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.

 

Israel was close to war this winter - Hezbollah missiles under direct control of Iranian Rev. Guards

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 06:42 AM
link   

'Israel was close to war this winter' - Missiles in Lebanon under control of Iranian Rev. Guards


www.thejc.com

Syria smuggled long-range missiles to Hizbollah in Lebanon earlier this year, leading to Israeli threats to attack the weapons convoys, it has emerged. Such an attack could have escalated into another war on Israel’s northern border.
(visit the link for the full news article)







[edit on 16-4-2010 by Mdv2]




posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 06:42 AM
link   
In recent weeks, there have been waves of news concerning the powder keg called the Middle East and although a vast part consists of the same old rhetoric, it only needs a fool to set this powder keg alight.

It is not so interesting that Israel was close to war this winter, but what is interesting in this report, is that Hezbollah apparently acquired 'chemical warfare bombs and advanced anti-aircraft missiles.' Another interesting thing is that 'Israeli sources say that the main difference since 2006 is that 'Hizbollah’s missile forces are now under the direct control of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and their firing can only take place under direct orders from Tehran.'

I personally believe that is major news as it gives sense to Syria's move of supplying Hezbollah with SCUDs. They are preparing for an all out confrontation with Israel in which Israel will likely to attempt to deal with Syria and Hezbollah for once and for all with direct Iranian involvement.

In such a war, Hezbollah would of extremely strategic importance as Iran could attack Israel with ballistic missiles from the North at close proximity and from the East. Syria's military is very outdated, but they have a very large number of artillery pieces. All together, the next war would in contrast to previous cause a high number of civilian casualties in Israel and I cannot see that the West will not get directly involved.

At least, this would be a good distraction from the financial crisis.










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



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 06:51 AM
link   
Ya know what? I think everything the Israelis say, or is parroted by their US mouthpieces, has to be taken with a very large dose of salt.
I think past experience should make this obvious, given the history of lies, unproven allegations and innuendo coming from Israel - always from anonymous but well placed sources, or from official sources speaking on condition of anonymity...etc...etc.... therefore completely unverifiable.


These warmongers are itching for another fight, dragging the rest of us in if at all possible, but they have to make it, once again, look like they are innocent victim.

Sorry, that aint gonna work Mr NuttyYahoo!

Something else to point out is that Israel too has an arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the means to deliver them over great distances. Obviously though, those are good WMD,s as opposed to anyone else, who only has evil intent.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   
My first impression of this is the source...

I don't count Israeli media propaganda as reliable sources for info like this...Nor do I take any notice of the same article copied almost word for word from another source like Reuters or AP...

I'd need to see this information from a "reliable" source to take it with anything but a grain of salt...

[edit on 16/4/2010 by Retrovertigo]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Aside from the increase in the number and quality of these missiles, Israeli sources say that the main difference since 2006 is that Hizbollah’s missile forces are now under the direct control of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and their firing can only take place under direct orders from Tehran.

IF this is true, which I doubt a lot, Israel will go to war with Lebanon, Syria and Iran... and they will be ``forced`` to use nukes against Iran if they go at it alone because Iran is too far, their airforce cannot go to Iran, it would let Israel defenseless... so the only way they CAN stop iranian launching missiles at Israel and/or supply to Syria/Lebanon is to use missiles... and conventionnal missiles won't do it, Iran is too large and too far...

So UNLESS the US gets in the war, Israel will be forced to use nukes against Iran....

So if Obama is really an enemy of Israel, which I think is utter BS... or he's too weak politically to help Israel against Iran... Iran will be nuked... and that will open a big can of radiated worms.

By being too weak, Obama will have created a big nuclear mess. It's like if JFK would have been too weak and let the Soviets put dozens of nuclear missiles in Cuba... it would have probably ended in a nuclear disaster.

Israel using nukes in the next conflict is also the analysis of many geopolitical experts.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Israel using nukes in the next conflict is also the analysis of many geopolitical experts.
[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]


And if Israel does use nukes without all but the most serious of provocations, can you imagine the outrage in the world at large and the fury amongst certain people in particular ?

If Israel wants to jeopardise the safety and well being of Israelis and indeed jews world-wide, then they can go ahead and nuke Iran...

I'm not sure I'd recommend it, however...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:20 AM
link   
the thing I feel is that these stories create a great deal of fear for those on the ground in these areas.. and it will only take one silly mistake for this to escalate out of all proportion..

I'm not sure if that is what the hawks on all sides are after, keep pushing the other until the other makes a mistake.. But I really do feel that whoever starts this, who ever fires that first shot WILL be deemed the bad guy..

