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.

 

3 US soldiers killed in Iraq by ``Iranian rockets and Iranian backed group``

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Oh boy. They died not because of Iran, but because of Bush and his masters. Bush started this war, not Iran.

Rocket attack kills 3 American soldiers in Iraq

A rocket attack on a U.S. base near Iraq's border with Iran killed three American soldiers, an official said Thursday, blaming the strike on a Shiite militia linked to Tehran.

Wednesday's rocket attack struck a U.S. base in southern Iraq that is located a few miles (kilometers) from the Iranian border, a U.S. military official said. He said the type of weapons used bore the hallmarks of a Shiite militia with strong links to Iran.

American intelligence officials have long believed that the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah, or Hezbollah Brigades, is one of the only militias to use weapons known in military jargon as IRAMs, or improvised rocket-assisted mortars, against U.S. troops. The weapons are made in Iran.

Kataib Hezbollah, which has links to the Lebanon-based Hezbollah group, is solely focused on attacking U.S. troops and other American personnel.

Yet more Americans who died for nothing. Thanks much warmongerers neo-cons, Bush and his masters and the militaro-industrial complex... I bet the families of those victims and million others are REAL HAPPY about losing the most important thing in their lives for nothing.




posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Its not the first time they accuse Iran of medling in Irak affair
IED made in Iran Revolutionary guard training alqueada .. etc etc
the release of this news is just another step closer to go after Iran
and the US will go because Israel regime said so

hard to know when the first US bomb fall on Iran
we need to keep amassing those important articles
S&F for that
edit on 6/30/2011 by Ben81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
lol, the americans couldnt even win in somalia, what chance do they have in iran.

iran is no iraq or afghanistan, they are an incredibly nrich nation that have spent considerable amounts on their defence budget and although these amounts may be considerably less than what the us spends, they will definatly have the terrain advantage and russia will just keep feeding them and feeding them until the us goes completely broke just like how the us made russia go broke some years ago.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:00 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


if ull pay attention to any wars the united states has been in since vietnam they are all guerilla wars which in general arnt winnable. everytime we go toe to toe with a countries actual army we wipe the floor with them. ex iraq 2 times



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   
No cause or admissible evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the Iranian government ordered these attacks. It's a completely different case if the Iranian government was involved in ordering the active Iranian military to attack U.S. troops specifically.

Any U.S. attack wouldn't hold up to logic or international law (like that matters)

All in all, there is definitely not going to be any U.S. military conflict with Iran in the near future due to this specific incident.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:28 AM
link   
Iran has never attacked either the UK or the USA or any other Western country to my knowledg but Western countries have armed them in the past as in the Iran v Iraq war. The Iranians have been our allies in the past.

The real countries that Iran does have issue with are Saudi Arabia over who should lead the Arab League and Israel who hates anyone who faces up to them and their ambitions.

Its funny how Jews have lived in Iran far more peacefully than Arabs have been allowed to continue living in Israel so we can all judge for ourselves on that one and we should remember that point.

Iran has advanced and been involved in a lot of research etc and despite sanctions has literally poked two fingers up at the hypocracy of the sanctioneers. It also has a population which has far more young than old. This older group such as many of the Mullahs and especially men like Armadinejad will go in the near future. If you occasionally scan odd blogs and read the young from Iran, they're vibrant, funny and they don't appreciate the old guard or many of their old ways. This is an ancient, fascinating culture whose government is hardly worse than any of ours in their deviousness and will modernize which is always better from within than imposed from without.

There is a scenario being enacted which I hope no one falls for, one should always remember one of Afganistan's usefullnesses is that it borders Iran, easy access? No wonder our withdrawal is so slow. We could leave now because nothing will be different in 5 years time in that country. Looking at it on the tv what are they protecting exactly if that was a top hotel? Disregarding the immediate damage, it looked like a rubble strewn dump especially when looking at the other buildings all around. Ross Kemp on tv remarked on the lines that the Afgans enjoy a more natural life which is their perogative. Perhaps if the West left they could rebuild their country to what it once was and get rid of the rubble.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 06:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by DankKing420
reply to post by lewman
 

wars which in general arnt winnable.


they don't make war to win them, they make war to give money to weapons corporations,to distract the mass and increase dod budget, get corporate hands on local resources & of course, to kill people.

the longest they last, the most successful they are in pursuing those objectives.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:35 AM
link   
reply to post by lewman
 


Dont be a small minded dolt.. If we are talking all out war, they don't have a chance.. If we are talking hide and go seek, like the dirt squirrels in Afghanistan and Iraq, then it will be drawn out..

