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.

 

Brookings Institution document on Iran - the next false flag outlined in policy recommendations

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
June, 2009 - The Brookings Institution is a nonprofit public policy organization based in Washington, DC. Our mission is to conduct high-quality, independent research and, based on that research, to provide innovative, practical recommendations.

This think tank, respected by Congress and the President, released the 170 page document, WHICH PATH TO PERSIA? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran in June, 2009. It reads as a primer and gives recommendations on "dealing with Iran". It is also very straightforward with the idea that lying, cheating, bribery and coverups are necessary in the political realm.

That is not new to any of us, however. What is new, is that contained in this document, on page 150, is the following excerpt:

WHICH PATH TO PERSIA? Options for a New American Strategy toward Iran


A policy determined to overthrow the government of Iran might very well include plans for a full-scale invasion as a contingency. Certainly, if various forms of covert and overt support simply failed to produce the desired effect, a president determined to produce regime change in Iran might consider an invasion as the only other way to achieve that end. Moreover, the United States would have to expect Iran to fight back against American regime change operations, as it has in the past. Although the Iranians typically have been careful to avoid crossing American red lines, they certainly could miscalculate, and it is entirely possible that their retaliation for U.S. regime change activities would appear to Americans as having crossed just such a threshold. For example, if Iran retaliated with a major terrorist attack that killed large numbers of people or a terrorist attack involving WMDs—especially on U.S. soil—Washington might decide that an invasion was the only way to deal with such a dangerous Iranian regime. Indeed, for this same reason, efforts to promote regime change in Iran might be intended by the U.S. government as deliberate provocations to try to goad the Iranians into an excessive response that might then justify an American invasion.


The entire document is worth a read if you really want a glimpse inside diabolical minds but the big question is... Can anyone doubt that the Obama Administration is engaging in covert regime change operations in the Iranian government? Is this a hint of a new false flag operation in the making?? Is it a false flag operation if we know that they will do it and force them into it because we know they will?? I'd say yes.

Remember this is not from a conspiracy theory site and the authors are making recommendations in their conclusion.



Edit to change the title.

[edit on 6/7/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]




posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   


Certainly, if various forms of covert and overt support simply failed to produce the desired effect, a president determined to produce regime change in Iran

It failed so far... they've tried...for 2 years now.


might consider an invasion as the only other way to achieve that end. Moreover, the United States would have to expect Iran to fight back against American regime change operations, as it has in the past.

Yep.


For example, if Iran retaliated with a major terrorist attack that killed large numbers of people or a terrorist attack involving WMDs—especially on U.S. soil—

Unlikely. But good scenario for a false-flag. Iran options are more closer to home... Attacking US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, cutting supplies. Attacking Israel with long range missiles, chemicals and biological weapons, ordering Hezbollah to attack Israel. Blocking the strait of Hormutz. Blowing up oil installations in Saudi Arabia. Attacking US bases all around the middle-east.


Washington might decide that an invasion was the only way to deal with such a dangerous Iranian regime. Indeed, for this same reason, efforts to promote regime change in Iran might be intended by the U.S. government as deliberate provocations to try to goad the Iranians into an excessive response that might then justify an American invasion.

We know invasion if the final goal, then divide the middle east according to the Greater Middle East map.

[edit on 6-7-2009 by Vitchilo]



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:46 AM
link   
brookings institute...scary institute...well versed in the teachings of george goebbels...
afghanistan...iraq...classic military maneuver...pincer movement..attack from 2 fronts...hmmm...that is how napolean and hitler were defeated...
control the output of info..the whole strategy for afghan and iraq was to put pressure on iran..seems to be working doesn't it?
it's very simple to c with an objective outlook..
u know that we are all being misinformed....if u look for yourself without bias this will become evident..
it's a simple plan with a single objective....Iran has been the plan from day one...so much senseless slaughter to enrich those few who already possess more than half of the world's wealth....while millions die...needlessly...greed isn't about sharing..it's about acquiring...and if lives are forfeited as a consequence...so be it..
my word count is expiring...hope u get the gist..

peace...actually i c i have many more words available...but wish to cut it short 4 now...disturbs me that life is considered so cheap by monied interests...but it is as it is...

again peace....if only we could attain it...

[edit on 6-7-2009 by panlan]



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
I'd say things are in motion, since over the weekend Biden indicated we'd allow Israel to attack Iran, Saudi Arabia said they'd allow Israel to atttack Iran, and today Obama himself is in Russia signing multiple documents including nuclear proliferation agreements and permission for U.S. to move arms across Russia.



posted on Jul, 6 2009 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Dbriefed, I'd say that that part of the strategy is in alignment with the overall strategy outlined in the document. They are clearly advocating a strategy which encompasses all of the options. The Israel connection is contained in Chapter 5 - Leave it to Bibi: Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike. And, if you believe that the CIA had anything to do with the recent Iranian voting scandal, then you must read Toppling Tehran: Regime Change, Chapter 6: The Velvet Revolution: Supporting a Popular Uprising.

This is the playbook.

The excerpt I took above was from their conclusions Crafting an Integrated Iran Policy: Connecting the Options.

Introduction
The Trouble with Tehran: U.S. Policy Options toward Iran

Part I
Dissuading Tehran: The Diplomatic Options
Chapter 1: An Offer Iran Shouldn’t Refuse: Persuasion
Chapter 2: Tempting Tehran: The Engagement Option

Part II
Disarming Tehran: The Military Options
Chapter 3: Going All the Way: Invasion
Chapter 4: The Osiraq Option: Airstrikes
Chapter 5: Leave it to Bibi: Allowing or Encouraging an Israeli Military Strike

Part II
Toppling Tehran: Regime Change
Chapter 6: The Velvet Revolution: Supporting a Popular Uprising
Chapter 7: Inspiring an Insurgency: Supporting Iranian Minority And Opposition Groups
Chapter 8: The Coup: Supporting a Military Move Against the Regime

Deterring Tehran: Containment
Chapter 9: Accepting the Unacceptable: Containment

Conclusion
Crafting an Integrated Iran Policy: Connecting the Options

[edit on 6/7/2009 by Iamonlyhuman]



posted on Jul, 7 2009 @ 02:42 AM
link   
I find it harder and harder to believe that just a couple months before I joined I did not know anything about Iran and less than a year later I am positive Iran is going to be the catalyst for WWIII... whether or not they do it is irrelevent I think, but I guarantee they will be made out to be the bad guy because the same happened with Iraq for pretty much no reason... and now the poor Iranian civilians are going to get the short end of the stick (as if they havent already, if Im not mistaken public affection is illegal).
Its scary that there are documents suggesting false flags too!! If thats not libel and terrorism I dont know what is. Misleading the public to act out genocide for you is worse than anything... I think politicians need to have their diplomatic immunity revoked!




top topics
 
11

log in

join