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.

 

Attack on Iran Soon (Don't be surprised, B-52s are on the move)

page: 4
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 11:33 PM
link   
Every one seems to be missing the Russian connection.

Russian (and China) are allies of Iran. We are allies of Israel. When Israel (or US) attacks Iran, what will their allies do?

From what I have heard, third hand sources, there are Soviet subs off our coasts. We may not be able to track them. I would assume there are a few in the middle east as well, given the circumstances.

We have effectively put all of our "Carrier" eggs in one basket, in the middle east.

I pray they are wrong, but many people believe Russia (as a minimum) will probably launch nukes against mainland USA, as well as the battlegroup on the water in the Middle East. And these sources are not the large number of past people who have had lucid dreams of a nuclear attack on USA followed up by an military invasion.




posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by seircram
Every one seems to be missing the Russian connection.

Russian (and China) are allies of Iran. We are allies of Israel. When Israel (or US) attacks Iran, what will their allies do?

China, maybe, but Russia's alliance with Iran is...tense to say the least.



From what I have heard, third hand sources, there are Soviet subs off our coasts. We may not be able to track them. I would assume there are a few in the middle east as well, given the circumstances.


Really? You have a contact in the Kremlin, then?
No, there aren't. The cold war days of invisible subs are over. They wouldn't risk it.




I pray they are wrong, but many people believe Russia (as a minimum) will probably launch nukes against mainland USA, as well as the battlegroup on the water in the Middle East. And these sources are not the large number of past people who have had lucid dreams of a nuclear attack on USA followed up by an military invasion.


Sounds like a great Tom Clancy book...wait, you're serious?



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:04 AM
link   
The united states isnt going to have a nuclear war with russia over iran.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
American's never learn.

I guess I shall have to increase my funding to various "parties" over there.

The enemy of my enemy is my friend. That's how it goes.


It is fine and dandy for American's to act all gung ho and big hard men when they are on the OTHER FRACKING SIDE OF THE PLANET when we living in Europe ar NEIGHBOURS to the middle east. That is one reason we dispise you because YOU PUT US IN DANGER by your actions and you have occupied our member states with your bases yet we have no bases occupying America.

American's are pathetic really.



[edit on 7-6-2008 by mOOmOO]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Crabmeat
 


You are thinking of the MetalStorm weapons systems - developed by a company in Queensland, Australia. www.metalstorm.com...

This technology is the future for projectile-based weaponry - can be applied to everything from hand-held pistol versions to vehicle-mounted systems, static defence positions (eg. AA), ship-mounted anti-missile/anti-air defences and even to launch several thousand mortar & grenade rounds in less than 10 seconds (enough to wipe out a small column of armoured vehicles!).



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by mOOmOO
 


Insults arent proper...then again its just ones own opinion.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Crabmeat
They have some machine gun type weapon, the has multiple barrels and can fire 1,000,000, yes one million, metallic shards a minute. Some third party weapons manufacturer developed it to sell the the military. They said no thanks, and stole his idea, adding to it a computer systems that tracks objects, predicts their trajectories, and then launches these shards in the targets path. The Military called it something else, so the original developer could not sue them.

Isn't it fantastic how resourceful our military is?



I'm pretty sure that weapon you mention is the Aussie invention, Metal Storm.

en.wikipedia.org...

www.discoverychannel.com.au...

It took the poor inventor, years to convince US Generals even to look at it. When they did, they still couldn't believe their eyes. Resourceful? Nah. LOL

Duncan



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   


Some people will say their just doing some other test flights or something. I've lived here long enough to know what is routine and what isn't.



'Routine' is a term that the Air Force does not like to use. It is likely that they are purposely straying from the routine in order to confuse enemy combatants. This is common in the military and it is likely the case.

Do not watch bombers and fighters. Watch heavies. A B-52 is not currently a threat to Iran.... but pair that up with a KC-135 and you have something.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by alienstar
Israel been stating for over a year now,if the us dont launch a strikes on iran,they would and stated they would do a better job.


Agreed. I'm betting any first strike on Iran will be done by Israel - and the US will be its justifiable back up or follow through.

For full scale war, I still think there will have to be a significant trigger event beforehand - there is just so much global anger at the US that an unprovoked attack by it, or Israel, on Iran - will be hard to support at home or abroad. Also, I think a lot of military will mutiny unless they are given some BIG reason to go in and kick butt.

So, like most, I am expecting a 'surgical strike' on limited facilities with no ground troops, probably conducted by Israel, with US/UK help (which we may, or may not, be told about).

(praying for) peace

Duncan



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I believe the Sunburn is far too fast for countermeasures.

Originally posted by Crabmeat
The USS Nimitz, or the Abraham, don't remember which one, has been outfitted with missile interception systems. A missile or warhead that has a programed destination and flight path would be shot down before it struck the air carriers.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   
I wouldnt want to see them do nothing else but go after the nuclear facilities.I dont want to see innocent people hurt at all.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Whether an attack on iran is in preparation or not, thank you for sharing this info Jet. Quick question, can you chat to the pilots where you are? Maybe they can give a clue or 2



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by mOOmOO

It is fine and dandy for American's to act all gung ho and big hard men when they are on the OTHER FRACKING SIDE OF THE PLANET when we living in Europe ar NEIGHBOURS to the middle east. That is one reason we dispise you because YOU PUT US IN DANGER by your actions and you have occupied our member states with your bases yet we have no bases occupying America.

