I think 9-11 type "false flag" op will take place between 15.6.-29.6. 2009 in US or EU soil... If not needed,

Beginning of Israel bombing of Iran-Israel-Lebanon starting a month - fast escalation to WW3.

US-Israel War in ME (declaration of war) will come in 4th July 2009.

OK maybe 75% of you need to be reminded W.T.C. was a Act Of Terror carried out by Islam and to sit there and think for one minute that Iran isnt hot on N. Koreas heels in developing a Nuclear Weapon is sheer stupidity and complacent on all American's parts!!!!!

They say Islam means Peace but thousands of attacks on people who dont follow their religion is not Peace by any means. Im a Republican and I will be the first to admit the Bush administration Hung themselves and dropped the ball so many times it was'nt even funny.

But dont sit their and think for one minute that Pakistan or Iran will not make the next move or maybe better yet Saudi Arabia and suprise everyone!!!!!!!!!!!!

Originally posted by MegaCurious

Originally posted by donwhite
DANGEROUS SCENARIO. Suppose these talks fail. Suppose Iran is not scared of the US. Suppose Iran goes forward with its nuclear weapons program.

Iran doesn't have a nuclear weapons program, just like Iraq didn't. They've clearly stated that it's against their religion, and they claim to be an "Islamic State".

But that doesn't matter, as Iran with a nuclear weapon is a safer bet than Israel with a nuclear weapon.

Originally posted by donwhite
Iran rightly asks us, WHY and on WHAT legal or moral authority to you oppose us obtaining nuclear weapons?

Q. What would happen in the 24 hours to 7 days following such a strike by Israel on Iran following the Bush/Cheney/Rice doctrine of waging preemptive war? (Especially if it involves those elusive WMDs).
[edit on 5/18/2009 by donwhite]

If they strike Iran for just building a nuclear power plant, we're talking total explosion of anger in the middle east. We're talking a "real" war for America, not some fake stuff. The Real Deal.

Iran is no joke. We're talking zillions of hardcore fight to the death folks with decent weaponry. When America decides to invade Iran, it will be their grave. We're talking real war, not stuff where you just roll right in. Iraq found that out the hard way.

As General Patton said to his men, "America fights to win." You cannot say that if we fight the Iranians that will be our grave. In that case, you should make the same generalization for the United Nations who will be right behind the United States in any invasion efforts if it were to happen that way. Iran has weapons, but not WEAPONS like the U.S. has. Because we have selected Iraq and Afghanistan, and as many consider that is not a "real war", we would be prepared to fight on a higher stage to defeat Iran if the time came. Iran is a powerful nation, but America has the intelligence, the technology and the feasibility to wage war against Iran. We do not just have these resources for nothing. It is used for wars of this magnitude.

This notion that we must believe Iran is building a nuclear power-plant for the boom of their population is worth the paper we blow our noses with. We have sophisticated intelligence that monitors population growth, that monitors human intelligence and economic intelligence to understand a nation's reason for expanding and growing. If those excuses do not match the intelligence we have gathered, we will continue to push the issue. We know that and Iran knows that. If it were truly for their population we wonldn't stress the issue. In fact, it now makes sense that Iran is building these programs because we clearly witnessed the launch of a "missile satellite" back in February. And the opposition we have received from the Russians on our proposal to develop a shield to counter Iran and North Korea is now slapping them in the face. Our intelligence is gathered everyday and we are watching everyday. With Iran's criticism of Israel being a racist state towards Arbas and the continuing settlement shows that their rush to development is on the basis of countering Israel.

If anything happens prior to such a catastrophe, it would be that the Iranian people would elect a new leader with hopes this new leader will cooperate with the U.N.

Originally posted by donwhite

---

After a nuclear exchange which country would have the best chance of surviving 50 years out? Iran with 400,000 square miles, plenty of oil and 70 million people, or Israel with 10,000 square miles and 8 million people and no oil.

I have been reading your posts with great interest but I have to disagree on one point. As you stated above, Israel is tiny in comparison to Iran. Even one nuclear weapon would cause such devastation to Israel that it might not survive as country. I believe that is the definition of an "existential threat."

I can certainly understand why the Israeli people would view even one nuclear weapon in the Iranian arsenal as too many. Even if the Iranian government can be trusted to act responsibly today, who knows when that could change? A perfectly good and fair deal or treaty with Iran today could become worthless by any number of unforeseen future events. Iran with only one nuclear weapon would have the power to destroy Israel in one blow whenever they decided to do so. I know I could not live with that risk - no way.

Israel has no choice but to bomb the sites before December because after that the Russian state-of-the-art surface to air anti-aircraft system will be complete.

After December no plane will be able to enter Iranian airspace without being shot down.

The globalists will support the bombing since it will lead to a money-making war.