Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

War on Iran: What Year Is This?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Yeah...it was a long cycle, that one. It never really lets up...at times it just peaks. But at any moment something could ignite it.

Truth is one faction (PNAC/neocon/Zionist) wants us in the Middle East and to "take" Iran like we tried to take Iraq and Afghanistan.

Another faction (CFR...current figurehead installed so slight balance of power) wants us out.

The factions are warring. And those who maintain we need to stay in the Middle East never really relent with their stories. The intensity sparks responses from the other side, and the Propaganda Playbook goes into full swing again, sometimes with sanctions. We've been through, what? Three rounds of those at least?

I'm still waiting for the missing nukes, loose nukes story 2010. We've had dirty bomb makers being hunted already, woman being stoned, holocaust, 9/11, and some nuclear scientist nuttiness, but no loose nukes yet.



[edit on 8/10/2010 by ~Lucidity]




posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Some of the clips were from 2006 and didn't George Bush put Iran in the Axis of Evil..the baddies that America needs to sort out. when was the axis of Evil speech?

Iran has always been a bit of a thorn in America's side as far as I can remember.
I guess the hard talk of attacking them in the media sparked up around 2006 maybe earlier.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Some of the clips were from 2006 and didn't George Bush put Iran in the Axis of Evil..the baddies that America needs to sort out. when was the axis of Evil speech?

Iran has always been a bit of a thorn in America's side as far as I can remember.
I guess the hard talk of attacking them in the media sparked up around 2006 maybe earlier.


Well interestingly Iran was helping the US in Afghanistan, and relations with the Islamic Republic had never been better, then Bush made the Axis of evil speech and all that good work was undone. But it doesn't matter as long as the US got what it wanted out of it.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Here's a link about my last post check it out;

www.antiwar.com...

After the Sept. 11 attacks, U.S. officials responsible for preparing for war in Afghanistan needed Iran's help to unseat the Taliban and establish a stable government in Kabul. Iran had organized resistance by the Northern Alliance and had provided arms and funding at a time when the United States had been unwilling to do so.

It was thanks to the Northern Alliance Afghan troops, which were supported primarily by the Iranians, that the Taliban was driven out of Kabul in mid-November. Two weeks later, the Afghan opposition groups were convened in Bonn under United Nations auspices to agree on a successor regime.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
The MSM anti-Iran propaganda is repeating the MSM anti-Iraq propaganda before the War on Iraq, that is obvious.

Obvious too it seems that old stories are being rehashed.

For example, this story is today doing the rounds:


'Iran digs mass graves for US troops'

From the link:




In a morbid show of bravado, Iran has dug mass graves for US troops should the United States decide to implement Adm. Mike Mullen's contingency plan to strike Iran, a former commander of the Revolutionary Guard said.

Adm. Mullen, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that the US military has a contingency plan to attack Iran, although he thinks a military strike is probably a bad idea.

Gen. Hossein Kan'ani Moghadam, who was the Guard's deputy commander during the 1980s, said graves have been dug in Iran's southwestern Khuzestan province, where Iran buried Iraqi soldiers killed during the ruinous 1980-88 war between the Islamic republic and Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's regime.

"The mass graves that used to be for burying Saddam's soldiers have now been prepared again for US soldiers, and this is the reason for digging this big number of graves," Moghadam told The Associated Press Television News late Monday. He did not say how many were prepared.



Link

So Iranian provocation, right?

Well, let's look at this article....does it look familiar?


Iran to ready thousands of graves for enemy soldiers


From the link:






(AFP) – Jun 29, 2008

TEHRAN (AFP) — Iran is to dig 320,000 graves in border districts to allow for the burial of enemy soldiers in the event of any attack on its territory, a top commander said on Sunday.

"In implementation of the Geneva Conventions... the necessary measures are being taken to provide for the burial of enemy soldiers," the Mehr news agency quoted General Mir-Faisal Bagherzadeh as saying.

"We have plans to dig 15,000 to 20,000 graves in each of the border provinces or a total of 320,000," the general said, some of them mass graves if necessary.

Bagherzadeh said Iran was keen to "reduce the suffering of the families of the fallen in any attack against our country... and prevent any repetition of the long and bitter experience of the Vietnam War."


Link


Note the date of the article. June 2008. Two years ago.

Seems to me MSM outlets may be rehashing old stories to add to the current tensions, swap the Revolutionary Guard Commander's name, and bingo, new story. Apparently. Stir up anti-Iranian "how dare they?" sentiment may be the aim here.

Of course Iran may be repeating a "digging of graves" exercise but, to dig the amount of graves they supposedly state takes time and energy.

And it's Ramadan. Muslims are fasting. Digging so many graves for a exercise at this time would be too energy-consuming.

So the story seems a rehash of an old story, for whatever motive you can work out for yourselves.

The war drums are beating, the propaganda bleating.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
Hey Lucidity not sure if you mentioned David Cameron's gaff the other day. Basically he had a little slip up where he stated Iran already had nuclear weapons.

5 August 2010
www.bbc.co.uk...

There are plenty of parallels to draw with Blair and the Iraq War here. After all Cameron is a poor man's Blair when it comes to rhetoric.



posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Big Raging Loner
 


ha! i never saw that...what an idiot..

who on earth voted him in...oh right...nobody



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 09:52 AM
link   



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Regensturm
 


Yep! Caught that one too. Please add anything like this you find. The patterns are fascinating to me.

