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.

 

Castro Warns of Nuclear War "Breaking Out Very Soon"

page: 6
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by area6
 
in the past month, the 4 country's that could start a "nuke" war have meet. NK Cuba, Iran and the biggest threat to the USA is Chavez, this has took place in the last 60 days, why have they meet in this time frame? i will start by saying, look at what has happened in the last 60 days, g20/g8 bilderberg and in the last 24 hours VP bl has gone to Iraq, our a steamed pres is still doing the soft shoe tap dance in the gulf, in the last week our number one general in Afghanistan has been replaced, and the list goes on and on. are we on the edge of "nuke" war? it will not hurt to be prepared. or could it be a smoke screen for Kim jong il so eyes are off him looking east and not west or south remember the sub? found this week in South America, could that have been designed for a nuke? or could Iran be in the possession of a nuke? and have itchy trigger finger? i would not put any of these in doubt! Fore they are all possible as well as plausible not to mention feasible.




posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Exactly. I think these writings should have been more appropriately named "ramblings".



Originally posted by mntnhooger
These writings by Castro are called reflections by some but to me they are just ramblings of an idiot. and probably not even written by him anyway!



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


Iran has rescources, so there is no value in nuking it. N Korea on the other hand ...

Say you're in Iran and spread pretty thin, and a country like N Korea sees an opportunity and starts giving you real trouble. Ka-boom. No more trouble.

If you can't control multiple theaters, you don't nuke what you want. You nuke what you don't want.

A lot of things are happening faster and faster ... look at how quickly the world doubles its knowledge compared to each last time it did so.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Well im certainly not going to run around worried about WW3 breaking out in the next few weeks or months because Fidel Castro said so!! I'll leave that to you worry-warts. Have fun-see ya next year when you're on here posting about some other "imminent" event.


Cya!


2nd



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Whats ironic about that is that even though the world doubles its knowledge at ever increasing rates, it appears to be getting dumber. I guess its a race against time...will humans advance to where they are "smart enough" not to want to kill each other and all progress together as one species or will they just find "smarter ways" to kill each other. Thats the question.



Originally posted by area6
reply to post by bekod
 


Iran has rescources, so there is no value in nuking it. N Korea on the other hand ...

Say you're in Iran and spread pretty thin, and a country like N Korea sees an opportunity and starts giving you real trouble. Ka-boom. No more trouble.

If you can't control multiple theaters, you don't nuke what you want. You nuke what you don't want.

A lot of things are happening faster and faster ... look at how quickly the world doubles its knowledge compared to each last time it did so.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
will humans advance to where they are "smart enough" not to want to kill each other


Hope so. The Fermi Paradox says no, but I hope so.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Unless there is a plot out there to reduce world population, I don't see using a - can I say - "conventional" nuclear weapon on Iran, but there are bunker busters out there designed to destroy underground targets, in this case a an Iran nuclear enrichment facility, which might not spread as much radiation, though that idea is a contradiction in terms since the facility itself would spread plenty. For the same reason a conventional air strike even seems unlikely, but I do worry about Petraeus orders to US Special Ops teams to infiltrate or prepare to infiltrate Iraq, since they may be capable of taking out such a plant with minimal radiation spread. Even that seems dicey.

Prevailing winds in the Persian Gulf area would seem to be a key to this. When do they blow which way? If they're westerly or northwesterly or easterly or north easterly, I don't think it's a go. But a lot of factors would play into weighing the risks of exposing our own troops and we did just that in the first Gulf War, so obviously that's probably not the prime consideration, but it is a consideration. Do want to risk exposing Saudi Arabia, Yemen or Israel to fallout? There I'd say decidedly not. Azerbajian? Probably not. Kazakhistan? probably not. South blows down to US bases in the Indian Ocean, but they're quite a ways away.

