Here we go: Senate resolves to back Israel if they attack Iran

reply to post by FortAnthem


Dear FortAnthem, ATS Readers, Writers,

Thanks for getting this up for folks to read...S&F to you.

Oh Lord, despite some folks in this threads responses, it really DOES give Israel a "green light" to do a raid, or start a war.

Syria and Iran, are 2 nations that Russia has made real clear that they will get really mad about an invasion or attacks, up to and including the possible use of nuclear weapons to STOP the aggression to those 2 nations.

Zionists are typically not a good lot of folks. They are DIFFERENT than real faith following Jews. They tend to be very warmongering folks. I have got a Jewish nephew-in-law, GREAT young man, very smart, and VERY ethical.
It is like Germans, and Nazi's.. Two totally different critters! One is a lovely addition to the different societies and cultures we have on our planet, and the other is at times, quite hazardous to the rest of humanity.

I sure wish Israel's government could somehow make peace with its neighbours. Too many blood feuds from way back I suppose..sigh. Hatfield's and McCoy's on steroids.

And even though it might not be a very popular topic, Israel does hold too much sway over American policy and actions.

The wording is too vague, or Orwellian in my opinion. It can mean anything, and just how will THAT be defined down the road?? Hmm..

We have seen vague wording in some American legislation that has been twisted into an assault on the citizens themselves! That is the problem with vague wording, and despite promises to not turn it to the dark side, somehow these governments have managed to do just that, TO THE DARK side of matters.

I am gonna throw this out there.. might think I am nuts..lol

The world teeters at the edge of a few cliffs. Economic cliff, WW3 cliff, Social unrest cliff, Currency War cliff.

I think that the corruption and evil has finally choked the goose that lays the golden egg for them, and they will soon HAVE to fight it out to determine who has to pay all these god awful astronomical debts, and who doesn't.

The world isn't smart enough, or are so blackmailed by these horrid corrupt banking institutions; that they don't have the gumption to do what is RIGHT. And that is, PROSECUTE these dirty bankers, and make the banks EAT the debt they created out of thin air! Namely by betting on things called derivatives, financing terrorists, laundering drug money, etc.

CANCEL the debt, make the banks eat the filth they created. Put em in jail. There WAS A REASON that Christ overturned the tables in the temple..and it wasn't just because they were defiling a holy place.

This ongoing aggression forever it seems, is what keeps too many economies going unfortunately; and it is going to end very badly for mankind, unless some leaders finally find the ethics and morals to do what is right and just.

The LAST THING the USA needs is another dang war, in another country. How long will the world put up with the USA, that I hate to say; has emulated what Nazi Germany did in the late 1930's? Back then Poland was the straw that broke the camels back for the other nations to go to war with Germanys Axis Alliances. WILL IRAN or SYRIA be the straw that brings down the nuclear wrath on the world? Nations, and leaders need to SERIOUSLY consider these thoughts. Or do they really even CARE? They say they do, yet continue on with bellicose statements and actions.

Was this resolution put out there by some in the Senate to curry favour with Israel? To ensure support and funding for their next election?

Besides, is there NOT already a Mutual Defence Treaty with Israel? We would have got drug into it no matter what eventually.

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by pravdaseeker


Your right about Zionists not being religious practicing Jews (Or Jews to start with). And that is the problem.. I don't think they have the Jews best interests at hand and only use them as a cover to push their agenda. The West use the same tactic concerning Iran and they even think we are stupid enough to buy it though Iran have a number of ancient Jews living amongst them..

The Zionist regime are sh**ting themselves because they know exactly who Iran are after and it isn't the Israel populace. It is the oppressive European wannabe semites who continue to bring death and destruction to the people of the Middle East. There is only one reason why Israel need the backing of the USA.. Pretty simple, they are too weak and gutless to attack Iran on their own. On their own, Iran would end them.

