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.

 

You are wrong about Iran.

page: 12
52
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by dadgad
 


Sorry I didn't reply to this earlier. That was a mistake on my part. Although that many children were killed, it had nothing to do with that post. I was trying to draw a parallel and failed miserably. Sorry for my mistake.




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


I do not think they care who gets the oil as long as the money keeps coming in....the current administration would certainly like to play a bigger role in the area and the world but not for control of the oil...they already get that but more power. Much like western politicians its power with this group...the more they have the more control they have. While Iran has always been the stable step child in the middle east they have always been the step child. They take a back seat to Saudi ... the Kings...a back seat to Egypt...world statesman....Syria ... war hawks...its more about power and the only ones in the region with the exception of Israel to have a nuke would bring immense power to his hands.

The oil is already sold to every one in the world...the US is the smallest customer...a majority of our oil comes from Canada....we just need them to supply the Haliburtons and BP's...Shell and many others ways to make money so people in power continue to make money. Its about control and power...they crave it...you can see it in how they play out the game across the world stage.

Power...Money...and Control is what they will fight over....the US and much of the world if not all of it as far as the TPTB wish for the staus quo...Iran right now sees a chance to go for it with turmoil in many of the places they have taken a backseat too...everyone around them is too unstable to stop him...he has to be very careful himself due to recent unrest after his election but if he plays the cards right he comes out looking good in front of his people...but war would destroy his chance. The people would rally but they are small and war would cripple them quickly as well his power.

He uses the reigious fanatics to control his popualtion just as the US uses fear. The religious fanatics keep the people in check and he retains his power...therefore plays the game to garner more. The US uses fear to keep the defense machine funneling money in several directions and maintains power over the people..more control is what the fight will be about....arrogrance and greed is what fuels it...not oil or even money just the absurd grab for control.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Frira
 





That map has shown up in numerous threads on ATS as "evidence" that the US has strategic intent in Iran invasion (and Switzerland!)-- but it only does so if the interpretation of the map is taken out of historical context-- which is exactly what those using it count on happening.


Start paying attention. Where did I make those claims about that map? What exactly did I show besides a visual aid showing the military bases? If people want to make outrageous claims based on a map linking it with strategic intent than so be it. US showed some aluminum tubes and everyone took it as a claim that Iraq had nuclear weapons.


You posted it-- and you don't know why?

You went to a website, downloaded the map, uploaded it here on ATS, and posted it in your OP-- and that was just an accident?

And when others make what you now claim as "outrageous" you sat quietly?

Did I miss your correcting those who misinterpreted the map? No. Instead you either are clueless yourself, or you wanted it misinterpreted. Either way-- you fail, and I so I wonder what made you think you were up to starting this thread?

Obviously, I am "paying attention." Last post you claimed I was "confused." I'm one of the few here that knows the history-- and you are not of them.

Trot back through the pages of posts-- and find another who has provided ANY historical context-- not many.-- and not you.

So knock off your ad hominem, and read a book before you post someone else's propaganda. You have collected other peoples ideas and tossed them into one OP-- and not engaged contrary views.

I have engaged contrary views, and read many of the threads on this topic so recognize the similarities-- it is propaganda-- and badly done.

Show me wrong-- engage your own post -- raise the bar-- discuss reasonably; but propaganda stinks-- and isn't worth discussing except to point out to the naive what propaganda looks like.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DJMSN
 


I guess that is one of the big things I don't understand. Americans yelled when 9/11 happened, but, the majority of the hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. None were from Iran. Iran developing nuclear power shouldn't be a problem for the US. I just don't quite understand why there are sanctions against a country trying to develop this type of power. What do they have to fear from Iran? I don't think they have anything to fear, that's why I believe it is Israel behind this latest round of sanctions but I don't know why the US is swallowing it up.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by superman2012
 


Good job here. S & F.

