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.

 

Biden: US not stand in Israel's way on Iran

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Biden: US not stand in Israel's way on Iran


hosted.ap.org

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Vice President Joe Biden seemed to give Israel a green light for military action to eliminate Iran's nuclear threat, saying the U.S. "cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do."

Israel considers Iran its most dangerous adversary and is wary of hard-line Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who just won a disputed re-election. He repeatedly has called for Israel to be wiped off the map and contends the Holocaust is a "myth."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
There you have it people. No change on Israel policy from this administration. The US is pretty much saying go ahead and attack Iran. I doubt it will take long for Israel to act. If Iran retaliates in any form I fear the US will quickly get involved.

The last paragraph I quoted talks about the threat to wipe Isreal off of the map has been argued on this site multiple times. Now the MSM is stating that Iran did in fact state that it wants to wipe Isreal off the map.

For those who do not believe in Isreals pull with the US here is proof positive of it coming from the MSM.

hosted.ap.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
They just waited for the whole destabilization campaign to take place... as Kissinger said, if the coup fails, the US will have to ``regime change`` Iran by force.

And Obama gave Iran until september to stop their nuclear program... the only obstacle to a war MAY be the new UN AIEA director who said that there were no sign that Iran was after nuclear weapons... not a big obstacle since Israel doesn't care about the UN, nor the UN ever enforce any resolutions against Israel.

And the whole economy is supposed to crash again around september-october... so IMO they will strike Iran to divert attention and to ``restart the economy`` as RAND suggested in december 08...saying the stimulus should be used to start a big war, they thought that Iran wasn't big enough... we'll see about that.



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 01:53 PM
link   
The combination of Iran and North Korea should be big enough. I do feel as well that it will be a distraction tactic, and that it will be used to jumpstart the economy so as to make it look like the problems were fixed with the fallible bailout program.



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 03:11 PM
link   
So the same day I hear about Mossad's assurance that the Saudi's won't interfere in any Israeli overflight en route to Iran, Biden says something vaguely similar.

Oh boy. Well, I suppose many will be too busy watching the Michael Jackson circus play out to pay any attention to this.

Man, I hate not having a 'free' press.



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
They just waited for the whole destabilization campaign to take place... as Kissinger said, if the coup fails, the US will have to ``regime change`` Iran by force.

And Obama gave Iran until september to stop their nuclear program... the only obstacle to a war MAY be the new UN AIEA director who said that there were no sign that Iran was after nuclear weapons... not a big obstacle since Israel doesn't care about the UN, nor the UN ever enforce any resolutions against Israel.


Wow, it appears Vice President Biden is working feverishly to get his sound bytes in this weekend. First, he says the administration was wrong on the economy and now he is standing behind Israel and subtly giving them the green light to proceed in eradicating Iran's nuclear program.

If the missiles and bombs start flying it is going to get pretty hairy over there militarily. Iran will probably try to shut down the strait of Hormuz, send covert operatives into Iraq to stir up the Shia majority, and give Hezbollah the green light in attacking Israel again. As a result of this, US troops will be sent into Iran with the UK as well. Then the Russians and Chinese are going to heated about it because of their business relations in Iran. Call it a perfect storm for an international crisis.

You mentioned a new IAEA director to replace Mohammed El-Baradei, well there is one waiting to take over in November. He is a Japanese diplomat named Yukiya Amano. His views on non-proliferation are pretty staunch and I guess that is because he is from the only country in the world where nuclear weapons were used.



In an interview in the Austrian newspaper Die Presse, the new head of the UN's nuclear watchdog said he was "resolute in opposing the spread of nuclear arms because I am from a country that experienced Hiroshima and Nagasaki".


news.bbc.co.uk...

Hopefully this guy will get there in enough time before all hell breaks loose and makes some progress in illuminating Iran's nuclear ambitions to the world in terms of peaceful or military use.

