Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds

reply to post by lacrimaererum


Sure, and right after 9/11, 90% of the population, and 100% of the intelligence agencies were convinced that another attack was "imminent" and we absolutely "had to go in to the middle east and get em"

Look how that worked out. And I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.

Iran, if our media is saying you're about to "attack" us, what that really means is that we are about to move-in. After all, now we HAVE TO, attack is IMMINENT.

Get out while you still can. I'm just glad my name isnt Ahamadinejad or Ayatollah Khamenei right now.

Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
reply to post by lacrimaererum

 

Sure, and right after 9/11, 90% of the population, and 100% of the intelligence agencies were convinced that another attack was "imminent" and we absolutely "had to go in to the middle east and get em"

Look how that worked out. And I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.

Iran, if our media is saying you're about to "attack" us, what that really means is that we are about to move-in. After all, now we HAVE TO, attack is IMMINENT.

Get out while you still can. I'm just glad my name isnt Ahamadinejad or Ayatollah Khamenei right now.

Well if they do attack they will cement their image of a warmongering nation. There is no cause to invade with what the IAEA has said so far. I believe this is just Obama's poor try at trying to be a 2 term president.

Originally posted by bigwig22

If you learned critical thinking, you would not have been in the army. Soldiers are a bunch of brainwashed tools for the government, that's all. They make you believe you can think on your own but it isnt true. The proof is you think you fight for all the people of the USA. YOU DON'T. Just look at how many people disapprove these wars on foreign soil against enemys that aren't near your homeland?

let's apply a bit of that "critical thinking", shall we?

1) Simply because someone disapproves of what you are doing for them does not mean you re NOT doing it for them. It means they disapprove - and may be suicidal. My kids always disapproved when I wouldn't allow them to eat chocolate cake for supper, washed down with copious amounts of Mountain Dew. The mere fact that they disapproved of my actions doesn't mean that I wasn't performing those actions for their benefit.

2) Do you really think it is somehow to your benefit to wait for your enemies to enter your "homeland" before reacting to stop that entry? REALLY? You seriously would prefer to wait to X out your opposition until they are intermingled with your family? Your version of "critical thinking" involves putting your family at risk because you want to be nice to the Bad Men?

SERIOUSLY? You want to take someone else to task over "critical thinking"?

reply to post by nenothtu

Do you really think it is somehow to your benefit to wait for your enemies to enter your "homeland" before reacting to stop that entry? REALLY? You seriously would prefer to wait to X out your opposition until they are intermingled with your family? Your version of "critical thinking" involves putting your family at risk because you want to be nice to the Bad Men?

I am not defending the person you are arguing with. I am merely going to respond to your 2nd point.

If we listened to your "leaders" about who the enemy is then how often would the US be invading country to preemptively strike a nation that "was about to destroy them"? The US MSM and Government rely on propaganda and fear to keep their nation in check, much like Nazi Germany did. I would even say that the US government does a better job of it than Germany did.
There is no reason to be "nice to the Bad Men", but, countries shouldn't attack other countries without 100% proof (see info on Iraq tubes). How many wars/conflicts has the US put themselves in, in the name of peace? Google "Africa Genocide" and then wonder why the US isn't there helping people.
People who say this isn't about oil or natural resources aren't fooling anyone but themselves.

where does it say in that washington post article that US thinks iran is plotting a terrorist attack on US. Soil?

I just thought of this the only reason why us is putting this out there is it because they are about to do a false flag? To find just cause for the war?

reply to post by superman2012


I'm not sure who it is you think are my leaders. I myself acknowledge none, and tend to figure out who I perceive to be my "enemy" on my own. For example, I could care less if Iran put a nuke in every basement - in Iran. I don't care if they turn their enrichment failures into sugar sprinkles for their kids' cereal. Whatever they want to do in their own house isn't any of my business, nor does it make them my enemy. The single exception to that philosophy is when they took over the Embassy and held hostages. Sure, that was something they did in their own house, but it was MY people they put at risk. had they simply ejected the Embassy staff from Iran, I'd have been ok with it. Now that we have no diplomatic relations, I can't imagine caring less what they do in their own country or to their own people.

The evil they do in other folks houses is somewhat more problematic. Even if they have a nuke under every street lamp, it's not my problem. LAUNCHING one is a different matter, and should invite the automatic erasure or Iran, IMO, based upon the rhetoric they spew, coupled with the evidence of action upon that rhetoric embodied in the launch.

