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.

 

Iran to target enemies' interests around world, if attacked

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Iran to target enemies' interests around world, if attacked


news.xinhuanet.com

"IRGC is in full readiness to encounter firmly with the stupidity of the U.S. and the Zionist regime (of Israel)," Public Relations of IRGC was quoted as saying.

Earlier this month, the U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen said the United States has a plan in place to attack Iran, if it is necessary.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www1.voanews.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Iran Urges IAEA to Counter Sanctions




posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:29 AM
link   
From a Chinese news source, which is interesting considering geopolitical alignment.

I believe this is due to the pressure they are feeling with the reactor going online this week. This is also probably to keep this issue in focus should they be attacked. And it coming from China would probably make a lot of people think twice.

From the article too, "In a letter addressed to the UN Security Council (UNSC), Alehabib criticized the U.S. for the military threats."

In a related story from yesterday,...

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told top Iranian officials in a speech Wednesday that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and others are right in saying Iran is ready to negotiate on its nuclear program. But he said no discussions will be held with the United States. See additional news links.


Iran this week also asked the IAEA to step in and counter the sanctions against them. See related thread.

They might be perceiving some threats and thereby terrorism. It's all about perceptions, isn't it?


news.xinhuanet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


One thing the top dog of Iran, the illegitimate dictator and master, must consider if he actually said those words, because it would mean they are sanctioning TERRORISM - the killing of innocent civilians and NOT combatants on foriegn soil.

If not, then that dog should sue or at least censure the chinese source, or their credibility will be gone, even with muslims whom they hope to convert and misguide using religion, because not just Sunnis whom he hates more than jews, are fellow muslims, so too with innocent Shias on foreign soil will be murdered.

2 can play the chess game or rhetorics.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


That is not necessarily spelled out. It says "the interests." Just as Israel might strike Iran's "interests."

And even if it were true, what about the fact that civilians get killed if they're attacked? That doesn't count?



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 


That is not necessarily spelled out. It says "the interests." Just as Israel might strike Iran's "interests."

And even if it were true, what about the fact that civilians get killed if they're attacked? That doesn't count?


Let that dog NOT play semantics here. Tell him to grow some balls and say it as it is, and not be the coward he really is and letting the peaceful soveriegn Iranians see him for what he truly is.

There is a difference between war and terrorism. War is declared, and civilians are advised to move out of targeted areas such as munitions dump, military objectivesm etc.

In terrorism, such as those by those fanatical radical Islamic animals, there is NO warning of target, time or location.

NO ONE wants war, and is one that I had actively fought against here and elsewhere, but if that dog continues to threaten the world's humanity, even I would turn, grab a rifle and hunt those responsible down to the last man, more so now that he had admitted publically through his puppets of his intentions.

At least now I know for sure now where the source of innocents and not combatants will die from, just as I would fight tooth and nail to get those responsible for the intentional murder of innocents in Iraq and Afghan, regardless if they are US commanders or taliban insurgent commanders.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:38 AM
link   
BEWARE-

Russia and China have resentment...they are in the background saying

"Go ahead....make my day"

Besides if Iran develops a nuclear bomb it wont be Iran that sets off a bomb in the USA or western friendly countries. It will be a team of a deep black operation running a false flag.
Yeah, kinda like 911.

Interesting thing about the Problem Reaction Solution of doing things. It has been overly used and now is worn out. These "interests" (The Secret Orders) you say don't exist aren't the most illuminated creatures in the universe.

But hey, continue to interact with the illusion. Reality and truth has an uncanny way of reering it's head in a most inconvenient way then everyone is sore.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:43 AM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

I'm sorry. He did say "if attacked."

I'm not sure I'm seeing the issue here. Terrorism comes in many guises. I'd bet a lot on the fact that many in Iran are feeling rather terrorized by events of the past 15 years or so. It all depends on where you sit.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by superluminal11
 


You're right. Problem, reaction, solution in this case lost its legs two cycles ago.

I still maintain that the US and Israel intel agencies aren't sure whether Iran got a hold of any of the loose nukes running around in the past 6 or 7 years or so. That may be going to some of the reluctance and/or caution. Same goes for Saudi Arabia. Rumors are rife there as to whether or not they might not have a nuke or two. So who knows.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


Apology accepted, and glad you admit to 'not see'. Sacarsm noted as well. lol!

That information divulged reveals MORE than the dog had unwittedly wanted.

No sane and legal govt of today would deal with such animals known as terrorists nor have any links with their intricate sleeper cells and network.

By publically announcing in this manner, he finally admits to having such links, and could easily deploy them.

Speaks the truth finally and a wake up call to humanity on who that dog really is and had been doing behind our backs.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I guess I'm not reading quite THAT much into the statements in the OP article. What admissions?

And that wasn't an apology as duly noted. They did say "if attacked." That would be natural for any country. To retaliate.

[edit on 8/19/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


OOPS...I forgot.

With you and your kind, it is ALWAYS translation error, taken out of context, etc, excuses galore for retraction whenever those top dogs of Iran spout threats against humanity, such as denial of holocaust, wiping Israel off the map, etc, etc.

Read it again and understand what it means. Does Iran have the capability to wage a declared war on foriegn NATIONS, with the S underlined, or are they deploying terrorism tactics of murder against soft innocent civilian targets.

Doesnt take a village idiot to figure that out, and I know for sure you aint some village idiot, or I would not be wasting my time discussing with you here.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Russia, china and iran, they're so not ready to confront the us and israel right now.
If iran and others are aware of this, then I'll say.. they're bluffing.