This attack Iran propaganda is so outdated and awfully over done during the last,well,,thirty years or so!...I do not think Israel or America or anybody else in the world is insane and hard headed enough to attack a country that practically has done no harm to them whatsoever and can firmly retaliate and kick back their butts as well....An attack on Iran is a lose lose situation for everybody...There is nothing to gain from that and it accomplishes nothing except more misery for the years to come.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
reply to post by pravdaseeker

 

The Zionist regime are sh**ting themselves because they know exactly who Iran are after and it isn't the Israel populace. It is the oppressive European wannabe semites who continue to bring death and destruction to the people of the Middle East. There is only one reason why Israel need the backing of the USA.. Pretty simple, they are too weak and gutless to attack Iran on their own. On their own, Iran would end them.

Here will be the problem of a invasion of Israel. How do you determin a zionist by looking at them? Do you think the soldiers will be asking people if they are zionist? No they will shoot anyone that moves or is found. Also Seeing as how Iran lacks a way to deliver alot of troops very fast It would not be as one sided as you think. If Israel goes to war and the attacks come from gaza and lebanon what do you think will happen to those areas? Israel will pacify those areas with no holds barred weapons so they do not have to fight on 3 fronts.

Iran would have to march troops all the way to Israel unless it used vulnerable commercial airliners to move troops . Israel wouls close their air space and waters around them to prevent that of course. Supply lines for Iran would be long and vulnerable to attack as well. I dislike the people in charge of Israel very much but i do not underestimate them either in their ruthlessness when they say to hell with the consequences.

reply to post by FortAnthem


Pretty soon we will find out that it was either Iranian or North Korean suspect in the Boston bombing.....GUARANTEED!!

No doubt at all in my mind whatsoever!! Oddly enough, I will be right....Mark my words down now

reply to post by yuppa


What makes you think Iran would attack Israel first? The Idea is for Israel to attack Iran and then Iran have a justified reason to launch everything at Israel. They aren't going to march troops to Israel

Iran not fussed

“The constant threats by the Zionist regime (Israel) against Iran are so worthless and they cannot do anything against our nation because they know that any measure will lead them to full annihilation,” the Iranian minister pointed out.

The ball is in Israel's court, Iran still don't seem to worried about them either. With that, they have just unveiled some more weapons to celebrate army day or something.

New weapons

The Islamic Republic of Iran has unveiled an indigenous stealth unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), two indigenous missile systems and a domestically-built mobile electronic interception system.

The drone, named Hazem 3, and Ya Zahra 3 and Mersad 2 missile systems as well as Sayyad 40 mobile electronic interception system were unveiled during a parade marking the National Army Day on Thursday.

Pretty sure with that they have built themselves a 50 Tonne Submarine also.. Don't know what the payloads are on these weapons but they aren't sending troops anywhere in the near future.

reply to post by charles1952


yeah, huge is a relative term
the amount does prove that Iran does not hate Jews

and if Iran ever did attack Israel ( even vice verse too I guess), there would be a significant 5th column behind enemy lines

reply to post by DarknStormy


I never said that Israel would be attacked first. If israel attacks first the scenario will play out the same way. The countries are very far apart and would have problems with a assault on both sides.

The Americans are really all over the place with the "we will defend our allies"..?

I mean honestly. You can barely handle a couple pressure cooker bombs and a fertilizer plant explosion internally, and you're "resolving" to rush to the defence of Israel/SK/Japan etc, simultaneously?

Why does this remind me of Rome?

reply to post by Helious


Not only that but Iran is trying to set itself up for the coming new age of nuclear energy by wanting to be a supplier of fissionable fuel. This is actually all a fight over the next "cash cow" being fissionable material.

Of course I see the concern of having such a religiously deluded society producing some of the most toxic substances. America really is the only one with the infrastructure and organization to produce nuclear fuel responsibly.

So I support the prevention of Iran's nuclear program and its desire to be a big player of nuclear proliferation. Although I despise the state of Israel and its Zionistic aspirations it is OUR puppet... not the other way around.

Youll see soon enough.

reply to post by yourmaker

I know I get confused easily, but what can you possibly mean?

An explosion occurs, our civilian forces treat the wounded, bury the dead, and return to normal. What can that have to do with launching military operations for our friends?

Actually, I'm a little less worried about attacks in the US than I was. Consider. The US is "The Great Satan," the primary enemy of the Islamic world of over a billion people and huge amounts of wealth. Our borders are fairly open, we have huge amounts of land to manuever and hide in. Our internal security is nothing special and with all of that, what attacks have occurred in the last dozen years? Major Hasan shooting unarmed people and the Boston bombs.

