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.

 

There Will Be War

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
reply to post by area6
 

Ah okay. Thanks for the clarification. No issue.




posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by area6
The recent round of UN sanctions is the greatest indicator that there will be war. They bite hard ...

These inspections of cargo ships & planes heading for Iran will force Iran into doing something or saying something that kicks it off - either that, or they will be weakened to the point of internal turmoil and revolution.





Pakistan's Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani says his country is not bound by U.S. sanctions on Iran, signaling Pakistan will move ahead with a deal to import natural gas from the Mideast country.

Source: www.globalsecurity.org... 22-voa03.htm




This month, Turkey voted against the United Nations Security Council's fourth round of sanctions against Iran. With Turkey's Islamic rooted government increasing its economic ties with Iran in the past few years, fears are arising that the pivotal Western ally is in danger of swinging eastward because of resistance in Europe to its bid for membership of the European Union.

Source: www.globalsecurity.org... 21-voa02.htm

Tough sanctions on Iran works both ways - Sure it isolates them but, it can isolate us some too. If we try to force the hands of Iran's neighbors, I think they will choose Iran over us. Not to mention patience with Israel's shenigans is at an all time low.

If we do go to war, it is very bad timing for us strategically. I am sure some blow hard pentagon office jockey can make a brilliant presentation as to why it would be a good time. But, they don't know crap.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Who bites hard?

Iran cooperates with the UN and inspectors. Israel on the other hand does not.


SAY WHAT!

Here's a post I'm going to paste on here from another thread here on ATS, ...

Iran IS a member of the United Nations.

Permanent Mission of The Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations New York


As a founding member of the United Nations, Iran believes deeply in the ideals of the organization and the purposes and principles of its Charter. The United Nations is the sole universal organization with the capacity to address issues of fundamental importance to the entire human family and move us all closer to a new global paradigm of understanding, sympathy, dialogue, cooperation and partnership.

Menaces that today threaten the international community are complex and varied. Yet all of them ranging from drugs, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, to injustice, poverty and environmental degradation have one common ingredient. They recognize no boundaries of geography, power or affluence. They affect us all.

And the ABOVE was straight from Iran's own, shall we say, UN website?

The International Atomic Energy Agency IS affiliated with the U.N., ...

IAEA - The "Atoms for Peace" Agency Relationship with United Nations

As an independent international organization related to the United Nations system, the IAEA´s relationship with the UN is regulated by special agreement [pdf]. In terms of its Statute, the IAEA reports annually to the UN General Assembly and, when appropriate, to the Security Council regarding non-compliance by States with their safeguards obligations as well as on matters relating to international peace and security.

The IAEA IS the worlds nuclear inspector, ...

IAEA - Pillars of Nuclear Cooperation

The IAEA works for the safe, secure and peaceful uses of nuclear science and technology. Its key roles contribute to international peace and security,

to ensure nuclear materials are not turned into military weapons.

Promoting Safeguards & Verification

The IAEA is the world´s nuclear inspectorate, with more than four decades of verification experience. Inspectors work to verify that safeguarded nuclear material and activities are not used for military purposes.
The IAEA inspects nuclear and related facilities under safeguards agreements with more than 145 States around the world.

So, being a member of the UN and not allowing the IAEA to inspect your nuclear facilities is breaking their rules.

IRAN HAS let inspectors to inspect SOME of their nuclear facilities, BUT not all of them!

So I see no reason how this can be called an "illegal" sanction/resolution.

Just because Israel may not have been "punished" by the UN, for whatever reasons, right or wrong, doesn't mean that this set of rules/regulations should be thrown out!

[edit on 6/22/2010 by Keyhole]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Poopra
 


I'll probably forget a few things because it's been awhile since I've followed this to any great depth. Feel free to correct any erroneous statements.

I believe it's closer to 35 if not 35 years that Israel has had nuclear weapons. Israel neither confirms nor denies that they do. For decades they have maintained that they would not be the first to "introduce" nuclear weapons to the Middle East. Israel is also a nonsignatory to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, has never been inspected, and is evasive about location (not a bad thing, I suppose, given where they are situated).

As for Iran, they are signatory to the treaty. They cooperate with inspections. They do not as of yet have a weapon, and to my knowledge it's not been proved that they even intend to. Yet they are on their fourth set of UN sanctions?



