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.

 

Britain threatens military action against Iran

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 



Britain entering this...baffles me yet further. Two reasons there... First, The U.S. hasn't been anything like a friend to Britain in those diplomatic ways that really matter between leaders. In fact, we've been perfect asses to London right from the start of this administration.


I am quite sure that regardless of what any other nation could say or had said that Britain would still have made this threats, it has had vested interests in the area that date well before the American Revolution i.e the Anglo-Persian capture of Hormuz Island in 1622, which was a move to ensure British trade routes remained open.

Capture of Ormuz (1622)

I am sure it is those vested interests that lay behind the reason British forces still refer to the Gulf as the Arabian and not Persian Gulf, theres nothing like playing to Arab Nationalism


EG Admiral visits Navy ships in Arabian Gulf

While I agree on your take of how the Obama Administration has approach Americas relationship with Britain, it is I think just one of those coincidences that they are speaking with a similar voice on this issue.. the same could be said for the Anglo-Soviet invasion of Iran in 1941..

Anglo-Soviet Invasion of Iran (1941)

While both wanted to deny the Nazis access to Iranian oil fields they also wanted to deny those oil fields to each other, hence the issues kicking the Soviets out of Iran at the end of the war..

Iran (Persia) has been nothing more than a pawn for the last few centuries that the major powers play with, and sadly it's not going to stop any time soon, and on this I feel for the Iranian people.
edit on 6/1/12 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by shapur
 




That freaking brownish bastards!!! .......Yeah....lets kill them all so the next time they would gladly keep their arses open till we are all done........sheeeeesh....... some of you guys make me puke............


OK obscenities. Your words not mine. One thing that makes me puke is your poor command of the English language. At least the posts by InsideYourMind did not have to use filthy language to make a point!



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by phatpackage
 


"But than again you may not want to see it and come up with excuses & justifications for their aggressive behavior! "

Indeed!!.. there are no justifications for the republicans & democrats aggressive behavior!..

Seems to me "Iran", being blood thirsty freedom hater terrorists and all that, can only hope to one day, maybe... kill as many innocent people based on lies as the GOP & DNC.

One guy in Iran allegedly "threatened" to wipe a nation off the map..

Meanwhile, in reality-land.. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have been wiped off the map.. millions suffering, and 2 prominent so called US "officials" have "threatened" to both "obliterate" and "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb iran.."



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Britain entering this...baffles me yet further. Two reasons there... First, The U.S. hasn't been anything like a friend to Britain in those diplomatic ways that really matter between leaders. In fact, we've been perfect asses to London right from the start of this administration.


Second tho....Britain, as I keep reading, has a rather large and ....assertive.. Muslim population. Isn't this more than a bit risky when it's KNOWN that Iran's tactics include international efforts through proxy organizations like Hezbollah and Hamas? If the Balloon goes up and Britain is shooting with us....I dare say they'll take more damage from domestic problems than we will. Simple number of cities and size of the country, if nothing else.

edit on 6-1-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: spacing change


This is just an opinion, but I would imagine that Britain is getting involved because the Saudi, Kuwaiti and Quatar, Bahraini Governments are all big business partners with the UK and if the Straits of Hormuz are closed those countries can't do business. I agree, the US/UK special relationship has been virtually non-existent since Obama has been President, but I don't hold that against him.

As for the Muslim Population of UK, the majority of those muslims originate from Pakistan and Nigeria, the UK has a sizeable population of Iranians as well most of whom came here after or before the Islamic Revolution. If the Muslim population of the UK all came together in violence, then the UK would have a serious problem, but as we've seen in the past that doesn't tend to happen, as most people are peaceful and enjoy the life they have here, they may voice their protest, but that is what anyone is entitled to do in a democratic country.

I don't wish to see war, because if it kicks off in Iran then the whole world will eventually be dragged in



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by phatpackage
As you said Tit for tat. Do you have proof Israel threatened Iran first? The were responding to off the map thing!


Why does it matter what phrase was used? Any kind of military threat is the same thing. whether it be a single bomb, an airstrike, or even a full blown nuclear attack.


On October 26, 2005, IRIB News, an English-language subsidiary of the state-controlled Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), filed a story on Ahmadinejad's speech to the "World Without Zionism" conference in Asia, entitled: Ahmadinejad: Israel must be wiped off the map.

en.wikipedia.org...


In November 2003 a Scottish newspaper claimed that Israel "warned that it is prepared to take unilateral military action against Iran if the international community fails to stop any development of nuclear weapons at the country's atomic energy facilities".[43] It cited Israeli defence minister Shaul Mofaz stating, "under no circumstances would Israel be able to tolerate nuclear weapons in Iranian possession".

en.wikipedia.org...