[edit on 5-7-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   
It certainly looks like the chess pieces are being moved into place, what with the big pushes recently in Afghanistan, pulling US troops out of Iraqi cities and the statements from the US VP and Israel already mentioned. I would hazard that this is intended to heap pressure onto Iran leading up to an ultimatum from Obama and the US government for Iran to climb down over their nuclear ambitions. If that ultimatum doesn't work then I can see Israel being given the green-light to go ahead with whatever actions they deem necessary. From what I have read of the current Iranian government I can't see them backing down, they already think the West has humiliated their country enough.

Then the US and Britain will be hoping to have at least given the taliban a black-eye in Afghanistan and for Iraq to be relatively quiet so that they have the forces on hand to assist should there be any serious response by Iran or Israel's neighbours.

I'm not sure why we (Britain) always need to get involved though, what with the war of words with Iran recently and the constant reporting in the press of how 'dangerous' Iran is, it seems we'll be dragged into this one too. Has there been any attempt to rubbish the "Wipe Isael from the map" statement? I heard a rumour that what was actually said was "Wipe Zionism from the face of the Earth" but have not seen any reliable recordings/translations of the original speech.

I would also add that I dont believe Iran getting nukes would be a good idea, ongoing nuclear proliferation seems to me to be sending us down a very dangerous path.



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by najapi
It certainly looks like the chess pieces are being moved into place, what with the big pushes recently in Afghanistan, pulling US troops out of Iraqi cities and the statements from the US VP and Israel already mentioned. I would hazard that this is intended to heap pressure onto Iran leading up to an ultimatum from Obama and the US government for Iran to climb down over their nuclear ambitions. If that ultimatum doesn't work then I can see Israel being given the green-light to go ahead with whatever actions they deem necessary. From what I have read of the current Iranian government I can't see them backing down, they already think the West has humiliated their country enough.

Then the US and Britain will be hoping to have at least given the taliban a black-eye in Afghanistan and for Iraq to be relatively quiet so that they have the forces on hand to assist should there be any serious response by Iran or Israel's neighbors.

I'm not sure why we (Britain) always need to get involved though, what with the war of words with Iran recently and the constant reporting in the press of how 'dangerous' Iran is, it seems we'll be dragged into this one too. Has there been any attempt to rubbish the "Wipe Isael from the map" statement? I heard a rumour that what was actually said was "Wipe Zionism from the face of the Earth" but have not seen any reliable recordings/translations of the original speech.

I would also add that I dont believe Iran getting nukes would be a good idea, ongoing nuclear proliferation seems to me to be sending us down a very dangerous path.


You hit the nail on the head in terms of the recent developments in the Middle East concerning Israel and Iran. It certainly appears that the chess pieces are being positioned for possible escalation after September-- if Iran fails to comply with President Obama's demands.

There is also another development with the Saudi government and Israel about Israel using Saudi airspace in the event of a strike on the nuclear facilities in Iran. Apparently, the Saudis will turn their heads the other way if Israeli fighter jets use their airspace en-route to Iran.



“The Saudis have tacitly agreed to the Israeli air force flying through their airspace on a mission which is supposed to be in the common interests of both Israel and Saudi Arabia,” a diplomatic source said last week.


www.timesonline.co.uk...

Echoing what you mentioned earlier, I am some what perplexed at the UK and US partnership? I guess it goes back to Prime Minister Churchhill calling the partnership between the US and UK "The special relationship." I guess it is our kindred relationship that has lasted since America's colonial days and with speaking the same language along with similarities in government and the legal system. However, the UK has been lambasted by the Iranians recently regarding alleged involvement in the Iranian protests and the recent capture of British embassy employees.

I'm with you brother, I think Iran obtaining nuclear weapons would be catastrophic to the the greater Middle East and quite possibly world security.







[edit on 5-7-2009 by Jakes51]



posted on Jul, 5 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
Certainly seems like an attack on Iran is fairly imminent. Revolution fails to materialize after western security agencies try to stir up unrest and, most likely, interfere with the election process. US forces start pulling out of Iraqi cities. Saudi Arabia pretty much agrees to allow its airspace to be used for any attack on Iran. Biden says that US won't stand in Israel's way.

The writing is on the wall, as they say.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
If the US attacks Iran, if Israel attacks Iran - and I think they will - then it will be their final demise.

