Iran trying to build nuclear missiles capable of hitting London, Cameron warns MPs

Originally posted by ufoorbhunter
Hey diplomats are saying Iran is testing nuclear triggers and cleaning up a secret site! Just heard this on Sky TV, the diplomats seen this on spy satellites, they speak on condition of annonymity. Is this gonna be the green light for Israel?

This is sounding grim , can you provide us with a link.
it also sounds contrived!!

reply to post by yorkshirelad


Yes, I understand that and see that it guarantees freedom of speech etc, not that we have many politicians who dare confront other MP's nowadays or challenge the status quo and TPTB, but neither should a Member be allowed to make unsubstantiated claims lacking any basis in truth or which are highly inaccurate.

As with most self-regulatory bodies it is very reluctant to chastise itself and any of it's Members.

The whole Parliamentary and electoral system and processes require urgent and radical reform delivering real power to the electorate, increased accountability of all elected officials and the abolition of the out-dated and restrictive self-serving party political system that is crippling this country.

Just because they keep strangling canaries and saying they came out of the coal mine doesn't make it true. Im sure Tehran really has a vested interest in seeing their entire country be reduced to radioactive glass after they hit London with a couple kiloton device and give them a proper raspberry before being consumed by nuclear fire.

Same goes for Israel, is our world truly so devoid of logic that this pandering is acceptable?

reply to post by Wide-Eyes

American people here often refer to China as a possible enemy in the future but surely if they were ever a threat then the US Gov would not allow them to buy all that debt.

Lol a little Naive. The US is indebted to China big time. But, as they have proven, they aren't against just bombing the crap out of people. In fact, all this "china is the new enemy" crap started right around the time that China started questioning the US's ability to actually pay off that debt.

They have more people, essentially slave labor, superior electronic warfare capabilities, and are in the midst of a massive military build up.

Now stop and think for a second. In, oh, the last 50 years, what series of events led to the biggest defense and military spending in US history?

The cold war. fought against communist russia, a nice easy to spot on the map enemy, conveniently in red.

The US has a history of rallying together against a common enemy, look at the weeks after 911, even if that was misdirected at the wrong people.

This is a chess match and you've got to think several moves ahead.

sure, China could cripple the US if they wanted to, but only if the US paid them. If the us declares them the next enemy, and wages war, all debts are written off, you lose freedoms AND give more and more of your GDP to defense and military budgets while infrastructure collapses.

reply to post by Wide-Eyes


Following the money huh? Well that's a good indication as to who might or might not be in the NWO, but in so far as China goes, the cards are still on the table.

George Soros claiming that China should now be the leader of the NWO instead of the USA:
thenewamerican.com...

Noam Chomsky's article on China and the NWO: www.inthesetimes.com...

Ofcourse you know who these people are, I personally take the words of Chomsky very seriously, since he has been following the US domination of the world for a while now, and if he thinks China could very well pose as the new leader of the NWO then you're not off in assuming they can be either.

But all of this suggests they haven't taken on that role yet, what is holding them is also, complete speculation.

Here we go, this is the prelude and stage-setting for the next wasteful, needless war of the 21st century!
I need to get the fck out EUSSR.
Oh and Cameron is just showing his true colours now, obeying his masters wishes.

Originally posted by Agent_USA_Supporter

Ah just like how Tony Blair said about Saddam?

Tony Blair: Saddam trying to build nuclear missiles capable of hitting London

Want me to find that link? history is repeating it self, Cameron is a liar like Harper, Bush and the Clintions.

edit on 7-3-2012 by Agent_USA_Supporter because: (no reason given)

Cameron, is definitely in with the other 99% politicians club. They're all liars.

Originally posted by EvanB

Pffffffttt

Can anyone say WMD? 45 minutes?? Deja-vu?

Will we have another sexed up dossier this time? Alongside murdered weapons inspectors like Dr David Kelly??

Or is this a case of the governments losing that much trust from the last lot of warmongers and liars that anything they say is now a case of crying wolf??

My own gut feeling is that Cameron is a liar...

Your thoughts...

www.dailymail.co .uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 7-3-2012 by EvanB because: (no reason given)

My gut says it's baseless rhetoric.

However, I think the more important point here is...SO WHAT? I see Iran having a nuke as making it less feasible for the US to engage in interventionist policy in the Middle East.

If we do not have interventionist policy in the Middle East...oil & gas gets really, really expensive.

If oil and gas gets really, really, expensive...I guess we will all just have to drive electric cars and put solar panels on our roofs. Financially it will hurt...BADLY...for a while. And then we can be off of the oil-crack.

HOW IS THAT A BAD THING FOR US??

The only loser I see are the oil companies.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters


So that to me begs the question, why did China take such a risk buying all this dodgy debt? Knowing that the US and/or NATO could declare war at any time?

Are you saying the chinese have been farming western trade to create an even more massive army than they have ever had before?

ETA: I agree that if western trade stopped with China they(China) would suffer huge losses in business contracts.

Originally posted by Krono
reply to post by nusnus

 

I think I know why. Bare with me on this.

As we know, our Russian "friends" are currently making money by selling arms to Syria and Iran, so could this be an attack on Russia's economy? If we (NATO) do go to war with both Iran AND Syria and remove the regimes then surely that would be an immediate halt to an trading between those two ME countries to Russia? Thus Russia losing out on some money.

Yes, Russia can make more money another way buuuut, we all know the cold war didn't really end, this would be a middle finger up to Russia.

