It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Bombing Iran? It's Not So Bad, Really

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:00 PM
Since this been a huge debate here lately on Ats,thought this was interesting what the world actually thinks about it as well.Seems Iran now is going the way with new options with world powers then a bombing campaign.Just as seen here on ats Europeans would despise us bombing and Americans dont really care.Me?Blah who am i to judge.

The Nation -- Patrick Clawson and Michael Eisenstadt, two Iran experts at the pro-Israeli thinktank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, have published a primer for bombing Iran that looks at the costs and consequences. It's called "The Last Resort," but it might have been called "Making the Unthinkable Thinkable."

They make it look easy.

Would Iranians "rally 'round the flag" if Iran is attacked? Maybe, maybe not, they say. "One cannot assume that a preventive strike against Iran's nuclear infrastructure would necessarily prompt a nationalist backlash.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:06 PM
I think that an attack on Iran would signal the last straw for all parties involved: American military; American citizens; European citizens; Middle East citizens.

2008 - 2012 will be interesting times if this attack will go ahead.

One thing is certain, Iran will rally and they have my full backing if they are attacked. Every nation should defend themselves at all costs against the aggressor - and the US are the aggressor in this case.


posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:10 PM

One cannot assume that a preventive strike against Iran's nuclear infrastructure would necessarily prompt a nationalist backlash

Yeah, just like Iraq. Quick and easy. Are they next going to tell us that we'll be greeted as liberators? These assertions are laughable, and just go to show how we get ourselves into # storms like Iraq.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:42 PM
Lunacy at its finest.
The whole planet is in an uproar now regarding fuel prices.
Just wait till this hurricane season picks up and the rigs in the gulf shut down for a few days.
$4.00 a gallon will be but a pleasant memory.
At what price freedom, indeed!

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 05:43 PM
Some would state that the best way to protect yourself is by striking first.......

I don't believe bombing Iran or any other nation is right because its the innocent civilians that get caught in the crossfire and are the ones who pay the ultimate price.

Iran wants to have a nuclear power plant? so what?

they want to make nuclear bombs? USA has them, Israel has them.......pretty much most all of the countries around the world have them not to mention im sure if they really wanted to they could just purchase one from some bankrupt or USA hating country.

Are they religious....yes......does their leader seem a little crazy....yes but no crazier than bush or Ehud Olmert when you get down to the brass taxes.

Israel and the countries around it have been at war for hundreds of years and its never going to end.

So should the US step in? is that their responsibility? are they the police for the world? NO there were better places they needed to be like Darfur when thousands of people were being ethnically killed yet the US did nothing about that. Its only when power and money for them is involved that they do anything. Forget about being morally obligated. Thats not their mandate. Its all about power and control in the middle east and the oil they can get.

After WW2 most all countries forgave war debt owed to them........except for the USA. They wanted every penny regardless if it put your country into financial ruin and made your citizens suffer.

Thats my rant and Im sticking to it.

posted on Jun, 13 2008 @ 06:03 PM
Not every country has the nuclear bomb.If that was the truth,we would have nuclear exchanges a long time ago.There only a handful that do have the nuclear membership which includes China, France, Russia, UK, US,India, Israel,and Pakistan.

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 12:10 PM

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 12:47 PM
reply to post by alienstar

Right, and how many of those countries have actually used a nuclear bomb?

India & Pakistan really don't get on, but they haven't used their nuclear bombs to resolve the dispute, so why is it a definite that if Iran get's nuclear bombs they'll nuke Israel?

Pakistan has close ties to Al Qaeda and is an Islamic state, yet I didn't see any threats of invasion when they got nukes.

How about this, how many of the countries who have nuclear capability are also major oil producers? None. Who think's we'd considering attacking Iraq or Iran (major oil producers) if they did have nuclear capability?

Funny how we'll only start wars with people who have less firepower than us. The only reason the US doesn't want Iran to have nukes is because Iran could defend itself and it's oil supply if they did have them, and the US would be further up sh*t creek with regards to it's oil needs.

posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 02:36 PM
Yeah, All the victims of the invasion of US is rather weak to US in military and rather rich in oil . The aim is oil, don't deny it. Every single one with brain on the earth know this very fact. When an empire focused in military force and can't afford the resources, it will start to invade the weaker ones. Just like Japan and Germany in WWII.

So,in the end,one of the winners in WWII falls down to the same level as the losers in the similar phase of development in the history.

And from historical view, we can easily guess that there will be other countries to play the winners' role. History always repeats like before. We will see that .
No thing more.

posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 02:40 PM
The nations with nuclear arms seem to me to be very responsible.

I believe the people of Iran are the same.

It's Ahmahdinejad who wants to set the nuclear demons loose on the world.

Just because other nations have "The Bomb" doesn't mean Iran needs or deserves one.

posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:27 PM
We need to help and support the freedom fighters in Iran, and support freedom from Sharia law. Watch these videos and rethink anything that would concern war and bombs, which only serve a tiny self-serving group who do not have anyones best interests in coaxing thigs to a nuclear exchange between Iran, Israel, China and Russia, except to make their murals on the Colorado International Airport a reality, and make it likely for a massively controlled population to view the Georgia guidestones as some message from their gods. watch?v=7DqDm5bA88g The Roses of Iran

and watch?v=DLiNaiLa4j8&feature=related WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT... WHAT'S HAPPENING IN IRAN
"In the public library in Elberton, I found a book written by the man who called himself R.C. Christian. I discovered that the monument he commissioned had been erected in recognition of Thomas Paine and the occult philosophy he espoused. Indeed, the Georgia Guidestones are used for occult ceremonies and mystic celebrations to this very day. Tragically, only one religious leader in the area had the courage to speak out against the American Stonehenge, and he has recently relocated his ministry.


1. Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2. Guide reproduction wisely - improving fitness and diversity.
3. Unite humanity with a living new language.
4. Rule passion - faith - tradition - and all things with tempered reason.
5. Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6. Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7. Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8. Balance personal rights with social duties.
9. Prize truth - beauty - love - seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature.

Limiting the population of the earth to 500 million will require the extermination of nine-tenths of the world's people. The American Stonehenge's reference to establishing a world court foreshadows the current move to create an International Criminal Court and a world government. The Guidestones' emphasis on preserving nature anticipates the environmental movement of the 1990s, and the reference to "seeking harmony with the infinite" reflects the current effort to replace Judeo-Christian beliefs with a new spirituality. "

We need to be supportive and a real help for those who seek freedom. Our freedom is not a mandate to enslave others, it is a responsibility, and something we must share and pass on. War is not the method to do this, especially a war that serves 13 families. Google the blood lines between all your leaders, and Rockefeller and then read about these peoples wish for all but 500,000 of us "useless eaters" to vanish, out of their own mouths. Ie. google depopulation plans of nwo.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by mystiq]

new topics

top topics


log in