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.

 

Vote:Iran or N Korea, who is the upcomming target?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Alright,
I'm not even sure that we WILL be going to war with Iran or N Korea soon... but recently there have been a spate of threads dealing with the possibility that war is IMMINENT (within a month). Most of these threads have centered around the carrier group deployment issue... but some new ones have taken into account the Iranian nuclear stance and the upcomming Korean talks....

So... I just want a simple vote here concerning what the minds at ATS think is going on. Why? Because I simply want to see how realistic our private terror/war analysts here are. Like my psychic prediction thread, in one month's time I will add this all up and see if the military predictions here are even remotely worth listening to (sorry to sound mean).

I just want simple answers, here. Think of it as a poll. Your choices are:

1-N Korea
2- Iran
3-N Korea & Iran at once
4- Some other country (like Libya... but you must NAME the country)
5- No war... all we're seeing is old-fashioned saber rattling and training exercises
6- Other (an asteroid or something like it IS about to hit, aliens are coming, or some other extraordinary thing)

You can't cheat by saying "If not X, then Y". Say what you REALLY THINK is going to go down, soon.




posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   
No way to set up a voting booth?

Oh well. Anyway I pick #2 Iran.



posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I really don't think N. Korea ........ but I have a feeling in my gut were gonna go after Iran..........



posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:40 PM
link   
I vote 5- No war. We simply do not have the resources to fight another conflict. Definately not Iran or NK, or even percieved 'easy' countries like Iraq, because of what that has become, a quagmire.



posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:46 PM
link   
5 - No war

Too many casualties. Doesn't sit well with the public, since the media make a meal out of every incident. The Iraq' photos, Berg beheading, the crippled americans sharing their story just to name a few. People have gotten past the WTC bombings, its been forgotten with all the media attention on the disgraced soldiers, bashing of Rumsfield and the UN's role in post-war Iraq. Americans are still searching for an escape hatch out of Iraq. Even after Bush, John Kerry isn't planning to withdraw the troops anytime soon. The sad truth is that if they leave there will be rebellion amongst the shiite and the sunni muslim population. The Americans have buried a deep hole. It will take a lot of time before another mission is planned. The US is $5 billion in defecit, which is why some Americans just look the other way.

While the Americans are situated in Iraq they can help in the negotiation process between Palestine and Israel. A conflict that has gone on for too long. The killing must be stopped. Israel has to pull out of the Gaza strip. and Ariel Sharon has to take control of his party.



posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:55 PM
link   
don't know who could be



posted on Jun, 10 2004 @ 11:56 PM
link   
awerawerawerawe aweraweraewra awerawera



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 12:09 AM
link   
I would say the next country we are going after is Iran. I would not be surprised if down the road we find out that the war in Iraq was just the beginning to take on other terrorist countries in the Middle East. I am sure we have had our eyes set at least on Iran and Syria in the not so distant future. We already had terrorists in Iran saying they have missiles aimed at 29 targets and what has the Iranian government done? nothing....



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 12:14 AM
link   
I think lebstar22 is broke. Someone give it a whack to see if it'll turn off.


Iran or NK?
If I had to choose between one of them I would say Iran. But with Lil Kim in power in Korea, the possibility that he'll do something royally stupid is always there, then we'll have to go after them.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
I think lebstar22 is broke. Someone give it a whack to see if it'll turn off.


Iran or NK?
If I had to choose between one of them I would say Iran. But with Lil Kim in power in Korea, the possibility that he'll do something royally stupid is always there, then we'll have to go after them.



1-N Korea
2- Iran
3-N Korea & Iran at once
4- Some other country (like Libya... but you must NAME the country)
5- No war... all we're seeing is old-fashioned saber rattling and training exercises
6- Other (an asteroid or something like it IS about to hit, aliens are coming, or some other extraordinary thing)

So, 6? And let's not mention lebstar22, it''s what the poster wants.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 12:59 AM
link   
could the mods please deduct whatever ATS points I may have gotten from lebstars malfunction?

