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.

 

Iran in 'backroom offers' to West

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Iran in 'backroom offers' to West


news.bbc.co.uk

It emerges from interviews with both Iranian and American officials that after 11 September, 2001, Tehran collaborated so closely with the US in order to topple the Taleban and remove al-Qaeda from Afghanistan, that they even provided intelligence information to pinpoint military targets for bombing.

Over Iraq too, Iran's reformist President Mohammad Khatami offered to collaborate on ousting Saddam Hussein, arguing that the Iraqi leader was also Iran's enemy.

But relations deteriorated after former US President George W Bush accused Iran of being part of an "Axis of Evil".
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:13 PM
link   
amazing - Iran was working with the west untill 2002 - when george w bush opened his big mouth ; there would have been s upport netowrk and continued help in this fight - instead when bush labeled them `axis of evil` all that available help melted away, and the bull# rhetoric started


hello neo-con dogs , you hearing this? the usa worked with these people - and bush messed it all up.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   
That's pretty impressive.

I knew Iran offered on many occasions to assist with the fight against Al-Qaeda, but I had no idea they had already worked with US intelligence this closely.

Clearly Iran is way more co-operative than the republican administration is willing to admit.


... and yes, Bush was a freaking moron.
But we knew that already.

Would have been funny to hear the irritated insults against Bush in the US intelligence offices when Bush began trying to make Iran look like the bad guys.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Afghan offered Bin Laden to the west thru a 3rd country , W said no, God damn it, daddy had a war , he wanted his



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
I don't buy this.

I can understand that Iran worked underground with the USA in disabling Iraq. However, the 'Axis of evil' speech was written by Michael Gerson for Bush. This speech gets vetted by military and White house reps before acceptance.

There is no way they would have allowed such a speech through the net without there being a purpose to it.

Did Mahmoud Ahmadinejad finally tell the US to get stuffed as a result of his 30year oil agreement with China which lead to this speech?

Watch this space.

P.s. there was deliberate intent in that speech -guaranteed enemies for Obama! The neo-cons had their war!

[edit on 20-2-2009 by Breifne]



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Have you ever thought that the axis of evil thing was done on purpose? Maybe the US and Iran didn't want this it to be known that they were helping each other. I wouldn't doubt if they were still helping each other right now. Government good or bad do many things in secret that we will never truly know about.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 05:05 PM
link   
The US was not eager to emphasize Iranian cooperation after 9-11 because the Israeli lobby would have gone crazy.

They're still trying to get us to take out Iran for them.

But Iran are natural enemies of the Taliban and Al Quaeda, who are Sunni fanatics who think that Shia like the Iranians are heretics that should be exterminated.

I am sure they were more than happy to see us bombing the stuffing out of both.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Breifne
 


"There is no way they would have allowed such a speech through the net without there being a purpose to it."

Oh, I'm sure there was a purpose. Have people already forgotten what Bush said after the 9-11 attacks?... "We're going to follow them into Afghanistan and start a crusade."... A CRUSADE?!

Obviously you can't fight a Crusade against Islam while you are working WITH Islam. That wouldn't be a crusade, just a regular run-of-the-mill war. Crusades are fought over ideologies...
To this end, Bush has achieved his goal. His goal all along was to destabilize the entire region so we could gain control of it. But I don't think we will achieve all of Bush's goals.

Unless we want to get really conspiratorial and say that Bush orchestrated the downfall of the American way of life.
Actually, the more I think of that last option, the more it makes sense.

Why would we accept Iran's help? So we could actually WIN the war?
That isn't their goal.



posted on Feb, 20 2009 @ 06:06 PM
link   
This is old news.

It's only news to people who never follow current affairs and then wake up one day with no understanding of the context of world events and hang a conspiracy label on it to excuse their own ignorance.

Khatami was an elected moderate leader who was nursing Iran towards more moderate relations with the west. The Mullahs and Revolutionary Guard however led a campaign to remove Khatami at elections and install a radical new leader who was so full of hate for the West that rapprochement could never happen.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Breifne
 


Mohammad Khatami was the leader at the time not Ahmadinejad - and relations were actually closer than they ever had been - heck , the rumour was normalisation , but little boy bush threw that away with his hot gun deplomacy.

Khatami is actually running again this year - as Ahmadinejad isn`t as popular as he thinks, but both are stating iran have the right to develope nuclear power.


oh and sy.gunson - Khatami had served his 2 terms so couldn`t be elected again that time - no campaign as you think.


The President is elected for a four-year term by the direct vote of the people and may not serve for more than two consecutive terms. The election on 3 August 2005 resulted in a victory for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and he will be up for reelection on 12 June 2009.



posted on Feb, 21 2009 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin

hello neo-con dogs , you hearing this?



Very classy post Mr. Harlequin. Is that kind of language supposed to promote a civil discussion between people of differing viewpoints?? You might be wise to spend less time looking at the past and watch what is happening in the country and in the world right now.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join