Tho ultimatly I think this conflict will take place and going by all the issues being spewed forth right now on all sides, I would say the conflict will take place pretty soon..



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Only strategical thing - if all these claims are truth - is that Lebanon and Syria, with help of Iran, tries to build same kind of "barrier of fear" to their borders like North Korea has build against South.

But no matter how much they could build their defences, it will not help in main problem - Palestinians, occupation or defending East Jerusalem. So what is the point? Scuds will not destroy any occupation or help palestinians...

So long that Israel wont show evidence to public, or any official statement wont back their claims - I really dont believe that Scuds has been delivered. I think Israel is just using feartactics against their own population, to keep them united - and ready for possible wars in near future.

Still waiting...



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
Ya know what? I think everything the Israelis say, or is parroted by their US mouthpieces, has to be taken with a very large dose of salt.


Exactly, i think they are coming out with this as iran is trying to just tell the truth about what the anglo american empire is doing to them.

Propaganda i very strong in west and even putin said that russia has alot to learn from the west on how powerful they are at getting people to believe rubbish.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


I really do not feel Nukes will be used... since the logistics of such an attack would mean something like a 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 redundancy.. (3 nukes per target) due to the risk of downed aircraft.. e.g the Dambusters used an 8 to 1 redundancy (8 lancasters/bouncing bombs per dam)

If your going after 10 targets in iran that is 20 - 30 Nuke armed aircraft.

Then you have the issue of what to do with a downed aircraft that has a nuke onboard (with 20 - 30 aircraft with nukes that risk is very very high) and of course you would not want one of your nukes to fall into enemy hands means the weapon needs to destroyed 100%..

So then what if one aircraft with a nuke crashes into a population center??

Losing one aircraft in that situation means you have lost control of the whole situation.. that level of risk is obsurd, no one will take that type of risk.

Unless the Dolphin subs can launch cruise based nukes, then *if* an attack occurs it will be (IMHO) conventional, at least the first round will be..

If the whole thing starts to escalate then I am sure the types of weapons used will escalate, until that point it will be conventional..



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:36 AM
link   
I read on a related post how certain "militias" have arranged to sieze land in Galilee in the event of conflict.

Now Israel's ultimate defense is nuclear, but they are surounded and heavily outnumbered on all sides. I've also seen reports where the Syrians(i think) threatened that they would take the fight to the Israelis.

What are the possibilities of a large scale human invasion into Israel itself, by Hamas/Hezbollah/anyone else? Surely that would short circuit any nuclear options? (they cannot nuke their own cities?)

It seems to me quite clear that all sides in this conflict are ready. None can win conventionally, not if this does explodes on more than 1 front, so surely all the strategists have "unconventional" plans?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:37 AM
link   


If Israel wants to jeopardise the safety and well being of Israelis and indeed jews world-wide, then they can go ahead and nuke Iran...

I'm pretty sure some sickminded people in Israel wants this... You know why? Because then it would be another ``good reason to move to Israel``... and ``support Israel`` since Israel will be the only place were jews are not attacked...

It would be like selling a product... It would be great divide and conquer... Jews are more attacked worldwide because of Israel actions, that's a fact. Now when Israel nukes someone, jews will be even more attacked worldwide and more jews will go to Israel thinking it's the only place safe for them...

The problem is that lots of people in the world don't do the difference between zionist and jew. Every goddamn time they talk about Israel in the news, it's always ``the jewish state``... So for most people, Israeli actions are all the world's jews actions...

This is so sick...

And yes Israel can use nukes, since they would put nukes on their JERICHO ballistic missiles launched either from their dolphin submarines or from their main missiles bases on Israel ground. They would not deliver them by plane because they need them near their home for defence. They cannot afford to send them to Iran.

They would attack : Tehran, important missile bases and army bases and nuclear enrichment/research plants...

Tehran for sure would be nuked. Now you know why Ahmadinejad wants 5 millions people to leave Tehran... not because of earthquakes but the fact that if Israel use nukes, the first one to get it will be Tehran.


THE ONLY WAY to avoid Israel using nukes is THE USA ENTERING THE WAR IN THE FIRST DAY OF IT STARTING.

Now you calculate the chances of that happening... I think they are pretty low unless a false-flag is staged.

I don't want war... but if the only option to stop nuclear war in the middle-east and TENS OF MILLIONS of dead people is a conventional war and a draft... I say we go for it... even if that makes me sick to say this.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by thoughtsfull
 


You also have to remember where did iran hide all this stuff, can israel and america really get to it with bombs or nukes or what ever.

