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.

 

All the evidence suggest Pakistan will be invaded, not Iran

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:16 AM
link   
This thread is for individuals getting ready for an Iranian invasion, or making predictions that Iran will be invaded.

All the evidence I have seen suggests other wise.

Let's start from the begin:

4. Iran is not being attacked by drones right now, Pakistan is. These drone attacks play specific role I suspect. They are not to destroy threats against US, or against US military in Afghanistan, but to reduce the same threat against invasion which America faces right now in Afghanistan. Pakistan publicly can't do much about it, but to criticize the attacks.

Behind the curtains we all know what is going on, and that brings me to my second point:

5. Pakistan is playing a proxy game against America, not Iran.

The Taliban would have been defeated along time ago without support, this is very true with any resistance group. Look at Iraq, the only reason why the Iraqi resistance shattered was and still is because they have no support from any side.

6. Pakistan is the last country to support the Taliban, while Iran helped America in regards to the Taliban.

Iran helped America, although America didn't say thank you publicly, I'm sure they did behind close doors.

7. The failed NY bombing, and its immediate admission by the supposed Taliban, and the straight away refusal of the admission by the Americans, and then the acceptance of admission after the suspect was captured, who wasn't bald as shown in the suspect photo, was and is very fishy.



I suspect this orchestrated attack, if worked according to plan, would have given America that excuse needed to invade Pakistan. What happened when it failed? Well they increased the drone attacks.

I guess the plan didn't fail completely.



8. No they are not after Iran, they want Pakistan, and Pakistan knows it therefore trying not to give the US any excuse to blow it up in to pieces. I suspect that is the only reason why Pakistan has created this pretense that it is fighting its own people. That is a Bullox and everyone knows it.


In conclusion, I don't see Iran getting attacked, it is a ploy, the target is Pakistan.




posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:22 AM
link   
The bloodthirsty genocidal Khazars want Iran, and they control the US. They would have gone after Iran long time if it was an Iraq.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Somehow I do not think we are going to attack or invade Pakistan. Right now the drones are in the tribal areas, where alot of the Taliban fighters have been coming from and going to. An attack on Pakistan would be a very bad idea, as they do have nuclear weapons, though they are trained on India, and India's nuclear weapons are pointed at Pakistan. Attack Pakistan and we may yet see another one of those weapons detonated against another country, as it would be something that is on their table to use, and would send Pakistan to seek assistence from other countries in the region. Care to guess what country would be the number one to volunteer to assist? Can you think of any country in the region who would be interested in an alliance with Pakistan, especially since it has the technicle know how to produce a viable working nuclear weapon? Or any country in the world for that matter? I can think of at least three who would be more than willing to step up and assist in exchange for that technology and plans for such.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:28 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Pakistan should be targeted, in my opinion. They allow safe places for the Taliban, but claim to be our ally.

I don't think they will end up being invaded per say, but they will soon allow the US to come in and hunt the Taliban down in their safe havens.

They will allow the US to do this, because they won't be willing to do it themselves.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:39 AM
link   
"All the evidence suggest Pakistan will be invaded, not Iran"
You couldn't have chosen a better word: INVADED.
Thats how the USA works: invade first and lie all the way. Disgusting.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


If you are suggesting that other country is Iran, you are incorrect. Pakistan and Iran are not allies, and they bitterly hate each other.

Pakistan is Sunni, Iran is Shia.

Pakistan and Iran are not compatible, Iran helped get rid of a Pakistan force within the region, hence Taliban.

Just like Israel is an America force within the Middle East.

If Iran was gonna jump in any fight, it could have jumped in Afghanistan and Iraq. But it didn't, there was absolutely no evidence that Iran was/is helping any of the resistance groups, in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The evidence just doesn't suggest any of what you are saying..



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 


Even Pakistanis are aware of truly what is going on, this means the truth is spreading.

Check this picture out:

image3.examiner.com...