Iran currently enriches uranium up to 20 percent — far short of the 95 percent level needed for an atomic weapon — and justifies its decision to go to higher enrichment levels by saying it needs to make fuel for a research reactor producing medical isotopes.

Iranian nuclear scientist and former lawmaker Rasul Sediqi Bonabi told The Associated Press on Friday that the U.S., which has about 5,000 nuclear warheads, has been warning about an Iranian nuclear bomb since the 1980s but that its predictions have never come true. AP


The 80s were when the US was dealing with the fact that the regime they wanted installed in Iran was not installed and that all their efforts there were for naught. The 80s were also when the US jumped for joy when Iran and Iraq got into it, when they used Saddam Hussein to try to accomplish again what they failed to do in the 50s through the 70s. Another fail.

On one level, I guess we have to wonder WHY all this focus on Iran, though most who follow geopolitics know full well why. The US "wants" Iran and wants it badly. For "some" reason. Iran though has not cooperated, proving to be among the more successful economically and actually sane powers in the Middle East, certainly more so than Israel, and if you really think about it, far more than the U.S. They haven't attacked other countries and ships. They haven't grabbed land. They haven't invaded a sovereign nation they kept under sanctions for decades and killed or caused the deaths of close to a million people while lying to get into that was and while violating the Geneva Conventions. When the U.S. started messing with Iran? Iran hadn't waged an aggressive war against another country in HUNDREDS of years.

The take that Iran would be any more irresponsible than Israel, Pakistan, China, India, France, or any of the other countries that have nuclear weapons or be somehow more vulnerable is not clear to me.

Iran's future nukes may at some point fall into the hands of some future terrorists with a far greater probability than say Pakistan's or India's or even the U.S.'s or even Israel's? Disingenuous at its core. Particularly when the smack talk and threats that go on between the two countries in most question here, Israel and Iran, fly both ways almost on a timetable. And the lies aimed at Iran and told about Iran seem never ending. You have to ask yourself why.

So we have to take someone's word for it and go on little information (trust me, I know what's best...we have to attack Iran...I mean Iraq!) and agree to treat a cooperating country who has attacked no one in a very long time (unlike Israel) with a different sets of rules just because someone thinks they might someday mishandle their future nuclear weapons in such an irresponsible manner?

About resolution 1929, Burns said, "A nuclear-armed Iran would severely threaten the security and stability of a part of the world crucial to our interests and to the health of the global economy."

Oh. Really.

Economic sanctions. Ah. Lying. Wheeling and dealing in billions to get the UN votes and other country's sanctions on Iran. Who knows what else. Now see, I see how they bought the votes in the UN. What I don't understand is how they're buy the average person's?

And to me it's particularly ironic that the solution to this issue is always to not allow one country to do what others have been allowed to do, based merely on...what? Wouldn't the more logical and sane solution for everyone be to disarm Israel and stop Iran? No. Of course not. It's a double standard and an economic mind game, and so it shall never end.

And why does no one ever ask, why might Iran need a bomb instead of blinding assuming that they don't? A hundred excuses, lies, and decades of obstinate pursuit or a country that basically is doing fine on it's own. I just don't get it. Well I do. Water. Gas. Oil. Pipelines and economic wealth only for the countries Israel and the U.S. say it's okay for. Only for countries just like them. Yeah how's that working out for you in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan?

Sorry. By the time I got here, I've realized that there's tons I haven't mentioned, but I no longer have the energy or the heart to argue this yet again. But I'll hit post anyway.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Keyhole

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Who bites hard?

Iran cooperates with the UN and inspectors. Israel on the other hand does not.


SAY WHAT!

IRAN HAS let inspectors to inspect SOME of their nuclear facilities, BUT not all of them!


[edit on 6/22/2010 by Keyhole]


Says who?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Israel has eye's on people, first pic's from Spy SAT come in on June 25th.... get ready

***yes, I am aware they had previous satellites, but the timing for this one, and it's specific Iran capabilities, is a little....err... timely perhaps



en.rian.ru...

[edit on 22-6-2010 by freetree64]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Poopra
 
That's it. Stick your finger in and stir up more sh__t. That's just what the world needs. Make everyone scared and beg for Big Brothers help.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:53 PM
link   
How is it that the only nation in the world to use nuclear weapons in aggression on another nation, is considered responsible and good enough to dictate the terms to other nations ? What does experience count as credibility ? Does'nt make sense to me ! anyone else ? Where is America's sanctions huh ?