The world was appalled by Palestine - make no mistake about that - the world was appalled by Iraq and the world will not stand for another ridiculous enterprise such as attacking Iran.

The EU wants rid of the UK - the emerging Bric nations are almost entirely at odds with the US (Brazil aside) - which means the US and UK are looking firmly at being entirely on their own, or against a considerable opposition.

Remember that it took an alliance of almost the entire world to defeat Germany and Japan - and before this occurred they succeeded in taking over much of the planet. So consider the consequences of a United front to the US and UK including Russia, China the "STANS" and much of the middle east and south east asia. As much as Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia enjoy the finance and protection of America - make no mistake about their underlying attitudes and precarious dictatorships - (Turkey aside) - almost the entire region would return to its previous stance of a united Islamic stance and over come the Shia Sunni hatred stirred up by the US.

The US and UK would be mown down financially and militarily - it would be a turkey shoot. The power of nationalism highlighted by the great wars of the 20th century was what led to volunteers and huge armies - the rise in self centred orientation in the west has led to an awareness of the corruption of their governments and unwillingness for self sacrifice will force the US and UK to conscript - the Russians, Chinese and entire middle east will have no such issues.

This will be the greatest mistake ever made and a turning point of modern history - we are headed for the Asian century - and this will be the pivot.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   


saying the U.S. "cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do."




Really? Maybe we should get a list of just who we consider to be "sovereign nations" because we seem to want to dictate what other nations can and can't do on a daily basis. Isn't Iran a sovereign nation? So, we can dictate what Iran can and can't do, but Israel's sovereignty prevents us from telling them not to go to war? Our hypocrisy knows no bounds.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karlhungis



saying the U.S. "cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do."




Really? Maybe we should get a list of just who we consider to be "sovereign nations" because we seem to want to dictate what other nations can and can't do on a daily basis. Isn't Iran a sovereign nation? So, we can dictate what Iran can and can't do, but Israel's sovereignty prevents us from telling them not to go to war? Our hypocrisy knows no bounds.


Very well said and you found the hypocrisy. I think a nation is only sovereign to the US and her allies when it is convenient to them. However when their interests are at stake; sovereignty goes out the window. Moreover, lets not just single out the US because I think every country has this stance. In terms of Iran, they are just as guilty as everyone else in disrespecting a nation's sovereignty; because of their meddling in Iraq.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Jakes51
 





Moreover, lets not just single out the US because I think every country has this stance. In terms of Iran, they are just as guilty as everyone else in disrespecting a nation's sovereignty; because of their meddling in Iraq.


Of course this is true. I am not singling out the US for supporting its allies. I am singling out our Vice President for thinking that we are all idiotic children that don't deserve honesty. There are a million different reasons that he could have given to "green light" an attack on Iran most of which wouldn't be dripping with such hypocrisy.

Why not be honest and say "We stand by our ally in any action they decide to take against Iran." Because, sadly...we are idiotic children who would object to that when phrased that way but are okay with it if he phrases it the other way. We (the majority of the population) don't want honesty I guess. It is apparently too much to ask for.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karlhungis
reply to post by Jakes51
 





Moreover, lets not just single out the US because I think every country has this stance. In terms of Iran, they are just as guilty as everyone else in disrespecting a nation's sovereignty; because of their meddling in Iraq.


Of course this is true. I am not singling out the US for supporting its allies. I am singling out our Vice President for thinking that we are all idiotic children that don't deserve honesty. There are a million different reasons that he could have given to "green light" an attack on Iran most of which wouldn't be dripping with such hypocrisy.

Why not be honest and say "We stand by our ally in any action they decide to take against Iran." Because, sadly...we are idiotic children who would object to that when phrased that way but are okay with it if he phrases it the other way. We (the majority of the population) don't want honesty I guess. It is apparently too much to ask for.