As I said, this was orchestrated, and now the drone attacks has increased.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by TSawyer
The bloodthirsty genocidal Khazars want Iran, and they control the US. They would have gone after Iran long time if it was an Iraq.

Pakistan is already being attacked, I don't see Iran being attacked.

Imagine drones going to Iranian territory and bombing the RG. Can you imagine that?



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


" Can you think of any country in the region who would be interested in an alliance with Pakistan, especially since it has the technicle know how to produce a viable working nuclear weapon"

How about Israel, which has an estimated 500+ nukes?
I know you were trying to be smart and insert your little Zionist anti-Semitic (anti-Iranian) assertions.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:14 AM
link   
Pakistan doesn't need to be invaded, it's already invaded.

All the Pakistani leaders are US puppets and do as they are commanded.Once their terms are over they will retire in their heavily guarded flats in London and enjoy the pocket money they received from US.

Their inability to stand against US and not utter a word against the drones target practising on poor villagers in Northern areas just shows that they are not loyal to their people or their nation.

The country is pretty much a joke with a leader that killed his own wife to get in power.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Maybe we should take our "call center" jobs back from India....let the newly unemployed citizens of India pick up some guns....and let them go to war with Pakistan instead of US. After all, they are mortal enemies anyway.

On topic, this makes more sense; as Pakistan is a bigger and more realistic threat than Iran.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
This thread is for individuals getting ready for an Iranian invasion, or making predictions that Iran will be invaded.

All the evidence I have seen suggests other wise.

Let's start from the begin:

4.



Interesting thread thus far. I'll hold my opinion until ooz posts points #1, 2 and 3. I feel I'm missing some of the evidence.


[edit on 14-5-2010 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


Well, I can certainly look at it from that point of view. Clearly, something was up with that bombing situation.

The reason they will just let the US in, is because that way, they don't have to be put on the block, for hunting down these people themselves, who might be citizens of their own country.

That way, they come up smelling like roses, while making the US look horrible.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 10:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aggie Man
On topic, this makes more sense; as Pakistan is a bigger and more realistic threat than Iran.


How is Pakistan a threat?

US bases and agents are littered around Pakistan and if US feels that the Nukes might end up in wrong hands, it would neutralize the threat without a problem.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Thanks OP for bringing this up. If we look at the MSM propaganda, then we will be able to see clearly the drift away from Afghanistan and towards Pakistan. Earlier MSM reported that the Taliban problem is in Afghanistan. Then slowly another term was added called Af-Pak. Now the MSM is going crazy over Pakistan.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
The Taliban would have been defeated along time ago without support, this is very true with any resistance group. Look at Iraq, the only reason why the Iraqi resistance shattered was and still is because they have no support from any side.


As I understand it the Iraqi resistance is divided because of different ethnic and religious factions.

One thing Saddam did manage to do was to hold together a country consisting of many opposing interests. When he was removed the whole thing fell apart and that's what it's been like ever since.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doujutsu

Originally posted by Aggie Man
On topic, this makes more sense; as Pakistan is a bigger and more realistic threat than Iran.


How is Pakistan a threat?

US bases and agents are littered around Pakistan and if US feels that the Nukes might end up in wrong hands, it would neutralize the threat without a problem.


So far as I know, we haven't caught any Iranians trying to set off car bombs here in the US. And to think that Pakistan's nukes are safe....
and




[edit on 14-5-2010 by Aggie Man]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 12:38 PM
link   
eventually iran will be targeted. the agenda is the standardization of the middle east.

take a look at any map and what are the countries that share a border with iran?

iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, turkmenistan, armenia, azerbaijan and turkey.

3 of these countries are already invaded by pro-western forces. and lets not forget, georgia is just on the other side of armenia and azerbaijan to the north.



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrVertigo
One thing Saddam did manage to do was to hold together a country consisting of many opposing interests. When he was removed the whole thing fell apart and that's what it's been like ever since.