BTW: I vote for no war... though I do think that a military action of some sort will happen with Iran within the next few years (most likely a covert subversion type thing).

So, my vote is 'no war'... though I'd never claim to be an expert on these matters.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 01:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by curme
1-N Korea
2- Iran
3-N Korea & Iran at once
4- Some other country (like Libya... but you must NAME the country)
5- No war... all we're seeing is old-fashioned saber rattling and training exercises
6- Other (an asteroid or something like it IS about to hit, aliens are coming, or some other extraordinary thing)

So, 6? And let's not mention lebstar22, it''s what the poster wants.

Man...I guess that's 6.

or how about 7 - Iran, unless NK provokes first.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 01:53 AM
link   
Wild guess here. Iran is the most possible, but I don't think it will happen. N.Korean could provoke something however. You never can tell with that whacko.
I'm hoping the answer is: no war...but who knows?
joey



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 04:17 AM
link   
If we do go to war again soon, it'll be NK, the one country we shouldve gone after to begin with. How can Bush talk about Iraq being a gathering threat when they were firmly under our thumb the whole time, they couldnt even fly planes in their own country. NK is a growing threat, and if we are gonna go after them it should be before they grow any more. We can take them out fairly easily, but there will be casualties. Their army is big, but poor and lacks the precision technology we have, which is alot more useful in open warfare with an actual army than ferreting out mountain weasels in caves. Maybe thats why we are moving our troops from the DMZ to get them out of range of NKs artillary while we launch an air campaign, take control of the skies, and hit all their artillary pieces with cruise missiles and guided bombs. The only friend they have is China, but I doubt they would get involved at this point. Their economy relies heavily on ours and vice versa so I dont think they would take a hit, nuclear or financial for NK who is pretty much a burden for them anyway. And as for NKs few untested nukes, kim jong il knows that if he deployed one, as clinton warned him, his country would cease to exist. Plus even if he was stupid enough to do so, we could test out the missile defense sytems our tax dollars have gone to. Thats my vote, but my hope is no wars are fought.

[edit on 11-6-2004 by jd27]



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 05:35 AM
link   
I vote no war, at least not with the current US army, I remember reading somewhere that the existing US army was designed to be able to fight in two theaters at once without seriously overstreaching itself(Iraq and Afgan)
Even if there was a "draft" I don't think that openning a new front would be in the army's interest at this time.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 06:50 AM
link   
Iran. We'll let China handle N. Korea as long as they are willing to keep a lid on things over there.



posted on Jun, 11 2004 @ 07:20 AM
link   
I would vote 5) no war. Its too close to the elections (U.S.) and if it went bad then it would affect President Bush at the Polls and would also give John Kerry more ammo to use. But if Bush wins then i think we are in for 4 years of pretty serious conflict.



posted on Jun, 13 2004 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I vote Iran. The US Military has proved it can fight on many fronts in different countries at any time, at least in the relative locality of the Middle East. To me Iran would be the logical next dtep for them, though I'm sure the US has something up its sleeve to spring on us as bloody usual.



posted on Jun, 13 2004 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib
I would say the next country we are going after is Iran. I would not be surprised if down the road we find out that the war in Iraq was just the beginning to take on other terrorist countries in the Middle East. I am sure we have had our eyes set at least on Iran and Syria in the not so distant future.....
2 - Iran
Agreed (is that alliteration or what!)
Iran is the target, this was outlined in several places by the nc's
or whatever they call themselves these days.
Iraq was just a flanking maneuver, the objective is oil,
and there is probably some kind of 'trigger event' being prepared.
.
All stateside pacifism will evaporate with the next sequence of events.

[edit on 2004-7-2 by Teknik]



posted on Jun, 13 2004 @ 11:02 AM
link   
#4 and #5. Probably no war, but problems from Pakistan and Libya.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join