Honestly, if that's the best the devoted Jihadi followers of Allah can do in 12 years, blowing up a couple of kitchen appliances, then we don't seem to have much to worry about. Perhaps we could import some guard dogs from Israel, breed them, and let them roam around the country sniffing out terrorists.

Originally posted by charles1952
reply to post by yourmaker

 

I know I get confused easily, but what can you possibly mean?

More along the lines of the civilians population mentality of jumping to conclusions based on assumptions or general unpreparedness. The Rome reference is about overstepping bounds in all forms.

An explosion occurs, our civilian forces treat the wounded, bury the dead, and return to normal.

But the result of the attack doesn't fade with time, the paranoia increases.

What can that have to do with launching military operations for our friends?

Is the civilian population today, in these times, ready for actual real war with multiple enemies?
The answer is no. They are thinking about taxes and maintaining their families all of that stuff, while the government has this war-time face on all the time, ready to rush to the defence of everyone.

Our internal security is nothing special and with all of that, what attacks have occurred in the last dozen years?

They've done a great job.

Perhaps we could import some guard dogs from Israel, breed them, and let them roam around the country sniffing out terrorists.

Originally posted by charles1952
what attacks have occurred in the last dozen years? Major Hasan shooting unarmed people and the Boston bombs.

"and the Boston Bombs" ???

Charles , you have some inside information, or did your Prejudice just Slip a Bit?

reply to post by Tw0Sides

Dear Tw0Sides,

That is an excellent question. Was including the Boston bombs an act of prejudice? Honestly, I don't know. Looking back on it, I was responding to yourmaker who seemed to be saying that the country's morale was seriously hurt by a couple of explosions, so we didn't have the morale to defend an ally or friend in war. He mentioned the fertilizer plant explosion and the Boston bombs. For some reason, that just stuck in my head. I don't have any inside information. I don't know that it was part of Jihad, and I sincerely apologize for mistakenly creating that impression.

After expressing confusion about the connection between the people's capability to cope and the conduct of a war. I tried to express the thought that the American people should not be too afraid of attack from the Muslim world, as their record of attacks had been feeble to date. (I don't think very many people are worried about a North Korean attack on the US mainland.) In fact, it would have made my point stronger if I had left out the Boston bombs. My point being that over the last dozen years terrorist attempts on the US have been singularly ineffective.

But Tw0Sides, you've raised an important question and I'll work on it. Do I have a prejudice? I'd like to think that if the evidence is equal on both sides, then I won't take a side. I try hard to work from facts and logic, but I'm really glad you raised the question. Thank you very much.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by FortAnthem


Doesn't really matter how WW3 kicks off it seems inevitable anyway.

There wont be troops on the ground, air strike is most they will do.

reply to post by FortAnthem


Sen. Lindsey Graham the leader of the neo cons, doesn't surprise me. Did they make this resolution while we were all fixated on the boston bombings?

Originally posted by FortAnthem

 

Its only a matter of time now before we see US boots on the ground in Iran to clean up whatever mess Israel gets started.

4 (more) problems with Resolution 65:

1) Resolution 65 essentially rescinds the sovereignty of the United States. We will "assist" with "economic and military aid" - regardless of American interests. In other words, we will pay for another country's war with American lifes and treasure. Even though this resolution is not actionable, the bipartisan Committee on Foreign Relations has significant authority, including the responsibility to oversee and fund foreign aid programs as well as arms sales.

2) Resoultion 65 has been reported in the Israeli press - but not in the American press. Why? Does American mainstream media believe that it is not of interest to the American people? Or is it actively suppressing that information?

3) Resolution 65 appears to not having been published in full by the Committee. Is that transparent government? It clearly had not been published or been debated in public prior to the vote. The US Senate Foreign Relations Committee does not even PRETEND that it protects the interests of the American people.

4) Resoultion 65 sends a clear signal from AIPAC that opposing any motion towards war with Iran will be political suicide. It also provides cover or justification for the President, who has been talking tough to Netanyahu, to PRETEND that he is tough on our "enemies".