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

The only reason that you drop smart bombs on people is because there is a huge increase in profit between smart bombs and dumb ones.

Really it is a great business model. It's like making condoms - use once and throw it away.. Bombs ... use once and drop it. No warranty! No nothing.

Smart weapons = $$$$$$$$$$$$

Weapons = 20% US economy. WOW!

Iran are looking to conduct terrorists activities in America..

oh and P.S., they are 52 weeks away from having nuclear weapons.



... lets put the pieces together and see the subtle message!

Originally posted by Rocky Black
reply to post by Vitchilo

 

Last I remeber Irak invaded Kuwait. We came to the rescue don't you remeber.

And yes then Afganastan.

Remeber 911.
The taliban thumbing there nose to us ya we have bin laden. No you cannot have him he is innocent. Do you remember the videos of the taliban commanders before we went over there saying it weas not him.

Then we went over there and laid some smack down.

How soon we forget.

And Irak.

rember arfer we kciked there ass we backed out to let them take control. And then his own people in the north and south started to attack his own forces. And the UN had to set up the north and south parralells.

MNot to mentuion they took way to long and his own people suffered brutal attacks from his forces.

Go figure.

We forget all this but one thing you always for get.

We respond.

We did not initiate #.

Wow, this is most inaccurate and by far most ignorant post i have seen on ATS . CNN or FOX should hire you asap !.

Originally posted by DivineFem
I saw on the news yesterday that Iran is only a year away from a nuclear weapon. I thought then that it was another scheme to bring the american people on board. Glad to see they are "covering all their bases" . I wonder what will happen next?

With them having 20% enrichment? They can make one right now, they probably already have it which would explain why Russia got the hell out and started talking about placing more sanctions on them when Iran announced they reached 20% enrichment.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by lacrimaererum

 

My point was that people aren't trying to drum up support. Iran IS milling around in South America and they very likely will launch terrorist attack. This isn't warmongering...its pointing out a serious threat to national security.

I'm not of the opinion that we should turn our backs on threats.

What do you consider a threat? Please spell it out (not literally), because you, along with a lot of other people, seem to be afraid of every country that isn't "westernized".

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by DivineFem
I saw on the news yesterday that Iran is only a year away from a nuclear weapon. I thought then that it was another scheme to bring the american people on board. Glad to see they are "covering all their bases" . I wonder what will happen next?

With them having 20% enrichment? They can make one right now, they probably already have it which would explain why Russia got the hell out and started talking about placing more sanctions on them when Iran announced they reached 20% enrichment.

They could make one before they reached 20% enrichment, it just wouldn't be as effective as one that was 80+%. What is your point?

reply to post by xavi1000


Iran is digging a very deep grave for itself.

It’s not too late for them to STOP the madness.

If they gave up their nuke pursuit it would be the greatest thing in the world for two reasons:
1) Iranians would live in peace, the world would avoid WWIII, and
2) It would shut all of you America haters up because, really…What would you say when YEARS go by and the PEACEFUL Iran doesn’t get invaded by the Great Satan, the US of A?

What would you all have to bitch about then??

Nevermind…it wouldn’t take long to find a new reason to hate!!

reply to post by superman2012


That they already have the abilitu to make nuclear weapons

Judas Priest!!!! Doesn't anyone here pay attention to the rhetoric, beliefs and writings of the militant Islams?

Words have meaning. If they say they are going to blow something up, I have to believe them. Your a$$ could be in the next tower that comes down. If someone says they are going to shoot you, you are going to call the cops and ask to be protected. They will hit the most popular and populated areas. I don't want war but if someone is loading their weapon to shoot me, I am going to take them down first before they have the chance. You can love everyone you want but that doesn't mean they will love you back. (Ask John Lennon.) People will kill you just because they believe something different than you believe, where you live, or because they want your Nikes. We have done it also so I make no assertion that we are clean. People try to deny the holocaust, or the killing fields, or the millions killed in the Soviet Union, Bosnia, and everywhere else. They happened and they will happen in the U.S. unless stopped. The only reason Japan did not invade the U.S. after Pearl Harbor was they knew there would be a gun behind every blade of grass. The human race is barely out of the jungle where survival depended on the skills to kill and survive. We are still trying to survive. To let another militant country have nuclear weapons is insane. They can make a low level bomb and some a$$hole will find a way to deliver it in a suitcase. You can pretend to be Ferdinand the Bull until the butcher comes down the road. You will cry all the way home to momma but she may already be fallout. Those who don't believe we are in danger must have inhaled.

