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: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by NeutronAvenger
 


The US had better be prepared to exact heavy losses, in that sense it is not prepared. Iran is allies with russia and the iranians have missles capable of reaching ALL surrounding US bases...prepare for a few thousand US troops dead in the first 30 minutes of the war. Plus the iranian army is larger...yes their equipment is old and what not...but this is going to be another guerilla war




posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by oozyism
 


No, becuase in that case the US would finally act like a real Super power and turn Iran into a glass parking lot. Simply becuase it hasn't done so doesn't mean it isn't capable of it.


God not you as well so you lose all credibility by joining the glass car park brigade without seeing the downside, what a sad state the US is in.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:11 AM
link   
It must be a reason why we attacked Iraq. What they told us about the weapons of mass destruction was only a temporary excuse. What was the real reason for that war is something kept in secret for a good reason.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
It must be a reason why we attacked Iraq. What they told us about the weapons of mass destruction was only a temporary excuse. What was the real reason for that war is something kept in secret for a good reason.


yes, oil and the reconstruction of Iraq by american companies. Not that much of a secret, if you ask me.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 06:53 AM
link   
He knows very well that nothing he said was true. Whether the US has an excuse to attack Iran is a matter of political opinion, if the –fact- that Iranians are assisting in the killing of Coalition soldiers is an excuse then we have an excuse. The covert retaliation for their involvement gives Iran just as much of a reason to attack the US, but that would not be a clever move. And yes Britain would most definitely invade Iran, in Iraq it was the British who were the ones pushing with the most gusto for retaliation against Iran for the increasing proof of Iranian involvement in the South.

The recent increase in air exercises in the UK including very large exercises around Herefordshire involving SF helis and strike aircraft in the past few weeks is generally believed to be preparation for an invasion. Funnily enough, 3 Typhoons and a Lynx flew past my house when I was typing a couple of paragraphs down and while I was proofreading my post two more Typhoons were whizzing around the general area for about 20 minutes.

Retaliation against Iran in the form of capturing and killing Iranians was/still is a political question, the military reasons or “excuses” as they are laughably being referred to are solid. You either sit back and let them directly or indirectly kill Coalition soldiers or you do something about it. It was 2004 when Iranian EFP bombs first started being discovered in Iraq and this was followed up with large intelligence gathering operations with the purpose of gauging Iranian involvement in Iraq (and Afghanistan). This resulted in rat lines being discovered pointing to the fact that Iraqi insurgents and other “foreign fighters” were being trained in Iran and discoveries of Iranian mortar rounds and rockets were continuously increasing at a dramatic rate. By 2007 US Intelligence speculated that 150 members of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds were in Iraq at any one time.

The level of secrecy surrounding Iranian involvement and the hesitation about how to deal with it was due to the worry of a continual escalation of the military situation in the Middle East. For JSOC and the special operations community in general however, the attitude was one of “no-one can decide what to do – whatever lets get on with it”.

JSOC formed a new branch of operations known as CII – Counter Iranian Influence. A Green Beret unit Task Force 17 was formed with the specific task of combating Iranian involvement in Iraq. Tier 1 assets were tied up with the insurgency in general but would prosecute intelligence gathered through TF17. Despite what people seem to believe there is a huge reluctance to attack Iran or retaliate in any way, and despite increasing proof of Iranian involvement in killing Coalition soldiers, not a great deal was being done about the results of these operations, which obviously continue to this day.

On 21st December 2006, two Quds Force operatives were captured in Iraq and were released 9 days later. Another Quds Force officer Mohsen Chirazi was captured in the compound of Abdul Aziz Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq. On 11th January 2007 Delta Force raided the Iranian Liason Office – effectively the Iranian embassy in Iraq. They found staff scurrying around burning and shredding every piece of paper in sight. Some were cutting off their hair in an attempt to alter their appearance. Everyone had fake ID cards and many tested positive for handling explosives. They took five men from the ILO.

The insurgents being trained and funded through Quds were first known as Secret Cells and later as Special Groups. I'll add more later.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 07:03 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Please dont be silly. The US is one of a relative handful of nations with complete and unfettered access to lazer based anti missile tech, and Im sure if they decided to go to war with Iran, they would have thier bases covered in lazer mesh so fine you could split hairs with it.
No the only question to consider here is this:
Would an attack on Iran be moraly correct. If so , why ? And if not, what are you going to do to ensure any government which supports such an action is not re elected? Because I can assure you, if the American people continue to allow the presence of dangerous warmongers in an apparantly free nation, then I think the US will find it increasingly hard to gain support in the future, for pretty much anything.

Edit to add:
The question of attacking Iran with the excuse that some Taleban are Iranian is ridiculous. There are white British, American, Australian members too, but if the US wants to rumble with Britain or Australia on that basis, then it will have to wipe out its own population also. What an idiot notion.
You cannot make a nation responsible for the actions of a few morons who happen to have been born in it. Fact is , those who join these groups are no longer proper members of thier home nations , because joining such a group requires loyalty which overides the thoughts of national pride, and loyalty to ones queen ,king, president or prime minister which may be familiar to patriots of those nations.


