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.

 

Ahmadinejad Drops A Bomb........

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by tristar
 


Originally posted by tristar
so who are they actually after....?


Hello tristar,

Still peeking out from under your keyboard I see.

Tell me who ...'they"....are, and I will answer your question.


Okay, lets see how i can place this, research from 2000 international agreements and you will eventually see who is the main objective. Iran poses no threat to the stability of the U.S. either as a nation or economy. To further my message, wasn't the whole of the U.S. population subjected to a "communist" take over the world. If such a crisis was true then all the indirect conflicts against the communist were simply mind experiment. Its exactly what is going on in today's media. Are you able to draw parallel lines to the "then" events and "today's" events ?




posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by minkey53
 


You wildly misunderstand the major threat to peace in the mid-East.

(Second line) It ain't Iran.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   
Iran may or may not be developing a nuke. I hope they aren't but with Israel, India, and Pakistan as constant nuclear threats, I can see why they would like their own nuke to dissuade any attacks.

Wiki

Israel is the only country who refuses to confirm or deny that they have a nuke and that is highly suspicious itself. The world will be a much better place once we all grow up and learn to live together in peace. My 2 cents.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by CanadianDream420
 




Regardless of what any for or against Iran person says, they will try to build nuclear bombs, if not already in the process. Look at the area and look at the past of that area, no country that has weapons of mass destruction, or a brain in there leaders head, will leave there land unprotected. Country's have this habit of taking over other countries, especially in that area called the middle east. Having a "big bomb" will give anybody pause and make them think twice in how they deal with said country.

Look at the past of that area?
What country has Iran invaded in the last 200 years?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:45 PM
link   
As if Israel has to do anything. Israel will snap its fingers, and Americans will gladly jump off a cliff if it pleases their master. Otherwise, bernanke will come out and say the economy is a little frothy, and lots of people will lose their jobs, markets will fall, and politicians will lose their next election. America...all brawn, no brain.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler
 


Hello Proto,

I despise atrocities of war just as much as you do my friend.

I do not think that Israel will bomb innocent Iranians. But I do think that there is an extremely high probability that Israel will surgically strike at Iran's nuclear facilities, as they have already done with Iraq and Syria.... it might buy us all a couple of more years before we would have to strike again.



This is not likely in large part because Iran’s present missile capabilities are more significant than Saddam’s Scuds were.

Syria is at a disadvantage because Israel can muster a ground invasion and do it from the high ground of the Golan Heights.

Yet Israel does not have the troop transport capability to invade Iran. So Iran can afford to get into a missile slinging contest with the Israelis. The Israelis can’t invade in mass. The citizens of Iran have been through the missile and bombing drills before during the Iran and Iraq war, so I don’t think Israel can pull off a surgical strike.

Honestly I don’t think there is anything there to surgically strike.

Like Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction.

In fact the greatest evidence that they have nothing is no surgical strike has been attempted.

This is really just a well orchestrated propaganda war to see if it’s possible to drum up public support for another costly, bankrupting, fruitless war, to secure oil resources and try to put the Prince of Iran back on the Peacock Throne in one fashion or another.

Good luck selling it!

Thanks.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by minkey53
At the end of the day, I think most people think that Mr Pyjamas from Iran is after the bomb.


Who is this Mr. Pyjamas? Im not sure where bedwear comes into a country possibly might have let slip they might be going after the Big A.

Maybe I have my stupid hat on today, but I could not find any info on this mysterious Mr. Pyjamas.

If you are by chance refering (in not really humerous way) to the president of Iran,
what are you 10?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Two things I'm going to throw into the mix because something reminded me of it.

1.

When Israel took out Lebanon in 2006, they had no real targets and hit the infrastructure. Whey they hit Syria in 2007, they took out just what they claimed were nuclear sites.

If they take out Iran's nuclear sites they will have to also take out the infrastructure because if they crossover it's on. Full out war.

Iran will not be a Lebanon or a Syria or even an Iraq back in 1981 when Israel took out their reactor...they will retaliate.

2.

I'm of the theory that the U.S. and Israel are not sure whether Iran might not already have nuclear weapons. This may be part of the hesitation. There are some loose nukes in the world (the Ukrainian ones and maybe even some American ones, and hell only knows what's going on with Pakistan).

We already know that there are claims that Israeli and U.S. intel on Iran's nuclear plans and current capabilities don't jibe (and I mean "know" in that this is what they told us.

Oh and in addition, rumor is rife that Bush helped the Saudis get nukes a few years ago. So there may be more nuclearly armed nations in the ME than we think. That's always at the back of my mind.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by tristar
Okay, lets see how i can place this, research from 2000 international agreements and you will eventually see who is the main objective. Iran poses no threat to the stability of the U.S. either as a nation or economy. To further my message, wasn't the whole of the U.S. population subjected to a "communist" take over the world. If such a crisis was true then all the indirect conflicts against the communist were simply mind experiment. Its exactly what is going on in today's media. Are you able to draw parallel lines to the "then" events and "today's" events ?




OK, Let's see if I got it......I don't understand anything you just said.

Iran does pose a threat to nation, and to the economy.

If they obtain planes and missiles and nuclear weapons they will indeed pose a threat to every nation. And if their supply of oil was withdrawn from the market we would all indeed suffer at the pump, and the ripple effect would weaken an already disastrous economy.

And most Americans were influenced by the cold war and were concerned about the Communist takeover, and many are still concerned about the Progressives today. You lost me on the rest, I have no idea what you are talking about. You'll just have to explain that further to me.

So who is the main objective?