To say we are losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, is irresponsible and delusional... We may not be winning at a fast pace, but are in no way losing....

Is the winner the guy who can hide the longest?.... I know .. it's all fair in war.... Its a gorilla tactic.... How about we play a new game called "Carpet Bomb the Damn place" Wait that's not fair? Oh Jeeeeesh.... America is weak, now come prove it...



Everyone here talking about how the US can't win these wars of hide and go seek..... Everyone better pray that the USA is never forced to fight for true survival... It won't be pretty, and you won't be laughing



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
lol, the americans couldnt even win in somalia, what chance do they have in iran.

Somalia mission was not a WAR.
It was a mission with small group of soldiers. Ofcourse its the stupid international/humanatarian laws and criticism that causes much of the hoopla.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vitchilo



American intelligence officials have long believed that the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah, or Hezbollah Brigades, is one of the only militias to use weapons known in military jargon as IRAMs, or improvised rocket-assisted mortars, against U.S. troops. The weapons are made in Iran.

Kataib Hezbollah, which has links to the Lebanon-based Hezbollah group, is solely focused on attacking U.S. troops and other American personnel.


I've underlined the important word in that quoted article. It's here-say. Not Factual. It's an OPINION

Also, "improvised rocket-assisted mortars" and "The weapons are made in Iran". So....if it's IMPROVISED, it's NOT MADE. Oxymoron?



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
It is no surprise for these nations to be testing the boarders, countries do it all the time North v South Korea, China v India, the list goes on and on. Iran is supported by China and Russia against an an invasion by Israel and America. Europe sounds quite divided on the issue and the EU would probably collapse under its current stress. The risk of a devastating nuclear winter is quite high if an invasion was to take place.

While some do see Iran as the next step with the ongoing WW3, it will take it to the next level where everybody loses.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
reply to post by lewman
 


Dont be a small minded dolt.. If we are talking all out war, they don't have a chance.. If we are talking hide and go seek, like the dirt squirrels in Afghanistan and Iraq, then it will be drawn out..

To say we are losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, is irresponsible and delusional... We may not be winning at a fast pace, but are in no way losing....

Is the winner the guy who can hide the longest?.... I know .. it's all fair in war.... Its a gorilla tactic.... How about we play a new game called "Carpet Bomb the Damn place" Wait that's not fair? Oh Jeeeeesh.... America is weak, now come prove it...

Who is the real dolt here - "all out war, they don 't have a chance". who do you think the 'they' is. Iran has two of the most wealthy and powerful allies in the world. You would see the entire ME go up in flame. The rest of the world is tetchy about Libya and as the wealth shifts out to the East other countries will take more of a leading roll and gain the veto power.

Its also one of the bastions of the stance against trading oil outside the US$ which a lot of countries are in favour of, as is born out by the 'gold rush' of the wealthy who are ditching the $.

Another war would likely finish the USA, not to mention the UK. You also may find the public have no more patience for war or the real cost of action like carpet bombs and instead want the debt got under control and investment at home not in double dealing bankers pockets.

Are you defining all the ME as 'dirt squirrels'? I do admit to having roared with laughter at that one



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by lewman
lol, the americans couldnt even win in somalia, what chance do they have in iran.


Actually, Somalia was a UN affair, not strictly US.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by kwakakev
 


Although I agree with you kwakakev, I believe that intervention in Syria will have the same effect.

Intervention in Syria is more realistic, therefore indirectly pulling Iran into a war that Russia and China would not feel justified in being part of.

The only problem in this theory is that Syria plays host to the most significant Russian naval base in the region.

It all comes back to whether "better the devil you know" in Assad being in power or maybe they have another agenda that doesn't involve him.

