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.

 

Washington talks war amid Iran diplomacy

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Washington talks war amid Iran diplomacy


www.aljazeera.com

Mullen said while he supports the aforementioned offer, he would rather have plans for a military strike on Iran, whether by Israel or the United States, as a last resort.

"I grow increasingly concerned that the Iranians have been non-responsive. I've said for a long time we don't need another conflict in that part of the world," said the top US military officer.
(visit the link for the full news article)






Headline: Please use the original story headline from your source.


[edit on 22-12-2009 by 12m8keall2c]




posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   
If America is talking diplomacy with Iran why would we also be talking about a possible armed conflict if this doesn't work in our favour? Are we trying to scare Iran with threats of international attacks because they won't obey us? This is very unproductive and will only drive Iran further into nuclear research so that they may make their own bomb for self defense. I think America is gambling way to much on this and Iran will give is the middle finger and then we will do the most ignorant thing by attacking them.

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



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   
It says millitary action as a "last resort". It's not a threat, his saying that war is the very last option on the table.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trolloks
It says millitary action as a "last resort". It's not a threat, his saying that war is the very last option on the table.


I know that, but it is unproductive to threaten military action at anytime, for any reason.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


Please don't lose sight of the fact that the source here...Aljazeera Magazine...on line....is typically not the place most of us would visit for straight out news.

Even to the right under "most viewed" one might see even the titles are quite biased and propagandized.

The veracity of the article as well as the others, is highly dubious, imo.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
All this article is really saying is: Iran, you better negotiate because if you don't we are not afraid to come after you....

It's a message for Iran to step up to the negotiating table and make a deal happen. The problem, of course, is that Iran is likely to call bluff.

If Iran doesn't make a deal happen before the end of the year, then I don't know what's going to happen. But my bet is that if ANY military action occurs, it will come out of Israel via indirect US involvement. The US will use Israel as the shield in this one I think.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:09 AM
link   
You can't simply *strike* Iranian nuclear facilities then be on your merry little way. This isn't Syria, if Israel strikes Iran thousands of rockets would be launched in retaliation and all out war would ensue. The strait of hormuz would be blocked, oil would skyrocket and we would find ourselves in quite a pickle.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I wish more people would watch/listen to this-

(skip to 2:00)


S/F



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ladyinwaiting
 


in this case the source doesnt matter however, this story is all over the place...



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 09:20 AM
link   
North Korea also attempted to work out a diplomatic solution... I wouldn't say they were talking about diplomacy as much as they were buying time. That whole situation worked out just great!

On the other hand we all know what happened to Iraq.

I would say the Iran situation is somewhere in between the to. There is no way for me personally to say where though. Iran has known nuclear facilities; some more recently known than others.

If anything else remember this. The military option is always on the table. All that means is when its stated publicly, it was stated for a reason.



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


self defense? that dog wont hunt. Iran has proven time and time again that it is not a nation that can be trusted with nuclear weapons. Time and time again the world has heard from Iran that if given half the chance it will destroy Israel, and you want to tell Israel that they have no right to neutrualize this threat. If America forces Israel to take out Irans nuclear facilities, rather than doing it themselves, then we are certain to see a major war in the middle east. If on the other hand The US were to grow some balls and take out the Iranian facilites then there is a slim chance we can contain the conflict and keep it from generating into a major middle east war. either way because we have pussyfooted around so long. taking out the facilities has grown harder and the repercussions of doing so have become more dire. This is what appeasment has brought us to.

[edit on 22-12-2009 by Phedreus]



posted on Dec, 22 2009 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Solomons
 

that maybe but we might need something like that to finally get to a greener economy..
If there is no oil we have to get on the bandwagon towards different sources.
We should allready invest in making nuclear power cleaner and using nuke power for hydrogene fuel because we have a to great dependancy on Iran and other oil rich nation who want the usa and the western world destroyd.
People know I don't like Irans leaders and there vision and there believe system.
But for the sake of the many Iran has to be dealt with.. with as less casualties as posible but we might have to use a tacticle nuke for our self to do the job and we have to take out all the leaders who support achmedinijad and the president self has to go to so that the people of Iran can finally have better education and see that the ways of the past and present aren[t the way forward.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join