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.

 

When, NOT If Israel Will Bomb Iran?

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 07:27 PM
link   
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.




posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:27 PM
link   
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!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jun, 6 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   

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.



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   
reply to post by donwhite
 


The reason is that Israel has no reason to negotiate. Yes both sides are wrong, but Israel has the backing of the US which means that they want things their way and if they don't have that then there is no peace.

Let them go to war with Iran, then watch as the other Arab nations decide to smack Israel around for a bit, I bet you dollars to pounds that after a while Israel will be much more cooperative at the negotiating table.



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 01:11 AM
link   
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.



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by itguysrule
 




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 don’t mean to quibble, so let me do it. What looks to be an existential threat to Israel is SELF IMPOSED. So whether it is or not is up to them, whereas they portray that they are helpless in the face of the Iranian bomb. Which I do not accept.




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.



It sounds very much as if you are urging a multi-nation effort to rid the world of nuclear weapons, such as we once had in the NPT - Non proliferation Treaty. South Africa backed out of its nuclear weapons program. The ABC of South America have declared SA to be a “nuclear weapons free zone.” Argentina, Brazil and Chile.

In the late 1960s or early 1970s, Israel determined it to be in its interest to VIOLATE the NPT philosophy and to go ahead with a nuclear weapons program. I have read that Israel got the necessary plutonium from France. I personally doubt that. France is not known for its generosity. I suspect the US furnished the plutonium but shipped it through France so we could have it both ways.

The world does not want to compel India and the Muslims who lived in India we now call Pakistan, to resolve the Kashmir issue. I have read a book by a Kashmiri who says the people living there do not want to be part of either country. So where is you commitment to SELF DETERMINATION? Instead, we sat by idly while first India and then Pakistan developed nuclear weapons.

Then our own president traveled to New Delhi and applauded them for backing the NPT and lifted American restriction on imports and exports from India. If we ever had any credibility on important issues, we surely hove NONE today on the idea of NPT and even of getting rid of all nuclear weapons everywhere.

Now I cannot think of any legal or moral reason why any nation including North Korea and Iran, that wants the costly burden of nuclear weapons ought not to have them. This is the world we more than any other Great Power have made.



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 




The reason is that Israel has no reason to negotiate. Yes both sides are wrong, but Israel has the backing of the US which means that they want things their way and if they don't have that then there is no peace.



Don’t forget that Israel is getting its own way every day. What is there to negotiate about? They have annexed East Jerusalem in contravention to the United Nations Charter. They are in daily violation of several Security Council resolutions. Over and over they have demonstrated they have no serious interest in negotiating with anyone over anything. The Jews alive and well today are cashing in the “chips” earned by the Jews of Germany’s WW2 Holocaust. It is their position that gave the survivors and the descendants of Jews everywhere carte blanc in the Land of Palestine.

For that I give Netanyahu and his cohort Liberman good credit. They tell it like it is. Israel is deeply committed to the ETHNIC CLEANSING of the Promised Land. Even Tzipi Livni, the supposed representative of the opposition is showing herself to be the LOYAL opposition. When Israel has ejected all non-Jews from Samaria and Galilee then PEACE can come. Golan they may keep for its fertility and mostly because Syria is incapable of taking it back. Gaza no one wants, including the people who are now held captive there by Israel.

The only issue the Israeli have not decided is how to handle the Temple Mount. Given an opportunity, they would claim the Dome of the Rock as their own, and turn the al Aqba Mosque into a museum. They would give Muslims about 50 tourist visas per year. End of story.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by donwhite]



posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by seabisquit
 




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.



I do not have that much confidence in the sellers of anti aircraft or of anti missile weapons systems. The sellers have the luxury of not having any of their products put to use in anger. And they run all the tests and most of the top ranking soldiers who buy the missiles will go to work with the makers when they retire. It's sort of like a closed loop. Everyone is getting fat except the taxpayers.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join