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.

 

A vote for Romney is a vote for war

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 01:55 PM
link   
The US elections this year stand to decide whether America enters into yet another war. This should be one of the main concerns American voters have when it comes to casting their vote-

Do you vote one way and maintain the current policy of trying to solve the Iran issue diplomatically, or do you vote another way and knowingly secure another military conflict?

Consider some facts from the Iraq war-

- Thousands of American soldiers dead

- A hundred thousand + Iraqi civilians dead

- An official cost of $800 billion to the tax payer, with some estimates at $3 trillion

Can America afford another war, one that could drag other nations, including Russia, into a much larger conflict? This is an important question to consider for voters, because one of the main candidates, currently 7/4 and 2nd favourite to win the election, is 100% behind a military option.

That candidate is Mitt Romney.

To vote for Romney, is to knowingly vote for another war. If he gets into office, there is no question he will fully support a military option against Iran.

You may think this doesn’t affect you, but it will. Oil transportation around the world would fall into chaos if an Iran conflict began, oil prices would sky rocket. If Russia got involved to help Iran then it could potentially escalate into a much larger conflict.

Both spiritually and financially, America can not afford this war.

Obama, for all his faults, is trying his best to stop this war from happening. He is holding Israel back, of all the leaders around the world, he is one of a small minority that is not afraid to point out the dangers of conflict with Iran-



He is pointing out the costs of war, on the lives of the soldiers, on the economy etc. He is warning against war in Iran. For this, he should be applauded.

Obama is thinking for himself and telling the truth. Some may argue that it is a first, but at least he has took this step.

Let’s look at Romney’s Iran policy-



He is just parroting what his puppet masters tell him to say. He is George W Bush in disguise, he doesn’t think for himself. Read any pro war foreign policy analyst talking of the Iran military option, and Romney is just repeating everything they say.



Romney is a scary candidate, he is a complete puppet of the Israeli lobby, to vote for him would literally, be a knowing vote for war with Iran, that would come at great cost to not just the people of Iran, but potentially all of mankind.

American voters, for the first time in a long time, you have the choice, an actual choice to try and prevent this war from happening. At least try and prevent it by not voting for Romney. Events may fall that ‘force’ Obama into action, but at least by not voting for Romney you will have tried to avoid this war.

If my message has failed to reach you thus far, here is a link to Romney’s foreign policy advisory team-

www.mittromney.com...

It is a ‘who’s who’ of pro Israel, war mongering neocons-

Michael Chertoff- dual Israeli citizen at the forefront of demonising Iran whilst simultaneously advocating the loss of privacy rights of Americans for ‘national security’.

Dov Zakheim- part of the Project for the New American Century and strong advocate for the Iraq war.

Rober Kagan- founder of the neocon PNAC, responsible for creating the agenda of regime change for the middle east in the 21st century.

Dan Senor- influential in Romney’s recent visit to Israel, also advocator in Romney’s stance on supporting an attack by Israel.

Michael Hayden- former head of CIA, Chertoff Group member and now forming Romney’s foreign policy, hard to believe this is the real world sometimes! Hayden is a main advocate in the idea that diplomacy will not work with Iran, as Tehran refuses to cooperate.

Richard Williamson- allow me to quote- "When Mitt Romney is president, Iran will understand that there is a new sheriff in town and that his position is that the only thing worse than the U.S. using force would be for Iran to have nuclear weapons”.

The people forming Romney’s foreign policy team is terrifying to say the least. It should not be any clearer to the people of the United States of America that if they vote for Romney, they are voting for another costly war.

Americans, do not vote for war.




posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:07 PM
link   
No doubt, you are correct.

However, a vote for Obama is also a vote for war. Go figure.

The PTB do not dare allow us to vote for peace.
edit on 21-8-2012 by Lazarus Short because: lah-de-dah



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


I don't know, I actually think Obama is standing up to them, the video I linked may well be evidence of that. I have a feeling his efforts are futile, but give him credit IMO.

It is clear what the neocons and Israeli lobby want, yet Obama has stood firm in saying diplomacy can work and that a military option would have terrible consequences. I can't comment on Obama in other areas, but for this, I applaud him, it takes some balls for a US president to stand up to the Israeli lobby!


edit on 21-8-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


I don't know, I actually think Obama is standing up to them, the video I linked may well be evidence of that. I have a feeling his efforts are futile, but give him credit IMO.