____________________



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by Frira
 





That map has shown up in numerous threads on ATS as "evidence" that the US has strategic intent in Iran invasion (and Switzerland!)-- but it only does so if the interpretation of the map is taken out of historical context-- which is exactly what those using it count on happening.


Start paying attention. Where did I make those claims about that map? What exactly did I show besides a visual aid showing the military bases? If people want to make outrageous claims based on a map linking it with strategic intent than so be it. US showed some aluminum tubes and everyone took it as a claim that Iraq had nuclear weapons.


You posted it-- and you don't know why?

You went to a website, downloaded the map, uploaded it here on ATS, and posted it in your OP-- and that was just an accident?

And when others make what you now claim as "outrageous" you sat quietly?

Did I miss your correcting those who misinterpreted the map? No. Instead you either are clueless yourself, or you wanted it misinterpreted. Either way-- you fail, and I so I wonder what made you think you were up to starting this thread?

Obviously, I am "paying attention." Last post you claimed I was "confused." I'm one of the few here that knows the history-- and you are not of them.

Trot back through the pages of posts-- and find another who has provided ANY historical context-- not many.-- and not you.

So knock off your ad hominem, and read a book before you post someone else's propaganda. You have collected other peoples ideas and tossed them into one OP-- and not engaged contrary views.

I have engaged contrary views, and read many of the threads on this topic so recognize the similarities-- it is propaganda-- and badly done.

Show me wrong-- engage your own post -- raise the bar-- discuss reasonably; but propaganda stinks-- and isn't worth discussing except to point out to the naive what propaganda looks like.



No. As stated just above, "What exactly did I show besides a visual aid showing the military bases?".
Show me a post in this thread where someone misinterpreted the map. All I did was repeat what you said. You wonder what I was up to when I created this thread?!?
Yet you claim to have read this thread.

Oh goody! You are one of those, "YOU FAIL" people...love em. When they don't have an argument that is usually their fall back. You do seem to be confused in my understanding of where you stand. I was talking about the sanctions...you have fixated on a map showing US military bases around Iran.




So knock off your ad hominem, and read a book before you post someone else's propaganda. You have collected other peoples ideas and tossed them into one OP-- and not engaged contrary views.


You accuse me of Ad Hominem or, Argumentum ad hominem, but you do the same thing. I have not posted other people's propaganda. I have this thing called critical thinking that lets me see facts and come to conclusions which are my own opinion, as stated before.

I don't see any contrary views as I haven't been provided with any that are in opposition to my viewpoints. Why are there these current sanctions against Iran? I have yet to see an answer from you. I agree that propaganda stinks, but to some people the truth stinks as well. Quit holding your nose.

Edit:



Trot back through the pages of posts-- and find another who has provided ANY historical context-- not many.-- and not you.


Historical context for the CURRENT sanctions?
edit on 9-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr

Originally posted by Rafe_
Yes and the U.S had guatanamo bay (and more) to indefinitely hold,torture and kill.


True.

These people detained here are not simply innocent gays however. They are POWs. I do agree that Guantanamo needs to be torn down or made more transparent. Again, im no fan of the USA either.


Yes but the term 'POW' has to be used in the loosest of terms.remember that their were even kids that were being detained in there.The sole reason why that prison existed is because they could detain anyone for any amount of time only because they said so.It is basicly the patriot act in full effect.

It is absolutley wrong of iran to hang someone who is innocent and because they are gay but those so called POW's were mostly innocent as well and on more then one occasion under 16.That is simply what happens when they start up a prison were they can simply do whatever they want,they do whatever they want.


Gay and innocent or just innocent it does not matter imo.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by nightbringr

Originally posted by superman2012

Originally posted by nightbringr
While I do not advocate the bombing of Iran, I am certainly aware of their brutal human rights record.

All we have to do is look at their leadership. Famously announcing in front of the whole world at a UN convention that there are "no gays in Iran", shortly after publicly hanging teenage gay men with the explicit permission of the government is a sure sign of a very sick government.