Saddam was an evil sob., and his sons were too. One of Saddam's son used tp play football (as in soccer for Americans) If his team lost. he would have them executed.... and if there was a woman he liked, even if she had a boyfriend, Saddam's son would beat up the boyfriend, and take the girl home....

The three of tem were sick and had to be put down.

BTW, just a question... WHo do think benefits by the U. S. and allies being given Russian information that Saddam was going to try to attact the U.S.A. Later on we found that the Russian government was providing intelligence on the move of our troops to Saddam's regime. We found domuments detailing what information was being said and by whom. Yt the Russians denied this and the thing went under a large rug.

Then we had a former adminhistration official who after he wasn't listened by the higher ups, he decided to give this info to regular folk.



Charles R. Smith
Thursday, March 3, 2005


According to a former top Bush administration official, Russian special forces teams moved weapons of mass destruction out of Iraq to Syria.

“I am absolutely sure that Russian Spetsnatz units moved WMD out of Iraq before the war,” stated John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for international technology security.


According to Shaw, Russian units hid Saddam’s arsenal inside Syria and in Lebanon’s Bekka valley.


“While in Iraq I uncovered detailed information that Spetsnatz units shredded records and moved all WMD and specified advanced munitions out of Iraq to Syria and Lebanon,” stated Shaw during an exclusive interview.


“I received information from several sources naming the exact Russian units, what they took and where they took both WMD materials and conventional explosives. Moscow made a 2001 agreement with Saddam Hussein to clear up all Russian involvement in WMD systems in Iraq,” stated Shaw.

Charles R. Smith
Thursday, March 3, 2005


According to a former top Bush administration official, Russian special forces teams moved weapons of mass destruction out of Iraq to Syria.

“I am absolutely sure that Russian Spetsnatz units moved WMD out of Iraq before the war,” stated John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for international technology security.


According to Shaw, Russian units hid Saddam’s arsenal inside Syria and in Lebanon’s Bekka valley.


“While in Iraq I uncovered detailed information that Spetsnatz units shredded records and moved all WMD and specified advanced munitions out of Iraq to Syria and Lebanon,” stated Shaw during an exclusive interview.


“I received information from several sources naming the exact Russian units, what they took and where they took both WMD materials and conventional explosives. Moscow made a 2001 agreement with Saddam Hussein to clear up all Russian involvement in WMD systems in Iraq,” stated Shaw.


Shaws assertions match the information provided by U.S. military forces that satellite surveillance showed extensive large-vehicle traffic crossing the Syrian border prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Moscow Paranoid About WMD

Shaw’s information also backs allegations by a wide variety of sources of Russia’s direct involvement in Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program. One U.N. bioterrorism expert announced that Russia has been Iraq’s “main supplier of the materials and know-how to weaponize anthrax, botulism and smallpox.”

Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Robert Goldberg cited former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Spertzel, who stated that Moscow supplied Baghdad with fermentation equipment to produce biotoxins.

According to Spertzel, the Russians on the U.N. inspection team in Iraq were “paranoid” about his efforts to uncover smallpox production.

Goldberg noted that no country has “done more to rebuild” Saddam’s chemical and biological weapons programs or “been more aggressive in helping hide the truth” than Russia.

It is a fact that Saddam Hussein rose to power backed by Russian weapons and Russian money. Saddam was in debt to Moscow for over $8 billion for the arms he purchased from Russia when he was captured by U.S. forces.

The primary Iraqi chemical weapons were VX nerve gas and mustard gas, a blistering agent, both obtained from Russia.

According to the book “Russian Military Power,” published in 1982, “It is known that the Soviets maintain stocks of CW (chemical weapons) agents.”

The two primary Russian chemical weapons in the 1982 Soviet inventory were the nerve agent “VX” and “blistering agents – developments of mustard gas used so effectively in World War I.”

