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.

 

'Iran to hold missile defense drill'

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   

'Iran to hold missile defense drill'


www.jpost.com

The day after the existence of second uranium enrichment facility in Iran was revealed, the Islamic republic announced it would begin missile defense exercises beginning Sunday, according to a Reuters report.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Well it looks like Iran isnt going to sit around and wait for it. They are preparing in ernest for an attack. Ive also been on reading statements coming out of Israel and its looking more and more likely that a strike will be coming soon. I believe we will see one within the next 2-3 weeks and maybe as soon as the G-20 summit is over and everyone (world leaders) return home.

www.jpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 26-9-2009 by princeofpeace]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
If iran gets striked than all hell will break loose in middle east.

-US troops can expect a nice flow of insurgents and advanced IED's into iraq.
-I wonder if the Shia northern alliance in afghanistan and mahdis in iraq will continue to collaborate with US.
-hezbollah goes mental raining hell on israel
-hamas gains more support
-Saudis/kuwait might see missiles heading towards the pipes

There's a saying that 'you don't put your hand in every hole,their might be a snake in one'.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Wow I must really need to get a new dictionary as either I have the meaning of the word Defense really backwards or the original poster does.

I had always been under the impression that 'defense' meant how you responded to being 'attacked' from someone's offense.

How defense gets construed into offense I don't know except perhaps by those people who imagine there is something offensive about a nation serious about defending itself against warrantless and baseless agression.

I doubt the Iranians suffer under the illusion of coined phrases like 'preemptive war or preemptive attack' as being defensive in nature.

It sounds to me like they are preparing for an offensive attack from the Israeli nation that won't let Interntaional Inspectors into it's nuclear facilities because Iran lets Inernational Inspectors into it's nuclear facilities.

Sadly because those International Inspectors can't find clear evidence of what they would like to find to justify a preemptive offensive war they just have to keep pretending that the world is in danger from Iran when it's pretty obvious to anyone of any reasonable intelligence the world is in danger from Israel and it's skewered notion of preemptive unilatteral attacks as somehow being defensive in nature, which is about as offensive to people of intelligence and common sense as offensive could be.

The meek sure aren't inhereting the earth any time soon with the Zionists running Israel that's for sure!



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 

I posted this on another thread earlier and nobdy seemed to notice


Anyway S&F my friend

Do you think Israel will see this as an act as Defiance against them and the west?



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


reread his post, he says Iran isn't going to sit back and wait for Israel to attack, they're going to prepare for it.

pretty well spelled out in the second post.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
DUH!!!! Of course i meant Iran was preparing for DEFENSE. What else would you call it when i stated that Israel was getting ready to attack within 2-3 weeks.

Okay-let me spell this out for you S-L-O-W-L-Y:

Israel attacks (thats offense).

Iran is attacked and responds (thats defense).

The title of my Thread is "Iran to hold DEFENSE drill."

Not sure what you're missing here?



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
Wow I must really need to get a new dictionary as either I have the meaning of the word Defense really backwards or the original poster does.

I had always been under the impression that 'defense' meant how you responded to being 'attacked' from someone's offense.

How defense gets construed into offense I don't know except perhaps by those people who imagine there is something offensive about a nation serious about defending itself against warrantless and baseless agression.

I doubt the Iranians suffer under the illusion of coined phrases like 'preemptive war or preemptive attack' as being defensive in nature.

It sounds to me like they are preparing for an offensive attack from the Israeli nation that won't let Interntaional Inspectors into it's nuclear facilities because Iran lets Inernational Inspectors into it's nuclear facilities.

Sadly because those International Inspectors can't find clear evidence of what they would like to find to justify a preemptive offensive war they just have to keep pretending that the world is in danger from Iran when it's pretty obvious to anyone of any reasonable intelligence the world is in danger from Israel and it's skewered notion of preemptive unilatteral attacks as somehow being defensive in nature, which is about as offensive to people of intelligence and common sense as offensive could be.

The meek sure aren't inhereting the earth any time soon with the Zionists running Israel that's for sure!



[edit on 26-9-2009 by princeofpeace]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Crakeur
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


reread his post, he says Iran isn't going to sit back and wait for Israel to attack, they're going to prepare for it.

pretty well spelled out in the second post.