You should check out the US's human rights record as well. Not just the US, but every country.


Your point is?

I'm quite aware the US is corrupt in the extreme. Does that mean I cannot say the same about Iran? At least we don't publicly hang homosexuals with the governments permission.


This thread wasn't about their brutal human rights record. It was an attempt to educate people about why this war will start and who the real aggressors are. No, you don't publicly hang homosexuals, but, you do have mass graves of Indians from residential schools.
So unless you have something to contribute to the thread, thanks for coming out.

edit on 8-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)


Mass graves of Indians from a century ago.... Homosexuals hanging from the gallows last year. Big difference.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012


All links to sources, here. My earlier post.


From here.

1-You seem to suggest that Iran is wrongly associated with terrorist groups. According to numerous polls Iranians overwhelmingly have favorable views of Hamas and Hezbollah. And that's just the general public. The political and religious leadership have made open threats towards America, Christians and Jews. So please don't pretend that it's only a narrow minded few who support terrorism and want to wipe out the Christians, Jews and Americans. A majority of the population supports terrorist organizations and the political and religious leadership wants to see us burn.

2-You state as a fact that Iran is not building nuclear weapons. That's ridiculous. The Iranian leadership knows for sure and whomever has infiltrated their government and military knows. The general public, you and me included, do not. THe Deputy Head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization stated that Iran has not been in compliance since the early 1980s. That's good enough for me. The IAEA has found them in noncompliances several times, not too long ago they refused to stop Uranium enrichment until it could be established it was for peaceful purposes. They were also found to be manufacturing tetrafluoride which is used for weaponizing uranium. THey developed the underground high explosive testing facilities as well. And they modified the Shahab-3s for nuclear payload delivery. Per your IAEA.

3- Saying the US isn't in compliance with the NPT because we aren't disarming is ridiculous. In the past 3 months we just disarmed the last of our largest nuclear missiles. And even if other countries are not in compliance, that doesn't give Iran carte blanche to go into a further state of noncompliance. That's like saying, Billy smoked crack so it's ok if I do it.

4-Israel, India and Pakistan are not threatening to wipe us out. And Iran's religious and political leaderships views couple with their human rights record and the sheer volume of threats emanating from the people in charge make them a prime issue. As far as North Korea maybe you ought to research our actions towards them and what we've done in South Korea with regards to missile defense.

5- I haven't seen a poll regarding that.

I do know this, multiple polls show the majority of Iranians see their central identity in terms of religion. And given the views of Iranian religious leadership that puts them in a bad light. The majority of Iranians believe that their government and people as a whole have a healthy respect and are tolerant of the rights of an individual. 53% of Iranians think Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians are justified. 3/4ths of Iranians have a negative view of American citizens and 92% have a negative view of our government. The view on the citizens says something. 3/4ths have a very negative view of our culture as well.

I'm really sick of people trying to paint Iran as something it isn't. People on this board make it sound like Utopia. I've been several times. I have quite a few friends there who are Iranian citizens. I have several friends who are military operators presently in Iran. I could care less what anyone elses opinion on Iran is, believe what you want. I'll believe what I want. Which is that their religious and political leadership needs to be removed from power. And as long as they have this psychotic leadership their nuclear options need to be severely limited or nonexistent as they are a threat to our allies in the region, to us and Christians and Jews worldwide.

Just the threats that the Iranian president has made towards us would have been enough for me to remove him from power. But that's the beauty of it. I can have my opinion and other people can have theirs.



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaarkSyde2012
Look at what has happened in the last few days with America helping out getting those Iranians away from the pirates, helping out with the Russian ship, I believe this shows that if politics is left out we can help each other out. What we really need is a new energy form and get off the oil....alas that will not happen because of GREED!!!


