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.


Haaretz:Israeli attack on Iran this fall is no longer in the cards

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by Alternative4u

Gave you a start, but that was the old system. Sanctions did not work because most nations never respect them, they depend on the target and interests of those that would help circumvent them.

Russia has learned a hard lesson in Iraq, and at a cost. In Syria Russia would probably boycott the sanctions but not on Iran.

Iran has been in a de facto unilateral sanction from the Anglo-American interests for a very long time, since the Ayatollahs came to power, their insulation and extremism was constructed out of that more than anything...

The only wild card here continue to be China and other BRIC nations that will suffer to very little gains (and even geopolitical and economical losses). I'm with you that the sanctions will not work but the play-field is not the same as it was Libya, Egypt, Syria and Iraq are out of the game. Russia has learned to be more pragmatic on the horses it backs, if it were to act it would already had done something regarding Syria, so it is not only the play-field but the players that have been managed in a position that to a point will help the Anglo-American interests like never before but they have not closed every gap.

I fully expect for China to smell the roses, and not be distracted by the noise regarding some inlands to see the huge play it can make in this arena, even if under cover using North Korea. The soon China gets the Anglo-Americans out of Saud-Arabia the better they and the world will be...

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 11:01 AM

Originally posted by Tw0Sides

Originally posted by moniesisfun

You didn't reality check me. You showed your ignorance.
Different approach to help my fellow ATSer.

Sept 11, 2001.
America was attacked, Unified together to fight a common Enemy.

Iran Oct, 2012.
Iran is under threat of Attack and is Unified to Resist a Common Enemy.

Which would be whom?

I'm not sure anyone on this board who isn't an Iranian is in a position to know where the Iranian people would choose to channel their frustrations towards.

There is more than one option for them to take. The scenarios are simply not the same.
edit on 7-10-2012 by moniesisfun because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by orbitbaby

No one really knows except the Israeli Govt.....and as if the Israelis are going to spread the word when they decide to bomb Iran's nuclear installations! Israel is well known for surprise attacks when you least expect it.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 11:56 AM

Originally posted by moniesisfun
reply to post by Tw0Sides

Yes, they are feeling it in the way that they fear a coup or revolution within the next year.

You didn't reality check me. You showed your ignorance.

And you have spoke to Ahmadenijad and his regime? Remember what happened in 1953? Exactly the same thing that is most likely going to happen down the track and the Iranian regime will be reminding their people what happens if they fall to the west

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 12:44 PM
I think that generally speaking we all need to take everything we're hearing right now with about a truck load of salt and when in doubt, fall back on what makes sense to the longer line of events.

A story just recently was also talking about how the Ayatollah would fire Ahmadinejad and disolve the Government all together. What is real and what is wishful thinking....then what is manufactured propaganda?

Hmmm....and I think back to some of the over-the-top propaganda that was freely printed and thrown out there by both sides of the war in World War II. In hindsight, it was pretty ridiculous. To people at the time? Well...History says it worked more often than I'd have thought.

Specifically about these sanctions. Iran has been planning for this day....this ultimate conflict..,since the 1980's. Sanctions are nothing new. Obama's been weaker than most with his waivers and exceptions, if anything, not more effective.

History of US Unilateral Sanctions against Iran

Anyone who thinks sanctions are effective...go ask Castro about that. He also had the same sugar daddy in the background that Iran does, as it happens. Moscow. However, Iran started preparing for THESE sanctions and the chance it would ever actually hurt them in some way, a long time ago. Over 6 years ago, actually.

The documents detail eight shipments in chartered jumbo jets from Zurich's Kloten airport. The shipments, from October through late November, brought 250 tons of gold bullion from the vaults of Swiss banks to Tehran.

That was about just one effort they made. A year later, Ahmadinejad said this:

The U.N. Security Council passed a sanctions resolution on December 23 against Iran, calling for the suspension of Iran’s nuclear programme, which the West fears is aimed at making nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charge.