It is clear what the neocons and Israeli lobby want, yet Obama has stood firm in saying diplomacy can work and that a military option would have terrible consequences. I can't comment on Obama in other areas, but for this, I applaud him, it takes some balls for a US president to stand up to the Israeli lobby!


edit on 21-8-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)


Wow, you serious? Not only has Obama continued the existing wars but he started new ones!



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jjkenobi

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


I don't know, I actually think Obama is standing up to them, the video I linked may well be evidence of that. I have a feeling his efforts are futile, but give him credit IMO.

It is clear what the neocons and Israeli lobby want, yet Obama has stood firm in saying diplomacy can work and that a military option would have terrible consequences. I can't comment on Obama in other areas, but for this, I applaud him, it takes some balls for a US president to stand up to the Israeli lobby!


edit on 21-8-2012 by Wonderer2012 because: (no reason given)


Wow, you serious? Not only has Obama continued the existing wars but he started new ones!


I don't deny that, but he hasn't attacked Iran, and as far as what he says, he has no intentions of doing so. Romney on the other hand...



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:26 PM
link   


I don't deny that, but he hasn't attacked Iran, and as far as what he says, he has no intentions of doing so.


Hasn't atttacked Iran eh?

Look up Operations Olympic Games
Flame,Stuxnet,Duku, and pay no attention to Pakistan,Yemen,Somailia,Uganda,Libya

Haven't seen the guy who ran on the anti war agenda that has waged more war than the last guy, and the latest comments that if Syria sarts using chemical weapons the Us will be there.

So anytime people want to take off the rose colored glasses , that would be great nevermind back to petty politics.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


A vote for either candidate is vote for war. It is also a vote to further have our liberties stolen from us.

The only reason we are not in a war with Iran already....is because there is an election coming up later this year. The only reason.

Iran needs a central bank.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   
Amazing people actually buy into this crap in this day and age.

Back when all your information came to you properly filtered through hot glowing tubes in your refrigerator sized radio folks at least had an excuse for their ignorance. Today, c'mon.

I often wonder why they bother. Why bother with these speeches? Why bother with the conventions? Why bother with the ads on TV and poor suckers wasting their days knocking on doors?

There are no mysteries. We know these candidates to be war-mongering authoritarians in rhetoric and in action.

Are so many really ignorant of this or are they just wanting to believe really, really hard?
edit on 21-8-2012 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
A vote for Obama is a war in Syria

A vote for Romney is a war in Iran

lesser of two evils

inb4 HurrHurr why can't we have neither?
Well, you all should have gotten on the train with eliminating labor and currency at least twenty years before I was born, then we wouldn't be having to make these choices. It could have been done, but it wasn't. Now we're still fighting over resources and control of capital when there is literally enough for approximately 50billion (machine exclusive labour necessary).

For now, we have our choices. Syrian conflict or Iranian conflict. The Syrian conflict doesn't end the existence of the human race.
edit on 21-8-2012 by TheOneElectric because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96



I don't deny that, but he hasn't attacked Iran, and as far as what he says, he has no intentions of doing so.


Hasn't atttacked Iran eh?

Look up Operations Olympic Games
Flame,Stuxnet,Duku, and pay no attention to Pakistan,Yemen,Somailia,Uganda,Libya

Haven't seen the guy who ran on the anti war agenda that has waged more war than the last guy, and the latest comments that if Syria sarts using chemical weapons the Us will be there.

So anytime people want to take off the rose colored glasses , that would be great nevermind back to petty politics.


I'm not an expert on Obama, but for whatever reason he is resisting the Israeli lobby on the Iran issue (in terms of killing millions of people with airstrikes and an invasion).

He's fighting a battle within his own adminstration- for whatever reason, despite his previous failings and policy, he has decided to make a stand and say no to attacking Iran.

The intrigue that goes on behind the scenes is incredible.

I'm well aware what goes on, but I also hold hope for humanity, Obama may have changed his approach to this issue, and that is why Israel is heating up the criticism so much.

We need leaders to stand up to the Israeli lobby, not parrot everything they demand like Romney.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by DIDtm
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


A vote for either candidate is vote for war. It is also a vote to further have our liberties stolen from us.

The only reason we are not in a war with Iran already....is because there is an election coming up later this year. The only reason.

