Obama to Iran and Israel: 'As President of the United States, I Don't Bluff'

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   
There's no "Iran vs. Israel war" there is "Russia+China vs.USA+Europe".

Don't fool yourself thinking that the point is Iran/Israel. The point here is WORLD DOMINANCE...




posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   
reply to post by storm2012
 
Bull cookies.
(sorry for the swear)

I still sand fast in my conviction that Obama will NOT attack Iran. It won't be popular. The soldiers are damned tired, America is damned tired. And Obama is a self-serving narcisist.



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

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
he may not bluff, but he sure as hell lies a lot.


"Yes we can"?

Reverse the audio of that and it comes out "thank you Satan".


i'm surprised it doesn't say "thank you Bernanke"



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Sure, sure...will you think the same after Israel bombs 2-3 iranian nuclear sites?
Iran will know 100% that USA was helping Israel bombing their sites.
After the bombings, along a retaliatory strike against Israel, Iran will also retaliate against US navy and bases in the region, because the Great Satan (USA) was working hand in hand with Little Satan (Israel) in bombing their nuclear sites.

What will Obama do AFTER US Navy ships and bases are attacked in retaliations from Iran?

I think you only ment US will NOT attack Iran FIRST...



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Recollector
reply to post by beezzer
 


Sure, sure...will you think the same after Israel bombs 2-3 iranian nuclear sites?
Iran will know 100% that USA was helping Israel bombing their sites.
After the bombings, along a retaliatory strike against Israel, Iran will also retaliate against US navy and bases in the region, because the Great Satan (USA) was working hand in hand with Little Satan (Israel) in bombing their nuclear sites.

What will Obama do AFTER US Navy ships and bases are attacked in retaliations from Iran?

I think you only ment US will NOT attack Iran FIRST...
Nope. The US will pressure Israel not to attack either.

It's just not going to happen.

(In my humble opinion)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Im really surprised no one has brought up this topic yet. The House of Rothschild.
Seems like things are right on schedule if you ask me. Here is a quote from an ATS post not too long ago called "Rothschild's want Iran's Banks"


Originally posted by ignant
As of the year 2000, there were seven countries without a Rothschild-owned Central Bank:
Afghanistan
Iraq
Sudan
Libya
Cuba
North Korea
Iran


Then.......... along came the convenient terror of 9-11 and soon Iraq and Afghanistan had been added to the list, leaving only five countries without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family:


Sudan
Libya
Cuba
North Korea
Iran


We all know how fast the Central Bank of Benghazi was set up.

The only countries left in 2011 without a Central Bank owned by the Rothschild Family are:

Cuba
North Korea
Iran


So honestly I feel, tension, or no tension between Israel and Iran, weapons of mass destruction or no weapons, doesn't really matter. It was going to happen regardless. Rothschild are playing both sides again, as usual, starting tensions and wars to better line their own pockets.

That's just my opinion on this.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scripter
reply to post by Azadok
 


Oh please, even if Iran was trying to obtain nuclear weapons(which they are not) this idea that as soon as they get one they will attack Israel and in turn be destroyed not long after is completely absurd and based on fantasy, not reality. Just like every other country it would be used as a deterrence. Oh and if you want to talk about hurting the Iranian people, bear in mind that the nuclear power project is extremely popular in Iran, sanctions being placed against them by the west is what hurts the average Iranian, never the people in power, just like half a million children that died in Iraq as a result of sanctions.

Iran has every right to nuclear power and the benefits it brings to a country.


I don't know, man.. martyring an entire country for Islam? It might be acceptable to them. Those nutters strap bombs to themselves and do the same on an individual basis, why not sacrifice a million or so people?



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Doesn't matter if Iran has nukes. Having nukes is like being the big kid on the block with the best toys and video games that money can buy, but being unable to play with them.



Yes but with the belief system of the powers that be in Iran they will no doubt use them . I mean any government that would march their own children thru mine fields to make way for their troops to fight the Iraqis , would have no problems setting off a nuke in another land or say port across the ocean.

Seriously they have a fountain that runs red like blood for remembrance of that war , sick. The people of Iran are the only ones that are suffering as it always is with these despotic rulers. I do not believe we should be the world police but I certainly believe Iran should not be allowed to enrich uranium. They are just to unstable at the decision making levels .


