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 demands US troop withdrawal

page: 3
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 



LOL

You call that stable?

As long as your head is in your rectum




You should really post links if you're going to quote headlines. Yup all Muslim on Muslim sectarian violence. Sunni vs Shia, Those were great examples of how many, NOT all, but many Muslims deal with their differences.

When you stop with the verbal diarrhea then maybe we could talk.



[edit on 20-4-2010 by SLAYER69]




posted on Apr, 20 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Why does Ahmadenijad want the US out of the Middle East and Central Asia? Probably to open the floodgates for easier access to resources by his pals China and Russia? As soon as the presence of the US is brought down to minimal levels, you can bet the Russians and Chinese will be there like flies on excrement to wheel and deal with the oil and natural gas producers of the region. In turn, Iran will become supreme power in the region as well, and with a minimal US presence, it will only embolden them even further to meddle in Iraqi government affairs and apply more pressure on Israel, Saudi Arabia, and even Jordan.

If he thinks the US is going to withdraw their forces from Afghanistan and Iraq altogether and leave the region open to Iranian influence, he ought to get his head checked, because it will never happen. What concessions of goodwill has his government taken to bring the US and Israel at ease about his countries' nuclear program? Have UN inspectors being given free access to the program, and has the Iranian regime been transparent about the direction and development of their nuclear program?

At this point in time, they have not, and are slowly exhibiting a war-like footing toward the West and its allies in the region. So, under these conditions, how could any country with a significant business dealings, allies, and a military presence in the region leave, and at the behest of a provocateur no less? He might as well be singing to the choir.

As of now, US forces are scheduled to be out of Iraq by 2011, however, I would not be surprised if there was a contingency plan in the withdrawal agreement between the US and Iraqi government if the need arises for US forces to remain. It appears the security situation has improved and the draw-down is going as planned.



. . . (General) Odierno described al-Qaida in Iraq as an enemy on the run. The number of attacks and casualties to civilians and military personnel dropped in the first three months of 2010, he said.

"Iraqi security forces are now in the lead at going after al-Qaida," he said.

Neighboring Iran continues to play a destabilizing role, providing lethal and aid and training for insurgent elements, Odierno said. Asked if he'd like the authority to go into Iran and take out the training camps, he said he doesn't think it is necessary to conduct such operations.

"I think what's more important is to build up the Iraqi capability to protect their own homeland," he said.

www.google.com...

Therefore, if Ahmadenijad bides his time and keeps his mouth closed, in 2011 he and his mullahs may get their wish, at least with Iraq. It should be no surprise to anyone that Iran wants exclusive ties to the new largely Shia run Iraqi government. However, if the harsh rhetoric and tough talk continues by the Iranian regime, it may give the US a reason to pause and drag their feet on withdrawal. Still, my gut tells me the US is not going to leave from Iraq or Afghanistan as outlined by the President, and all the talk of complete withdrawal is just rhetoric and a political ploy. We will just have to wait and see?


[edit on 20-4-2010 by Jakes51]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Good post Oz, thank you

You should all remember the Iranians yearning for peace and independencies for ages “I am talking about more than 1500 years”.

The very damn thing they never had because of the foreign countries influences. Leave them alone and keep those paranoia (about the A bomb) to yourself and your region.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 12:40 AM
link   
Iran is a puppet they have no capabilities to back up their talk. They are merely the pawns of China and Russia. They are economically dependent on them as well as militarily. The problem though is these small little rogue countries can cause lots of problems by supplying groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas with upper end technology



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I don't recall any talk of serious armed sectarian violence in the ME or Afghanistan until we invaded and started our usual divide and rule tactics, I don't count the post Kuwait anti Saddam violence that we whipped up anyway. IIRC Shia fought alongside Suni in the Iraqi army during the USA's proxy attack on Iran during the 80's.

The son of the old Sha must have loads of looted cash left over from when they ran away in the face of the revolution cos he's spreading mountains of lobby dollars all over DC.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Thepreye
 



You are more educated about the situation now becuase it's been in the news more often and on the Interwebs. The US and Israel were not around in Muhammad's time or shortly there after.