If those were Americans that were pirated you can bet Iran would have done nothing to help us...in fact I'd think you'd see Iran supporting the same pirates through their state sponsored terrorist organzations.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by bruwin

Originally posted by DaarkSyde2012
Look at what has happened in the last few days with America helping out getting those Iranians away from the pirates, helping out with the Russian ship, I believe this shows that if politics is left out we can help each other out. What we really need is a new energy form and get off the oil....alas that will not happen because of GREED!!!


If those were Americans that were pirated you can bet Iran would have done nothing to help us...in fact I'd think you'd see Iran supporting the same pirates through their state sponsored terrorist organzations.



You mean like the U.S sanctioning Iran and supporting israel?

Which is actually happening compared to you hypothetical suggestion.
Of course another detail is it is actually happening on a much grander scale then the idea one hijacked boat full of americans being terrorist by a handfull of iranians.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by DJMSN
 


We have our own oil fields just off Australia so we don't need Middle Eastern oil either



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 04:13 AM
link   
reply to post by FoosM
 


Actually, if you did your homework properly you'll find Iran is the 3rd biggest exporter of oil in the world......the 1st is the USA (Alaska) but they have no interest in drilling in to it just yet.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 


I am sure you have sources for everything you listed, otherwise, let people know that it is conjecture on your part and your own opinion please.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
No. As stated just above, "What exactly did I show besides a visual aid showing the military bases?"


It is your sixth point in your OP


.
Show me a post in this thread where someone misinterpreted the map.


All of them mentioning Iran being "surrounded"-- all them mentioning the map at all-- except mine.
FoxMulder147 was the first on page one; but not the last.

And you keep insisting that the topic be on the CURRENT sanction.

Fine, You first: start by explaining what that map has to do with them.

I'll spell it out for you: The bases in all but Iraq and Afghanistan exist because of the lessons learned in World War II by the host nations and by the United States. Those that supported the Nazis (like Iran) got their tails kicked, and were looking for powerful allies to help them defend their own sovereignty. The Russians did not have anywhere near a good history in the Middle East-- which is why some of the states had sided with the Germans during WWI-- and got their tales kicked.

The British were better task-masters than the Russians, but still task-masters, rather desperately trying to cling to the economic remains of its Empire-- and so that left the USA.

Likewise, the US had learned the lesson of its flirtation with isolationism and included in its new, post-WWII alliances the ability to extend its military presence around the globe. The role of "World's Policeman" was not function following form, but form following function-- the US was asked to jump in and help and did-- becoming that in the eyes of others-- not in its own interest.

But of course, exploiting such ability in one's own interest is certain.

Like it or not, the lesson of history is that anarchy leads to what is now called "failed nations states" and the behavior of those are characterized as tribal and brutal. The concept of peaceful tribes of humans living in harmony with nature and one another is a lie-- it is not the lesson of history of such human organization. There are exceptions to that rule-- but they are just that: exceptions.

So with power comes brutality-- unless a world view is primary.

When famine strikes anywhere on the globe-- who gives the food? When disease ravishes a section of the globe-- who rushes in with medicine? That is a world view and I describe the USA.

Now, as I pointed out in a previous post-- Iran is struggling to become a world power, but so far has not manifest a world view. Israel makes up much of the rhetoric of Iran, but Israel and Iran are not even sharing a border. So it MUST be about racism, or religious intolerance or simply regional "us verses them" politics.

I used the Chess analogy. As long as Iran seeks to establish its national identity based upon saber rattling, the world powers are not interested in allowing the pawn to become a queen-- that is-- gain nuclear technology.



You wonder what I was up to when I created this thread?!?

No, I wondered what made you think you were up to creating the thread-- since you have not demonstrated a familiarity with the historical background. It is passionate, but lacks direction.



Oh goody! You are one of those, "YOU FAIL" people...love em. When they don't have an argument that is usually their fall back. You do seem to be confused in my understanding of where you stand. I was talking about the sanctions...you have fixated on a map showing US military bases around Iran.