I agree with you here. I think the humane thing to do is take out the facility. Otherwise if Iran gets the nukes and uses them, the people will suffer because we will tun Iran to glass! The people who are like sheep there, will die because of the crazy ass people in charge don't put a value on human life. I wish the Iran lovers would pack up and move there if they love these policies so much. I'll bet they would find the majority of people there don't agree with the policies and they would be a minority again. I know there are a lot of people who don't like their policies on this site. They don't bother to answer the crazy claims of the Iran lovers because it's like trying to argue with a drunk. They just don't want to listen to reason. They deny that the Iranian President said things that he stated at the U.N. and then you have to waste your time looking it up for them and then never hear from them again when you do. I've seen it so many times on this site and it pisses me off. This country has turned me into a warmonger and that pisses me off too!



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

Originally posted by sykonot
reply to post by IanPaul
 


Im not sure how far this argument has gone in this or other threads but anyone with half a brain would know you cant get a four syllable phrase or word out of a three syllable phrase or word.

1. Yes 2. We 3. Can

1.Thank 2. You 3. Say 4. Ton

No matter which direction you play it at you cant add and subtract sounds from a playback.

Come on guys really?


Seriously.

In addition can we have one freaking thread where someone doesn't bring Satan into it? Ugh, as soon as I see that word it's like "oh, is that where we're going with this? I'm out" I'm going to start bringing Santa into every thread....



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
They are saying back " but you bluffed america with your b.s. to get elected,,we dont want you, we want to deal with that sensible doctor who packs crowds by the thousands,who your media pretends doesnt exist.he would be a REAL threat to big banks and more sensible to talk to, hes not a bully"



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
ya ya ya and the day goes on



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:17 PM
link   
What strikes me most as I read across the thread was how everyone seems to read something different from this. One focuses on the implied threat to Israel while another focuses on the not so implied threat to Iran. What blows me away here is that Obama pretty much said BOTH in the same statement. It's just mind boggling.

So, depending on conditions, we could see EITHER Israel OR Iran as the problem? Oh Geeze.... Obama needs to do something here and make a choice. Any choice. Throw a DART if need be, but just CHOOSE one side or the other.

I'd PREFER to be Neutral if he can't keep us on the Western side of the interests here (in every sense), but neutrality MEANS neutrality. It doesn't mean playing 'Arm the rebels' when no one is looking while selling top tech to Israel while everyone IS looking...and then actually trying to make nice to Iran for pressure on their programs.

It's like watching Obama lead us on a global game of Frogger, but the game isn't won when we get through traffic. He turns us around to cross again...and again...and again. We're bound to be squashed eventually.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 08:49 PM
link   
Processing of nuclear fuel

Iranian Ambitions?

Nuclear fuel cycle


Nuclear power relies on fissionable material that can sustain a chain reaction with neutrons. Examples of such materials include uranium and plutonium. Most nuclear reactors use a moderator to lower the kinetic energy of the neutrons and increase the probability that fission will occur. This allows reactors to use material with far lower concentration of fissile isotopes than nuclear weapons


Why go nuclear?

Iran has the capacity to produce nuclear fuel to export and be a productive member of the global community. It's just that the global community has no idea of the facts thanks to MSM, you know, those people who are charged to bring us the 'scoop'? Instead we get fed crap and left in the dark.

Personally, trying to boil water using the power of the sun and thinking that power can be harnessed is absolutely ludicrous to me.

It's funny how when two kids tire of calling each other names then it progresses into an act of aggression. Ten minutes later, they are shaking hands saying everything's cool. And whatever gets damaged in the scuffle is somehow acceptable because it was such a good fight to watch.

That is life. And nobody who matters gives a damn to make things right.


I'd rather be in the stone age



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by thecrippler
There's no "Iran vs. Israel war" there is "Russia+China vs.USA+Europe".

Don't fool yourself thinking that the point is Iran/Israel. The point here is WORLD DOMINANCE...



i agree



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by storm2012
 
Bull cookies.
(sorry for the swear)

I still sand fast in my conviction that Obama will NOT attack Iran. It won't be popular. The soldiers are damned tired, America is damned tired. And Obama is a self-serving narcisist.