Source

Sectarian violence between two major Sects of Islam i.e., Shiia and Sunni has occurred in countries like Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Lebanon etc. This violent conflict has roots in the political turmoil arising out of differences over succession to the leadership of the state of Medina at the demise of Muhammad.



In a nutshell here is the Good, Bad and the Ugly.

Chronology: A History of the Shia-Sunni Split

The division of Islam into Sunni and Shia branches goes far back in Muslim history to the aftermath of the death of the Prophet Muhammad. Its repercussions have rippled through history, with periods of peace and periods of war. With the recent turmoil, the conflict between Shia and Sunni is once again a driving force behind events in the Middle East. Read a chronology:

570: The Prophet Muhammad is born.

598: Ali, who will become the fourth caliph and the first Shiite Imam, is born.

610: The year Muslims cite as the beginning of Muhammad's mission and revelation of the Koran.

613: The public preaching of Islam begins.

630: The Muslims, led by Muhammad, conquer Mecca.

632: Muhammad dies. Abu Bakr is chosen as caliph, his successor. A minority favors Ali. They become known as Shiat Ali, or the partisans of Ali.

656: Ali becomes the fourth caliph after his predecessor is assassinated. Some among the Muslims rebel against him.

661: Violence and turmoil spread among the Muslims; Ali is assassinated.

680: Hussein, son of Ali, marches against the superior army of the caliph at Karbala in Iraq. He is defeated, his army massacred, and he is beheaded. The split between Shia and Sunnis deepens. Shia consider Ali as their first Imam, Hussein as the third Imam.

873: The 11th Shiite Imam dies. No one succeeds him.

873-940: In the period, known as the Lesser Occultation, the son of the 11th Imam disappears, leaving his representatives to head the Shiite faith.

940: The Greater Occultation of the 12th or Hidden Imam begins. No Imam or representative presides over the Shiite faithful.

1258: The Mongols, led by Hulagu, destroy Baghdad, ending the Sunni Arab caliphate.

1501: Ismail I establishes the Safavid Dynasty in Persia, and declares Shiism the state religion.

1900: Ruhollah Khomeini is born in Persia.

1920-1922: Arabs, both Shia and Sunni, revolt against British control of Iraq.

1922-1924: Kemal Ataturk abolishes the Ottoman sultanate and the Turkish Sunni caliphate.

1925: Reza Khan seizes power in Persia, declares himself Shah, establishing the Pahlavi dynasty.

1932: Iraq becomes an independent nation, under King Feisal, a Sunni Arab.

1935: Persia is renamed Iran.

1941: Reza Shah abdicates throne in favor of his son Mohammad Reza Shah. British and Soviet military forces occupy Iran.

1953: A joint CIA/British intelligence operation in Iran keeps the Shah on the throne and ousts nationalist Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.

1963: Amid widespread protests in Iran against the Shah, Ayatollah Khomeini is arrested, then exiled to Najaf in Iraq.

1967: Israel defeats Egypt, Syria and Jordan in the Six Day War.

1968: The Baath Party seizes power in Iraq.

1973: Israel defeats Egypt and Syria in the Yom Kippur War.

1978-79: Widespread protests force the Shah to abdicate and flee Iran. Ayatollah Khomeini returns to Iran to lead the revolution.

1979: Saddam Hussein seizes power, becomes president of Iraq. Iranian revolutionary students seize the U.S. embassy in Tehran and take diplomats hostage. They are released in January 1981.

1980: Saddam Hussein orders the Iraqi army to attack Iran.

1980-1988: Iran-Iraq war. Hundreds of thousands die on each side and the war ends in a stalemate.

1982: Israel invades Lebanon, seizes Beirut. Hezbollah is formed in Lebanon.

1983: Suicide truck bombers, believed to be Hezbollah, kill 241 American servicemen in Beirut.

1989: Ayatollah Khomeini dies in Iran.

1990: Saddam Hussein orders his army to seize Kuwait.

1991: The U.S. military ousts the Iraqi army from Kuwait. Shia of southern Iraq rebel against Saddam Hussein, who puts down the rebellion brutally. Thousands of Shia are killed.