The israel and the US control the timing for now. We'll wait August 21th.

Besides if iran is holding a trump card, its supreme leader wouldn't even "offer" negotiation with the US at all, yet he did, he feels insecured, he's bluffing.

Believe it or not if the US admin know that iran is bluffing, this could be settled peacefully, if that is what the US want, as long as the admin manages to put the israeli on a leash.

Any major global war will only "strengthen" the dollar, everybody knows this.

US Dollar: The Unsafe Safe Haven


Curiously enough, the dollar is still considered by many to be the world’s most reliable currency, the island to which all flights of safety are destined. Ergo, when the tide of risk recedes (or is at least perceived to have receded), once-skittish investors emerge from their dollar-clad bunker to re-enter the world of reckless speculation. Financially speaking, the dollar falls during periods of economic peace and rallies during times of war



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SeekerofTruth101
 

Oops...I didn't manage to read past "my kind." So sorry.
 

reply to post by Jazzyguy
 

Yes. There would potentially be many players in this, or perhaps just the two. Believe it or not, Iran is rallying support among the other Arab states.

Always about the dollar, isn't it? In any wars today. In this case, All the countries you mentions and then some hole the power to topple the dollar.

In as far as profit, well some wars just aren't as profitable as this one might prove to be. Then again, they told us that the Iraqi oil would cover the cost of that war and that the coalition nations would chip in. Neither has happened to my knowledge, although I guess in a way China has financed a good part of this...directly or indirectly.

Also, I believe the Supreme Leader said there would be no talks. Unless I misread that part.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
The key things to note are the words "If attacked". This is what they always say. Its what they've been saying. Seems like business as usual and in my opinion, quite fair. If someone hits you, you have the right to hit em back.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jacktherer
The key things to note are the words "If attacked". This is what they always say. Its what they've been saying. Seems like business as usual and in my opinion, quite fair. If someone hits you, you have the right to hit em back.


Even killing innocent men, women, and children in other lands who were not warned in advance or where that target is, humans whom cannot defend themselves?

Had we, humanity after centuries of civilisation, turned into animals that we think it is ok for such tactics on foreign soil when war is declared?

May you be the only one who thinks this way, or humanity may be a lost cause...



[edit on 19-8-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:12 PM
link   
If Iran was attacked there would be some pissed of countries Russia China India Lebanon Turkey north Korea Syria Palestine Germany France Venezuela Italy Georgia etc all with a wide range of interest with Iran, also with one million troops ready to be mobilized and a paramilitary of 10 million and a bunch of brand new soviet tech designed mainly for defeating the current us defense systems and a whole heap of money there in a pretty good position.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SeekerofTruth101

Originally posted by jacktherer
The key things to note are the words "If attacked". This is what they always say. Its what they've been saying. Seems like business as usual and in my opinion, quite fair. If someone hits you, you have the right to hit em back.


Even killing innocent men, women, and children who were not warned in advance or where that target is, humans whom cannot defend themselves? Had we, humanity after centuries of civilisation, turned into animals that we think it is ok for such tactics even when war is declared?

[edit on 19-8-2010 by SeekerofTruth101]




1. I in no way endorse the slaughter of innocents I am merely stating it should be an expected response because
2. Aren't the U.S and Israel doing that already? and finally
3. No. We are animals but as a species we do not all think such tactics are sound and just. It just so happens the people we let rule us do happen to believe war is moral.

I understand this is a harsh realization but one must understand what is blocking them before progress can be made.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:26 PM
link   
This amounts to what I believe is Aloudmouthjihad saber rattling on his speakerbox again. He has just been exclaiming how any attack will result in never before seen retaliation (much like that of Kim Jong Il). I think he is scared, why can't Iran just play nice with the rest of the world?



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by canderson180
 


Sure. It's smack talk. that's been flying back and forth for over a decade now. Israel says this, Iran says that, the UN says this, the US warns, Venezuela and N. Korea pipe up, China and India chime in, Russia has a say. And the cycle repeats. Sometimes at a higher ebb. We haven't seen it this high since 2007.

A lot of the talk is also recycled. I have a thread about that here: War on Iran: What Year Is This?

Iran's return volleys can also be viewed as a wise, defensive move, can't they? Draw world attention and the odds of someone sneak attacking lessen. That kind of thing.



posted on Aug, 19 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by ~Lucidity
Always about the dollar, isn't it? In any wars today. In this case, All the countries you mentions and then some hole the power to topple the dollar.

In as far as profit, well some wars just aren't as profitable as this one might prove to be. Then again, they told us that the Iraqi oil would cover the cost of that war and that the coalition nations would chip in. Neither has happened to my knowledge, although I guess in a way China has financed a good part of this...directly or indirectly.

This is beyond war profiteering, this is about israel. And china is diversifying to euro. To avoid the dollar colapsing, the US could create some threat of a major war to deter precisely that move.

17th August news. China Favors Euro Over Dollar as Bernanke Alters Path


Also, I believe the Supreme Leader said there would be no talks. Unless I misread that part.

He didn't offer it out loud, but he "offered" it.


Iran's supreme leader says his country will hold talks with the United States only if the U.S. lifts its "sanctions and threats" against Iran.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei told top Iranian officials in a speech Wednesday that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and others are right in saying Iran is ready to negotiate on its nuclear program.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join