Also another theory (Russia again), perhaps they want to see how Russia react? Perhaps America finally want rid off Russia? So invading the two countries would definately see how Russia react.

Failing that, its for the oil.

Good ideas all...but it's the oil. It's always, always, the oil.

Remember...it is absolutely impossible to "get rid" of Russia. It's too damn cold and big to sustain an invasion throughout the winter. The U.S. is resigned to pretty much just knowing that Russia will always "be there" barring full blown nuclear war.

Same with China. Geographically smaller, but the terrain is even MORE harsh and there is a billion of them. They ain't going anywhere either.

Originally posted by rigel4

Originally posted by EvanB
reply to post by nusnus

 

I know what you mean...

For example, all of the very huge austerity measures in Greece.. The people are suffering big time yet the Greek government has just bought 400 US M1 Abrams tanks!!!...

Falls of computer stool in utter disbelief..........wtf

It true!!

Linky

Submarines and warships too it seems...

Originally posted by wilburn
Daily Mail ---------------->>>>>>>>>>

The United States strategy is that London is collateral damage. Really, who cares or needs them?

Are you a strategist? Do you speak for everyone in the US.
Also could you please provide proof, that the United States, strategy, is that London is collateral damage.

geez everyone knows that's BS. why even bother talking about this.

Originally posted by wilburn

Originally posted by TrueInstinct
Despite all the tensions and allegations surrounding Iran, I never though we would get involved.

They're really going to have to start working the publics opinion in the media soon if they want backing for another war..

I've noticed the BBC has really been covering the Israel / Iran problems a lot more recently. I wouldn't be suprised if by the end of the year the average person will assume Iran needs to be dealt with soon.

edit on 7-3-2012 by TrueInstinct because: (no reason given)

Yes, UK does what we USA say, get over it. Plain and simple, whose the Mother Of the Colony now, eh?

You really are a troll with a hump on your shoulder.
You sir, clearly have issues. Stop living in the past and get over it.

Quick run to your bomb shelters.. not... WMDs? Call Colin Powell to the UN..

and let us not forget that Nukes are obsolete with the new techs that are now out... matter of fact.. US and Russia are decommish' faster than you can say boo because they can now be blown up at a distance by the bad guys..

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Wide-Eyes

 

American people here often refer to China as a possible enemy in the future but surely if they were ever a threat then the US Gov would not allow them to buy all that debt.

Lol a little Naive. The US is indebted to China big time. But, as they have proven, they aren't against just bombing the crap out of people. In fact, all this "china is the new enemy" crap started right around the time that China started questioning the US's ability to actually pay off that debt.

They have more people, essentially slave labor, superior electronic warfare capabilities, and are in the midst of a massive military build up.

Now stop and think for a second. In, oh, the last 50 years, what series of events led to the biggest defense and military spending in US history?

The cold war. fought against communist russia, a nice easy to spot on the map enemy, conveniently in red.

The US has a history of rallying together against a common enemy, look at the weeks after 911, even if that was misdirected at the wrong people.

This is a chess match and you've got to think several moves ahead.

sure, China could cripple the US if they wanted to, but only if the US paid them. If the us declares them the next enemy, and wages war, all debts are written off, you lose freedoms AND give more and more of your GDP to defense and military budgets while infrastructure collapses.

There's no reason for China and the US to wage war. It is much more profitable for all parties to keep on trading. China is a potential market of 1.3 billion people, why fight them when you can brainwash them to get mortgages and spend on luxury.

I wouldn't say China is in the midst of a massive buildup either, sure they're building their military but the spending levels are still at 1.4%-2.5% of GDP which is perfectly normal and less or at the same level as for example the UK or Taiwan. Consider that the US has a bigger economy and uses 3.6%-4% GDP for military and you can see how massive the difference is. If anything it's Japan who will soon start a "massive buildup" as they're only using about 1% of GDP so sooner or later they'll have to start thinking about scenarios where the US won't always be there to support them. But I'm sure that if and when Japan does that the doomsayers will take it as proof that US&Japan are planning to start a war.

About Cameron, I've said it before and I say it again: Remember Iraq.

Nobody paid attention to Libya when NATO bombed them, I should imagine a lot of people either don't care or just feel powerless.


People knew the Iraq war was a sham, that's why millions protested to stop it but the guv didn't listen. From the people I have talked to about this stuff, the general concensus is that the people in charge don't take any notice! So what is the point?

People have become very apathetic through a lack of value, many of us are feeling powerless.

you can never install a democracy on a tribal system of government. which is what the u.s. and the west will never understand.

they just don't believe in voting and handing over their lives to a stranger who lives a thousand miles away in a palace or mansion.

they prefer to keep power amongst themselves, to govern themselves in their tribal territory and settle their own disputes according to their customs and traditions.

even saddam hussein knew this. he was never a dictator. he respected the tribes and governed his sphere of influence while respecting tribal sovereignty.

And the UK dont have missiles capable of hitting Iran?!

OK you can stop already I have seen this movie before. I didnt like it the first time and I dont want to watch it again.

How do you keep unemployed men (ones trained to fight) off the streets and keep them so busy the dont conspire to over throw you? You send the off to war. Almost every overthrow that worked in histoy had some sort of backing from the military.

Them you unite the people against some common enemy ( that isnt you) next thing you know they forget about everything YOU did to them and slap a bumper sticker with a flag on their car.

God I hate this movie. Isnt there anything else on?