“The (U.N.) resolution was born dead and even if they issue 10 more of such resolutions it will not affect Iran’s economy and policies,” Ahmadinejad said in a speech to parliament broadcast live on state television.

Without considering what Iran had already been doing for quite sometime to make those words of his true, he sounded laughably arrogant and I recall being amused when I read his statements in the news back then. In hindsight and considering the forward planning Iran has put into countering whats being done now, they may have more reason to be confident than they're being given credit for.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 02:59 PM

Originally posted by buster2010
Looks like Obama was right and Benny and everyone else calling for war was wrong. Either that or Israel finally realized Obama isn't going to let America fight Iran for them.

You know what.

This is the most scariest time.

When they stop threatening and they say they are friends , that is the time they are going to plan for an attack.

That is the difference between Israel and US govt.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 03:04 PM
WW3 will then only happen for another 10 years.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 03:11 PM
I mean in another ten years...

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 03:16 PM
They're gonna attack. There will be peace talks and then it's on. A thief in the night and all that jazz sorta thing.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 05:24 PM
reply to post by moniesisfun

to clear the situation more:
an individual may think:
1-bad economy can lead to a revolution in Iran.
2-Iran is isolated.
3-snactions have made them to starve to die !
4-these can made them stop saying down with Israel or USA !
5-Israel is strong and legitimated in the region !
6-Ayatollahs are ruling people like a theocracy and dictatorship.
7-religion is something like Medieval

from an Iranian (the widely accepted ideas) point of view:
1-no noway ! the history of this country is full of hard situations. sanctions, imposed war, coups, colored revolution and .... this is it's recent 30 years history let alone the long experiences throughout it's long history like colonialism ... . the aim of sanctions is to prevent their improvement as an independent country.
of course bad economy can lead to social problems. but these situations are not something strange in Iran.
in fact with considering economy crisis in EU, Iran's economy is far better than many EU countries !!!
so they find their solutions and they are reforming their economy.
let me explain it this way, some of strong economies of the world are going down from the apex and Iran is struggling to reach the apex, so who is more disappointed !!!
2-surely Iran is not isolated, it is the chief of NAM a group of 118 countries and their aim is to reach a new world order !!!!
EU and USA knows it well that Iran is circling their sanctions but they are pleased at least they could make it's path long. of course they can not say that they want to shut the mouth of Iran because they are after freedom of speech anyhow ! so they say this is because Iran is doing something bad !
3-the turnover of Iran's economy is large and indigenous. sanctions can not make them starve to die !
4-this can encourage them to say down with Israel or USA (surely this is not against their nations) even more !
5-Israel has many serious problems and it is in his weakest situation in it's 60 years bloody occupation !
6-how can a colored revolution take place in a dictatorship political system ! history of Iran is full of referendums from parlement members to presidency and even the Ayatollah leader indirectly and the duties are in the constitution !
7-imagine what a person may think about religion in west. inverse it. that is the widely accepted view about religion in the middle east countries especially Iran.
they consider their religion as a powerful tool for improvement even far better than Communism or Capitalism. they think their problems are because they have not implemented their religion and revolution's goals truly.

edit on 7-10-2012 by maes2 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 10:38 PM
reply to post by Socrato

I agree, it is in the nature of Israel to attack when least expected. This change in rhetoric could well be a sign that they are going to attack. If we don't hear much in the way of war drums beating in Israel in the next month or so then the chances will have increased for an attack to take place.

Regards, Skellon.

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 10:43 PM
With US elections able to be bought or manipulated I wouldn't believe this.
I do believe Romney would do what Israel, Bush and Cheney asked him to do, Obama.. not so much.

It is a bit of a flaw in their theory but,
Sanctions don't change nuclear research. Just because people are losing work doesn't mean the scientists in the underground labs are being let go.