We have exposed US troops to radiation or nerve gas in the first Gulf War, throughout the Cold War in the Nevada desert and in the Pacific in Operation Shad (biological weapons) and the South Pacific in Operation Castle Bravo and others. Hell, we probably killed John Wayne with the Nevada teasts! (over a period of years with cancer, of course). International relations make it trickier, but if the stakes are high enough, I still think we might do it and as others have said, Castro may actually know something we don't.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by area6
 
in the past month, the 4 country's that could start a "nuke" war have meet. NK Cuba, Iran and the biggest threat to the USA is Chavez, this has took place in the last 60 days, why have they meet in this time frame? i will start by saying, look at what has happened in the last 60 days, g20/g8 bilderberg and in the last 24 hours VP bl has gone to Iraq, our a steamed pres is still doing the soft shoe tap dance in the gulf, in the last week our number one general in Afghanistan has been replaced, and the list goes on and on. are we on the edge of "nuke" war? it will not hurt to be prepared. or could it be a smoke screen for Kim jong il so eyes are off him looking east and not west or south remember the sub? found this week in South America, could that have been designed for a nuke? or could Iran be in the possession of a nuke? and have itchy trigger finger? i would not put any of these in doubt! Fore they are all possible as well as plausible not to mention feasible.


Iran has pride and dignity of being one of the oldest civilizations in the face of this earth, still alive.

Don't even question their credibility and their honesty.

They have never started a war since their independence from the US empire through the revolution.

Iran is against weapons of mass destruction, even stated by Ayatollah himself, that there is no good use for these weapons.

All the countries which is not controlled by the greedy, oppressive empire is joining alliance.

-North Korea, millions died when the empire stepped in.
-Iran, revolted against the puppet Shah, so much support for the revolution that no one got killed.
-Venezuela, American coup to get rid of Chavez and bring back US puppets, and US control of Venezuela failed due to the people of Venezuela who went and got their leader back from captivity.
-Cuba, which has been blockaded by the US for how long now? And how many times has the US tried to assassinate Castro?

These are just a small number of victims of the empire who gained the back bone to talk back, and fight back.

For you to say that they could potentially start a nuclear war is absurd, it is the greedy, oppressive, expansionist Western empire which the source problem.

Iran has 0 nukes, Venezuela has 0 nukes, Cuba has 0 nukes, N-Korea has let's say 10 nukes.

How many nukes does the Western empire have?

Listen to the words of an Iranian, not me, I'm an Afghan, another victim of the empire:



Iran's president says Tehran rejects nuclear weapons, as both immoral and impractical tools that powers build, stockpile and use to threaten others.

Tell me if he is telling lies.



"The age of the nuclear bomb, the worst and ugliest weapon known to man is over. We reject atomic weapons both in moral and practical terms," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a press conference in New York on Tuesday afternoon.

Tell me if his vision is incorrect.



"We believe those who build, store and use nuclear weapons to threaten others are committing the ugliest deed of all," he added.

Tell me if moral is not good.



"Just two bombs created that atrocity in two Japanese cities. Now do you think it is a source of pride to own 5,000 new generation warheads with greater destructive potential?" he asked.

Which America is gonna answer that question? Is it a pride having that many nuclear weapons?



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostpigeon
Hell, we probably killed John Wayne with the Nevada tests!


That was a good one.


But seriously, great arguments. I've been watching this for the past couple years (like many), and the more I look at it, the more I see it is not an easy situation to deal with.



posted on Jul, 5 2010 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xeven

Originally posted by hippomchippo

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Castro is an idiot. I wouldnt give anything he wrote any credence whatsoever.

Maybe thats exactly what they want you to do.


The media does condition Americans to hate Castro, that is undeniable.

[edit on 6-7-2010 by hippomchippo]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ghostpigeon
 



The Times Square thing is not "tied" to any one country, but Afghanistan was providing the main political base at the time. And was picked out as the most desired place to recreate the glory times of the Caliphate.

The bombers can be tied to numerous countries and groups and even into different religious sects. This is because the "enemy" in this case is based out of the Pan-Islamic State of Islam as seen by its supporters. This entity has no country - currently it is being based out of Africa. Where it moved its main point of power to after Afghanistan was taken from them.

That's just one small point of the numerous problems with your analysis.

Just because you are questioning the half-crap you are being sold doesn't mean that swallowing another pile of crap is better than the first.

[edit on 2010/7/6 by Aeons]



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ghostpigeon
reply to post by Darkblade71
 



You need to go back and check the stories before the invasion of Afghanistan and after 9/11. The Taliban never "refused" to give up bin Laden, they asked for evidence he was involved and if we could give it, they'd extradite him. We couldn't, because it didn't exist, which is why the FBI still won't add 9/11 to his wanted charges even to this day. Even they think the videos purporting to be him "admitting" his complicity or happiness about 9/11 were faked.