[edit on 22-6-2010 by 13th Zodiac]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Geesh... evidently we are moving ships!



Meanwhile, the Obama administration has ordered a massive buildup of U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf starting with Carrier Strike Group 10, headed by the USS Harry S. Truman aircraft carrier. Just last Friday an armada of more than 12 U.S. and Israeli warships passed through the Suez canal amid extreme security provided by Egypt. The ships are headed for the Red Sea and from there to the Persian Gulf. Another four U.S. warships will be making their way to the region to join the Strike Group. The Americans have also conducted joint air and naval strike practices with France and the U.K. under the command of American forces, while Germany is sending warships to the area, also under the command of American forces.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by 13th Zodiac
 


For everyone who hasn't read it, I recommend the "Imperial Cruise" by James Bradley
www.amazon.com...

It explains a lot of how we have gotten to this point, from the early 1900's to now. I warn Red Blooded White Americans - you probably will find it distrubing. I did and I'm a White Former Marine.

International law (Western Style) was basically set up to take advantage of everyone else who was viewed as less sophisticated. The law can always be twisted and turned and Sanctions are used to justify the inevitable.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Wait. Where's Turkey? Is Egypt still mad at Saudi Arabia or vice versa?

But how convenient that so many ships are all in one place now. The tinder is laid...now where's that lighter?



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 10:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Wait. Where's Turkey? Is Egypt still mad at Saudi Arabia or vice versa?

But how convenient that so many ships are all in one place now. The tinder is laid...now where's that lighter?
Theyre still reading the manual on how to operate the lighter..and looking for marshmallows..



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrispyB
reply to post by Mr Poopra
 
That's it. Stick your finger in and stir up more sh__t. That's just what the world needs. Make everyone scared and beg for Big Brothers help.



Hmmm...

What in heaven's name are you talking about?



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 12:25 PM
link   
"A total of eight mortar shells and one rocket were fired at Israel on Thursday, causing no injury or damage".






www.ynetnews.com...



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Poopra
 
Oh, excuse me. What was I thinking?! Let's just pull another Bush & Co. and invade every innoscent country a news souce fingers as a terrorsist country. Let's keep the CRUSADE going! Better?



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by KrispyB
 


You seem to have an obsession with finger's.... just an observation


Back to the topic, has anyone figured out yet, what the possibilities are, in regards to what got this thread started in the first place.... I mean let's just say that the report's of Israel landing in Saudi are true, why drop off supplies, and then just wait a week or two, shouldn't there be more taking place somewhere.... I've got extra saber's if thats what they ran out of, to rattle that is....



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by KrispyB
 


Much better than a nuke "accidentally" finding it's way to a major city near you, eh?

I don't agree with what we've been doing in the middle east, hell i don't agree with most of our foreign policy. Sanctions don't seem to be working with Iran's leaders, most of which see this conflict as divine retribution. Ideologues aren't much for negotiating or compromising. What do you suggest? Leaving them be? They're at 20% enrichment, it could be weeks before they have a weapon. I don't trust Iran to keep these out of the hands of Hezbollah or Hamas.



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 09:15 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 09:29 PM
link   
Published 02:19 25.06.10
Latest update 02:19 25.06.10
Infrastructre Min. warns Hezbollah: Israel will fight for its gas fields
By TheMarker and Agencies Israel will not hesitate to use force to protect its natural gas fields from being claimed by Lebanon, National Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau warned yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg News.

Lebanese parliament speaker Nabih Berri earlier this month urged his government to start exploring its offshore natural gas reserves, claiming that otherwise Israel would claim the resources.

"Israel is racing to make the situation a fait accompli and was quick to present itself as an oil emirate - ignoring the fact that, according to the maps, the deposit extends into Lebanese waters," Berri said. "Lebanon must take immediate action to defend its financial, political, economic and sovereign rights."




Could be the straw that broke the...... well, you know



posted on Jun, 24 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Ok, here it is, Israeli's find huge LNG deposit, Saudi's need huge LNG to make more money from oil, Lebanon say's it's in their waters, Israel say's they will use military force to defend it, and finally, Iran has said it will back up Syria, and Lebanon, if they are attacked, is it starting to make sense now, or am I completely off base here??? C'mon Man??




top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join