[edit on 6-9-2010 by TrueBrit]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 07:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheSam

'US has no excuse to attack Iran'




America won't do it directly. They'll use Israel as a proxy to do so. Simple! QED!



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 09:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Trueman
It must be a reason why we attacked Iraq. What they told us about the weapons of mass destruction was only a temporary excuse. What was the real reason for that war is something kept in secret for a good reason.




Petrodollar Warfare: Dollars, Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse

I think this thread explains what may be the true reasons. Saddam stopped selling oil in $US in March 2000. This means any oil the US bought from Iraq they had to exchange to €Euros which added a huge cost to buying oil.



In 2007 Iran did the exact same thing. Iran stops selling oil in U.S. dollars. The war drums for Iran have gotten a lot louder since then.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 11:12 AM
link   
I'm defintely no fan of the regime in Iran. I think it's basically fascist or Nazi and was not even legitimately elected. It rules it's own people at gunpoint.

Even so I don't want a war with them. That would just leave us with yet another "nation building" mission and we don't do those very well. It would probably damage the economy even more, too, since there would be another Oil Shock like 1973 or 1979.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by witness63
I'm defintely no fan of the regime in Iran. I think it's basically fascist or Nazi and was not even legitimately elected. It rules it's own people at gunpoint.

Even so I don't want a war with them. That would just leave us with yet another "nation building" mission and we don't do those very well. It would probably damage the economy even more, too, since there would be another Oil Shock like 1973 or 1979.


His 2005 presidential campaign, supported by the Alliance of Builders of Islamic Iran, garnered 62% of the runoff election votes, and he became President on 3 August 2005.
wiki

And again in 2009;

Iran's official news agency, announced that with two-thirds of the votes counted, Ahmadinejad had won the election with 62% of the votes cast,[3] and that Mir-Hossein Mousavi had received 34% of the votes cast.
wiki



They're not a dictatorship suppressing the Iranian people like the MSM would like to have you believe.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 11:49 AM
link   
us has every reason to attack iran.. islamist terrrorist , al qaida , taliban etc are being financed by the iranian governement, and iran gives terrorist training and explosives, weapons etc.

Iran is reasponsible for hundreds of US combat soldiers in afghanistan and iraq,
and iran is undermining homeland security by planting and financing terror cells on US soil and sending radical imams to US mosques trying to gather home grown terrorist on US soil.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by MarkLuitzen
us has every reason to attack iran.. islamist terrrorist , al qaida , taliban etc are being financed by the iranian governement, and iran gives terrorist training and explosives, weapons etc.
Iran is reasponsible for hundreds of US combat soldiers in afghanistan and iraq,
and iran is undermining homeland security by planting and financing terror cells on US soil and sending radical imams to US mosques trying to gather home grown terrorist on US soil.



They were also financed by the U.S., so why are you bitching about them being financed by Iran and not by the U.S.? But this is the best part:

"iran is undermining homeland security by planting and financing terror cells on US soil and sending radical imams to US mosques trying to gather home grown terrorist on US soil. "

Do you also believe Fox News and some others, brother? Ridiculous.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Faustian Spirit
 


because the Us is not financing the muslim extremist in Europe , and if they are financed by iran which they are the same has to be said for abroad Europe.
Iran is pure evil its the last reminand of Nazi germany and I don't like people who are trying to undermine my country the netherlands.
my country has enough problems and thats why we have some one like geert wilders who has quiet a lead in current polls.. currently he has 26 seats and prognosed is 35 seats if there would be voting today.

All across Europe people have problems with the radical islamist and muslim youth and thats why in
Danmark - danish volks party
belgium - NVA and Vlaams belang
austria - FpO
are in the lead and why in french the party of Le Pen is in getting more votes.

because of those iranian financed extremist / imams and youth of muslim ideoligy.

and we don't get Fox news here anymore and what is truely redicules is voting for Obama and thinking he is the saviour of the usa , because obama is playing with us citizens lifes by letting a mosque being build on ground zero and going around the world saying sorry for things the usa shouldn't be sorry for.
we in Europe are opening our eyes and the usa has to follow suit.
our PVV leader wilders is going to speak at ground zero rememberance try to be open minded when listening.

[edit on 6-9-2010 by MarkLuitzen]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I was watching that 2009 election in Iran very closely and I know that the votes were never counted at all. They stopped the count when they realized Ahmadinejad was losing by 2-to-1, then clamped down on the opposition and the media with extreme brutality.


I saw all this at the time and was strongly against it, so I'll never believe the "official count" of that election.

My hope is that eventually the Iranians will overthrow this facsist police state on their own, but I do not believe the U.S. should take on that task. Nor do I believe for a minute that Obama is ever going to take any military action against them, not unless they are foolish enough to start shooting first.

In that case, the first thing that will happen is that we will cut off their oil exports. This Oil Shock will hurt the world badly, but it will hurt that regime in Iran even more. That's one reason I doubt there will ever be a war.