And again, who are 'they"?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth

Originally posted by tristar
Okay, lets see how i can place this, research from 2000 international agreements and you will eventually see who is the main objective. Iran poses no threat to the stability of the U.S. either as a nation or economy. To further my message, wasn't the whole of the U.S. population subjected to a "communist" take over the world. If such a crisis was true then all the indirect conflicts against the communist were simply mind experiment. Its exactly what is going on in today's media. Are you able to draw parallel lines to the "then" events and "today's" events ?



OK, Let's see if I got it......I don't understand anything you just said.

Iran does pose a threat to nation, and to the economy.


Not sure on what your info is, but its military nor its economic assertion upon the U.S. let alone on a global scale comes close to one tenth of the U.S.'s ability to counter any act or any such moves.




If they obtain planes and missiles and nuclear weapons they will indeed pose a threat to every nation. And if their supply of oil was withdrawn from the market we would all indeed suffer at the pump, and the ripple effect would weaken an already disastrous economy.


Okay, so from what you have told me, that if they obtain planes (which they do and are capable of nuclear delivery) , missiles ( we all know they have the know how and have show us), and now for the oil (we all know its the 3rd largest resource). So why would one, infact point out that if the oil was withdrawn from the market. Considering that its exactly why Iraq was bulldozed under the disguise of lunatic who was infact put to power with the blessing of the NATO (all nations involved) , to fight the so called "terrorists". Sure there are basket cases, but mobilizing and considering the logistics to move against a single nation that obviously was inferior to the U.S. was an obvious stress point test upon the global tolerance level.


And most Americans were influenced by the cold war and were concerned about the Communist takeover, and many are still concerned about the Progressives today. You lost me on the rest, I have no idea what you are talking about. You'll just have to explain that further to me.


Perhaps if you looked at the radio / paper and television coverage of how the so called communist threat was drilled into the brains of millions, then perhaps you too can have a clearer picture.




So who is the main objective?


You are the main objective..!




And again, who are 'they"?


Them.







posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:33 PM
link   
we should put Mr. inmydinnerjacket and Mr. netsinwhawho in a room with foam bats, and let them settle their differances.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


?????????????

?????????????



[edit on 7-8-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by MY2Commoncentsworth
 


Take the time to read through

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by galadofwarthethird
reply to post by CanadianDream420
 




Regardless of what any for or against Iran person says, they will try to build nuclear bombs, if not already in the process. Look at the area and look at the past of that area, no country that has weapons of mass destruction, or a brain in there leaders head, will leave there land unprotected. Country's have this habit of taking over other countries, especially in that area called the middle east. Having a "big bomb" will give anybody pause and make them think twice in how they deal with said country.



Yes, if I was Iran's leader I absolutely would be pursuing nuclear weapons.

Big bombs are a major deterant against imperial nations(aka U.S.) trying to F you over.



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


So ..."Them"... is the government and the military?

And they are looking to control me through brain implants?

And the sabre rattling is a test to see how I react so the implants can be tested?

Is that what you are saying?

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by tristar
 


So ..."Them"... is the government and the military?

And they are looking to control me through brain implants?

And the sabre rattling is a test to see how I react so the implants can be tested?

Is that what you are saying?

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Them cannot be defined since the term has no identification as to a physical or non physical entity. When dealing with this subject you first must begin to question anything and everything related to rational or logic thinking.

In short, you are a product of your environment, please keep in mind, i have no hostile intentions, simply pointing out how one is influenced by one of his/her senses. Its a mind blowing world out there, do not assume that the wind is orderless or colorless.

[edit on 7-8-2010 by tristar]



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 



Originally posted by tristar
Them cannot be defined since the term has no identification as to a physical or non physical entity. When dealing with this subject you first must begin to question anything and everything related to rational or logic thinking.


So if "them" can't be defined and are not real or spiritual, then just what are you saying, that this is "The Matrix" or something like that?

And if "them" are not physical or otherwise, than what would "them" have to do with the current Middle East crisis?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by tristar
 



Originally posted by tristar
Them cannot be defined since the term has no identification as to a physical or non physical entity. When dealing with this subject you first must begin to question anything and everything related to rational or logic thinking.


So if "them" can't be defined and are not real or spiritual, then just what are you saying, that this is "The Matrix" or something like that?



Matrix, being a virtual representation of reality, no i am not suggesting as such. The fact that you chose to quote a fictional representation of what one has indicated shows the level of exposure. "Switch off the idiot box" , no offense intended.




And if "them" are not physical or otherwise, than what would "them" have to do with the current Middle East crisis?


So i am guessing and allowing for any diversion of the fact that the M.E. has a direct and indirect influence on past/present and future interaction on a global scale a pure coincidence ?



posted on Aug, 7 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by tristar
 


Originally posted by tristar
So i am guessing and allowing for any diversion of the fact that the M.E. has a direct and indirect influence on past/present and future interaction on a global scale a pure coincidence ?


Sorry dude, can't make heads nor tails out of that one........guess I'll just have to be stuck in the old box I guess.

But I have witnessed evil in the world and I am well aware of the demonic forces at work on the planet.



posted on Aug, 9 2010 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by MY2Commoncentsworth
reply to post by tristar
 


Originally posted by tristar
So i am guessing and allowing for any diversion of the fact that the M.E. has a direct and indirect influence on past/present and future interaction on a global scale a pure coincidence ?


Sorry dude, can't make heads nor tails out of that one........guess I'll just have to be stuck in the old box I guess.

But I have witnessed evil in the world and I am well aware of the demonic forces at work on the planet.


If you witnessed the so called "demonic forces" then they are simple soldiers. Its the Generals that you should look for, hard to find, in fact there in plain view.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join