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.

 

Let's Cut to the Chase - Iran Must Be Stopped

page: 68
51
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Currently, The IAEA total access to facilities is a bit of a problem when the crooked country next door wants to blow up your uranium enrichment plant, as showing the IAEA some of the underground areas exposes any weakness to an attack, as the IAEA will tell the full details of the underground plant's vulnerabilty. Being totally open, at this point in time, would not be wise for Iran, as the IAEA isn't confidential on facity risk issues. Iran isn't going to open the door for a facilty attack, as they built them underground to avoid an Israeli attack.



ANY excuse is better than NO excuse, right?

If living by the terms of your agreements is a "problem", then you should withdraw from the agreement, rather than simply ignoring and breaking it.

What sot of "weakness" in these underground facilities are you referring to? Weren't they built deep underground specifically to avoid "weakness"? Are you also accusing IAEA inspectors of being military spies now, to ferret out military "weaknesses" and report on them?

It's a weak excuse, but ANY excuse is better than NO excuse, eh?

Regarding your argument against "ability". In Common Law, there are 3 basic elements to any crime: 1)ability, 2) intent, and 3) opportunity. we - both sides here - agree that they have are developing the "ability", per your own post. They have repeatedly stated their intent, the evidence for which is salted throughout this thread, in numerous links. The single lacking element so far is opportunity, because they have not yet construct a nuclear bomb.

International Law is simpler to demonstrate an accomplished violation of. 1) the NPT requires signatories to open facilities for inspection, and 2) Iran has refused to permit said inspections. They should either facilitate the inspections or pull out of the treaty if they expect to escape penalties for violation of it, since they are demonstrably in violation, per your own post.

It's hard to believe that Korea under Kim Jong Il had more honor than Iran under the ayatollahs, but it did - Korea pulled out of the NPT to build their bomb rather than allow inspections. Having less integrity than either Kim Jong Il or your fabled Zionist boogey men really tells me all I need to know aboiut the Mad Mullahs.




posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


Lol... as I said earlier when describing people like you...

Its always someone elses fault. Even funnier is your ability to invoke Israel without stating the name Israel. The problem is Iran and their continual excuses as to why they need this or that.

If Iran would quit threatening to wipe Israel off the map...
If Iran would quit promising all out support for any parties to attack Israel...
If Iran would comply with their treaty obligations...

Your excuses are just that, and are based on Iranian actions, not Israeli.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

lacking element so far is opportunity, because they have not yet construct a nuclear bomb.




There we have it------in your own words----they have not construct a nuclear bomb.

And the US tells they ended the nuclear bomb project years ago. They say nuclear bombs are evil and they don't want one.

Thus, Iran can make use of nuclear for power and peace.


For now, the methods are sanctions and Iran will allow inspection in time, perhaps when Israel ends wanting to bomb Iran like they have done to others too many times. That won't work this time.


But, Zionists are going to be very tempted to bomb Iran-----then the world will deal with Israels war crimes. imho

There will come a regime change in Israel----if only because the Book of Revelations tells it will come-----it speaks to the long term need of the Zionists to end the Babylon Talmud Satan methods. Most of the Christians are for speeding up the second coming by letting Israel become so extreme.

The US and the Christians don't really need Satan as a partner. imho



edit on 2-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Ban the Israeli Bomb



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

Originally posted by nenothtu

lacking element so far is opportunity, because they have not yet construct a nuclear bomb.




There we have it------in your own words----they have not construct a nuclear bomb.


Nor have I ever said they do have one. If they had one, we would not be having this discussion. Have you a point to make?



And the US tells they ended the nuclear bomb project years ago. They say nuclear bombs are evil and they don't want one.


No, they don't - however much you wish they did.



Thus, Iran can make use of nuclear for power and peace.


Within treaty limits, yes. Is there any danger they will be in compliance any time soon?

Refusal to comply with the treaty terms which they promised to abide by is the issue here, not whether or not there is a nuke in every Iranian basement. If they'll lie about that compliance, they'll lie about other things, too. The aggregate makes them untrustworthy, dishonorable, and in serious need of monitoring.






edit on 2012/3/2 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


If Iran would quit threatening to wipe Israel off the map...
If Iran would quit promising all out support for any parties to attack Israel...
If Iran would comply with their treaty obligations...




The language of Iran's President was mistranslated and the real translation mentioned earlier. Israel does need a regime change, even the Book of Revelations is all about that issue.