1991-2003: Iraq is placed under economic sanctions. U.N. weapons inspectors destroy most of Iraq's nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs.

2001: Al-Qaida, led by Sunni Muslim fundamentalists, mounts attacks in the United States, killing 3,000 people. The United States invades Afghanistan and ousts the Sunni Taliban government.

2003: The U.S. military invades Iraq, topples Saddam. An Iraqi insurgency erupts, led by Sunni Baathists and al-Qaida.

2005-2006: Iraqi elections bring Shiite political parties to power in Baghdad, backed by Iran. Sunni-Shiite sectarian violence intensifies.

2005: Hard-line fundamentalist Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is elected president in Iran. Iran pursues acquisition of nuclear technology.

2006: War breaks out between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The U.N. Security Council imposes economic sanctions on Iran in response to nuclear activities.

2007: The United States sends additional troops to Iraq.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 03:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I see your point. I wonder if any of these iranian apologists and appeasers will.

Hard to blame the middle east violence on the U.S. when history shows that the muslims there have been at each others (and everyone else's) throats for 1,400 years..



[edit on 4/21/2010 by centurion1211]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   


"The region has no need for alien troops and they should return home and let the regional states take care of their own affairs," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a speech marking the country's annual Army Day on Sunday.


Shhh! Don't antagonize America, or they'll "bring democracy" to your country next!



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by centurion1211
 


You know what I was thinking?


Civil War!

Maybe this needs to be hashed out Once and for all among Sunni and Shia Muslims. I mean look at the UK and the US. At one time we were at our individual throats then the Birth.

This would actually work! If Iraq can figure out it's own future without US or Iranian Interference that is.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Given time, Iran could be the most stabilising nation in the region, that is if look at the youth in their shopping malls, designer clothes, piercings and nights out having fun..

Image it
it would be a contagion running through the ME, youth wanting to have fun, while still being good Muslims and all the traditional hard line govs would not be able to stand in the way of that..

If you look at the youth in Iran, they are a reflection of youth from all round the globe, with their phones and sunglasses, and just as skirts inched their way up in the West in the 60's, head scarf's are inching there way down in Iran..

Change in coming to Iran if war does not get there first..

That image of the Iranian youth does not bode well for the current hard line regime, who, like Western governments are using all the tricks they can to remain in power.

In time the youth of Iran will change the regime to their way of thinking, just as in the West, the same process will happen with the banksters that control our worlds, that is, unless the hawks manage to pitch us against each other first.

Just as we are the real threat to our own governments and banksters, it is the youth of Iran who are the real threat to the current status quo within Iran, and these are the reasons why I feel the Iranian Gov equally seeks an external conflict with the West.

Mass distraction from internal issues.

So for me this posturing by Iran is nothing more that Western posturing on Iran.. each using the other to maintain control of there respective restless populations.

It will be a crying shame if the hawks on all sides get their way and cause the ME to end up in flames...

But make no mistake (at least I won't) that the hawks who want to keep their power at any costs are the ones that cause these events to happen and neither side is blameless, or heroic..

Edit cr*ppy spelling.

[edit on 21/4/10 by thoughtsfull]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by centurion1211
 


You know what I was thinking?


Civil War!

Maybe this needs to be hashed out Once and for all among Sunni and Shia Muslims. I mean look at the UK and the US. At one time we were at our individual throats then the Birth.

This would actually work! If Iraq can figure out it's own future without US or Iranian Interference that is.


I think thats the future for the Middle East, probably in 15 to 20 years.

The Saudis and the Iranians are going to go head to head over Iraq and who will dominate the Middle East. It will be nasty. There will be nukes and Iraq will become a WWI style no man's land.

Whoever the Turks side with will win.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by thoughtsfull

Given time, Iran could be the most stabilising nation in the region, that is if look at the youth in their shopping malls, designer clothes, piercings and nights out having fun..

Imaging it, it would be a contagion running through the ME, youth wanting to have fun, while still being good Muslims and all the traditional hard line govs would not be able to stand that path..




