and reaffirmed U.S. commitments to Israel.

"In the Middle East and Persian Gulf, we seek to foster regional stability, deter aggression against our friends and interests in the region, protect U.S. nationals and property, and safeguard our access to international air and seaways and to the region's oil. The United States is committed to the security of Israel and to maintaining the qualitative edge that is critical to Israel's security. Israel's confidence in its security and U.S.-Israel strategic cooperation contribute to the stability of the entire region, as demonstrated once again during the Persian Gulf War.At the same time, our assistance to our Arab friends to defend themselves against aggression also strengthens security throughout the region, including for Israel."


Nothing to do with Zionists, eh?

[edit on 3-6-2008 by DJMessiah]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


Christianity is not illegal in Iran.

Muslims also believe in Jesus and his return.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah
Quoted from the Doctrine itself, the US is forced to protect Israel at all costs, at even the lives of its own countrymen:

Umm.....are you intentionally being disingenuious?
It does NOT say that!!
Please highlight in your quote where is says, "the US is forced to protect Israel at all costs, at even the lives of its own countrymen".

All is says is that we are going to protect our friends in the ME. What's wrong with that? We should protect our allies.

So again, just admit that the posters point that we are protecting Israel because Israel says we must is false. It's obvious that is a ludicrous statement.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:48 PM
link   
When asked to explain himself while at the food summit in Rome. Ahmadinejad repeated his statements from yesterday. He said, whether Iran has anything to do with it or not Israel will disappear.

Now its quite obvious he is of the opinion that Israel will cease to exist very soon. It doesn't mean that Iran has a nuclear arsenal with which to destroy Israel. It means what he said, that Israel will disappear / vanish.

I think the people on this site don't want to understand this concept in any other way than the most brutish and clumsily of ways; that the Persians and Arabs will blow Israel up with bombs. Its like many contributors to this site have put a ceiling on understanding current events and don't want to understand that there are more powerful weapons than nukes.

What this guy is saying is that the body of laws and agreements which underlie the State of Israel will cease to exist therefore Israel will vanish. It has nothing at all to do with military activity. However, he is making it quite obvious that he is participating in some activity either actively or passively to subvert the State of Israel and all the governments of the Western world. This is why is dangerous. The conversation concerning WMDs and such is just cover to identify this guy as a participant in the global subversion plots. Islam is primarily about subversion not military might; always has been.

Nevertheless, I don't agree that this is the case at all. But I do think it is important to understand this person is exceptionally dangerous. His team is on the ropes and they are about to carry out another attack soon; but not against the physical reality we call the State of Israel, but against the body of laws and agreements which underlie it.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by bruxfain
His team is on the ropes and they are about to carry out another attack soon; but not against the physical reality we call the State of Israel, but against the body of laws and agreements which underlie it.

What does that mean?
How would they attack the body of laws and agreements which underlie it?



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 03:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Umm.....are you intentionally being disingenuious?
It does NOT say that!!
Please highlight in your quote where is says, "the US is forced to protect Israel at all costs, at even the lives of its own countrymen".


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

"While the U.S. cannot become the world's policeman, by assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will retain the preeminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations."

How do you expect the US to protect Israel without using it's own soldiers? Look at what we went to Iraq for. Saddam was once our ally, but when there were threats of nukes being there, we took him out for the sake of Israel.


So again, just admit that the posters point that we are protecting Israel because Israel says we must is false. It's obvious that is a ludicrous statement.


Did you just not read the Doctrine? If that doesn't do it for you, look at AIPAC. Our own congressmen are being bought by them, to protect Israel at all costs. We didn't even give our own soldiers a proper investigation into the deaths of their fellow soldiers during the USS Liberty attack by Israel. Instead we chose not to give an investigation because it might "hurt" our relations with Israel.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:06 PM
link   
The people, families, and treaties and agreements. The individuals that are responsible for its existence. It custodians. The average jewish person on the street or even within the government doesn't have to will to sustain Israel, there are other people who get up everyday and go to sleep every night and are about the business of Israel. A body which exists out of plain site which can be said to "be Israel".

Ahmadinejad is saying that this core will die and leave no heir. Perhaps some are getting older. Over the past year at least two Rothchilds have died, right. Aren't they supposed to be super evil satan worshippers and zionists? I don't know if they were I don't know any. Rothschilds, satan worshippers or Zionists. But it is very obvious that these people are dying off, when it is complete he predicts that the State of Israel will vanish as a consequence. I don't agree with him but I know what he is talking about.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by johnsky
 


Who has Israel attacked that has not attacked them first? You cant answer with facts that so don't try.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   

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

"While the U.S. cannot become the world's policeman, by assuming responsibility for righting every wrong, we will retain the preeminent responsibility for addressing selectively those wrongs which threaten not only our interests, but those of our allies or friends, or which could seriously unsettle international relations."
Did you just not read the Doctrine?


Ok, just as I thought, you were being disingenuous as you cannot highlight your claim that quote, "The US is forced to protect Israel" nor can you provide proof for the other poster who said that we are protecting Israel because Israel says we should.
Is this how you normally operate? It's really pathetic. Try being honest for once, then you might be able to make a point.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by WhatTheory
 


First you would capture members of Israeli parliament and the prime minister and get them to agree to a secret plan. In writing. Before the plot is launched it always requires traitors. No well designed plot ever omits the value added by betrayal of trust.

Then you would corner the King piece. If he is captured he could be forced to sign a treaty that simply writes Israel out of existence. If he kills the traitors he can be imprisoned. He doesn't have enough evidence to prove a plot exists. He'll just look insane even If he tried to. If he is commited as an insane person then his business will have to be carried out by someone else and gradually Israel could be dismantled.

