It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


WW3?Maybe not, but a Middle East War is INEVITABLE and might lead to WW3

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 05:54 AM
A World War in the current international situation have best chances to start in only few scenarios :

1) US and/or Israel attacks Iran
2) US/NATO attacks Syria
3) NK and SK will start a war
4) China attacks Taiwan

There are some other scenarios, like Russia attacks Georgia, or Argentina attacks Falkland, or India and Pakistan are at war, but there are fewer chances then the above 4 scenarios.

On the above 4, only first 2 have a high probabilty to happend : an attack against Iran or an attack against Syria.Or both in same time or shortly one after the other.
China and Russia have clearly stated that they won't stay aside if Iran or Syria are sttacked, and, since many people on ATS give to much credit to Russia and China, i will assume that Syria and Iran will NOT be attacked because if Russia and China will intervene, this will lead to WW3, and my point is to prove, LOGICALY, to anyone who (mindesly) hope that WW3 will not start, a Middle East War is inevitable.

Let's asume for a second that those who think that there will be no attack against Syria and / or Iran are right.
Let's also assume that Iran does not want nuclear weapons.

If the above 2 asumption are right, and no military attack is looming against Syria and / or Iran, that means that Iran will aquire nuclear knowledge but will NOT use it to manufacture nuclear weapons, even tho they will KNOW how to do it...just to appease the ones who firmly believe that Iran does not want nukes.

So, what will happend AFTER Iran have the capability to build nukes ?
1) they will NOT build nukes;
2) they will build nukes;
3) they SHARE the tech to build nukes with friendly nations;
4) they don't SHARE the tech to build nukes.

Let's apease those who think Iran will NOT build nukes or will NOT share the tech.However, Iran will know and will have the capability to build nukes or to share the tech.

How will OTHER nations in Middle East will react to this ?
This is ONLY one answer, and its based on LOGIC : everyone will WANT at least the tech to BUILD NUKES.I don't imply that they will build nukes, just that they will WANT to be able to do it.

Why is this logical ?
1) because Iran DID IT and NOBODY stoped them
2) If Iran CAN HAVE it , why don't WE CAN HAVE it also?

So, in time (1 to 20 years, depending on every country capabilities, Saudi Arabia being the first) there will be AT LEAST 5 countries in the Middle East CAPABLE to BUILD NUKES (but they won't do it, because they are "peace loving people" ) :
-Saudi Arabia

Remeber, all those countries (to apease the supporters of Iran or anyone's right to aquire nuclear tech) will have the CAPABILTY to make nuclear weapon, they will just DON'T do it.

However, here is WHY a MIDDLE EAST WAR is INEVITABLE :


How will Israel react to the above situation ? Will they accept a nuclear Iran (without nuclear wepoans ofc, they are "peace loving people") ? Will they accept the same for Saudi Arabia ? Or Egypt ? Or Syria ?
Well, to apease the Israeli haters and the Arab lover...NO, Israel WILL NEVER accept this, because, duh, they are "warmongers, terrorists, they kill children in Gaza, they are NOT peace loving people, they are CRAZY CRIMINALS".

When ALL current and former enemies of Israel will KNOW HOW TO BUILD and have the CAPABILITY TO BUILD nuclear weapons...WHAT EXACTLY STOP THEM TO MAKE THEIR DREAM COME TRUE : TO DESTROY ISRAEL, or, to apease the Arab lovers, WHAT EXACTLY STOPS ISRAEL TO ATTACK IRAN because otherwise everyone will be EMBOLDED by the lack of action, TO AQUIRE NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY and later the CAPABILITY TO BUILD NUKES?

So you see, a war in Middle East is INEVITABLE : either started by ISRAEL very very soon against IRAN, or later against SYRIA (after Syria gets the tech from Iran) or even later against EGYPT or JORDAN ?

The problem here is that Israel have to choose between :
1) attack Iran soon = Middle East War = potential WW3.
2) do not attack Iran, EVER, but attack Saudi Arabia or Syria or Egypt or Jordan, who will be emboldened by Iran succes in nuclear technology = Middle East War = potential WW3.
3) don't attack anyone, but live in a constant fear NOT only to be attacked by a nuclear Syria, Egypt, Iran, and / or Saudi Arabia but to be destroyed in a first nuclear strike (this is actually imposible, because Israel will never accept that, i just inserted it to apease some lunatics that believe Israel can accept this situation).