I'm still waiting for the missing nukes one. Hope I'm wrong about that.



[edit on 8/11/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by moosevernel
 


Doesn't much matter who the president is or who's in "charge" because there are warring factions in the subgovernment that permeate across all administrations.

The ones beating the war drums on Iran for many years now (let's just go back to the mid-90s for simplicity's sake) are what some call PNAC/neocons/Zionists. They're the ones betting the farm on the Middle East being the only thing that will save the US hegemony.

The faction with a slight edge now because one of their figureheads is in power is the CFR. They don't want us in the Middle East. Their focus is more on Asia.

Gets even more confusing when you realized there's overlap in the factions as far as some goals and some people go too. But you can pretty well tell who's aligned with who when it comes to the higher levels of power.

Just watch what they say and do, and also watch which media aligns with which faction. The WSJ, for example aligns with neocons. You start to see the patterns if you look at the stories from the perspective of who reports what how and from whom with what slant.

Neocons: Bush-43, Cheney, Lieberman, Bolton, Kristol and the like.

CFR: Bryzenski, the Clintons, Bush-41.

When you think of it this way, left/right, dem/rep...none of that matters. It's these factions that influence and try to run things. And sometimes it's a matter of choosing the lesser of two evils to get what you want in the short term. That's how they play the game and that's how we have to too. Every battle on its own merits and for its own goals.

And by they way, my theory is that someone on the CFR side may well have helped WikiLeaks.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 11:35 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Thanks ~Lucidity.

There's certainly a discernable pattern. Today it's about how Iran have increased their uranium enrichment.

It's all part of the anti-Iran agenda, the beating of war drums.

It makes you wonder what story will be reheated in the MSM microwave next...

On the subject of TPTB, I strongly urge and encourage you to post a thread about it, and your thoughts on the factions which I do find interesting, and I'm sure others would too.

My thoughts on TPTB is that while there maybe factions, they simply bicker over which chess piece to move next.

Your description of how one faction favours Asia over the Middle East in terms of where to expand interests next seems to correspond to what I think.

In terms of greater or lesser evils, we still have to accept that both factions, if they exist, are nonetheless still 'evil' to be a greater or lesser evil.

The NeoCons and the pro-Israeli lobbyists are still powerful. Look how quickly the military aid was cut off to Lebanon after the border incident.


Thanks again.



posted on Aug, 11 2010 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Regensturm
 


Yes, they are powerful. That power is currently at an ebb, but they're really entrenched everywhere, even in this administration. Warring factions at every level. We'll probably never really now the half of it either.

I'm still hoping that one day Colin Powell writes a book. I think that there was a lot of this that didn't sit well with him, going back to the Plame incident, which by the way is in the news again too!



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity

Yes, they are powerful. That power is currently at an ebb, but they're really entrenched everywhere, even in this administration. Warring factions at every level. We'll probably never really now the half of it either.


Like the iceberg seen above water level, there's the rest of the iceberg below the water level that we don't see.

Scary to think about. I once heard a saying which said to imagine the worst thing your government could be doing. Now multiply that by a thousand, and you're close to the truth.


Originally posted by ~Lucidity
I'm still hoping that one day Colin Powell writes a book. I think that there was a lot of this that didn't sit well with him, going back to the Plame incident, which by the way is in the news again too!


I don't know if he will spill the beans. He was caught up in it like the rest of them, and I'm sure people have things about him they could say.

Going to the UN about Iraq's supposed WMD's was not his finest hour, he's entangled in it all, and as he is a former soldier, he may have a mixture of self-preservation and staying loyal to his superiors holding him back from writing a book.

But still, if the right publishing deal came along, he might think about it.

Until then, he might rely on anonymous briefings to journalists to get his view across.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   
To start this discussion, which I hope will be very interactive, let me post a video. You tell me what year this is...
This video which was made by Bill Moyers which centered around the Iran Contra affair ...Spooky similar in so so many ways ... tv.globalresearch.ca...



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
How many of you have children?
Young enough to not know better?
Or old enough to know better but are doing whatever they want cause you the parent just don't have the time to care and trust their judgment?





Well the government are the children and you all are the parents that just don't want to take the time to pull the reins back.
WE THE PEOPLE have this right to control our government but everybody is just too busy to care. Lazy and want someone else to handle it.

AS for Iran ,.. the government needs your approval to generate another war
so headlines are created and stories are embellished to create anger

But whatever,. cyclical chaos

For your viewing pleasure
Just another random opinion
from ME



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 06:02 PM
link   
It seems that Iran is importing the oil from Iraq per this startling photo and article found on npr's web page
www.npr.org...

It fits after reading how the Russians sold Iran a handful of small submarines to block the straits of Harmus. (not sure of the spelling)



posted on Aug, 27 2010 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Thought you might be interested in this doozy;

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Mobius informs me a variation of this story was floating around in 2007. Much larger amount this time around though.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


The thing is Lucidity, even though at times Iran's president sounds civil, he shoots his own protesters. Even though we are restricted here, free speech is still considered number one



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Skerrako
 

I think half the news we get out of and from Iran is whack. They're tightly controlled on both the good news and the bad and the rest of the world conflates things about them and makes it seem as if the entire country is totally in the dark ages.

Where is Ahmadinejad these days? Last I heard he went AWOL for a couple of weeks, was consulting sorcerers and then was asked to step down. (No need to answer.)









 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join