But their is a third option for the King when faced with plots and betrayal. Do nothing.

I would be much better at explaining how to destroy Islam. If i were somehow able to show that Ishmael was the son of Eliezer of Damascus and not Abraham. Mecca would vanish. This is the basic nature of warfare.



[edit on 3-6-2008 by bruxfain]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by WhatTheory
Ok, just as I thought, you were being disingenuous as you cannot highlight your claim that quote, "The US is forced to protect Israel" nor can you provide proof for the other poster who said that we are protecting Israel because Israel says we should.


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."

This Doctrine has already been signed and is now known as the "Bush Doctrine."


Is this how you normally operate? It's really pathetic. Try being honest for once, then you might be able to make a point.


Again with stone throwing.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by DJMessiah
 


No they just make them and the Jews wear their colors so they can be easily identified like the Nazi's had done.

Mahdi Army in Iraq ring a bell. This is the group that the Mahdi will take over first and then be backed up by the Iranian military witch will integrate and be a large Mahdi army as they try to conquer Iraq on their way to Israel.

At least thats what Amidinanut thinks and plans on. DJ your off your rocker if you think this guy is peaceful. Are you brainwashed like Hitler did to many. He never answered Mike Wallace's questions with anything but BS when he was asked about what he says and what he does.

Iran will be the one who goes by by soon if they mess with Israel. Its to bad that the Persians are hi-jacked by these radical Arabs.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:47 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."

This Doctrine has already been signed and is now known as the "Bush Doctrine."



The only Bush doctrine I support. Lets not forget this little stunt.

video.google.com...=Iranian%20millitary%20parade&hl=en&sitesearch=&start=20

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Sky watcher]

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Sky watcher]

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Sky watcher]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   
Wow did I screw that one up. Edit will not let me fix it, What is wrong with the edit feature when I had a perfect preview of it.

Got it.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by Sky watcher]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Sky watcher
 


Question how many countries have the US invaded in the past 50 Years and how many have the Iranians invaded? Whos really the aggressive ones? You spout this guys evil and this and that but he has not shown aggression. He talks a lot of smack no doubt about it but you cant give me one credible bit of evidence showing that is is aggressive and he is without a doubt going to try to take over the world. Dont be a sheeple and listen to everything fox news tells you. Open you eyes and look at another point of view.

If he starts invading other countries then we maybe we should help but now with our troops help with weapons and money. If they invade us then its on. We have to stop being the worlds police we cant afford it anymore.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


The United States hasn't "invaded" anyone in the last 50 years. Since 1958, the United States initiated many police actions and interventions, with invitations. Some successful, some not. But invaded nothing. We're composed of 50 states, then and now.

If you're talking about arresting criminals like the man Hussein who was convicted and executed as a war criminal, don't even try it. Hussein is a mass murderer, fact, who was holding 25 million people hostage. The terrorists that are in the country now are just opportunists that are finding out just now that no opportunity to plunder the country exists.

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.

But all of these misconceptions about who is what will be cleared up before the leaves finish falling from the trees.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by bruxfain]

[edit on 3-6-2008 by bruxfain]



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


Up and till twenty seven years ago they were not led by wacko Arabs.

They are just now getting a big enough army and they think that we are in a bad spot strength wise so thats why they are acting tough and it is also about time for the end times fight in their view.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah
1. So what religion was Abraham?


Abraham existed before there was a split in the religious beliefs.


2. What was Ismael's race?

I've already told you. He is the father of the Arabs.

3.

What's funny is that I always thought the Arabs came from the Lakhmids, who were Christians. But I guess Abraham didn't know Ismael was Arab and not a Jew, as you put it.

Your circular reasoning is not even remotely intelligent or humorous. Abram was told he would be the "Father of many nations" ie: Israel and Palestine just to name two.


As for Jews and Arabs living together peacefully before Israel became a State, absolutely not! Read History.
4.

Which is it? Jews and Arabs, or Jews and Muslims?.

Do you even know where the Muslim religion originated?
The majority of Arabs are Muslim.

5.

Can you show me where it speaks about the Arabs (or even Muslims) in the Bible?

Hagar, the slave mother of Ishmael, is indicative of Mount Sinai in ARABIA (Galatians 4:25)
Please don't tell me that you're even implying that most Arabs are not Muslims? If you want to play that card, okay- does it speak of "Christians" in the Koran? No? Then if not for religious reasons, why do they hate Christians so? I am Christian. We're only "Jews" because we are grafted in by faith.

6.

The Canaanites (Philistines) only fought them because the Jewish settlers tried to take their land by force.


Without a doubt, true, but that has nothing to do with your original statement that the Jews and Muslims have only been fighting for a short time. Seriously, don't try to spin the discussion.

7.

Notice that they lived together peacefully in Jeresulam, prior to the Crusades. During the Crusades, both Jew and Muslim were killed to "cleanse" the holy lands.


It wouldn't be the first time that opposing forces have come together to fight against a third party.



posted on Jun, 3 2008 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mybigunit
reply to post by Sky watcher
 


. Dont be a sheeple and listen to everything fox news tells you. Open you eyes and look at another point of view.

[edit on 3-6-2008 by mybigunit]


Mike Wallace interviewed him for CBS. The speeches that this clown makes in his own country to his own media will frighten you. Fox or anybody else has reported only half of what he has said.
The Parade speaks volumes. Seeing how they are former allies of Hitler and love Identifying with the Nazi cause. Brainless when you think about that one.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join