You would think that if russia helped iran they would of been able to advise iran on how to hide what ever to ensure the best security against american bombs.

So i think the fact that america and israel have not hit them already, shows that iran has hid them somewhere americans cannot get to yet.

I think thats why bush and now obama cannot do this yet, or israel would have done it by now.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 08:12 AM
link   
If Israel is dumb enough to use nukes, then good on them.

They will screw themselves as well through fallout immediately after, and later when the first dust storm picks up the irradiated sand and particles and blows it all over the middle east, Israel and into europe.

the best thing (i wish) is that Israel keeps up it's mis-information tactics pushing for a conflict to draw the US into another killing field, and when the SHTF, they give obama the phone call for US help ...

...and Obama says "remember the USS Liberty and 9/11? FU!" then hangs up on his whinney zionist a**, grabs a beer and goes and watches the simpsons.



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1033
 


Pesonally I think who ever breaks the nuclear silence since the last ones where dropped on Japan will have the whole world up in arms against them.. especially in a pre-emptive strike scenario.

The only weapons I know of capable of taking out a D5 hardened target accuratly is the Trident II with the Mk4 arming fuse..

And if that was used as it would be deemed a first strike and wouldn't leave any of the other nuclear player the option of not joining WW3.

That nuclear silence means a lot of the world, a comfort blanket if you will..

Given the level of hype and fear that first use of nukes creates in the world I really feel that an almost audible sigh will take place if Israel uses conventional weapons..

That is the level of fearmongering that has taken place over the last few years, so rather than outrage at an attack on Iran most will simply sigh in relief if conventional weapons are used.

Edit to add: We live in a sad sad world of fearmongering.. I wonder how much happier people would be without that mill stone around their necks.

[edit on 16/4/10 by thoughtsfull]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 08:41 AM
link   
I guess all of you haven't read the pentagon papers in 2006 about striking Iran using nuclear bunker buster eh?

I did. And in those papers, I've seen the craziest thing I ever saw... the sentence :

Underground nuclear warheads are safe for civilians because they explode underground.

WHAT?

I mean I COULDN'T BELIEVE IT THAT THIS KIND OF CRAZYNESS WAS IN PENTAGON PAPERS.

So don't be so sure about the level of sanity of your government because you may be surprised... and not in a good way.

And to those who think I'm making this up... well it's your business, but I wouldn't joke about this.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 08:47 AM
link   
Hezbollah have just answered to "Scud Crisis" ...

Hezbollah: Our missiles are none of Israel's business




A Hezbollah government minister said on Friday that whether or not they have acquired scud missiles is none of Israel's business.

Minister Hussein Haj Hassan says the group was always arming and preparing itself but he refused to confirm or deny Israeli allegations that the militant Lebanese group has acquired Scud missiles.

www.haaretz.com...

- What a way to handle diplomacy, uh?



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
a little change to the wording gets this:

An Israeli government minister said on Friday that whether or not they have acquired nuclear missiles is none of the worlds business. Minister (insert any zionist nut job name here) says the country was always arming and preparing itself but he refused to confirm or deny any allegations that the militant Israeli government has acquired nuclear missiles.

What's good for the goose... as they say!



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo
I guess all of you haven't read the pentagon papers in 2006 about striking Iran using nuclear bunker buster eh?

I did. And in those papers, I've seen the craziest thing I ever saw... the sentence :

Underground nuclear warheads are safe for civilians because they explode underground.

WHAT?

I mean I COULDN'T BELIEVE IT THAT THIS KIND OF CRAZYNESS WAS IN PENTAGON PAPERS.

So don't be so sure about the level of sanity of your government because you may be surprised... and not in a good way.

And to those who think I'm making this up... well it's your business, but I wouldn't joke about this.

[edit on 16-4-2010 by Vitchilo]


If that is their chosen course who are we to be able to stop them.. but the logic and risk of flying with that amount of nukes is obsurd, since I would have thought that at least 3 or 4 of the nuke armed planes would get downed.. then you are into a whole other kind of mess.

*shakes head* at a very mad world..

Well I will hope they are not that silly and this is all just distraction from the economic issues the world faces..



posted on Apr, 16 2010 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


I don't think you're making up the underground nukes remark by the Pentagon one bit, Vitchilo...

To me, you've proven yourself as one of the best providers of info regarding ME happenings on ATS along with a few other people, and I have no reason to doubt you when you say you read those papers


Gotta make you wonder about how smart the blokes at the Pentagon are tho...An image of Jim Carrey and Owen Wilson looking rather demented for a movie promo leaps to mind tho...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join