What Iran's religious leaders speak about isn't necessarily the Govt's position. If anything the Islamic Messiah and the Christian Messiah return sounds like the same thing.

Iran will get around to allowing inspections, for now they want to bait Israel into attacking Iran. Then they get the position advantage of claiming war crimes, and they can declair war on Israel, along with all of Islam.


America needs to stand clear of the Iran baiting games of the extremist Israel. Let the Israelis only bomb Iran. The rest gets fixed quickly.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Nor have I ever said they do have one. If they had one, we would not be having this discussion. Have you a point to make?

No, they don't - however much you wish they did.

Within treaty limits, yes. Is there any danger they will be in compliance any time soon?



In the Middle East scheme of things, Isreal is the militant mad dog that attacks anything and everything using the pre-emptive strike excuse.

Israel is the one most given to telling lies on nuclear issues, not Iran. Iran is likely running in full compliance and not after any atomic bombs.

The Zionist religion promotes telling lies and faking others out, and the Islamic is more truthful.

Iran appears to want to invite Israel for their typical pre-emtive strike paranoia. Then they can decair open war on Israel and they'll show the IAEA there was no bomb projects in Iran. Leaving Israel hit with International War Crimes issues and the dismantlement of Israel's political system and taking away their weapons. imho


Let Israel do one of their preemptive strike things and it will all be over in short time. America needs to stand clear. imho


If Israel tries any faked up false flag games on the US to attempt to drag the US into this Iran war, one can be assured it will be America's Nukes that will burn Israel off the face of the planet. Any Israeli nuclear theats against Europe, Russia, or China will get Israel burned off the planet.




edit on 2-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: Preemptive strikes and the extremists



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


No problem. Here you go.

The link below is to the official 1969 CIA report to the Secretary of State which clearly and plainly states that Israel's "official" position that it does not have nuclear weapons is almost certainly a lie and recommending that failing an Arab-Israeli peace agreement the only option which appears viable option for the peace in the Middle East is for the U.S. to withdraw any and all support and concern for Israel's security so that they begin behaving themselves.

....THAT WAS 43 YEARS AGO!!!

www.gwu.edu...

Let me guess... you're going to tell me that CIA agent Joseph Sisco was really just an "Anti-Semite" who was on Iran's payroll or some sort of similar gibberish whilst continually asking everyone for sources and proof...only to summarily disregard it when it's provided.

How close am I?



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


A simple "no, I'm incapable of making myself clear" would have sufficed, rather than launching into another incomprehensible diatribe of gibberish invoking ancient Sumerian gods.



Work on your reading comprehension skills. I understood exactly what MagnumOpus said, and, more importantly, how it directly pertained to the topic at hand.

Also...catch up on your History. The Babylonians were not Sumerian. The two civilizations were separated by AT LEAST 2500 YEARS...perhaps even longer.

No wonder you are so confused. Chronologically speaking, that's like trying lumping the Mayan Empire in with 1950's America and wondering why Elvis Presley wasn't depicted at Teotihuacan when he was clearly such a big deal just a little to the North.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by MagnumOpus

In the Middle East scheme of things, Isreal is the militant mad dog that attacks anything and everything using the pre-emptive strike excuse.


You claim Israel has nukes already. You claim "Isreal is the militant mad dog that attacks anything and everything using the pre-emptive strike excuse". Why then, isn't Tehran already a glow in the dark crater-shaped search light?



Israel is the one most given to telling lies on nuclear issues, not Iran. Iran is likely running in full compliance and not after any atomic bombs.


"Likely"... and you can somehow say that with a straight face after being show, repeatedly, where it is documented that they are NOT in compliance?



The Zionist religion promotes telling lies and faking others out, and the Islamic is more truthful.


I've never been a "zionist", nor have I ever met one, so I know nothing of their religion. I WAS a muslim, however, and can tell you first hand that this statement as far as Islam is concerned is itself either a lie or very, very mistaken and misguided.



Iran appears to want to invite Israel for their typical pre-emtive strike paranoia. Then they can decair open war on Israel and they'll show the IAEA there was no bomb projects in Iran. Leaving Israel hit with International War Crimes issues and the dismantlement of Israel's political system and taking away their weapons. imho


One can only hope that is their strategy, for it is a very flawed one. They will get no sympathy by opening up for inspection AFTER an attack when they could have opened BEFORE one and prevented it - IF they are really on the up and up. That amounts to provocation of war. One cannot pick a fight and them use "butbutbut they jumped on me and I had to defend myself!" as a defense. Initiating a fight obviates the self-defense argument.