Hey Crakeur my friend, my reading comprehension serves me well enough to decipher the highly speculative nature of his commentary.

My love of history serves me well enough to know Iran has not undertaken a war of overt agression as an Islamic Republic.

When I combine the speculative nature of the Original Posters commentary with the facts of history that suggest it is purely speculative it causes me to dismiss these speculations as being anything but either wishful or paranoid ramblings.

No offense meant but even though I ride a bicycle the cost of groceries is going to go up right along with gas should Israel get this war.

It has been Israel repeditively calling for war and talking about military action so please respectfully foregive me for believing my lying eyes as opposed to the baseless and self serving speculation of others.

Had Iran had a true overt history of starting agressive war I would feel diferently but I find the charges against Iran to be as baseless as the charges against Iraq turned out to be.

Considering it's the same intelligence agencies and inspection agencies, you know those intelligence agencies who got it wrong in Iraq and didn't get it right here when someone was flying planes in to our buildings I have a hard time reaching the same conclusions that the media and the government would like me too.

I appreciate you understanding that friend.

Thanks!



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Being a 'level headed' individual, i have always managed to see past the hype and paranoia in these situations in recent years. However, this time i have an uneasy feeling that things may take a turn for the worst.

A strike on Iran, whether Israel or the US or any other allied nation will open a large can of worms.

It seems to me that the US has been relatively unchallenged in it's quest to 'rid the world of terrorism' so far.

Consider this, is world just going to sit back and allow the US and any ally systematically pick a rogue nation that it believes to be a threat to global security or a harbourer of terrorists ,invade them and try and convince the world that what they are doing is justified?

Do the PTB in the west have a crystal ball? Psychic ability? Perhaps they got a copy of the bible code by Michael Drosnin and decided it was 'better to be safe than sorry'

In the case of Iran, why must they not be allowed to produce a nuclear warhead when half the globe has possessed them since the sixties?

Just because no nation that currently possesses them has not thrown one in anger for the last 6 decades, does that qualify them to own them and deem another nation incompetent to do so?

This time, i think, it will be a step too far.

This is , of course, my own opinion. Reasons? References?

Well no! but i'd bet a truck load of cash that this time it will be different.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 





Well it looks like Iran isnt going to sit around and wait for it. They are preparing in ernest for an attack.


This is pretty ambiguous wording. It could easily be construed as Iran is preparing to launch an attack.
That if they fail to launch an attack within a certain window that they likely will be attacked.

Perhaps your intent was different than how the words were crafted, but based on how the words were crafted they lacked a clear definition and could be widely interpreted and were.

So you agree that Iran is not planning on launching an attack of it’s own ‘first’ and is only preparing defensively to respond to an Israeli attack?



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Read the title of the thread. That is the premise of the discussion. The thread doesnt say "Iran preparing to attack Israel". Im not sure what you are having such a hard time understading? Forgive me if English is not your first language.



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by princeofpeace
 





Well it looks like Iran isnt going to sit around and wait for it. They are preparing in ernest for an attack.


This is pretty ambiguous wording. It could easily be construed as Iran is preparing to launch an attack.
That if they fail to launch an attack within a certain window that they likely will be attacked.

Perhaps your intent was different than how the words were crafted, but based on how the words were crafted they lacked a clear definition and could be widely interpreted and were.

So you agree that Iran is not planning on launching an attack of it’s own ‘first’ and is only preparing defensively to respond to an Israeli attack?


[edit on 26-9-2009 by princeofpeace]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:49 PM
link   
To throw out another theory, I don't think Iran is doing "defense drills" at all. Iran opened his mouth at the G20 and welcomed inspectors to his "new" site.

My guess is that they are staging the facility -- removing anything they don't want seen or inspected -- and doing it under the guise of a drill.

Nobody is going to notice what exactly is coming in and out of that facility if there is the pretense of a drill.

So my guess is that they are getting the facility "ready" for inspection..

And yes, it's a guess.....



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Good point. I mean im sure the US's "eyes in the sky" are trained all over Iran, but this defense drill will most definitely muddy the waters a little right?