Note the dates.




Your right but it is a tit for tat game right?

No.



Sure it is! But it does list everything. The tip is go past page!

Far from it. Google listings are the tip of the iceberg. Besides google can only reveal 100 pages per a search.

Sorry, Google does not serve more than 1000 results for any query.


Many websites are not spidered by any search engines at all. There are also hidden networks within the internet using hidden services such as Tor, DarkNET, I2P, a few examples.



I do not watch fox news. Again read past page one on the google results. Oh that's right Google deliberately censors all the truth. Haha. The talk to some people in authority or the military. They are not all corrupt like many on ATS would have you believe. Nor are they in any form of the fabled NWO/Illuminati. It is not up to me to hold your hand and do your research for you!


Google does in fact censor alot of things although this is how google works. It doesn't censor the truth as fact, it actually tailors your search results to your browsing habits. For example if i was a religious person and visited alot of religious websites, if i entered the search query "how was the earth made", the most relevant results would be related to stories on "the creator, god" as depicted in various religious texts.

However if i had a browsing history related to Science and Physics or even Astronomy, when i enter the search term "how was the earth made" i will be recieveing completely different relevant sites to what i wrote above.

Google tailors your search to what you have previously visited or searched. Using google to search facts isn't ideal because of that problem.

Good example of a search engine, duckduckgo.com... which does not tailor results to the users habits.



I live the Australian Dream not American. Asleep, bahahah the tin foil must be wrapped pretty tight at this time! What next! Are going to be racist against Australians and claim you must be asleep to live the Australian dream? Not assuming just asking!


I assumed you were because of your agenda, i did not realise that the american MSM "hate attitude" towards Iran had also spread to the Australian media aswell.

PS; why are you mocking me for wearing a tin foil hat, when i am simply writing how i see things? This is a website pretty much based on the topic of cconspiracy theories and yet it's somewhat "haha uncool" to question the facts? I also do not understand why you put the word "racist" in there, as i was not being racist or even mentioned anything about race, so what was that for?

edit on 6/1/2012 by InsideYourMind because: fixed quotebox



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 04:47 AM
link   
British Mi6 brought the islamists to power.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by phatpackage
 


Command of the English language has got nothing to do with the very clear fact that you and i both know ,is the cause of all these conflicts in the world...............and yeah...I would like to see you,trying to express.and type your concerns in Russian or Farsi and not get pissed off when they are trying to justify a lie to kick your behind for no good reason! ....If you pardon my French!.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by InsideYourMind
 




Sorry, Google does not serve more than 1000 results for any query.


Yes but have read all 1000? Probably not!



Many websites are not spidered by any search engines at all. There are also hidden networks within the internet using hidden services such as Tor, DarkNET, I2P, a few examples.


Yes correct. I do not allow robots or googlebots to many of my websites. But that does not mean there is biased content in those 1000 hits! As far as I.T goes I run my own successful business and have probably been in "the game" longer than you have been alive! So go there at your own peril. When you have more experience than me in IT ...........



Google tailors your search to what you have previously visited or searched. Using google to search facts isn't ideal because of that problem.


Too bad I have my own proxy server for my clients with many IP addresses. With over 400 people using it there would minimal "tailoring" here.



I also do not understand why you put the word "racist" in there


You really need this explained to you? I actually gave you credit for having more intelligence for that. YOu comment below further proves the point!



I assumed you were because of your agenda, i did not realise that the american MSM "hate attitude" towards Iran had also spread to the Australian media aswell.


What are you trying to say? I don't have a hate attitude. What you are implying about Australia & Australians speaks for itself. hate attitude ...... Fair Dinkum! But don't worry I am not a "Sook" and will not report you to the mods.

By the way what is my agenda? I don't have any agendas or official allegiances. What's next call me a Schill?



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 05:45 AM
link   
reply to post by shapur
 




he very clear fact that you and i both know ,is the cause of all these conflicts in the world


Enlighten Us? Who is at fault. Oh wait it is the "Big Bad West" oh Jeez. Very predictable and very very wrong!



I would like to see you,trying to express.and type your concerns in Russian or Farsi and not get pissed off when they are trying to justify a lie to kick your behind for no good reason!


I have no need to write in Russian or Farsi! But if I had to I would use a "Potty Mouth"

"Justify a lie". Now that is laughable and a massive lie in itself.

