'US deploys troops in Israel for Iran war'

page: 2
140
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


You're right, US troop deployment in Israel doesn't give those troops a tactical advantage against Iran. Iraq is where the US wants to be if they go to war with Iran. And don't forget the USN 5th Fleet is always in Bahrain.



edit on 4-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Unless they are going for Syria first? That would put them in a better position, although Iraq would have syria covered on both sides...



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Jerisa
 


They better not go into Syria. But if they did they would go via Iraq, which really works out for the west if they want to spread their campaign across the Middle East, which they intend to do, so keep an eye on them.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Obama has a re election and voter problems , Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has people problems , Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu has people problems, It has been suggested weeks ago that this whole Hormuz situation has been cooked up between the three countries to push the price of crude up and also take the internal home flack off the
leaders.

Before everyone says , well how does this fly for Iran , well who are we to say that the US and Israel and the EU have not got a financial plan in place to compensate Iran behind closed doors, while to the outside world Iran is seen to be punished.........KERCHING everyone is a winner except normal hard working people the world over.

This rhetoric that Saudi and the like have enough crude to cover the loss of Iranian crude makes sense , BUT why do I hear the words down the line , we are running low on crude people of the world , SORRY the price will be going up.

Any NWO obsessive would say that this situation is perfect for heaping on the pressure to the little people, making them soft and docile to anything there leaders have to say.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jerisa


Poke the bear a little more....

Are the powers that be not going to be satisfied until all heck breaks loose?

Hasn't Isreal already told us that they don't need the USA to help them?

This is getting a little ridiculous if you ask me!

Oil, power, greed...I am so tired of this, let's put the powers that be in a cage match and let them duke it out, save thousands if not millions of lives.



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


Yes, the powers that be are preparing for out and out war..... It is 2012 after all and we've been told this is the year in which the world comes to an end......



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Droidinvoid
Obama has a re election and voter problems , Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has people problems , Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu has people problems, It has been suggested weeks ago that this whole Hormuz situation has been cooked up between the three countries to push the price of crude up and also take the internal home flack off the
leaders.

Before everyone says , well how does this fly for Iran , well who are we to say that the US and Israel and the EU have not got a financial plan in place to compensate Iran behind closed doors, while to the outside world Iran is seen to be punished.........KERCHING everyone is a winner except normal hard working people the world over.

This rhetoric that Saudi and the like have enough crude to cover the loss of Iranian crude makes sense , BUT why do I hear the words down the line , we are running low on crude people of the world , SORRY the price will be going up.

Any NWO obsessive would say that this situation is perfect for heaping on the pressure to the little people, making them soft and docile to anything there leaders have to say.


This has got nothing to do with any of that. I can't go into detail because its off-topic but i will say this. This war aint gonna be about money, oil or land or even religion. This fights been brewing for a loooong time.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Ok, this is getting more interesting by the minute.

www.presstv.com...

so now the USA is in talks with the taliban for returning to power?


Let's look at the map again...



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Troops being deployed to Israel are for when the sh*t hits the fan, because if the U.S. moves in on Iran, Russia and some other islamic countries are going to try to pound the sh*t out of Israel to cause a war on several fronts and you really don't want your troops spread thin like that because that is disaster. Logically the reason the troops that left Iraq are going to afghanistan to hit them from that side while our navy takes the straight of Hormuz to deliver air and naval support so we can establish a beachead on Iranian soil where our Marines will go in from that side and the 101st Airborne will probably come in from afghanistan. Thats what i would do. Its a classical battle strategy called a "nutcracker" and Iran ends up being the nut.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Jerisa
 


From the looks of it the Afghan President Hamid Karzai wants to open talks between the US and the Taliban. Definitely interesting.


Afghan President Hamid Karzai


www.washingtonpost.com...


Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Wednesday endorsed direct U.S.-Taliban talks and the establishment of a Taliban office in Qatar to facilitate negotiations.

A statement issued by Karzai’s office couched his blessing in the government’s desire to “eliminate the foreigner’s excuses for and actions to continue war and bloodshed in Afghanistan.”

The implied criticism of U.S. military forces, which Karzai has accused of killing innocents in air attacks and night raids on Afghan villages by Special Operations troops, was something “he had to issue for internal reasons,” an Obama administration official said. “We get that.”

In the past, Karzai has also complained that the United States was working behind his back in informal talks with the Taliban that began in the spring. The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity about the sensitive relationship, said the Obama administration was prepared to ignore Karzai’s “digs” in exchange for the statement’s positive elements.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Swills
 


Troops being deployed to Israel are for when the sh*t hits the fan, because if the U.S. moves in on Iran, Russia and some other islamic countries are going to try to pound the sh*t out of Israel to cause a war on several fronts and you really don't want your troops spread thin like that because that is disaster. Logically the reason the troops that left Iraq are going to afghanistan to hit them from that side while our navy takes the straight of Hormuz to deliver air and naval support so we can establish a beachead on Iranian soil where our Marines will go in from that side and the 101st Airborne will probably come in from afghanistan. Thats what i would do. Its a classical battle strategy called a "nutcracker" and Iran ends up being the nut.