I really can't see inviting them to come here and launch in our house, against our people. Simply saying that someone is going to attack isn't reason to obliterate them, but it IS reason to watch them more closely, and get everything in place for said obliteration should they even twitch to act on it. Inviting them to launch their attack from here isn't much different than stripping yourself and raising your chin to the sky in order to give them easy access to your throat.

On a purely personal level, I've never, EVER needed "100% proof" to counterstrike. A declaration of intent, in any form, has always been enough for me, which I guess is why I'm still here, and not pushing up daisies in Potter's Field.

But back to "my leaders" - I have none at the moment, and neither does the US. This country is on auto-pilot, and the pre-programmed course is leading to a nosedive into the ground, a crater in a field.

reply to post by nenothtu


My mistake, I don't disagree with you on most points, I must have taken what you said to mean what I wanted to hear. Sorry about that.

On a purely personal level, I've never, EVER needed "100% proof" to counterstrike. A declaration of intent, in any form, has always been enough for me, which I guess is why I'm still here, and not pushing up daisies in Potter's Field.

I'm still here, I will always need 100% proof.

But back to "my leaders" - I have none at the moment, and neither does the US. This country is on auto-pilot, and the pre-programmed course is leading to a nosedive into the ground, a crater in a field.

I couldn't agree more with you on this, and not just the US, alot of countries are circling the drain.

Article 14
In accordance with the sacred verse; ("God does not forbid you to deal kindly and justly with those who have not fought against you because of your religion and who have not expelled you from your homes" [60:8]), the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran and all Mu slims are duty-bound to treat non-Muslims in conformity with ethical norms and the principles of Islamic justice and equity, and to respect their human rights. This principle applies to all who refrain from engaging in conspiracy or activity against Islam and the Islamic Republic of Iran.

www.iranchamber.com...

interesting culture


Article 13
Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian Iranians are the only recognized religious minorities, who, within the limits of the law, are free to perform their religious rites and ceremonies, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education.

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant

The point of this comment is to show that while the use of coercion and threats of force (i.e. Gun Boat Diplomacy) may seem to be effective, more often then not they create environments that are even more unstable and insecure. When a weaker country is backed into a corner, often they are forced to bite even if they know it may cause their own dimise. Perpetual ignorance is not the way.

Only a rabid animal bites knowing that bite will cause it's own demise.

Rabid animals must be put down for the good of the whole neighborhood.

Merely backing a healthy critter into a corner will not cause it to bite. Only getting close enough to it to allow the teeth to take hold will cause that. Otherwise, it just remains wary. Rabid animals, on the other hand, don't wait for you to get close enough, or even present a threat, because they are acting offensively, not defensively.

What you are looking at is nothing more than gearing up for a "false Flag" event perpetrated by the U.S. government
and it's Zionist handlers.
Just like Iraq here we go again.
Fear and lies, fear and lies.The only people with the resources and capability of pulling off a terrorist attack on U.S. soil are elements within the U.S. government or Mossad.If the TSA and homeland security are doing such a great job of protecting Americans and can somehow keep justifying their existance then how could a terrorist attack occur on U.S. soil ? They do such a great job of groping our children, and terrorizing our seniors, or beating the hell out of peaceful protesters, how could they let a terror cell slip through their grubby little fingers?
None of this makes sense.
We all know this is pure BS, Each week the reasons for attacking Iran grow and grow, now we are supposed to believe that Iran has somehow gotten past or will get past all the airport security and TSA and homeland security
and what? get their hands on some sort of nuclear reactive material, or smuggle it in their underwear?then launch an attack all on their own? Inside one of the biggest police states on the planet?While the U.S has pretty much declared war on them without any reason or justification?It wouldn't make any sense from a military point of view at all.The American game gets crazier every week, its so obvious and laughable all at the same time.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cant fool all the people all the time.
The attention span of the average American is not very long and this is obvious by the fact that your government is about to again lead you into a conflict that is solely designed by them.
Fear and lies drive the American dream now.
When you see a so called terrorist attack on U.S. soil in the very near future, try to look past all the lies and don't get caught up in the whole rah rah America yeah! emotional crap.See it for what it is.It will be a false flag no matter how they spin it and people half way around the world who have done nothing will bare the brunt of a bully's games.
I think everyone needs to grab some popcorn and sit down and watch V for Vendetta one more time.Its time for a refresher.