Can you actually write something without swearing? It shows a distinct lack of vocabulary and education. I have many friends for whom English is second language but they do not have to resort to obscenities when expressing opinion either written or verbal.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by phatpackage
 


Greed,,Fear,and an endless lust for power by the corporates, bankers, and their Elite friends are the cancer cells of this beautiful earth.........come on man you know better than that!!...........Waking up someone who is sleep is easy...........Waking up some one PRETENDING to be asleep is another thing,,,,,,...And maybe it would have been good for all of us that you tried writing in another language for a change so you would realize,, what we are going thru ..or is it true?. or maybe throu...or,,,throughtefmn!!...............................Oh. .and by the way I learned English watching a lot of holly wood movies.....so bare with me on that coarse language woujju?!::
,,,,Peace...



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by phatpackage
 


This is what i call hypocrisy. You are the only one calling names and questioning technical experience about someone you do not even know for a start, assuming you somewhat believe you are smarter than me, so according to you my argument immediately becomes invalid.

On the topic of making a mockery of my use of "Agenda", it can in fact be used for other meanings as a loose phrase;

in english an agenda is a list of individual items which must be "acted upon" or processed

Eg;
Sanction Iran
Invade Iran
Destroy Iran

By using that word, i tried to imply that you seem to agree with what the MSM is feeding you.

Your attitude gave me the impression you are accepting that all of these measures should be neccasery... by immediate notice of you using the word "terrorists" to describe the Iranian authorities.

Hence, the reason i used the word: i do not like your agenda towards Iran. After i tried to note that i am against the bullying of Iran by the great oil crusade of the west.

So if i don't believe everything exact to the word that the MSM tells me.... then i "wear a tin foil hat" and i am "wrong" and "racist"? I don't have a clue what that means, the logic is just not there at all.

This was a debate about Iran, britain, sanctions, western politics... not personal attacks inspired by an ego.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 10:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Shminkee Pinkee
 

This is also a reply to Thoughtsful,

Thanks for the replys from both of you. I appreciate the insight and added context from the British perspective. It sure helps in making sense of things when we're increasingly being fed two different version of events within each nation's media. I sincerely hope the relations can be repaired and restored to the close position England and the United States have shared for the majority of recent history following our next election.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Your welcome
always handy to see another perspective, which is why I usually pester my relatives on your side to see what their take on things is.. some times it is very enlightening.

As far as Obama goes, we can but hope
I have oft wondered if he was set up to create the friction, can't say he is popular around here (a very liberal area
)

edit on 6/1/12 by thoughtsfull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Thanks to everyone for the great input on the thread. These developments will be extremely interesting to follow and it's nice to hear from people who will be affected by whatever happens.

I was attempting to see if there was any response from Tehran on this development but a las I cannot get to the information.

I'm currently at a local starbucks and apparently ATT wifi has blocked access to presstv. Would anyone mind taking a look and reporting back?

Thanks in advance!



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by freakjive
Well, we've had Israel and the US openly threatening Iran on the world stage. It wouldn't seem right if Britain wasn't following in lock-step. Well, here we have more rhetoric aimed at Iran from the Western world.



Britain has issued a stark warning to Iran saying that any attempt to blockade a key trade route in the Gulf will be met with military force from the Royal Navy.

Philip Hammond, the defence secretary, told delegates in Washington DC that Britain will not tolerate an enforced closure of the 34-mile Strait of Hormuz, where 20 per cent of the world's oil passes through.


With the latest moves and Obama's recent decision to share secrets with Russia, I really believe it's about to blow up...quite literally. I'm not trying to fear-monger. I honestly believe it to be true.

Would Iran be so stupid to attempt the blockade at this point? Will they even need to or will the West just create a different scenario if Iran backs off?



Source


edit on 1/6/2012 by freakjive because: (no reason given)


Iran ain't gonna test anything so don't worry everythings gonna be alright.



posted on Jan, 6 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by freakjive
I was attempting to see if there was any response from Tehran on this development but a las I cannot get to the information.

I'm currently at a local starbucks and apparently ATT wifi has blocked access to presstv. Would anyone mind taking a look and reporting back?


Not unexpected at all... PressTV is also about to be cut off from british cable/satellite providers.

Although, replying about this:
It seems the decision has changed slightly for the better, heading in the right direction...

The British Defense Secretary says London is against preemptive military action against Iran as it will threaten the global economic growth by disrupting oil flow through the Strait of Hormuz.

www.presstv.com...

At least for now, they are not admitting they want to start a libya-style invasion. If it's true then i hope other countries follow and the whole situation settles down, back to negotiations.

I've also pasted the full article contents below, in the event you want to read more and still can't access it:
pastehtml.com...



posted on Feb, 11 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
UK threatening Iran.. with their new Daring class type 45 destroyers. New found "balls" if you ask me. UK does not have the "dough" to fight a war. Even their latest destroyer is not yet fully armed. They are pulling back the troops and they will be engaged in the Falklands issue in the foreseeable future with Argentina and a few more S. American countries



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join