The most you'll probably see is an increase in protests and anti government rallies, but unlike Syria and Egypt Iran just squashes this immediately and in stealth. (you don't hear about the people kidnapped or killed)

Then again you'd be a fool to believe anything to do with Israel, this could be a carefully orchestrated string of dis-info to lull Iran into a full sense of 'more time'

.. after all, they only have like.. 2-3 months left until the end of the world anyway, they'd best get a move on right?

posted on Oct, 7 2012 @ 11:42 PM
If they the attack is off this fall. Then I would say bull. Its probally still going to come this year. Iran will not back down. Just today Press tv put a story up saying that Israel will suffer loses of around 10 000 people if they go to war with them. And I dont think the US gave Israel those huge bunker bombs for nothing.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 04:08 PM
I think both points are right....

1. Dial down the rethoric, make it look like the attack is off. Get Iran to lower their Guard. With all the talk and statements I would think Iran's military has to have been on a fairly high level of alert. The DIF two, might be sitting on a hair trigger. You can only do that so long until maintenence, crew rest, and training needs come up.

2. They are waiting on Romney. He is picking up steam. If he gets in, he will likely take a harder stance on Iran, and is more likely to give support, (if not a joint strike) to the IDF. So by dialing it down it actually gives the IDF a little more flexibility.

posted on Oct, 9 2012 @ 04:30 PM
Not sure if this goes here can anyone tell me if its accurate or not? or maybe just old news not sure it was published 21hrs ago so not sure.

IRAN'S SECRET NUCLEAR-BOMB PLANT REVEALED Source says project hidden underneath 'medicine' facility Iranian scientists are nearing completion of a nuclear warhead, having already successfully tested an implosion system and neutron detonator at a secret site while enriching uranium to weapons grade, according to a former Iranian intelligence officer.


posted on Oct, 10 2012 @ 05:15 PM
reply to post by orbitbaby

Israel not going to attack Iran?

There's a shocker.

posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 05:20 PM
I think that NATO has decided to provoke a major war between Turkey and Syria, with the help of Turkey who must have been promised something big in exchange. Do they want anything big? Yes they do. You know they do. This is not rocket science.

An attack by Israel on Iran would be a confusing sideshow that might get in the way. Iran is definitely going to run into a lot of trouble in the not too distant future. Personally, I believe they would have, even if the nuclear issue were not at all an issue. Even, in fact, if they had no nuclear installations of any kind on their soil and had to send their citizens to Georgia for catscans.

Meanwhile, Sideshow Bob will have to wait a little while longer to see action.

posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 06:03 PM
One thing that is interesting about the current confrontation between Turkey and Syria is that it is giving us the paradigm of how the attacks on Iran will begin. It won't be with an Israeli airstrike on nuclear facilities. It won't be a naval action in the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz.

It will be an escalation of action in the west of Iran, probably on the border with the Turkish province of Hakkari, where the Iranians are having a lot of trouble with the Kurds, trouble that has similarities with the situation involving Syria, Turkey and the Free Syrian Army. In this case it involves the Kurdish PKK.

Coincidentally the Kurds want something too and again, it doesn't require a rocket scientist to figure out what.

This is where the Iran war will break out. (Disregard the red square and note "Kurdish Inhabited Area".)

edit on 11-10-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 11 2012 @ 06:46 PM
Just to make things even twistier, I think Turkey has been suckered by NATO in this scenario. I think they have been told that if they help topple Assad, they will be allowed into the EEC at long last, but when the situation erupts on the border with Iran and they are pressed by NATO to cede territory to an independant Kurdish state, that will have started the war with Iran, they will balk at this development, things will sour and they won't get their EEC membership.

It's just a hunch. Maybe all the thieves will play nice. They usually do, don't they?

By the way, Kurdistan, if it becomes a reality, a legitimized by the US reality, that is, is situated perfectly to be a perpetual thorn in the side of Turkey, Iran, Iraq (very importantly) and Syria. It is a landlocked country, easily dominated by its neighbors who all have "blue water" outlets and it would normally not be a problem for them except that it has something better than a blue water outlet. It has an American outlet.

Things are shaping up quite nicely on the chessboard for "NATO".

edit on 11-10-2012 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in