Well, I am not surprised by the Vice President's statement or his oratory skills. His mouth has gotten him in trouble before. However, like you, I think he should learn to pick his words a little more carefully now that he is on the world stage instead of the United States Senate. Personally, I think President Obama appointed this buffoon for comedy relief *sarcasm*.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   
"Sovereign" isnt just the Websters Dictionary version. Typically what is meant is a country who doesnt attack its neighbors and who isnt run by a dictator and whoe people are free. Thats a Sovereign nation. In Irans case, yes they havent attacked neighbors and they had "elections" but they are run by a person Ayatolla Kahmenai who has abosulute power (a dictator) and their people are not free. The US on the other hand has attacked countries, but is not run by a dictatorship (our president doesnt have absolute power-not even close) and the people are free.

So when someone says they arent going to tell another sovereign nation what they can and cant do, remember the criteria.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
"Sovereign" isnt just the Websters Dictionary version. Typically what is meant is a country who doesnt attack its neighbors and who isnt run by a dictator and whoe people are free. Thats a Sovereign nation. In Irans case, yes they havent attacked neighbors and they had "elections" but they are run by a person Ayatolla Kahmenai who has abosulute power (a dictator) and their people are not free. The US on the other hand has attacked countries, but is not run by a dictatorship (our president doesnt have absolute power-not even close) and the people are free.

So when someone says they arent going to tell another sovereign nation what they can and cant do, remember the criteria.


Absolute garbage - I just did a Masters on sovereignty - a soveriegn nation is irrespective of its form of government - don't post about things you have no idea about as though you were some authority on the issue - more than happy to put up my 30,000 words over two years on the subject -

why try and pretend you are an expert on something you clearly, CLEARLY know nothing about.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:05 AM
link   
LOL, way to put your foot ENTIRELY in your mouth, princeofpeace.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:06 AM
link   
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .


Short memory there tiger - the US and Russia may agree on a return to the table to discuss nuclear disarmament - and Russia may not want to see proliferation - however that is a long way from accepting a US or Israeli invasion of Iran.

Remember two things - Russia and Iran are infinitely better at politics that the US - the US barely has a machivellian (in the true sense of the term) in their collective diplomatic body. The Russians have also stated very clearly and emphatically that there will be repurcussions for the Georgia trouble cause be the US. Further it has been made abundantly clear last week that Russia fullfilled its cotnractual obligations agreed to last year with Iran to supply the s-300.

Russia will supply and arm Iran with whatever it needs as will China - China would not be adverse to sending troops - Iran can be resupplied through the caspian with whatever it needs from either of these countries - HENCE AMERICAS ATTEMPTED COUP -

Israel goes into Iran - you can kiss good-bye to your entire lifestyle - a Hamburger in the US will be 300 dollars - and that is how you will be defeated - your lifestyle will kill you.



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by audas

Originally posted by dooper
A nuclear armed Iran is unacceptable.

Russia and the US agree on that.

So - since Israel was the one threatened with extinction - turn them loose!

Simple problems only require simple solutions.

The Iranian Mullah government seems to be begging for destruction. Let them have it.

Now, if we could just let South Korea . . .


Short memory there tiger - the US and Russia may agree on a return to the table to discuss nuclear disarmament - and Russia may not want to see proliferation - however that is a long way from accepting a US or Israeli invasion of Iran.

Remember two things - Russia and Iran are infinitely better at politics that the US - the US barely has a machivellian (in the true sense of the term) in their collective diplomatic body. The Russians have also stated very clearly and emphatically that there will be repurcussions for the Georgia trouble cause be the US. Further it has been made abundantly clear last week that Russia fullfilled its cotnractual obligations agreed to last year with Iran to supply the s-300.

Russia will supply and arm Iran with whatever it needs as will China - China would not be adverse to sending troops - Iran can be resupplied through the caspian with whatever it needs from either of these countries - HENCE AMERICAS ATTEMPTED COUP -

Israel goes into Iran - you can kiss good-bye to your entire lifestyle - a Hamburger in the US will be 300 dollars - and that is how you will be defeated - your lifestyle will kill you.


You're my effin hero!

Wake up America, the Khazars were always a blood-thirsty people expelled wherever they go -- like aliens without human emotions,



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join