American's are pathetic really.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by mOOmOO]


Most of those bases in Europe were established during World War II and the Cold War, where we SAVED YOU ALL. If it weren't for our military presence you'd all be speaking either German or Russian. Those bases were welcomed.

Why don't any of you have bases in America? Here's why:

1) You've never been involved in any wars on our soil.
2) There's no strategic advantage to having a base in the USA; it would be a waste of resources.
3) We don't need the protection.

Oh yeah. And so far, I don't think the terrorists have been interested in our European bases. It would seem that they are a little more interested in attacking OUR homeland. When they attacked London, they attacked because Britain was still actively supporting the war. We're all on the same side here.

Like us or not, we're still allies.



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptainIraq
 


Americans aren't pathetic. They're arrogant. There's a big difference.

As for Europe being next to the middle east, big whoop. You talk all big but it's not the London Clock Tower thats getting targeted with suicide plotters (if the 9/11 conspirators read this don't flame me, I can see why you think it's a lie, but I was there 2 blocks away).

You're saying basically, if Russia attacked America, that America shouldn't do anything because it's on the other side of the planet. You, my friend, really need to get your logic checked out.

The Crab with the pensive hat, Crabmeat



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:51 AM
link   



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Can you say which airbase, or

do we just try to guess?


As far as I remember B-52s were based only at Barksdale AFB in Louisiana. I wouldn't know if that's been changed in the last few years though, but while in the Air Force I worked with a few people that were stationed there.

Secondhand info from them is what this is.


If anyone is near any Special Ops bases it would probably be slightly difficult to tell if they're ramping up the tempo more than usual for the current deployments. Though without bases relatively close to the targets a lot of those SpecOps helos wouldn't be too effective. Unless they were dropping off people for long missions or something.

I dunno, last bit is mostly speculation on my part.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by Shaker]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainIraq

Originally posted by mOOmOO

It is fine and dandy for American's to act all gung ho and big hard men when they are on the OTHER FRACKING SIDE OF THE PLANET when we living in Europe ar NEIGHBOURS to the middle east. That is one reason we dispise you because YOU PUT US IN DANGER by your actions and you have occupied our member states with your bases yet we have no bases occupying America.

American's are pathetic really.

[edit on 7-6-2008 by mOOmOO]


Most of those bases in Europe were established during World War II and the Cold War, where we SAVED YOU ALL. If it weren't for our military presence you'd all be speaking either German or Russian. Those bases were welcomed.

Why don't any of you have bases in America? Here's why:

1) You've never been involved in any wars on our soil.
2) There's no strategic advantage to having a base in the USA; it would be a waste of resources.
3) We don't need the protection.

Oh yeah. And so far, I don't think the terrorists have been interested in our European bases. It would seem that they are a little more interested in attacking OUR homeland. When they attacked London, they attacked because Britain was still actively supporting the war. We're all on the same side here.

Like us or not, we're still allies.



Ahh yes the WW2 rhetoric.

So how long did it take you to enter the war? Yes and after another false flag operation. Oh and you didnot save the Enigma as stated by Hollywood. And the UK had the most intel that you could ever dream off and the US practically use our regions as a base for their own PERSONAL GAIN, yes they use INDUSTRIAL ESPIONAGE via their listening stations for their own industry gains aswell. For their own defence, yes ECONOMIC DEFENCE. Good read your own executive orders and laws, a lot now state Economic "protection" reasons for their actions.

Your homeland is in America, not Europe.

Would you object if we set up bases in America with NUCLEAR weapons.

I am betting you sure would.

Allies, please spare me the sob story, I am not your friend so please don't expect me to support you for something even you don't believe in.

There are offically neutral member states in Europe and yet you still fly CIA flights over them. YOU JEOPERDISED OUR NEUTRALITY. ( I am not talking about the UK here).

Oh and you are lying about not being interested in US bases in Europe.
German police foil plot to unleash 'massive' attack on US military base






[edit on 7-6-2008 by mOOmOO]



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by mOOmOO
 


We have to remember that America only agreed to help out after being allowed to have their bases here..and remain here after WW2
Its been convenient for both sides.
Personally I have nothing against them and remember the 80s when Greenham Common protests were in the news everyday.I was friendly with a few guys who took me onto the base and showed me round....If you grew up in the cold war it was reassuring to see these things.
Closing Greenham and other places like Burtonwood may have eased fears to those people living near them in the 80s but those fears pail into insignificance when we look at what people face today.
A suicide bomber with a dirty bomb in a rucksack is such a contrast from those days......
Also with reference to earlier posts about Russia and Iran-Russia have made it pretty clear that they will not sit around and watch if Iran is attacked.Yes they have supplied them Sunburns...but much more dangerous are the Topol Ms...check out the specs of these Babies !!!



posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 02:54 AM
link   
I guess there will be a limited strike on Iran soon.

Afterwards a nice staged terrorists attack in the USA or Europe (to be blamed on Iran).

Martial law in the US and elections delayed until further notice.

Then a full blown attack on Iran (including their nuclear facilities).




posted on Jun, 7 2008 @ 03:35 AM
link   
reply to post by mOOmOO
 


And Euros are morally superior? They started two wars, participated in extreme mass murder, and they spend all of their money on welfare program living on the largess of Imperial America. Once America got up to speed, they essentially took over the two theaters of war: Pacific and European Theaters. The only country that paid back their war debt was Britain.




top topics



 
10
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join