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.

 

'US has no excuse to attack Iran'

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   

'US has no excuse to attack Iran'


www.presstv.ir

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has ruled out the likelihood of an attack on Iran, stressing that the US would have no reason for such a move.


"First of all, there is no reason or evidence to support a conflict with Iran," Ahmadinejad said at a press conference in Doha on Sunday. "Secondly, the US is incapable of taking action against Iran."
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I always like to read news about Ahmadinejad. Today he talks about the unlikelihood of a US attack on Iran & says any attack would be effectively countered by the Iranian military should it come to that.

I don't share his confidence with preventing or successfully defending an attack, but maybe his military have a few tricks up their sleeve.

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
I think they've definitely got something in the bag.

The problem with this statement is not that they have no excuse, they just don't have a good enough one yet. That does not change the fact that one is being gradually fabricated. Maybe something will happen 5 years from now. Hopefully not though.

Just seems every day there is some garbage from at least one side of the dispute.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
He's not correct about the latter statement...



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
Actually,the US had every right to attack Iran back in 1979 when our embassy was attacked and taken over. Carter was/is too much of a pussy to do anything about it as his demoncratic views of America is everyone needs a hug and we are always wrong. This is also the current demoncratic view in the White House.

There is no current reason to turn Iran into a glowing pile of sand. I think the citizens will overthrow their government in the next few years if more moderates aren't elected.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:24 PM
link   
This is what throws me:


"Secondly, the US is incapable of taking action against Iran."


If necessary, the United States is incredibly capable.

Does he really think the US is scared of Iran's new UAV? Nope, US has stock loads of them..

Does he really think the US is scared of their long range missiles? Nope, US has counter missile technology .. and a bigger arsenal...

Does he really think the US would be alone in the operation? Nope, they would have the backing of NATO and Israeli forces...

spelling.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by NeutronAvenger]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   
The US doesn't have a current reason to attack Iran... But then again we didn't have a reason to attack Iraq either... So, we made one up. The US has capabilities far beyond what we all know and what the media portrays no doubt, but I think any open military action against Iran will not happen, I think the people of the country will be able to right their governments wrongs within the next ten years. Those people are chomping at the bit to join the western culture.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
The US has no money to strike Iran, but with a big loan from our Chinese landlords it may be possible.



+1 more 
posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by hinky
Actually,the US had every right to attack Iran back in 1979 when our embassy was attacked and taken over.


So by that virtue when the CIA launched Operation Ajax then the Iranians had every right to attack the US regardless of whether they would achieve anything but on principal alone. If we are going to bring some history in I think its prudent to provide a somewhat bigger picture.

brill



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by NeutronAvenger
 


They would have the backing of Israel and maybe Britain but I don't think the rest of NATO would join in. If they had credible intel on Irans nuclear weapons program it would have first been plastered all over the news and then the strikes would have happened. The fact that Busher went online shows that they have nothing.

Iran has every right to develop Nuclear Energy under the NPT which they signed. Israel has an illegal weapons program according to the provisions of the NPT.

Iran isn't Iraq or Afghanistan. Their military isn't depleted like the US military and the Patriot Block 3 missiles aren't as effective as everyone is led to believe. They only intercept about 1 in 4 targets so if you have to fire 4 patriots to hit one Iranian missile then the batteries would be caught reloading while the hundreds of other missiles rain down on Israel and any others they wish to target.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by brill
 


Most people only go by the "history" they want to know about, or have been spoon-fed, rather than the more colorful and complex history that defies the propaganda they subscribe to. You can give some people the history of PR/ propaganda, how it's been implemented in culture after culture, in politics and commercial enterprise, then show them the documents from their own government that verifies it's use on them, the detailed history of events like our shameful history in Iran, and they will still hate Iran and want to see them bombed. That's how effective good propaganda is, and that's how weak minded "the masses" are.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by erumisato
 


Exactly!


Believing every little thing coming out of Tehran as if it's the gospel truth is ridiculous and naive!



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   
And believing that everything that comes out of Tehran is a lie is just as naive but I hear it's a common shill tactic to paint things into extremes.

[edit on 5-9-2010 by American_Soviets]



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by American_Soviets
And believing that everything that comes out of Tehran is a lie is just as naive but I hear it's a common shill tactic to paint things into extremes.



And...Who said that "everything" they say is a lie?

Assumptions will get you nowhere in life. Simply becuase many choose not to blindly believe everything that is said or written by either side does not make one a "shill"

ASS-u-me much?



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
if we dont have one , we can always make one.
cheney may still have a nuke around from the barksdale caper.
we can concoct anything..they're axis of evil aint they?
we'd be doing them a favor..the war would pay for it self-
like iraq and afghanistan. make check out to the petro-chemical-
military..exxon, royal dutch shell, the usual suspects.
FREEDOM IS ON THE MARCH!
we have a special on one size fits all puppet govt.
just like the one in the usa.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
From the same source & same event today. Interesting follow up on possible tactics.




Ahmadinejad added any military action against the Islamic Republic will lead to the collapse of the US hegemony in the entire world.

He stressed that any military action against Iran will also lead to the elimination of Israel from world "geo-politics."

Source


Does this mean an attack on Iran will result in missiles towards Israel?



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   
reply to post by NeutronAvenger
 


I don't think they would get any NATO or UN backing for such a war, especially in view of the fact that all the experts say Iran has no nukes.

They are in a similar position as that of pre-Iraq invasion. They are exaggerating the case of Iran's WMD, but morally they don't have a leg to stand on really. US wouldn't attack Iran on its own, without Israel and vice versa. But Iran is a member of the NPT, and Israel is the maverick country who has allegedly more than 200 nuclear WMD, but won't declare them. UN has been pushing for Israel to join the NPT and declare its nukes recently, but Israel, surprise, surprise, has refused.

Britain might join in an attack on Iran, but may also be influenced by UN, European allies and public opinion not to do so. If UK goes to war with Iran, Cameron will likely suffer the same fate as Blair, which he is probably aware of.

So - America/Israel could find themselves in a very difficult position if they were to attack.

The governments of these two countries seem to tbrive on murder and bloodshed, but would put themselves seriously at risk if by going it alone.

I pray that they never get the support they need to go ahead, so their Vulture Capitalism will just have to contain itself for now, thank God.

For sure, this time, America will be hit in return if it attacks Iran. I do not believe it will be able to attack and remain unscathed at home in such a case, unlike Afghanistan and Iraq. This too might be a deterrent from its usual bullyi boy approach - not because the Gov cares a fig for the American people, but because the Gov might not survive a war in which the Americans at home also get bombed.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSam
 


I think it means that USA homeland will be attacked - either by Iran or its allies, which right now seem to be China, Russia and possibly many Arab countries.

I think AN is suggesting that one way or another US will be pulverised if it attacks Iran.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 08:15 PM
link   
reply to post by American_Soviets
 



Who is painting things in extremes, ahem........... except perhaps yourself?????

If you knew anything about Iran you would know that one of Ahmanazijad's constant tactics is to include a good dose of truth in amongs a lot of lies.

If you are looking for deception tactics, the Iranian regime is up there with the US and Israel. They are all playing the same game.



posted on Sep, 5 2010 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by TheSam
 


He definitely has the power to put 20% of the worlds oil on hold briefly, and for us to engage Iran with a limited amount of oil wouldn't be pretty wise. After 5 days of rationed oil, the American public will demand the withdrawal of US troops, saying 'Not another Iraq!', and 'No WMD's here!' (that is, if there was no such thing as a corrupt government and false flags...).




top topics



 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join