Again-- you put the map there-- and so associated it with your point about current sanctions. You did so without explanation. And I know why. I called you on it. It weakens your point-- and your credibility. It was a mistake you made, and I chose not to look the other way. You ran the risk-- don't blame me.




You accuse me of Ad Hominem or, Argumentum ad hominem, but you do the same thing.

I referred to those who disparage the US without engaging the topic as "blog-sucking morons" but I was not specific. Would you like me to be?



I have not posted other people's propaganda. I have this thing called critical thinking that lets me see facts and come to conclusions which are my own opinion, as stated before.


The map is other people's propaganda-- you used it and cited a source for it in your original post. Saying it isn't is so doesn't change a thing.



Historical context for the CURRENT sanctions?
edit on 9-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)

Exactly. And you will find the US bases have NOTHING to do with the current sanctions.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Here is a video showing that Iran isn't developing nukes as said by the US.




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:16 AM
link   
And you know...

Not specifically Iran, but one can see it at work there... The rise of Islam is troubling in HOW it is rising-- by brutality and violence.

The Jewish faith's beginning as a blend of faith and state, according to the Bible, was brutal. Harsh and extreme punishments for transgression of religious law and state intolerance against neighboring states. That was three thousand years ago, and the only difference between the Hebrews and their neighbors AT THAT TIME is that they survived as a people until today.

The Christian faith began under persecution, but a little over three hundred years later, went through a period of tying the faith to the State-- and again, we see brutality in intolerance. That was about 1700 years ago and the only difference between the Roman Empire tied to the Christian faith and its neighbors is that the faith survived after the Empire fell.

Now the Muslim faith is emerging, but the brutality of religious intolerance -- especially when tied to the State-- is occurring in age of impersonal violence-- and the world which has already been through that Age is saying, "No!"

When a primitive tribe has access to RPGs, the world sees that as too much power and too little certainty of control. In one word: "Somalia."

And the religion is seen, IN THAT REGARD, as something other than the worship of God and seeking spiritual truth-- but of nothing more than a national identity enforced with brutality.

Iran, because of its natural resources, is in a position to finance great things, but what the world sees (not just the USA) is a leadership appealing to its people at the tribal level-- not the global neighbor level.

Wanting nuclear power plants for sustainable energy for its people and economy is laudable.

But playing, "Hide the centrifuges" with the rest of the world when combined with saber rattling is EXACTLY what got Saddam Hussein overthrown-- and dead.

You realize (right?) that nations which provide nuclear technology also have a responsibility for insuring the technology is not for the purpose of destroying one's foes. France, Germany and Russia?

You realize (right?) that centrifuges can be used for creating fuel for power generation (in which case, Why would you hide them?), or for weapons (in which case, we KNOW why they are hidden).

Two reasons to hide them:

1) You are trying to make nuclear weapons.
2) You are wanting people to fear that you are trying to make nuclear weapons (Saddam's reason).

As can be seen from history-- either reason is taken by the rest of the world as potentially the first-- and dealt with as if it is. Of course.

Israel took out Saddam's research reactor built the by the French with a strategic strike-- a few days or weeks before the nuclear fuel arrived-- but after all of the enormous amounts of money, material and effort had been spent. Israel did not invade, they did not attack innocents, and they did not occupy.

They spanked the child playing with a book of matches and took the matches away. I don't blame them. I don't like the State of Israel (I love the Jews and their faith), but the strategic strike on Iraq's research reactor was a good thing. So was Bush's occupying invasion-- for the same reason.

And Iraq not only possessed, but had used poison gas on its own people as well as on Iranians.

Now Iran is playing the Saddam game. This is not new, but it is absurd.

Yes, the USA has and is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons. It did so to end a war which it did not start. It was the only viable means to end that war available to it at the time. It did so on viable military targets. The US has other means, now; and has used them-- but has not used nuclear weapons again. That is not a bully-- that is a nation with the will and the means to protect and project its values.