Originally posted by Sharpenmycleats

Originally posted by vault13er
...quoted post removed and poster now banned...

That was a great rant, but truthfully it seemed pretty racist and hateful. Not sure how you figure that will sway many Americans into your camp. Truth is the American people by the majority do not feel threaten by Iran and their individual pursuit for power. I also do not believe that the Iranian people by majority do not wish, "Death to America."

So why both governments beating war drums?

Because their government doesn't have their best interests at heart any more than ours does.

Governments these days exist for a singular purpose - to continue to exist while retaining their iron grip on power. That's our government, their government, Russia's government, China's government, North Korea's government, the UK government, Canada's government, Cuba's government, Mexico's government, and a majority of world governments. That's not how it's supposed to be, but that's how it is.

It's also why governments are in the process of delegitimizing themselves - they exist only to propagate themselves, and have ceased being responsive to their constituencies.

When governments have disagreements amongst themselves, they care not what is good for their People, only what is good for themselves.

reply to post by bigwig22

If you learned critical thinking, you would not have been in the army. Soldiers are a bunch of brainwashed tools for the government, that's all. They make you believe you can think on your own but it isnt true. The proof is you think you fight for all the people of the USA. YOU DON'T. Just look at how many people disapprove these wars on foreign soil against enemys that aren't near your homeland? 

Spoken like a true liberal, elitist professor. Who is brainwashed here? Saying things like that might make you cool among your spoon fed college buddies and might get you a few stars on ATS but that doesn't make it the truth. 

I agree with the poster that said it was the soldiers fault. Just stay home and mind your own business. If all the soldiers stayed home, the world would be better IMO. Without soldiers tofight their wars, the ruling "elites" would have to find another way to extend their power.

Freedom isn't free - it's paid for with the blood of brave men. Every civilization that has ever existed has fought to preserve it's existance and improve it's position in the world; ours is no different. Whether or not you agree or approve is of little significance. 

Most children pull the covers over their head to protect themself from the boogy-man. In the real world, brave men must step up and kill the boogy-man. If you believe "staying home and minding your own business" is a viable means of protecting our national security then you are no critical thinker yourself. You can't close your eyes and make it go away...sorry! 

While I'm bursting your bubble I might as well add that...get ready...there is NO SANTA CLAUS! It was a LIE!!

Originally posted by WhiteDevil013
reply to post by lacrimaererum

 

Sure, and right after 9/11, 90% of the population, and 100% of the intelligence agencies were convinced that another attack was "imminent" and we absolutely "had to go in to the middle east and get em"

Look how that worked out. And I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.

Iran, if our media is saying you're about to "attack" us, what that really means is that we are about to move-in. After all, now we HAVE TO, attack is IMMINENT.

Get out while you still can. I'm just glad my name isnt Ahamadinejad or Ayatollah Khamenei right now.

I agree, and well said. And Iran is sitting on a mountain of oil conveniently. Better get Iran fast boys! If you don't support a military campaign against Iran, you hate America, and you disgrace the brave troops that died for your FREEEDOMMM. More of the same Fox News crap, it gets old and tired after awhile doesn't it?

Let's be crystal clear for the others in this thread who support needless war: World War 2 was dying for freedom, everything since then has been a pile of steaming bs.

This may seem extreme to a lot of you, but when was the last time you walked by a Hell's Angel club house, kick over a Harley and threw a rock through the window? Chances are never. Did you ever know anyone that jumped a fence and kicked a couple of pit bulls in the nuts? How many midgets (Little People) have you seen run a crossing route against the Alabama secondary, none?

How about we take our nukes, our three-million man military, our flying saucers hidden in Nevada and just tell every little a..hole in the world that screw with us and we will take out your mother, you pops, Main Street in Bum F Anywhere and build a Starbucks where your mud hut use to be..See how that works.

reply to post by L00kingGlass

I agree, and well said. And Iran is sitting on a mountain of oil conveniently. Better get Iran fast boys! If you don't support a military campaign against Iran, you hate America, and you disgrace the brave troops that died for your FREEEDOMMM. More of the same Fox News crap, it gets old and tired after awhile doesn't it?

Agreed. Iran is #2 in natural gas reserves and #4 in oil reserves, but this is about peace right? If the US was all about freeing people from unjust murders and genocide you would think they would have been in Rwanda during 1994(800,000 - 1,000,000). Or in Darfur in 2003(approx. 300,000 civilians killed).