The rest of you post had nothing to do with the topic, and was merely vitriol and wishful thinking directed against Israel.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Learn Arabic and keep towing their rope, and maybe they'll kill you last.



...says the guy whose avatar is a stylized Hospitaller.

You are aware that the REAL Hospitaller's believed that a divinely inspired and prophetic goose (Yes...a goose. That's not a typo) was responsible for leading the peasant rabble and Peter the Hermit to Constantinople, correct?
Dead serious. The first Crusade started in Flanders, France when the peasants "jumped the gun" and started following The Holy Goose to their eternal salvation ahead of Pope Urban II's organized military campaign.

Furthermore...you are aware that those very same Hospitallers were responsible for the beheading of hundreds of thousands of unarmed women, children, and the elderly in the name of their God and the aforementioned Divine Goose...correct?

Sorry bud...but you sort of lose any type of real credibility on all things Middle East when you show up dressed in a crusading knights halloween costume.


Get over it. It's an avatar, not a photograph. I'm not really 900 years old, nor do I habitually dress in soup cans.

Have you got anything to address the points I've made, or is the best you have a deflectionary assault on a drawing?

Nice try, no cigar.



To clarify...I was using a literary device called sarcasm. Many times this is employed by the wittier of our species in order to illustrate particular points and is sometimes used in conjunction with satire and irony...but not always.
However, an astute reader who understands the deeper meanings and connotations of words delivered in context will note that you have more or less proved my point.

Much like the Hospitaller of old, you fail apply the critical thinking skills necessary to realize that you are ALSO following a Divinely Inspired Goose, of sorts. While I did not spell it out, or make a finger painting previously...perhaps I should point out that it was from Peter The Hermit's magical goose that the colloquial phrase "wild goose chase" has been handed down to us today.

Much like the common semi-literate medieval "holy" warrior you are able to process information well enough to be vocationally sound...but you seem unable to draw a valid conclusion. The term "valid conclusion" being in reference to a conclusion which does not contain any formal Logical Fallacies, given that such conclusions are the very basis of human civilization and are routinely employed by High School Forensics teams nationwide.

The only truly sad part is that you will not be able to share the same chuckle with me over your response to the observation about your avatar until you read and understand many thousands of pages of Classical Philosophy as well as develop a knowledge of medieval history in general...but especially the history of the Crusades. Preferably from primary documents so that you are able to see the Errors of Logic in your thinking without being able to dismiss it away as being part of a modern political ideology that you may not agree with.

If you would like a reading list, I will be happy to get you started.

I promise you will never see the world around in the same manner again.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Look who's talking.

You asked for sources and proof of why people keep saying your understanding of Iran, Israel, The Middle East, and the validity of invading Iran are patently and demonstrably inaccurate. I've given those to you two or three times now and you simply bury your head in the sand and don't even acknowledge them.

I know it's probably shocking to find out that Texas is still sentencing the mentally retarded and children to death as well as the fact that the CIA reported that Israel either had nukes or would have nukes in the imminent future back when Ed Sullivan was still on TV.

For the record...it's totally cool to go "Wow...I did not know that. Perhaps I should look into this a bit more", rather than just go "double-down" on the willful ignorance in holding with the idea that Iranians wear black cowboy hats and the Israelis and Americans wear white cowboy hats.

It just isn't true.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


A simple "no, I'm incapable of making myself clear" would have sufficed, rather than launching into another incomprehensible diatribe of gibberish invoking ancient Sumerian gods.



Work on your reading comprehension skills. I understood exactly what MagnumOpus said, and, more importantly, how it directly pertained to the topic at hand.


No thanks, I'm good. If he can't express himself clearly, he can't. It's not my job to puzzle my way through it, deciphering as I go.



Also...catch up on your History. The Babylonians were not Sumerian. The two civilizations were separated by AT LEAST 2500 YEARS...perhaps even longer.


I suggest you brush up on YOUR history. Babylonia was an outgrowth of Sumeria around 2200 BC, complete with a co-opt of all the older Sumerian gods. "Tammuz" is not Babylonian, it is a Hebrew designation for Sumerian Dumuzi, a shepherd god and the consort of Innana, who herself was later known as "Ishtar".