But Iran's leadership has espoused values which are not critical to its own identity-- namely, the rage it has against Israel. What is that to Iran?

I'll tell you what it does for Iran-- it garners the support of radical Islam.

Why is the support of radical Islam important to Iran? Because if it does not support radical Islam, then it must FEAR radical Islam-- like every other ME state.. And that is the action of a frightened child-- not an adult ready to take a seat at the adult table.

I will forever associate radical Islam with the Iranian Khomeini: A man must not shake off the drops with more than two (or is it three?) shakes-- or it is self abuse.

So, Iran overthrows a brutal dictator (after that dictator's Nazi father was overthrown) and enters the later part of the 20th Century with such absurdity?

Iran is still a child. Its people deserve more-- but that works both ways. If the people embrace the saber rattling of its leaders, if the people identify their own identity with hatred of others, and if the people endorse a radical faith-based state-- then the world (not just the USA) needs to say, "No!"



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


ATTENTION MODS:

Please erase the map in my opening post so that we can stop fixating on a map of US bases, and get on to the meat and potatoes of why people think Iran is getting sanctions laid upon them, and so we can focus on the intent of this thread instead of derailment by fixating on a map.

Thank you.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


I'm only going to reply to a portion of your post as I don't necessarily disagree with the rest.




Iran, because of its natural resources, is in a position to finance great things, but what the world sees (not just the USA) is a leadership appealing to its people at the tribal level-- not the global neighbor level.

Wanting nuclear power plants for sustainable energy for its people and economy is laudable.

But playing, "Hide the centrifuges" with the rest of the world when combined with saber rattling is EXACTLY what got Saddam Hussein overthrown-- and dead.

You realize (right?) that nations which provide nuclear technology also have a responsibility for insuring the technology is not for the purpose of destroying one's foes. France, Germany and Russia?

You realize (right?) that centrifuges can be used for creating fuel for power generation (in which case, Why would you hide them?), or for weapons (in which case, we KNOW why they are hidden).


I agree that it is great that Iran wants to have nuclear power plants for sustainable energy. (We all know oil isn't going to last forever.)
As for Saddam being overthrown for "hiding centrifuges"...well, read this: Evidence on Iraq’s Aluminum Tubes Misrepresented. There is no doubt in my mind that this was over oil, not protecting the planet from a Maddas.


I do realize that nations that provide nuclear technology has a responsiblity to make sure they don't use them for weapons. However, Russia also helped them build their nuclear technology, why would they Slam new sanctions against Iran? Shouldn't the US, and every other country that ALSO helped Iran get their nuclear program up and running be slapping sanctions on Russia for not following suit?

I do realize that centrifuges can be used for creating fuel for power generation or for weapons. If Iran didn't want to have big bullseyes on their NPP's why wouldn't they hide them? Can you imagine what would happen if they had a plant up and running and it took a direct missile hit? Wouldn't that cause a lot of damage for years!? I say they should drop out of the NPT, North Korea did it and they aren't at risk of getting attacked.

Edit: I posted this on page 7 and I think it applies as well here.

It is their way of life, their religion, their mores, their morals, their values. I don't agree with it either, but, if we don't let nations act in the way that they feel is best for their citizens, then we are giving all western nations free reign to go into any country that doesn't believe exactly what they believe. So why not have a one world government then? That seems to be what you are advocating. I don't agree with that either.
edit on 10-1-2012 by superman2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by superman2012
reply to post by DJMSN
 


I just don't quite understand why there are sanctions against a country trying to develop this type of power. What do they have to fear from Iran?.


The leaders of Iran constantly refer to the USA as "the great Satan" and use other such inflammatory language. Is it any wonder that the US might fear an Iranian bomb? Aside from Israel, they obviously consider the US their biggest enemy.

If someone constantly tells you that you are an enemy of theirs, you might worry when they buy a gun.



new topics

top topics



 
52
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join