Kissinger Calls For Attack On Iran If Revolution Fails, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times


reply posted on 24-6-2009 @ 08:10 PM by starscape
Originally posted by john124
Originally posted by Stormdancer777
Originally posted by john124


Thank you john.



no problem.

Twitter messages talk of brutality much worse and bodies beaten bloody unconscious or dead being dragged away to warehouses. This is turning into a catastrophe of a huge magnitude. The woman in the video is right, at some point the west will have to do something. If Russia veto a resolution at the UN tell them to go to hell.

Something tells me America would have been better if John Mccain was president. It's not like I don't like Obama, I just don't think he fully understands this Islamic regime yet.

IMO the deaths could be over a thousand already, maybe more.




Are you serious? Are you saying that because the Iranian government is 'cracking down' on protesters that the US/UN should invade their country?

Why didn't the UN invade the US when the US fired on protesters in Iraq? www.commondreams.org... (not the only time this behavior was documented.)

Why hasn't the US been invaded for its brutal attacks on Pakistan. They happen week after week, dozens of dead civilians each time but I don't hear Americans (or many other nations for that matter) standing up to their government or insisting the the US be invaded because of this activity. news.bbc.co.uk...

What is wrong with you people? Look to your own nation--fix that--before you insist on meddling in other's nations.

Oh, wait. At least the protests have been allowed to occur n Iran. In the US peaceful protests are now defined as 'low-level terrorism'.

That said, Kissinger is a monster. Sweet of him to let the game slip, so we know what's going on. *facepalm*


reply posted on 24-6-2009 @ 08:34 PM by Unlimitedpossibilities
reply to post by Erasurehead



Yeah. I agree. Although the reptilian conspiracy is not the popular view, I have always thought Zbigniew Brzezinski was a great portrayal of one.

Both Kissinger and Brzezinski were Nation Security "Advisors". Yeah they advised alright....







[edit on 24-6-2009 by Unlimitedpossibilities]


reply posted on 24-6-2009 @ 09:18 PM by TheBandit795
reply to post by Electro38



He was Bushes secret advisor, and now he gives the orders to Obama's national security advisor. He's in the CFR. He's a Bildeberger. He, together with his partner in crime, Brzezinski have worked for one of the co-owners of the federal reserve, David Rockefeller for years. He is more powerful than the president of the U.S.A.. I think we should take him seriously.


reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:43 AM by dariousg
reply to post by Amagnon



The problem is that we have to educate the people first. There are still so many people that think of Iraqi's as terrorists and definitely think the Iranians are. Just because of the portrayal of their culture and religion and leadership. They won't bat an eye when they see a young female student stopping to witness history in her own country get shot down. They think good riddance. It's pathetic really. I have at least gotten my immediate family to start thinking of these people as that. People. And innocent for that matter.

There are many others that are still looking at these countries as the enemy and that they are simply evil. It's really sad. I try to talk to them and they simply rant on about how George Bush was the best thing to ever happen to us. Hell, my nephew runs around with an "I love Haliburton" shirt! I haven't ever known a bunch of more brainwashed people. The sad thing is that they are the nicest people to be around and will do anything for their family. They just don't have a clue when it comes to the true politics behind the scenes and these foreign people.


reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 12:42 PM by Gorman91
reply to post by SpaceMonkeys



If I may be so keen to ask, how do you expect anyone to win in the event of a 3-way war between fully prepared powers? The only reason we won WW2 and WW1 was because we were the only freaking fighting force left! everyone else was dying off. Now we are dying off. Exactly where do you expect victory in the event of WW3? All 3 nations, already having problems with their people, would cripple and collapse. Then the military would take over, and in all 3 nations, probably fight amongst each other. The Midwest just told the feds that they consider the direction of the government criminal and any further advancement into things like trade and cap systems will be viewed as a deceleration of war. In WW2, if a part of the US told FDR they consider his actions a decleration of war against their state, you'd probably be arrested as governor and replaced with no word from the people. Today if they try it, the supporters would fight the police.

So again, I ask you, how exactly are 3 superpowers that are already critically injured from within suppose to fight each other and still have a functioning legitimate government through it all.

What, are you planning to have a cripple fight for WW3? No one wins dude.
www.youtube.com...


[edit on 25-6-2009 by Gorman91]


reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 02:31 PM by Kombatt98
reply to post by Gorman91



USA won WW2 , singlehandly , this is the biggest load of BS i ever read .


reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 02:52 PM by Gorman91
reply to post by Kombatt98



Of course not alone. But with allies who were already on the edge. Forget not that at it's worst, Hitler was just about ready to take over England and end the war in Europe, devoting full power to the East.

The US simply had the time to ready itself for war and be a refresher for the allies. Without them the West would fall. With them they won. Alone they could not win, as English resources were the only thing allowing the US to even have a presence in Europe. But the thing is, if England fell, the US would have no way to act in Europe. Hitler would have a strait line from south to east to fight.

The fact remains that the US is what allowed the allies to win. Today this is not true. There is no nation out there able to "ready" for war while the rest of the world fights. So if the CIA is doing this, they are essentially wanting the US to die. They are essentially pushing the destruction of all superpowers. The US cannot enter a WW3 and come out victorious in the current situation.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by Gorman91]

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4  >>    ^^TOP^^




Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 14 hours ago, 68 replies