Regards, Skellon.



posted on Jun, 30 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by TXRabbit

Originally posted by Vitchilo



American intelligence officials have long believed that the Iranian-backed Kataib Hezbollah, or Hezbollah Brigades, is one of the only militias to use weapons known in military jargon as IRAMs, or improvised rocket-assisted mortars, against U.S. troops. The weapons are made in Iran.

Kataib Hezbollah, which has links to the Lebanon-based Hezbollah group, is solely focused on attacking U.S. troops and other American personnel.


I've underlined the important word in that quoted article. It's here-say. Not Factual. It's an OPINION

Also, "improvised rocket-assisted mortars" and "The weapons are made in Iran". So....if it's IMPROVISED, it's NOT MADE. Oxymoron?


Id like to triple star that underwire oops underline

........................
They tried this before
the weapons that were supposed to be made in Iran were
made in Israel The Us and Britian..
like the "babies torn from incubators lie" and the bruckhiemer scripted Jessica Lynch rescue

hell when they caught those SAS guys dressed in dresses and wigs making IUDs
why didn't the US bomb Britian?
since thay had PROOF it was britian making the IEDs

haha sorry f
ruedian slip showing there ...
edit on 30-6-2011 by Danbones because: spelling and paragraph structure



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Skellon
 


I am not sure about Syria, it is a complex and messy one and not up to speed enough to play it all out. With Russian bases there, they will have a treaty obligation to step in on any hostilities. Politically it is a bit of a basket case at the moment as revolution is sweeping the area.

Geographically, with Turkey moving towards the EU, Syria has become the boarder nation between the East and West. For anyone wanting to play this game it will be like walking on egg shells. There is a chance of things going nuclear if it is pushed to hard. The best approach is to just let the population breath and give them time to sort out the mess. Diplomacy is very much encouraged.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 



Is the winner the guy who can hide the longest?.... I know .. it's all fair in war.... Its a gorilla tactic.... How about we play a new game called "Carpet Bomb the Damn place" Wait that's not fair? Oh Jeeeeesh.... America is weak, now come prove it...


How about YOU remember WHY the US is supposed to be there in the first place??

It's meant to be HELPING the Afghanistan and Iraq citizens,
NOT carpet bombing them !!



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Star for pointing out the pious flag waving done so majestically to hide the sheer hypocracy of motive.

There to help, nah, there to take for those who instigate and finance the operationwhoe media waves vigorously on the world stage.



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
reply to post by lewman
 


Dont be a small minded dolt.. If we are talking all out war, they don't have a chance.. If we are talking hide and go seek, like the dirt squirrels in Afghanistan and Iraq, then it will be drawn out..

To say we are losing in Iraq and Afghanistan, is irresponsible and delusional... We may not be winning at a fast pace, but are in no way losing....

Is the winner the guy who can hide the longest?.... I know .. it's all fair in war.... Its a gorilla tactic.... How about we play a new game called "Carpet Bomb the Damn place" Wait that's not fair? Oh Jeeeeesh.... America is weak, now come prove it...



Everyone here talking about how the US can't win these wars of hide and go seek..... Everyone better pray that the USA is never forced to fight for true survival... It won't be pretty, and you won't be laughing


First off, Osama was a fraud, and we openly acknowledge that the new leader is not even close to what they said Osama was.

So, who are we playing hide and seek for... specifically?

Furthermore, you can't win a geurilla war because there is no clear enemy. That is pretty much the definition of geurilla warfare.... the only way to win... is to kill everybody -- which we won't/shouldn't ever do.

There is nothing saying that we couldn't do that though... we definitely have the means to destroy nations without the use of nukes...

You miss the point, the point is this is engineered social collapse. The geurilla wars are sort of a catalyst to this goal. They never intended to win them... We were told we needed to get osama, before we "got" osama, they comitted to the 10-100 year war with no end in sight.

Pray tell, why... would we do that? Makes zero sense... we can't even afford to do it.

But, thats exactly the point though -- isn't it?



posted on Jul, 1 2011 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Ha ha ha.

Oh who would have thought it? Iran supplying weapons to attack U.S. troops. The same U.S. that has been meddling and threatening Iran for the past 50 years.

Get the Fu*k out of Iraq America, NOW!




top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join