Originally posted by lpowell0627
To throw out another theory, I don't think Iran is doing "defense drills" at all. Iran opened his mouth at the G20 and welcomed inspectors to his "new" site.

My guess is that they are staging the facility -- removing anything they don't want seen or inspected -- and doing it under the guise of a drill.

Nobody is going to notice what exactly is coming in and out of that facility if there is the pretense of a drill.

So my guess is that they are getting the facility "ready" for inspection..

And yes, it's a guess.....



[edit on 26-9-2009 by princeofpeace]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


The title of the thread is irrelevant as it's in the Breaking News forum; and you do not create the title being used, my response was to your commentary.

When you break down those two introductory sentences that were poorly prefaced it is wide open and subject to interpretation.

My unanswered question remains though, the same, and that is once again: Do you then agree that Iran is not likely to attack Israel first and is only drilling for and in anticipation Israel attacking first?

I can try to translate that into another language if it will help you to answer it! Thanks!



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Israel WILL hit Iran. Netenyau(SP?) as much as said so this week. Israel will not let any country overrun them. And since the president of Iran has continually denied the holocaust, he has infuriated the Jews, and the Christians who support Israel. Not to mention the WWII vets and survivors who saw the evidence for themselves.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 04:00 PM
link   
What i have written is not cryptic in the least. Yes, i expect Israel to attack Iran first. Thats why Iran is holding DEFENSE drills not OFFENSE drills. Hope this clears things up a little.



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


The title of the thread is irrelevant as it's in the Breaking News forum; and you do not create the title being used, my response was to your commentary.

When you break down those two introductory sentences that were poorly prefaced it is wide open and subject to interpretation.

My unanswered question remains though, the same, and that is once again: Do you then agree that Iran is not likely to attack Israel first and is only drilling for and in anticipation Israel attacking first?

I can try to translate that into another language if it will help you to answer it! Thanks!


[edit on 26-9-2009 by princeofpeace]



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by kettlebellysmith
 


Exactly how does a nation that does not border another nation overrun it?

How is denying what all occured during the holocaust and who all it benefited and to what extent the same as a decleration of war?

Exactly how would Iran overrun Israel, it lacks the landing craft both by sea and air to put an invasion force on the ground.

China has long wanted to attack Tawaiian just off of it's mainland but was never able to logistically move enough forces over 50 some odd miles of water to do it.

I think Israel is in far greater denial about the threat Iran poses than the Iranians are in regards to the holocaust and since clearly all the advance hype illustrates Israel is likely to attack and be the agressor how then does that illustrate any validity to the arguments for yet another costly 'preemptive war' that benefits the Military Industrial Complex and the Oil Companies but serves humanity not well at all?

Perhaps Israel should have sent an official delegation to Tehran when it has held Academic Conferences on the Holocaust to convince with words what it seems to only be able to convince people of with munitions?



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Thank you that wasn't so hard now was it!

It's nice to know you agree Israel will launch yet another unilatteral war of agression on a non-violent nation that has not attacked them.



posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 04:07 PM
link   
LOL-umm yes it was pretty difficult actually being that half of this thread has been taken up with my posts explaining to you what its about!!



Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Thank you that wasn't so hard now was it!

It's nice to know you agree Israel will launch yet another unilatteral war of agression on a non-violent nation that has not attacked them.




posted on Sep, 26 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by kettlebellysmith
 


Israel would hit Iran.... Maybe. Probably not though, at least i fail to see any positive outcome. Iran would retaliate, all hell would break loose ,another nice war here. And when dust settles and all sides lick their wounds , Iran could easily continue or even totally restart its nuclear program while having much more support for it . Inside and outside of Iran. And if a target of strike is to change the rulers of Iran, i fail to see how it can be done. Current government has support from most fanatical of Iranians, and those guys would not let go and locals would not help foreigners. Also Israel has no manpower or capability to occupy even Teheran, not to mention most of Iran.
Thus i hope that all this tough talk and sabre-rattling would end up in real pressure from all the sides, sanctions and such. This would translate in inner Iranian pressure and it will pop Ahmadinejad and co out, Iran is not a tyranny after all. Then normal Iranians can develop nuke, H-bomb or even death star as far as i stand.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join