Well it is obvious that we have a different perspective


*shrug*



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darkblade71



BTW, the Taliban never attacked us before 9/11 and probably hasn't since. The so-called Times Square Bomber's ties are to Pakistani intelligence, not the Taliban in Afghanistan.



I don't remember where the first times square bomber was from, but the 2nd was Osama Bin Ladin's doing. The Taliban was hiding him, and refused to give him up, and in doing so was directly involved in 9/11. (the protected Osama) and for that they were almost totally wiped out. They even were given a few chances to back out and chose to die instead.

We did the right thing in Afghanistan at the beginning. We went after Osama, and the Taliban, and tried to free the Afghan people who were under Taliban rule. We bombed the people with wheat and rice. We were on the right track there.

My, how things have changed due to bad tactics and policies in Afghanistan. It makes me sad that we didn't finish what we started there.



So you've swallowed that thoroughly discredited story whole. Thanks for sharing.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 01:18 AM
link   
I'm tired of this war will start soon and it will be nuclear... blah blah blah... Maybe it will - and then I won't be affected because I live nor in Middle - East, nor in USA... nor anywhere near strategic objects as military bases and big cities.

But ok damn it I will read the letter maybe Castro makes sense.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 02:51 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



In addition to what I've already said in this thread, I also want to add:

Keep in mind that Georgia launched a fullscale attack against Tskhinvali, South Ossetia, just hours before the Olympic opening ceremony in Beijing, August 2008. Did the attack coincide with the Olympics by coincident, or was it planned? It does look like the attack was timed to coincide with the Olympics. Just saying...



As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 03:20 AM
link   
i think if you are to respond to this you must first read Castor's letter, i do not think he is saying we will be the ones to use the "nuke" but the "4" will, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Chavez,? and possibly Qaddafi read his last part of the statement he listed the ares of the world that have a disregard for the us and it allies the UK and Israel. this week will be in the spot light as well, so be fore warned things could get "HOT"spf 2000 any one?



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 05:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightPoet
reply to post by Korg Trinity
 



This isn't 1939, it’s a lot harder to start a world War now, you need to jump through quite a few hoops to be able to do what will surely happen. ~ Korg Trinity

"It's a lot harder to start a World War now...?" Really? Let's see, North Korea and China both hate South Korea, Taiwan and Japan, and would just love to invade all three and take "complete control!" China snubs everything we want to do politically and militarily, but they sure did not argue about us sending all of our jobs over to them.


I agree with you but in 1939 you just invaded when no one was looking.. These days we have to the millisecond recognisance and litigation so tight, it’s hard to load a magazine in a practice range without a stack of paperwork.

What I’m saying is War could break out at any second, but it cannot be started by us, we have to be seen to be a responder not an instigator.

I guess this is why people are so quick to call false flag. The Western coalition mostly made up with US and British military are like a heavy weight boxer with their hands tied behind their backs until the first punch is thrown, whereby the gloves come off.

The Cold War has never ended in my opinion between late 1980's and up to 2001 people had the wool pulled over their eyes and 911 was a wakeup call to how dangerous and precarious a world we actually live in.

I think all people from all nations should have to do national service, learn the gears of war. Maybe then people would get how the world really works and appreciate more what they have.

The Military are not our enemy; we owe the personnel that work the military everything we have. I only wish more people would realise this very important point.

All the best,

Korg.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 06:10 AM
link   
China, and India's recent statements and actions (here and here) might tend to back Castro's analysis. He's not alone in his opinions or assessment. Bet we hear from Russia soon too.

Seems to me like some of the people posting might need to take a look at what the e Non-Aligned Movement is doing and saying...or even at what it is. Same goes for the SCO.

Some related articles...

Poll reveals UN 'hypocrisy' on Iran

NAM considers move to challenge Ban

Different positions between France and the G21 in the conference on nuclear disarmament



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


Thanks for the "-ed", like Poppy's suicid_ed pausible deniability. For whatever reason, the PTB will not be able to quaterback sneak one in THIS
time without a whistle getting juiced.
The special effects were a little over the top-- but if you go for that kind of thing, "The Sum of All Fears" was a nice preconditioner. It's starting to play out word for word, with sand and the World Cup for a backdrop instead of snow and the Super Bowl.
Anybody who smoked cigars that good for 60 years has a good reason.



posted on Jul, 6 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
sweet, I wonder what a nuclear winter feels like?



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join