I see you completely missed the reference to "The Bull of Heaven" as well, yet I'm the one who needs to "brush up"




No wonder you are so confused. Chronologically speaking, that's like trying lumping the Mayan Empire in with 1950's America and wondering why Elvis Presley wasn't depicted at Teotihuacan when he was clearly such a big deal just a little to the North.


Not even close. No cookie for you.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by milominderbinder
 


Attempt at an insulting deflection accepted, and parried, with this post, which addresses the whole of the relevance of it, as well as all of the salient points within it..





edit on 2012/3/2 by nenothtu because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 





In the Middle East scheme of things, Isreal is the militant mad dog that attacks anything and everything using the pre-emptive strike excuse.

actually all we have ever seen
Israel do is protect its borders.

I hear Iran needs Nuclear Scientists
providing you have your own transportation
edit on 2-3-2012 by rebellender because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by nenothtu
 


Please at least have your avatar change it's shirt before I take you seriously



Are you kidding? It's recycled hemp - how much more PC or green can he get? It's for the environment - and it's for the children!



Israel should sign it, if Iran had 300 nukes, the world would be pissed off.


"Should"?

"SHOULD"?

I think a lot of things "should" happen that aren't going to. I think the Ayatollahs in Iran "should" resign first thing tomorrow morning and step down to let the people rule. What I think "should" happen will in no way affect what actually does, or the right or wrong of what actually does.



You people are dawning in your illusion and be safe there.

But don't bother liberating other nations.

And you think that people in Iran don't back Iranian religious government.

That is just your governmental tv tells you.

My advice : don't bother comping to these sites to use your head.

Just turn on the tv and let it flow through your brain.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by rebellender
 


Actually the truth is Israel blew up Iraq's nuclear reactor. That wasn't in Israel, althought they want that area some day. Then Israel jumped the Egyptian border in the Six Day war to kill a bunch of Egyptians, using that preemptive strike game.

Then the Israel Bomb needs desided to kill JFK, another pre-emptive strike.

And the list of Israeli back stabbing the US runs very long. The US doesn't need treacherous Israel.


Ancient History made simple----Nimrod, Semiramus, and Tammuz of Babylon

www.youtube.com...


edit on 2-3-2012 by MagnumOpus because: add tube link



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by MagnumOpus
reply to post by rebellender
 

Then the Israel Bomb needs desided to kill JFK, another pre-emptive strike.


Care to comment on this one?
I can SEE how YOU would say such hearsay but tell me more about this one



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by rebellender

Care to comment on this one?
I can SEE how YOU would say such hearsay but tell me more about this one


In the time of the JFK assassination, Ben Gurion and JFK were in a huge battle to keep Israel from getting the bomb. Most of those phone calls between JFK and Ben Gurion are still classified, as it shows up too much of the Zionists trying to control JFK.

Israel had a huge helper named Louis Bloomfield, a raging Zionist that started the Jewish Army in Palestine. Bloomfield had extensive connections with the nuclear establishment due to his associations with DISC, as put in place by JE Hoover. Bloomfield was also a principle controller for PERMINDEX, which is the European version of the Industrial CIA like a NAZI NW-7 group.

Bloomfield via PERMINDEX connections with HL Hunt in Dallas were the central group connected with killing JFK, and they employed both Hoover and LBJ to work the extensive cover up. Persons like Allan Dulles were also very close with PERMINDEX.

The reason Bloomfield hated JFK was over this JFK theme to keep Israel from getting the nuclear bomb, so that JFK and the US would not appear to be helping a US associated country set up bombs in Russia's back door as had happened with Turkey and the US Nuclear Missles there that kicked off the Cuban Missle crisis.

Israels want of nuclear weapons was a principle part of the killing of JFK, as LBJ would cast a blind eye to the Zionist's nuclear proliferation issues, even to the point of stealing nuclear weapons material from NUMEC at Apollo, Pa.

It has been well presented there is a huge association of Israel foreign agents involved in killing JFK.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by milominderbinder

Originally posted by nenothtu
reply to post by MagnumOpus
 


A simple "no, I'm incapable of making myself clear" would have sufficed, rather than launching into another incomprehensible diatribe of gibberish invoking ancient Sumerian gods.



Work on your reading comprehension skills. I understood exactly what MagnumOpus said, and, more importantly, how it directly pertained to the topic at hand.


No thanks, I'm good. If he can't express himself clearly, he can't. It's not my job to puzzle my way through it, deciphering as I go.