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by superman2012

 

That they already have the abilitu to make nuclear weapons

So does Canada, what's your point/agenda?

Originally posted by superman2012

What do you consider a threat? Please spell it out (not literally), because you, along with a lot of other people, seem to be afraid of every country that isn't "westernized".

What do I define as a threat? Well, in this case it would be a country like IRAN in the backyard of the US with bad intentions.

I’m not going to keep laying out why Iran is a threat. If you want to know why I think Iran is dangerous then read THIS OP and the subsequent posts.

False flag imminent.

I repeat, false flag imminent.

Originally posted by superman2012
What do you consider a threat? Please spell it out (not literally), because you, along with a lot of other people, seem to be afraid of every country that isn't "westernized".

Weren't you the one recently arguing that the Iranians are good at asymmetrical warfare in one of your recent threads? That they would use it against the US? Wouldn't this qualify as such?

Have you changed your opinion now?

Just curious is all.

Asymmetric warfare

Asymmetric warfare is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly.

"Asymmetric warfare" can describe a conflict in which the resources of two belligerents differ in essence and in the struggle, interact and attempt to exploit each other's characteristic weaknesses. Such struggles often involve strategies and tactics of unconventional warfare, the "weaker" combatants attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in quantity or quality.[1] Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized.[2] This is in contrast to symmetric warfare, where two powers have similar military power and resources and rely on tactics that are similar overall, differing only in details and execution.

The term is frequently used to describe what is also called "guerrilla warfare", "insurgency", "terrorism", "counterinsurgency", and "counterterrorism", essentially violent conflict between a formal military and an informal, poorly-equipped, but elusive opponent

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by superman2012

What do you consider a threat? Please spell it out (not literally), because you, along with a lot of other people, seem to be afraid of every country that isn't "westernized".

What do I define as a threat? Well, in this case it would be a country like IRAN in the backyard of the US with bad intentions.

I’m not going to keep laying out why Iran is a threat. If you want to know why I think Iran is dangerous then read THIS OP and the subsequent posts.

I didn't ask about "this case" but oh well. Where is the proof that Iran is planning an attack?

You have never laid out why Iran is a threat. I brought this up to you and you subsequently disappeared from that thread. The US may have grounds for sanctions, but, they are trying to back a wild animal into a corner. Why do they want this?

Everything you have said is a regurgitation of MSM and the government propaganda. Why? Didn't they teach critical thinking in your command? I notice you used the word "think" Iran is dangerous...that's right, they are your own thoughts, not facts.

ps- on the linked post, this:

Iran ranks second in the world in natural gas reserves and third in oil reserves. It is OPEC's 2nd largest oil exporter and it has the potential to become an energy superpower.

should be this:

Iran ranks second in the world in natural gas reserves and fourth in oil reserves. It is OPEC's 2nd largest oil exporter and it has the potential to become an energy superpower.

Thanks to Slayer69 for pointing that out to me.

reply to post by SLAYER69

Weren't you the one recently arguing that the Iranians are good at asymmetrical warfare in one of your recent threads? That they would use it against the US? Wouldn't this qualify as such?

Irrelevant, I wasn't asking about my thoughts.

Have you changed your opinion now? Just curious is all.

No, not at all. I said that the US is unprepared for asymmetrical warfare. ( I believe.)

The term is frequently used to describe what is also called "guerrilla warfare", "insurgency", "terrorism", "counterinsurgency", and "counterterrorism", essentially violent conflict between a formal military and an informal, poorly-equipped, but elusive opponent

Trying to trip me up? Asymmetric warfare = terrorism? Might want to check your buddy's post on that thread then.