Even so, no approval of the Iranian regime from me. I have never supported it from 1979 to the present and never will.




[edit on 6-9-2010 by witness63]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 12:58 PM
link   
[edit on 6-9-2010 by BiGGz]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 01:07 PM
link   
An Iranian may think Ahmedimejad's statement is more to do with national pride and to calm the businessmen. On the other hand, it may also inspire Mossad, CIA or other dark operations to plant/engineer a good excuse to invade Iran.

Which ever way the future develops, there's no doubt Iran is the only rogue country in middle east. It's only a matter of time before the region will be under full control by Zionist powers.

Either an invasion or regime change (an internal revolution). Anymore creative ideas?



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 02:05 PM
link   

No the only question to consider here is this:
Would an attack on Iran be moraly correct. If so , why ?


Yes, and read my post it’s just above yours ffs.

A US police liaison from an airborne artillery battery based near Iskanderiyah was conducting a security coordination meeting at the Provincial Joint Coordination Centre in Kerbala when at 5:45 a convoy of black GMC SUVs arrived with men in US uniforms and carrying M4s. This was a normal occurrence and the Iraqi guards waved them in. They threw stun grenades into the centre and dragged 2 American officers from the meeting, bundling them into the SUVs while another group assaulted the second floor taking another hostage. A third group assaulted a Humvee parked at the PJCC dragging another 2 American soldiers from it. Ten minutes later they were driving away with five US soldiers in tow and Iraqi police in pursuit. They decided to shoot the five men in the head and throw them out of their SUVs.

On 22nd March UKSF got permission to assault the home of Qais Khazali. Intelligence pointed to considerable connections between him and the Iranian operation. This connection with Iran made it very difficult for the SAS operation to be approved and it took a lot of arm-twisting. The door was kicked and everyone inside was cuffed. In his home was his brother Laith and another man who pretended to be deaf-blind-mute for three weeks. In his home they found documents describing the planning and execution of the Kerbala raid in great detail. There were also documents indicating that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Quds Force had approved the raid and that they were sending $750,000 to $3 million to Khazali’s operation on a monthly basis.

The third man captured eventually cracked and revealed himself as Ali Mussa Daqduq, a senior Hezbollah operative who led several militant groups and at one point was the head of Mohammed Nasrallah’s bodyguard, the Hezbollah leader.

Daqduq was hired by Quds Force to be a consultant for various militant groups operating inside Iraq. He had travelled from Lebanon to Tehran in May 2006 where he was briefed by the head of Quds. It was his responsibility to tutor militant groups in the use of IEDs and other techniques. He was passed around umpteen militant groups during his stay and returned to Iraq four times to do this.

In short, it was Iran that brought the IED menace to Coalition forces, Daqduq was just one of many terrorist management consultants. We already have a good excuse to invade Iran and have had a good excuse for years. Conspiracy theorists should concentrate on why we haven’t done so already, but then again that makes it difficult for them to whine about oil and the big bad west etc.


[edit - typo]

[edit on 6-9-2010 by Soshh]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   
Manufacturing consent to attack Iran is not the hard part. The hard part is how to attack Iran and keep the oil flowing ...

The US is more than capable of taking Iran out, but this involves massive air campaigning, and possibly even tactical nukes.

The problem with doing this is the disruption of Gulf region oil through the straight of hormuz, and the loss on the world market of Iran's production (about 5% of world - which is a lot).

This would be absolutely devastating to the West economically, aggravate world competition for oil resources with China, and allowing Russia to put a stranglehold on European energy supply ... it's simply a non-starter.

To ensure the continued flow of oil out of Iran and the security of the Straight requires boots on the ground. This would become a massive asymetrical (guerilla tactics) war ... very bloody, and it could take years to get Iranian oil production back online and secure the Straight ...

So Iran can not be attacked in any way that ensures current world oil flow into the market.

Sanctions will continue to tighten. Regime-change tactics will continue to be used. And if, through all this, Iran feels weakened enough or threatened enough to strike out ... war is still possible.

And such a war will have a dire impact on the way of life that most people in the world enjoy ... think fuel rationing, massive inflation, food shortages, etc.



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Saying that US has no reason for an attacking attempt is only a statement of a lie or ignorance. If you do not have knowledge of the main reason, try investigate abit. Besides, a war at a larger scale is actually a signed agreement that has to be withheld for the sake of economy,resources and our own future, not that it seems so bright anyway. War is one of our last chances of success in the future. When the earth axis changes and the natural disasters start rolling in big time ,we then got enough cash to rebuild our society.

People will get lost and killed, YES, but so has it been the last 10 000 years since the beginning of higher technology and real economy, politics.

[edit on 6-9-2010 by Archirvion]

[edit on 6-9-2010 by Archirvion]



posted on Sep, 6 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheSam

'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)



Sorry, had to laugh at the second statement there. Ahmadinejad better watch how confident he begins to sound because I assure you if the USA really wants to take out Iran, they will do it without much more effort than Iraq took.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join