Russian Chemical Weapons in Iraq

Iraq did most of its WMD killing using Russian-made MiG and Sukhoi aircraft equipped with chemical sprayers. In addition, Saddam used French-made artillery and helicopters to dump gas on Iranian troops and Iraqi Kurds.

Iraq obtained Russian delivery systems and the same inventory of Russian-made chemical weapons at the same time. Iraqi SU-22 Fitter attack jets were armed with Warsaw Pact-designed bombs filled with chemical weapons. Iraq used these Russian jet fighters to drop chemical weapons on Iranian troops during the Iran-Iraq war.

Iraq tried to use these SU-22 jets during the 1991 Gulf War, but they were detected, and destroyed on the ground before they could launch a deadly chemical attack.

Other Russian weapons found with chemical weapons include the FROG-7 missile, 122 mm rockets, 152 mm artillery and the M-1937 82 mm mortars. All the Iraqi artillery missiles, rockets, shells and mortar rounds filled with chemical weapons are of Russian design.

Iraqi forces were trained by Russians in the use of chemical weapons and equipped by Russia with anti-chemical suits. The Iraqi armed forces were trained, equipped and supplied with the proper logistics to perform chemical warfare by Russia.

Lebanon and Syria

The arming of Iraq with such weapons has a direct impact on events today in the Middle East. The presence of former Iraqi WMD systems in Lebanon raises serious questions surrounding the Feb. 14 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Many blame Syria for Hariri’s murder.

However, the possibility that Hariri discovered the location of the Iraqi WMD systems inside his country lends some credible backing to a Syrian assassination effort to silence him.

In addition, the sudden sale of advanced missile, and other weapons, to Damascus by Moscow also supports the allegation that Syria is hiding something for Russia.

Russian weapons makers have previously insisted on hard, cold cash payments for their missiles, especially after the fall of Saddam and the collapse of credit deals done with Baghdad. More importantly, the Syrian economy is in bad shape, making it difficult for Damascus to come up with the required money for advanced Russian weapons.

Instead, it now appears that Moscow has extended both very good terms and no down payment required to Syria for an extensive purchase of advanced missiles and weapons. This is in contrast to weapons sales to other “good” Russian customers such as China, which can afford to pay up front for weapon systems.

CIA Failed
here is no question that the Russian effort to remove Iraqi WMD systems was the most successful intelligence operation of the 21st century. The Russians were able to move hundreds of tons of chemical, biological and nuclear materials without being discovered by CIA satellites or NSA radio listening posts.

“There is a clear sense on how effective they were,” noted Shaw.

“The fact that the CIA did not know shows just how successful the Russian operation was,” he concluded.
(3)
www.barossa-region.org...

Iraq‘s WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says By IRA STOLL January 26, 2006
The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam Hussein’s air force says Iraq moved weapons of mass destruction into Syria before the war by loading the weapons into civilian aircraft in which the passenger seats were removed.

The Iraqi general, Georges Sada, makes the charges in a new book, “Saddam’s Secrets,” released this week. He detailed the transfers in an interview yesterday with The New York Sun.

“There are weapons of mass destruction gone out from Iraq to Syria, and they must be found and returned to safe hands,” Mr. Sada said. “I am confident they were taken over.” Mr. Sada’s comments come just more than a month after Israel’s top general during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Moshe Yaalon, told the Sun that Saddam “transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria."

Russia tied to Iraq’s missing arms By Bill Gertz WASHINGTON TIMES October 28, 2004

Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein’s weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, the Washington Times has learned. John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, “almost certainly” removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad.

“The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units,” Mr. Shaw said. “Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units.”

Mr. Shaw, who was in charge of cataloging the tons of conventional arms provided to Iraq by foreign suppliers, said he recently obtained
heavenawaits.wordpress.com...

[edit on 14-5-2010 by ElectricUniverse]



posted on May, 14 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


BTW, Shaw was fired because he gave secret information to the public, which even high ranking Russian defectors have been warming us about these exact things.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join