Regarding the assymetrical warefare issue.....

Iran isn't a dumb country, it is highly intelligent as Im sure is its own military industrial complex.

What Im trying to say as echoed by some people, is that they would not be stuoid enough to proceed with an "open" attack on the USA to justify instant retaliation against them...what would be a smarter form of warefare/weakening the enemy without direct contact or blowback against them?

A couple alternative methods might be.....bioweapon that could be traced to a third country, throwing the US attention towards it rather than Iran. Distracting the US in a way. Like maybe Venezuela or North Korea?

Hiring Mexicans to work for Iranian regime within the USA (either as spies, suicide bombers etc...bait in a way)....this would put all mexicans under the spotlight as possible enemy combatants especially illegals? Another diversionary tactic which would also cause social unrest within the USA.

Same could be done with African Americans.

What Im trying to get at is, if US/Israel are already in a covert war with Iran, whats to stop Iran doin the same thing to the US?

But to suceed, they would need to be smart, and ensure nothing gets linked back to them.

What better way to weaken your enemy than within, with their own people or frame a secondary enemy.

Once your primary enemy is distracted, you come in with a swift attack.

(Im not saying Iran will directly militarily attack the USA).

It wouldnt be too difficult with the USA's large gun culture to deploy a couple hundred "snipers" in various cities to terrorize the populace.

Once again, Mexicans or blacks could be used putting them under the spotlight as opposed to Persians/Arabs.

Might doesnt always win in the end.

Originally posted by rebellender
this is getting to me. I know some people in America have'nt seen both Oceans and smelled the air. Seen the Power of the Pacific or the sheer width of the Mississippi. The Height of the Rocky's or Cacti in Arizona.
I challenge any person to go to a Military center base what have you and see what it takes to keep America Free and Sleeping soundly at night. Sit in on a war room where intel goes through and see the PURE EVIL of the world.

Then with a gasp say "WOW I just didn't know" or "No Wonder" or "God Bless you for what you do"

In other words GET REAL cause outside of the land of good and plenty They All want what we have and will do anything ANYTHING to take it away

Good an plenty eh? I've been in Marines and I sat on some of those wonderful butt kicking planning missions. I saw maybe, one or two people all the time I was in the Corps that was good an honorable. And they left because of the bull#. I don't feel like this land is good and plenty at all. A whole lot of people don't. Take your idealized crud and write some fairy tale books. Hell the best place I saw to live back then was Europe. I remember thinking "I've been lied to" when it dawned on me that perhaps America wasn't number one and that all countries tell their people convenient lies ala 1984 and Animal Farm. People are so damn self serving eagerly ignorant it makes my soul hurt. Hell, the Koreans think they are number one also .

I kinda hope we go to war with Iran because it is the line in the sand (Hah hah). The only thing that changes people is pain and if so many casual Americans get caught up in the lies the only thing I think that will help them is some big pain. Bring the pain.

Originally posted by Laokin

"Blowback" is defined as inevitable consequences of ones actions, known or unknown.

It's not a "intelligence" community term. It's a colloquialism.

Come on now.

edit on 31-1-2012 by Laokin because: (no reason given)

Colloquial to where? I've never seen it used in the way it is at ATS, anywhere. Nor have I ever seen it used in the sense you claim it is used. All I've ever seen was the intelligence community use of the term, and firearms forensics usage. Having gotten curious because of your post, I looked it up, and found this:

Wiki disambiguation page on "blowback"

Now, admittedly, there are a lot more ways to use the term listed there than I was aware of. Having said that, I find neither the usage you claim, nor the misuse common to ATS posts using the term. As a community service, I think you should post a link to some sort of verification that you are not just making this alleged usage up as you go, and speaking from your fourth point of contact in the matter.

as a corrective measure, I will state plainly and categorically that it IS a term used in the Intelligence Community, and means there precisely what I said it means. It is not limited to the intel folks, but it IS specifically used by them, and people trying to look like they know what they are talking about in matters of international intrigue is where the ATS general misusage comes from.