Now is that the result of WESTERN influence or the Mullahs?
It seems to me that Iran/Persia has had a very good history of clothing style and freedom. That is until 1979. It's only becuase TPTB there fear revolution that the Iranian PTB are allowing the present situation.


IMHO.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Honestly. I think a bit of both. From what I understand the ideas they are seeing on the internet is making it worse, and I simply don't think the Iranian gov can stop the process as it moves forward, so I guess allowing a little is better than creating an underground movement.. But I am guessing on that part..

Edit to add:
The movement can only go in one direction.. it is hard to unlearn things once you know them, or go back to traditional garb/ways.. we in the West can not do it.. and neither can the Iran..

The only way to maintain those ways is via oppression and that does not last long, which is another reason why I feel the current situation of exclusion, sanctions and even conflict suit the current regime.


[edit on 21/4/10 by thoughtsfull]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by oozyism
 


((snip))
The war is over. We won.
((snip))


Ding ding ding.. people of the US win! we're winners!!

Tell em what they won G-man!!

Fly 1st class like a DC mafia politician on a fact finding mission.. over indulge on the tax payers dime riding in your new disposable private jet!! courtesy of KBR airlines* (*a wholly owned subsidiarity of banker gangster / CIA enterprises) on your way to visit the ancient jewel of the mid east, iraq!! ding ding.. join 50,000 armed friends on a never ending military mis-adventure of war crimes and failed occupation!! kids love 6 flags torture village!!

A total prize package worth trillions of your grand kids taxes!! Enjoy the exotic sights and smells of 1 million dead iraqis!! stroll through an actual scaled down model of the GOP/DNC US city of the future: the pepsi green zone!!... all while you tour a nation infamous for the 75,106 US kids that became "casualties" fighting a war the empire bankers lied them into to defend the ever expanding homeland!!.. ding! yeah!!

Oh boy thanks for the win mister government!

edit add lnk:
Last Week: US Iraq Casualties Rise to 75,106
www.afterdowningstreet.org...

[edit on 21-4-2010 by GovtFlu]



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism


And this is the reason why I love Iran, it is truely the only nation in that region with a voice..



They are actually the only nation in that region that has nothing to lose, only because they are already on questionable terms. So in reality, they don't have a voice. Nobody is going to actually take Iran seriously when they demand for the US to withdrawal troops.

When Iran says things like this they are only fronting for their hometown supporters. They are pumping up their own crowed. Nobody else places any sort of value upon these words.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:28 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Let me bring things back to the original argument.. Which two countries are the most unstable currently in Middle East?



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Let me bring things back to the original argument.. Which two countries are the most unstable currently in Middle East?



Ask Iran WHY Iraq is presently unstable.
Come on Ooz.

Let's Deny Ignorance here.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Ask Iran WHY Iraq is presently unstable.
Come on Ooz.

Let's Deny Ignorance here.

Well I guess the blame is always on someone else, how can we deny ignorance then?



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
We have not lost the war in Iraq or Afghanistan dummies. we accomplished everything we went there to do. The only problem is that most people dont realize what we went there for.
1. We didn't go to Iraq for the wmd.
2. We didn't go to Iraq to liberate the oppressed.
3. We didn't go to Iraq to control there oil.
4. We didn't go to Afghanistan to fight the taliban but that was a bonus.
5. We didn't go to Afghanistan because of 911.
6. We didn't go to Afghanistan to free the silk road or to by opium.

It's simple look at a map, we completely Isolated Iran from the rest of the middle east. We've got them completely surrounded.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Let me bring things back to the original argument.. Which two countries are the most unstable currently in Middle East?



Ask Iran WHY Iraq is presently unstable.
Come on Ooz.

Let's Deny Ignorance here.


Just like when you used info from a thousand years ago to justify your claims of sectarian fighting in the ME, you now try to play low level intra family support and bi governmental cooperation between Iraq and Iran as the reason for Iraqi instability. I say your claims are US propaganda, if Iran was arming the resistance movements how come none of them get shoulder launched SAMs how come ied's are made of artillery shell explosive.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join