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 trying to provoke a war?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 02:56 AM
link   
Does anyone else think tht maybe Iran seized the British ships in an ttempt to drw the U.S. led coalition into a war with iran? I know it seems a little far-fetched but think about it this way, By provoking a war against them it would motivate any borderline militants to become full fledged, array middle eastern opposition to the U.S. even more strongly, put greater pressure on our allies and force the U.S. to fight 2 gurellia wars in the same region. Possibly even mking the war completly untenable thereby forcing the U.S. to withdraw with Iran in control of both countries. Or am I just crazy?




posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 03:02 AM
link   
nah... I think if the US went to war with Iran it would be over quick. And the US wouldnt even care about cleaning up that country lol.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 03:32 AM
link   
The war with Irq was over quick too. But ts still going on. The danger in the middle east is not the military its the civillians.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 03:36 AM
link   
Is there any legal precedent with Iran taking the British boats? As in were the boats in Iranian waters without proper clearance?

Also, Iran must be spooked as to the U.S. engaging them in war. Bush noted them as part of the "Axis of Evil". Two of the countries in that "axis", Afghanistan and Iraq, have already been invaded and taken over. Surely they must see themselves as being next. Quite justifiably too considering U.S. actions.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 03:38 AM
link   
Yeah the British boats were in Iranian waters without permission. Guess losing 3 ships (lol.. ok boats) from your fleet is the price you pay for not paying attention to what you are doing.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I think it was to make the point it has technology enough to know when anyone enters it's territory and can and will do something about it.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Iran's military is now much stronger than Iraq's was, and in technology, significantly stronger than Iraq's was in 1990.

They have been spending like a fiend on Russian missiles, especially some very high qualitiy anti-ship missiles which are deadly and hard to defend against.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   
I aslo dont think Iran wants to screw up things that they have accomplished over the years by provoking a war with the US. Why would they want to risk loosing everything? Iran wants to be a major world power one day lol. And if the US went to war with Iran the aftermath of gurellia warfare would only be Irainians vs Irainians. The US doesnt care for gurellia warfare in that country. Sure it might spill into Iraq but that is nothing new. Most of the bordering territories of Iraq are fighting gurellia warfare already.



posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 11:48 AM
link   
My take on it is this. Iran wants to make certain that the US & UK respect their borders. They are a little nervous and edgy, what with being surrounded and all.

I don't believe they are wanting to provoke a full fledged war, not at this point.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 04:02 AM
link   
But perhaps they are counting on U.N. intervention? Think about it, Lets say they execute, or even just refuse to release the british naval men. Britain would be forced to take military action and the U.S. would support them, But who else would? European opinion is solidly against the war in Iraq, Wouldnt this drive the wedge even deeper? What if france or germany decided to ask the U.N. to intervene in Irans behalf? Could such a war rip NATO in two? Perhaps even start a larger war between "the coalition" and "old europe"? Even if it didn't The war in Iran would be even more costly (both in lives and dollars) than the one in Iraq. How long before public opinion (in the U.S.) would force us to leave the area? How much prestige would Iran gain in the middle east by doing this? Not to mention the opportunity to take over a destabilised and war torn Iraq?



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 06:05 AM
link   
Iran has no reason to provoke a war with the coalition. They're happy saddam is gone.. they now have more influence than ever before in a country which they had to consider a threat for the past 20-odd years. Also, invading Iran would be different from invading Iraq. For starters, the Iranian military is not nearly as demoralized as was Iraq's. Sure, America could eventually destroy Iran in a military sense, but we would have a harder time occupying it than Iraq, if that's possible to believe, and we would get one hell of a bloody nose in doing so. Seizing the boats is just Iran's way of saying, this is where the line is, keep on your side. They provided the coalition with a lot of leeway already... remember the missiles that landed near Iranian cities during the initial phase of the Iraq war? They didn't really say anything then, I think they just don't want to be taken for granted.

koji K.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 07:57 AM
link   
In the 80s Iran fought Iraq to a standstill in a war of attrition. Even though Saddam used chemical weapons the Iranian government send hundreds of thousands of young men into a virtual meat grinder. Any war with Iran wuld be the same. The iranian strategy could be to fight a losing battle till the military is wiped out and then go underground for a guerellia war. After a year or two at most U.S. opinion would be so heavily against the war as in the case of vietnam that we would be forced to withdraw by our own populace. Iran could then expand to cover both countries and the allatoyahs would come out of hiding stronger and morepopular than ever before. During the war Iran could coordinate with every terrorist group in the world. If done correctly it could force the U.S. out of the middle east entirely.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:11 AM
link   
Iran might get a couple lucky shots at some Navy ships. Other than that they would be bombed to dArk ages in a week or 3 and if we felt the need to put boots on the ground it would be similar to what you watched happen in Iraq last year. Mostly mopping operations. Squash.

The only thing keeping the U.S. from defeating all its enemies in one big war is the U.S.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:17 AM
link   
The mullahs in Iran are an enemy of the U.S. The people of Iran are not, sadly. They like the mullahs about as much as Americans do.

As far as the Brits boats and equipment being seized, one must ask the question, just what were those limeys up to? They were in Iranian territory and, please, they knew it. They were not lost.

I'm glad the Iranians let them go.

As for Iran agitating against the U.S., don't bet on it. They're not stupid. There is, however, another foreign entity working (up to recently) in the shadows, agitating Iran and Shi'ites. They are who and what we should be worrying about. They are masters at the art of deception.

Always ask, who benefits?



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by EastCoastKid
As far as the Brits boats and equipment being seized, one must ask the question, just what were those limeys up to? They were in Iranian territory and, please, they knew it. They were not lost.


They were sent to assist in the training of the ICDF. One can only assume that they were out on the water learning the lay of the river before they brought students with them.

I thought they had already determined that the Iranians were the ones at fault? Didn't they say that they were in the wrong?



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:28 AM
link   
I'm not clear on that. If the Iranians said they were in the wrong, why would they have kept the Brits' equipment?



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:36 AM
link   
i seem to recall the opposite.. the british troops said they had accidentally strayed and apologized. all i remember is that iran was originally going to prosecute, but then cooler heads prevailed.

koji K.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 08:55 AM
link   
If one takes the reason for the boats being captured at face value then the "incident" was a very minor infraction of the border on the Shatt al Arab waterway.

Hearing of how much airtime was devoted to this on Iranian TV I have to believe the Mullahs used this incident to demonstrate to the home audiance that they are vigilant and that an external threat looms from abroad.

There is much underground opposition internally to the government and incidents like this one serve to bolster the governments crackdowns as legitimate moves to end so-called foreign sponsored opposition within Iran.

Can't say they are wrong about the threat at this point but with a nuclear program uneccessary for power production and buried reprocessing, heavy water facilities going online along with an oppressive secular theocratic government that their own people despise one has to conclude they will produce their own self fufilling prophecy.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   
There's no way the Brits had strayed. They knew exactly where they were at, bet on it. GPS doesn't lie.

Interesting comments Phoenix. Very insightful.



posted on Jun, 24 2004 @ 09:06 AM
link   
I think what we are seeing is the symptom of the growng divide in the Iranian halls of power. As the mullahs are getting older, younger more progressive lawmakers are gaining power.
Maybe one of the parties wants to provoke an incident to get the U.S. to depose the reiging government. Think about it they ask the coalition to come in and take out the top guys and then the middle managers take over.




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join