And for anyone who believe that there is the 4th option , one that EVERYONE in Middle East will have NUCLEAR technology AND LIVE IN PEACE WITH ISRAEL...pls stop dreaming and wake up.
Arabs are not attacking NOW Israel because ONE BIG REASON :
Israel have NUKES and the ARABS don't have nukes.

Maybe i am stupid, or i lack logic.I know that i don't know (and nobody here knows) what is going on inside CIA, Mossad, White House and how the future will REALLY BE.
All i now is that once Iran will be capable to build a nuke, everyone will want the same, and for Israel its game over , now or in 5 years or in 20.

Would Israel WAIT for this to happend? Will they TRUST that Iran, and later other ME countries will ONLY have peaceful, energy only nuclear programms and NEVER build nukes?

I don't think Israel will wait, and, the sooner they attack Iran (their BEST option) the better.Now, Israel have the edge...later, they will not.

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 06:52 AM

If Iran CAN HAVE it , why don't WE CAN HAVE it also?

If Israel has Nukes, why can't the rest of them have them? That is what the Arab world would be thinking. Israel's nukes havn't been inspected.

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 07:12 AM

Originally posted by daaskapital

If Iran CAN HAVE it , why don't WE CAN HAVE it also?

If Israel has Nukes, why can't the rest of them have them? That is what the Arab world would be thinking. Israel's nukes havn't been inspected.

Very true. Furthermore, what makes the US feel it has moral footing to judge other countries' responsibility with nuclear weapons? It is the ol' usa, the only nation in history to commit mass murder with these types of weapons not once but twice, and felt totally justified in these attrocities? The US and its handler, the warmongering Israel, should be at the top of the list for nuclear disarmament! Hypocrisy running rampant on ats as the drum wars beat. We've seen this song and dance before with wars of afghanistan, iraq, bombing of Libya, etc. Ultra nationalist shills using the same old tired routine. So transparent yet the mods dont give a care. Follow the ip of the warmongers and check if theres any .gov, fed or mossad ties at least imo.

Constant repugnant warmongering is getting old as hell!

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 08:26 AM
reply to post by daaskapital

Man, if you could only see beyond your hatred for Israel.

The point is NOT to see WHO started the nuclear arms race and WHO follwed it afterwards.The point is that muslim countries in the ME were and still are afraid of Israel attacking them if they try to make any moves toward nuclear technology and potential nuclear weapons (See 1981 attack on Iraq and 2007 attack on Syria).

The points is that IF (and i say IF because its still IF) Iran will aquire the knowhow and enough materials to build nuclear weapons, other nations in the ME will follow suit.

Also, don't give me the Pakistan nukes bull# (they are muslims, they hate Israel but they didn't attacked Israel).The diference between NUKES in Pakistan and NUKES in Syria is clear : the time required for a nuclear missile launched from Pakistan to hit Israel and the time required for a nuclear missile launched from Syria.

The Pakistani missiles (their long range one) will be shot down hundreds of miles before reaching Isarel (and will ALL be shot down, because Pak doesn't have many long range nuclear capable missiles.
The potential syrian missiles (in 5 or 10 or 20 years) needs MINUTES to hit Israel, and Syria can launch THOUSANDS of missile as decoys before launching the nuclear tipped ones.

Iran have NOW nuclear capable long range missiles, they just don't have the tech to miniaturize the payload and also not enough fissile material for a safe number of nukes (at least 5-6).
Even in this case Israel MIGHT accept a nuclear Iran and not attack it, based on the fact that they can shot down any potentil iranian missle (distance and flying time is the main factor, same as Pakistan, to shot down the missiles far away from Isarel).

So, yes, why we don't have nukes (insert any country here) if Israel have them?

Because if you are one of the present or former enemies of Isarel (Syria, Egypt, Jordan) you are TO CLOSE to Israel, you HATE Israel, and if you HIT FIRST, Israel LOSES.
Israel is TO SMALL to survive even 3 nuclear first hits (Tel-Aviv-Bersheeba area, Jerusalem area and Haifa area).

Now, don't get me wrong here.I DON'T GIVE A FLYING RAT who had first nuke and why (was US) and also WHY ISRAEL have nukes and why do they have them.