Iran needs a central bank.


So there is no hope?

I know what you are saying, but perhaps naively, I genuinely believe Obama is resisting his masters on this issue. I also get the feeling he knows what is ahead, he is caught up in this agenda and it is very tragic because deep down he knows he can only delay the inevitable.

Maybe I'm wrong, and his attempted efforts to prevent an Iran war are part of the script



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Indeed... I caught this drivel from the White House spinners last night. I love the audacity it takes for Obama's camp to put THIS point out as an actual talking point.

The man who pursued Iraq ...despite saying it would end on HIS time table and not the one Bush established before Obama ever came to Office.

The man who is saying now we can expect combat operations in Afghanistan for at least another couple years and perhaps longer. Not troops...they'll be there FAR FAR longer...but actual combat.

The man who stood with and gave material support to the invasion and destruction of Libya.

The man who is now saying Syria MUST have regime change and openly threatening U.S. Military intervention the moment certain 'red lines' are observed...as recently as yesterday.

The man who is all but saying the same to Iran and actively building up everything from top line fighters to a Naval force capable of handling all possible paths this will take.


THIS is the man we turn away from to point a finger at Romney as a warmonger? And don't even start with Bush......he's History.

Obama is present and Romney, a possible future. Romney MAY bring war.....I've already watched Obama do it now, repeatedly and promises to keep it going at the same or even higher levels across the Middle East and now, even areas of Africa.

Who is a vote for war? One is a maybe...even if a strong maybe. The other? Damn... He's been RUNNING the wars and starting new ones for over 3 years.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Wonderer2012
 


So is a voye for Obama... looks like we're going to war regardless



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
For now, we have our choices. Syrian conflict or Iranian conflict. The Syrian conflict doesn't end the existence of the human race.


A war in Syria could lead to the End, just as well as a war in Iran. It might just take a little longer. I don't trust Obama, and his standing up to the pro-ZOG camp may be commendable, but it may well mean that he will not serve a second term. Thus, we get Romney by default. We lose either way...



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


So you think Obama is pretending to not want war with Iran?

As I said, I agree the mistakes Obama has made, but out of Romney and Obama, the former is calling for war and it stated to be the 'new sheriff in town', whereas Obama, which he says is off the record, warns of the Iran military option.

At no point am I justifying anything Obama has done, I'm well aware of what happened in Libya and now Syria, perhaps we can call Obama the lesser of two evils, for at least he is opposing the Iran war and opposing the Israeli lobby on the issue.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lazarus Short

Originally posted by TheOneElectric
For now, we have our choices. Syrian conflict or Iranian conflict. The Syrian conflict doesn't end the existence of the human race.


A war in Syria could lead to the End, just as well as a war in Iran. It might just take a little longer. I don't trust Obama, and his standing up to the pro-ZOG camp may be commendable, but it may well mean that he will not serve a second term. Thus, we get Romney by default. We lose either way...


Well I have a theory for that, but that is another thread



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wonderer2012...perhaps we can call Obama the lesser of two evils...


No, in this case, as it has been in other presidential elections, it is the evil of two lessers.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


And a slow burn is better than a fast one. While the building crumbles, you can at least feign searching for a way out. If the building simply exploded, then that would be the end.

Some versus None...we are left with this decision because of the choices of people 40 and older (I'm sorry, it's just fact). We can only do better from here...trust me we can only do better (all of us). To do better, we need time...and an Iran conflict siphons that away with an other worldly quickness.



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 03:05 PM
link   
So much for you taking your own advice...ATS Member Link

One of your last posts and maybe not recent discussed you using a good deal of fear in some of your posts..seems like you are at it again...



posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Lazarus Short
 


I agree with your posts in this thread. The belief that Obama would not get the United States involved in a war with Iran are misguided. They work for the same bosses as many have said in this thread.

I would point out that what Obama and Romney say vs. what they do is drastically different. Obama is assigned to speak to the electorate that does not want war. Romney is assigned to speak to the electorate that either want war or wouldn't mind another war.

Bottom Line - When TPTB are ready to kick off the war, they will do just that. Will they worry about Obama's credibility if he is stil in office? Possibly, only if it serves their purpose. A flase flag attack would put Obama's supporters on the war side if necessary.

It is a game to the elite. They have been moving their pieces into place for decades. I do not see any President stopping it now. Unfortunately.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join