Let's be crystal clear for the others in this thread who support needless war: World War 2 was dying for freedom, everything since then has been a pile of steaming bs.

Agreed.

Edit: I had to give you a star you had 666. haha

reply to post by MissingRonnieR


America has 2,937,899 total. Iran has 3,833,000 total. In a war Iran would deal a massive blow to the US. I hope it never comes to this and don't wish casualties for either side though.

reply to post by superman2012

you would think they would have been in Rwanda during 1994(800,000 - 1,000,000). Or in Darfur in 2003(approx. 300,000 civilians killed).

Exactly. Also my previous statement wasn't entirely accurate, Bosnia was a noble cause.

I had to give you a star you had 666. haha

Thank goodness, thank you. That was bugging me.

reply to post by superman2012

I'm not going to go over all 25 pages of the IAEA report. So I'll just quote the "strong" language the report makes on Iran's nuke program. Indications, some activities relevant to the development, some may. Wow. That's proof enough for me.

Obviously we have a difference of opinion about what the IAEA report says. Apparently, you want a report that shows PICTURES of a NUCLEAR WARHEAD before you believe they are doing anything wrong. I can understand this because you (and many others) draw the similarities between this and what led to Iraq.

I get it!

Here’s my point with regards to Iran…

They have made their intentions know. I don’t really care if they have nukes now or not. I DO care that they INTEND to acquire them and I’m sure, based on their own rhetoric, that they will flex their muscles with their new-found power. They are flexing NOW and they KNOW they would be crushed!! I also feel that psychos should not have WMD…it’s just unacceptable if the world hopes to have peace. Finally, Saddam never had missiles in South America. You can downplay Iran’s missile capability all you’d like but you DON’T know what THEY have any more than you KNOW what US has. Hell, the top speed of our carriers is classified…what makes you think US capabilities in other areas are well known??

Be objective here, as I have.

Why would a country sitting on 1,000 years’ worth of oil NEED nuclear energy??

You also have to admit that, like Saddam, Ahmadinejad isn’t doing anything to calm the situation down. Quite the contrary…he is throwing fuel on the fire. Why the threats to US (sinking carriers), Israel (wipe them off the map) and the entire world economy (close the straits)??

reply to post by seabag

Here’s my point with regards to Iran… They have made their intentions know. I don’t really care if they have nukes now or not. I DO care that they INTEND to acquire them and I’m sure, based on their own rhetoric, that they will flex their muscles with their new-found power. They are flexing NOW and they KNOW they would be crushed!! I also feel that psychos should not have WMD…it’s just unacceptable if the world hopes to have peace. Finally, Saddam never had missiles in South America. You can downplay Iran’s missile capability all you’d like but you DON’T know what THEY have any more than you KNOW what US has. Hell, the top speed of our carriers is classified…what makes you think US capabilities in other areas are well known??

They made their intentions known? So if I said I intend to acquire the ability to make nukes I should be killed? What new-found power will they have? The power to bomb someone, and in doing so seal their own fate? I also agree that psychos should not have WMD that's why I believe all country's leaders should get rid of them.
No, Saddam never had missiles in South America, neither does Iran. Saddam had chemical warfare from "western" countries, so by your logic so should Iran?
I am not downplaying anything about Iran's missile capability, I am sure, if the US is as great as you say it is, that they know exactly what Iran is capable of and I'm even more sure that Iran would brag about it. I still stand by my statement (was it this thread?) that the Shahab-3 couldn't even reach the US...are you afraid of a splash?

Be objective here, as I have.

Seriously, I spit out my soda. You are responsible for cleaning it up now. You? Objective? Yes, and I believe we should bomb Iran.

Why would a country sitting on 1,000 years’ worth of oil NEED nuclear energy??

Maybe they don't want to be left in the dark as far as technology is concerned...do you still have a tube tv or an LCD? Commodore 64 or a new PC? Oil won't last forever, especially if you are selling it.

You also have to admit that, like Saddam, Ahmadinejad isn’t doing anything to calm the situation down. Quite the contrary…he is throwing fuel on the fire. Why the threats to US (sinking carriers), Israel (wipe them off the map) and the entire world economy (close the straits)??

Absolutely! I have stated many times that he is playing a very dangerous game by all his bravado...and quit using the "wipe them off the map" you have been involved in numerous threads where that was shown to be untrue. I think he knows the US won't invade so he is like a little kid sticking his tongue out to a bully, safely behind 15 feet of barb wire.