I know that IF a neighbour is close enough to Israel (Pakistan and Iran are not close) will want to have nukes (or Israel will beleive they want), Israel will consider to be in mortal danger, and whatever reason they give or not, they will attack that nation, and that attack will lead to a regional war and potentially to a world war.

It is NOT important who will strike first and why, the important thing is that SOMEONE will.And that SOMEONE, regardless the reason behind the action, is ISRAEL.

Hate it or love it, ISRAEL will strike first, for reasons i gave already inside my first post.
edit on 18-2-2012 by Recollector because: *

posted on Feb, 18 2012 @ 09:48 AM
This is an excellent thread to add some discussion to the world war III possibility and concerns for how such a world war will effect us.

While many are focused on Iran and some false flag event involving Iran, what many miss I feel is the more realistic scenario that never gets mentioned in these threads discussing so many viable military options and strategies.

The scenario that needs more discussion and more thought is the scenario that places limited and controlled American knowledge of what is happening globally into the hands of the media who report what propaganda they are told to report.

With such a global black out of what the world is really saying, we should pay attention to the Chinese and Russian threats made on foreign media channels because they offer the clearest picture of what is developing globally regarding a move to global world war in the Middle East.

With a national media not discussing the real threats to America, it is no surprise to me that no one is thinking what I am thinking, so I will share a few thoughts to add some food for thought to this discussion.

I feel our greatest danger is not some false flag event on say, the USS Enterprise by some Iran looking terrorist. I contend our greatest present danger is a surprise nuclear attack on America as an effort to prevent what most agree will happen in the Middle East if a world war breaks out.

I think that on a global basis, it would be more strategic and more viable to attack the USA and Israel in a major sudden attack long before the NWO interests in Iran can become the problem the world does not want.

A sudden attack on America long before some false flag can be attempted would have to be thermonuclear and many American cities would be lost in such a major and sudden attack.

Combine a sudden attack on America with a traitorous president willing to lose the world war and anyone with half a brain should be able to see that Americans greatest threat is a sudden attack from a combined Chinese and Russian military that is allowed to happen and succeed because our POTUS has no intentions of winning any world war. In fact, he could prevent the missile codes from being issued and could even order the military not to retaliate as part of Obama's part in the conspiracy.

In fact, should this scenario be more widely understood, I am certain those that understand what I am concerned about will be best to comprehend what I just stated.

While the media keeps us focusing and waiting for the Iran false flag event to happen, we better be concerned enough to see that it is a sudden attack on America that is our most dangerous threat and when you mix that with a president that cannot and will not obey or uphold the Constitution, it should be easy to see that if a global world war begins, it will most likely begin by preventing America and Israel along with UK interests from ever creating the Middle East dilemma that best serves the NWO agenda.

As food for thought, we should be anticipating a nuclear first strike on America, Israel and the UK and if that happens, dont expect our POTUS to do anything that would prevent the invading Army from getting what they want.

It is time to stop listening to the main stream media distraction and begin to see that it is not Iran that is first to be nuked or attacked in any scenario that looks to prevent a Middle East war.

I hope others begin to see that it is a sudden attack on America by foreign elements in cooperation with American politicians and evil interests that we need to be prepared for, because when it begins, if anyone really thinks that anyone is coming to help us, you better get to studying this scenario I bring up, because I feel you will find it to be more in tune with what the rest of the world already knows is the real solution to preventing a global world war and that would be to attack America. Israel and the UK first and with great deliberate intention to destroy what makes America and smug and arrogant to the world at large.

Stopping America and Israel along with the UK from ever getting their Middle East Zionist world war in the way the USA and Israel wants it, is seen as what would be really needed to prevent any Middle East war of conflict in the region from beginning in the first place..

The world knows this, China and Russia know this and this is why all the Iran focus as a trigger point to world war is in my opinion a clever deception of distraction to keep Americans from knowing that our leaders contrary to what Americans want, are rushing us into a war where it has already been determined, America loses the war and is finally shown by the world just how fed up the world is with American and Israeli actions around the world.

It is not an attack on Iran that will begin the world war, it will be the sudden surprises attack on America that begins the world war and that is what is not being discussed for obvious reasons.

Thanks for the thread.


log in