Here's a verification link to get you started. There's more where that one came from if you really want to tussle over this. That one was just at the top of the list.

Your turn. Toss me a link and educate me.

ETA: I didn't read far enough. Slayer scooped me, because I was off chasing butterflies and unicorns.

I didn't ask about "this case" but oh well. Where is the proof that Iran is planning an attack? You have never laid out why Iran is a threat.

Of course I have…you refuse to acknowledge them.

There are fears there will soon be a second world missile crisis after it was reported that Iran, who are fierce enemies of Israel, are due to build a mid-range rocket base in Venezuela. In a dual partnership between Venezuela and Iran, the rocket bases will include measures to prevent air attacks on the South American country as well as commando and control stations.

The Iranian military will also build bunkers, barracks and oversea tower construction, as well as 20-metre deep rocket silos.

These preparations are all because Iran wants peaceful nuclear energy in IRAN, RIGHT?

I brought this up to you and you subsequently disappeared from that thread. The US may have grounds for sanctions, but, they are trying to back a wild animal into a corner. Why do they want this?

We are arguing in circles because YOU fail to acknowledge the facts, friend.

The report, sent Tuesday to 35 nations on the IAEA's board, says Iran, which signed the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), is violating the pact. Congressional leaders called for crippling sanctions on Iran's financial institutions and oil industry and nations that do business with it.

"The IAEA has turned on a big, red, blinking light and siren and they're rallying attention worldwide to the Iranian threat," said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the subcommittee on terrorism and non-proliferation of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Everything you have said is a regurgitation of MSM and the government propaganda. Why? Didn't they teach critical thinking in your command? I notice you used the word "think" Iran is dangerous...that's right, they are your own thoughts, not facts.

During my 8 years fighting your battles overseas in the Marine Corps I learned critical thinking. I was also taught critical thinking during my 4 years in college, and based on my knowledge of the subject you are exercising no ability!


www.usatoday.com...
www.dailymail.co.uk...

Originally posted by lacrimaererum
Not long now I suspect.

U.S. intelligence agencies believe that Iran is prepared to launch terrorist attacks inside the United States in response to perceived threats from America and its allies, the U.S. spy chief said Tuesday.

That plot “shows that some Iranian officials — probably including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei — have changed their calculus and are now more willing to conduct an attack in the United States in response to real or perceived U.S. actions that threaten the regime,” Clapper said in the testimony, which was submitted to the Senate Intelligence Committee in advance of a threat assessment hearing Tuesday. “We are also concerned about Iranian plotting against U.S. or allied interests overseas.”

Iran has blamed the United States and Israel for a series of mysterious developments, including the apparently targeted killing of yet another Iranian nuclear scientist in Tehran on Jan. 11, as well as a crippling cyber attack on the country’s largest uranium enrichment facility.

Another spoonful of fear being spoonfed to the American public. The story is clearly aimed at justifing an attack on Iran and getting some backing from the american public. Of course Iran has to be attacked if they are threatening attacks on US soil.

Will they move into Iran in the next couple of weeks or will a 'trigger' be needed first? What dreadful occurance would result in a merciless all out attack on Iran? It would have to be much bigger than 'shock and awe'.


please ues this link, if you try this, it should be the first story on that page;
www.washingtonpost.com...

edit on 31-1-2012 by lacrimaererum because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-1-2012 by lacrimaererum because: (no reason given)

I don't know about you but I'm not being 'spoonfed' anything.I for one,can think for myself and not for one second do I believe Iran is even capable of attacking the US.Let alone do I believe they are dumb enough to try it.Regardless of what many here believe we would CRUSH Iran in a war.If they want to be aggressive towards us,we have every right to defend ourselves.That's reality folks.FACT : Americans aren't as dumb as many here like to think.There's no reason to be attacking Iran.And also,Amercians do not want war with Iran.There's no reason for it. extra DIV