Check out the polls....70% of Americans support an attack on Iran. Their propaganda campaign worked flawlessly. The best propaganda campaign since WWI. They've managed to convince the majority that another war is necessary...even with Iraq and Afghanistan still in the rear view mirror, heck you can still see parts of it in the front _
Who says a war means we send in the soldiers? Nah, I just see an exponentially greater series of events similar to Libya, i.e. drone attacks but in much greater force. both sides of the political spectrum supported them in Libya. And both sides will support them in Iran. And just like in Libya, there's going to be troops in Iran, I just doubt many American ones. You know, use the American planes, and the Israeli foot soldiers. A modern day blitzkrieg. But when you're dealing with nuclear reactors, somethings bound to go drastically wrong.

However, I don't believe any of this will happen. There are forces at work that won't allow it.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Azadok

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
Doesn't matter if Iran has nukes. Having nukes is like being the big kid on the block with the best toys and video games that money can buy, but being unable to play with them.



Yes but with the belief system of the powers that be in Iran they will no doubt use them . I mean any government that would march their own children thru mine fields to make way for their troops to fight the Iraqis , would have no problems setting off a nuke in another land or say port across the ocean.

Seriously they have a fountain that runs red like blood for remembrance of that war , sick. The people of Iran are the only ones that are suffering as it always is with these despotic rulers. I do not believe we should be the world police but I certainly believe Iran should not be allowed to enrich uranium. They are just to unstable at the decision making levels .


Rofl. The Soviet Union had thousands of nukes. At the peak of it's power the Soviet Union was hundreds of times stronger than Iran currently is. The Soviet Union had many inhumane practices, a strict one party system and it didn't have a problem using force when people tried to overthrow the commies. Yet it never used nukes as an offensive weapon. The only country that has done that is still the United States of America.

All you ignorant warmongers are like rabid dogs.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:04 AM
link   
The time has come.

Iran has gone too far in calling for death and destruction to Israel and the West. Iran is a country with so much oil it does not need nuclear technology. Yet it is developing it to what end? Simultaneously its leader publicly calls for the death and destruction of others. Connect the dots. The nuclear program was never intended to for energy reasons.

Iran (not its people, but its leaders) is like a child with a flamethrower in a library.

How long do you wait to remove dangerous toys from bloodthirsty, child-like madmen?



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Malynn
 


Wow. FREAKING FANTASTIC avatar.

Anyway, uh-hm, I think the Iranian leadership has shown their cards. It's time to up the ante. Either back down or... And the bad part is that it may already be too late to back down. Iran might be "all in" and unwilling to back away, tuck tail and submit to inspections. Heck, it's probably too late for inspections, for that scenario has gone on for too long. Sanctions have little to no effect. Diplomacy has had little or no effect.

The one good thing I can say about the Iranian president is that he called for a re-investigation of 9-11. Only, being who he is, he actually hurt the Truth movement concerning 9-11 by calling for this. Because of him, people who want the truth about 9-11 are n



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Malynn
 


Wow. FREAKING FANTASTIC avatar.

Anyway, uh-hm, I think the Iranian leadership has shown their cards. It's time to up the ante. Either back down or... And the bad part is that it may already be too late to back down. Iran might be "all in" and unwilling to back away, tuck tail and submit to inspections. Heck, it's probably too late for inspections, for that scenario has gone on for too long. Sanctions have little to no effect. Diplomacy has had little or no effect.

The one good thing I can say about the Iranian president is that he called for a re-investigation of 9-11. Only, being who he is, he actually hurt the Truth movement concerning 9-11 by calling for this. Because of him, people who want the truth about 9-11 are now wrongly connected with him.
edit on 3-3-2012 by GhostLancer because: Typo



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by GhostLancer
The time has come.

Iran has gone too far in calling for death and destruction to Israel and the West. Iran is a country with so much oil it does not need nuclear technology. Yet it is developing it to what end? Simultaneously its leader publicly calls for the death and destruction of others. Connect the dots. The nuclear program was never intended to for energy reasons.

Iran (not its people, but its leaders) is like a child with a flamethrower in a library.

How long do you wait to remove dangerous toys from bloodthirsty, child-like madmen?


Pure warmongering. Iran is a growing country and is heavily dependent on energy exports for income. Nuclear energy provides a stable source of energy so it makes economical sense to feed the growing demand by going nuclear while profiting from oil&gas exports.




How long do you wait to remove dangerous toys from bloodthirsty, child-like madmen?


Read your own post again. To me it seems like you aren't much better than those bloodthirsty, child-like madmen you so despise.





top topics
 
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join