Also...catch up on your History. The Babylonians were not Sumerian. The two civilizations were separated by AT LEAST 2500 YEARS...perhaps even longer.


I suggest you brush up on YOUR history. Babylonia was an outgrowth of Sumeria around 2200 BC, complete with a co-opt of all the older Sumerian gods. "Tammuz" is not Babylonian, it is a Hebrew designation for Sumerian Dumuzi, a shepherd god and the consort of Innana, who herself was later known as "Ishtar".

I see you completely missed the reference to "The Bull of Heaven" as well, yet I'm the one who needs to "brush up"




No wonder you are so confused. Chronologically speaking, that's like trying lumping the Mayan Empire in with 1950's America and wondering why Elvis Presley wasn't depicted at Teotihuacan when he was clearly such a big deal just a little to the North.


Not even close. No cookie for you


...so your rebuttal is to "disagree" with me by confirming everything I just pointed out? You must watch a lot of Bill O'Reilly.

Yes...the Babylonians were an outgrowth out of Sumeria about 2500 yrs after Sumeria first appeared on the scene. Much in the same way that that Mexico and the American Southwest can trace a fairly strong genetic lineage back to the Mayans...as well as a good deal of cultural heritage such as The Day of The Dead...which in turn provided inspiration for the Grateful Dead. Similarly, the religious practices of Sumerians and the Babylonians share about the same amount of similarities as does the original Mayan religious ceremonies and a rock concert.

Depending upon which one you go to...you might see a lot of very similar iconography, symbolism, linguistics, and even an artistic lineage. However, that is where the similarity ends...right up on the surface and exterior glazing.

Once again. You have done a better job illustrating my point than I could ever have hoped for. Although, I would imagine that you probably still don't realize it.

Oh...by the way. If other people can understand a giving written work and you can't it simply cannot be that they "aren't making themselves clear". If they weren't making themselves clear...then NOBODY would be able to understand them...or at the very least there would be wildly different interpretations of what is being stated as the vernacular is somehow ambiguous.

If there are only some people who think the writing "isn't clear" and others who think the message is as self-evident as a "stop" sign, it would appear that the primary difference in interpretation is nothing other than the individuals skill at comprehending what they read.

...and we come full circle.

Again....I'm totally cool with helping you out if you want help. No worries. Everybody has to start somewhere. However, something tells me that the response I will receive will be sound more like "I'm right and your wrong 'cuz I said so. Yippee for Israel!!"

Hopefully I'm wrong...time will tell, I suppose.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by hmdphantom

You people are dawning in your illusion and be safe there.

But don't bother liberating other nations.


Actually, I'm with you on the liberating other nations". that's not our job, nor is it possible. The only way people will ever be free is by liberating themselves. No one else CAN do it for them - we can remove all impediments, and still, if they don't seize liberty for themselves, they will NEVER have it. No cage of iron is as strong as the prison a man makes for himself in his own mind. Therefore, it's a waste of out time, money, and resources to go in with the intent of liberating anyone.

I don't want to "liberate" Iran, nor do I think such a thing is even possible.



And you think that people in Iran don't back Iranian religious government.

That is just your governmental tv tells you.


What I think is irrelevant. I'm not owner or operator of Iran, so they can look to their government themselves. It's not my job to change it for them, nor is it my job to decide for them what they like in a government. My opinion means NOTHING in internal Iranian politics.

Just a word to the wise - and you ARE fairly wise - you may be hurting your case against war if you ally the civilian population too closely with the government. Our beef is not with the people, it's with the government, a .thoroughly evil regime. Now, internally, that's for Iranians to do something about if they so desire, but externally it becomes a problem for the rest of the planet If a majority of the people support that evil regime, then there will be a lot less of feeling bad about bombing the crap out of Iran if their pursuit of external matters gets too disagreeable.

Honestly, it seems that everyone is expecting some kind of ground invasion. That will never happen. If anything is done at all, it will be overflights and large clouds of debris floating skyward. It's possible that the generals may lose their ever lovin' minds and try a ground invasion - look at how they've mismanaged Afghanistan - but if they do, you'll not have to worry about me or my son coming to Iran. I'll shoot my own kid in the foot sure as you're born to keep him out of such foolishness. Too many good men have been killed through hesitation, and others psychologically screwed for life, by being sent against child soldiers, and Iran has a history of using such.

I'd rather just bomb the crap out of them if it comes to that, and let them clean up their own mess.




top topics



 
51
<< 65  66  67    69  70  71 >>

log in

join