If Iran hits Israel before the US is physicality in Israel in force, the US deploying troops after an attack would be viewed as they've only coming in aid of Israel however. If the US is there before Iran does something stupid the US can claim Iran, in addition to attacking israel, attacked the US. And then the fight is a matter of the US protecting itself against Iran the aggressor. Not that the US really cares, it makes for a more legitimate reason for the US to enter into yet another war and palatible to the US taxpayers who ultimately bear the cost of any and all wars...



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:37 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Quote This war aint gonna be about money, oil or land or even religion.

Without going off topic , what then is this pending crisis about
I have read your posts and you make the tactics of the US straight forward , this I get and understand , what is the purpose of the US attacking Iran.



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


I see your point but don't kid yourself, the Israeli does not F around and they are not some military force to be taken lightly. Israel alone can handle the Middle East, and I'm not exaggerating. As far as Russia is concerned, they do have a straight route to Israel but Israel is not at all alone. The amount of bases the US has in the area can't be ignored, ie Italy, France, Spain, Germany, Greece, Turkey, Asia, & many more. And then there's EU and the UK forces to add in as well. A few thousand US troops is nice but not really needed. They could deploy that many troops by sea alone in no time.

This whole Middle East conflict needs to come to an end because eventually it will lead us down this path of obvious WWIII. The US military's Middle Eastern civilian causalities outweigh terrorist causalities, but people excuse the latter because they were killed during "war", although, I suppose Pakistan isn't at war with the US but suffers major civilian loses thanks to US drones killing them.

I'm soooo over war and terrorism



edit on 4-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Droidinvoid
 


1. They're threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil exporting site. This won't only affect the United States, but a majority of the world.

2. They're threatening military action against the United States for traveling in the Strait of Hormuz which is AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW of free travel during Maritime. The US also has a naval base in Manama, Bahrain, which is accessed through the strait of Hormuz.

So basically Iran is trying to tell the US where they can/can't travel, and attempting to deny them access to their naval base. The US response? "Oh yeah? We'll see about that"

The US will not fire the first shot.
edit on 4-1-2012 by apodictic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by Swills
 

Troops being deployed to Israel are for when the sh*t hits the fan, because if the U.S. moves in on Iran, Russia and some other islamic countries are going to try to pound the sh*t out of Israel to cause a war on several fronts and you really don't want your troops spread thin like that because that is disaster

Which Islamic nations would engage in a war against the US on the side of Iran?

If Russia gets involved, why would they want to pound Israel? Exactly what problems does Russia have with Israel? If Russia is looking for a direct confrontation with the US and that is what it expects by pounding Israel, why not attack the US mainland with missiles?



posted on Jan, 4 2012 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by Droidinvoid
 


1. They're threatening to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil exporting site. This won't only affect the United States, but a majority of the world.

2. They're threatening military action against the United States for traveling in the Strait of Hormuz which is AGAINST INTERNATIONAL LAW of free travel during Maritime. The US also has a naval base in Manama, Bahrain, which is accessed through the strait of Hormuz.

So basically Iran is trying to tell the US where they can/can't travel, and attempting to deny them access to their naval base.

So Iran is talking exactly like the US, telling others what they can and cannot do? You find that offensive?


The US will not fire the first shot.

Nor will Iran.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 12:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jerisa
Are the powers that be not going to be satisfied until all heck breaks loose?

Zec 12:2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

What better place to locate US troops for the protection of Israel, than in Israel itself whilst every surrounding arab nation attacks Israel.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


Please point out where I said I was offended. I was answering the question of WHY the US is doing what it's doing.

In response to "either will Iran" - Good. Then there's nothing to worry about, right? We're not the one threatening a "full force" attack for traveling through a waterway.



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 12:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Observor
 


The pounding will be simultaneous.Biological weapons for Israel and Arab states.Nukes for american and NATO military targets.Biological weapons for North American civilian population.Chemical weapons for tactical NATO forces in Eastern Europe.Nukes for civilian and military targets in EU. Also there are other classified weapons for military targets of NATO and its allies with exception of Germany.

edit on 5-1-2012 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 5 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Jerisa
 


Has the discrepancy between

DEPLOYMENT

VS

EXERCISE PREP

been resolved yet?

Sure sounds serious enough, to me.

May God delay the 'festivities' as long as possible.

I'm convinced the global oligarchy has schedule it to evolve quickly into a very devastating global WWIII . . . partly as a population reduction strategy. Sigh.





top topics
 
140
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join