POLITICS: VP Cheney Voices Fear of Isreali Attack on Iran Over Nuclear Standoff

as posted by kegs
That's the kinda the stories I was talking about.

Hey kegs....anyone with one bit of integrity and a willingness to look beyond their own preconcieved notions would use a search engine and check to see if these "stories" are indeed "stories" or factual truth. What you think?
"Monty Python logic" indeed......



seekerof

[edit on 20-1-2005 by Seekerof]

Now I see the chain of events for what,s to come... if Israel does stupid things:

-Israel attacks Iran;
-Iran threatens to use nukes on Israel, while Israel struggles to defeat Iran;
-the US sends its remaining troops in Iraq to invade Iran;
-draft is reinstated in the US (just as it was planned by the SSS for the beginning of 2005);
-Situation gets worse day by day in Middle-East, as the conflict in Iran deepens and gets more and more complicated for US troops;
-UN tries to resolve the conflict, with no results;
-Russia, India and China urges the US and Israel to stop their war;
-the US is attacked in many cities by nukes or dirty bombs, Pentagon points out to Al Qaida, once more;
-martial Law is declared in the US, millions of americans are being sent to confinement buidlings and camps, all movements of social resistance are brutally repressed by both US authorities (FEMA, National Guard, police) and a UN peacekeeping mission sent in the country to "restore order" and secure civilians;
-India gets nuked by Pakistan, India strikes back (or the opposite);
-China invades Afghanistan and Pakistan, with land forces, and a large part of Eurasia, in collaboration with Russia, which invades its border countries (as they see the US/Israeli war as a move towards taking over the rest of Middle-East, and invading Eurasia)
-the US, Israel and the EU sees this as a provocation, and US/Canadian troops in Afghanistan are getting overwhelmed by a huge mass of chinese soldiers, highly trained;
-War is declared between NATO countries and China, Russia and India;
-WW3 begins;
-in the US, the government, that was took over by the FEMA, uses concentration camps and other infrastructures of confinement to train soldiers and use all those that are not apt to fight as slave workers for the military industry, while the people is kept being told the situation is temporary and things will get back to normal as soon as the war is over. Similar situation in Canada as well as the EU;
-Huge clashes and revolt explode in South America and Africa, many governments are overthrown, but the UN and US cannot intervene since they are concentrated in the war;
-Global thermonuclear holocaust erupts between the most poverful nations in the world;
-conflict ends as nations are too much exhausted and damaged by nuclear strikes to keep on fighting;
-resistance movements in the US evolve towards a civil war;
-US government -what's left of it- is finally overthrown... same thing as with the EU and Canada;
-...and finally, all tyrannies in the world have disappeared! Bush was right, but not in the sense that he meant though...

More of that Monty Python logic...

as posted by kegs
The same kind of evidence as it would of taken Saddam to prove he didn't have WMD's during the 48 deadline he was given to disarm before the invasion began perhaps?

48 hours added to 12 years!
Oh wait, you mean like the evidences and proofs by your own government concerning Saddam having those alledged WMDs? You know, the very same ones that they accumulated over the years? Like the UN did? Like the French did? Like Russia did? Like Spain did? Like Poland did? Like Germany did? This can go on and on.

For people such as you, its the hands on "I got to see it to believe it" mentality. The same mentality that will also only believe after a nuclear device has gone off in your backyard, too, huh? No matter though, right? After all, it was only strictly a "Neo-Con" bold plan of world domination right? Interesting that your very nation is side-by-side in that alledged goal, dern.




seekerof

[edit on 20-1-2005 by Seekerof]

By Phoenix
Kegs I understand your views and arguments about U.S. involvement, thats a given for those opposed to any U.S. involvment in any foreign wars voluntarilly entered into , the premise here is that Israel forces a position based on their percieved policy position forcing the U.S. into one sort of action or another regardless of any existing plan by U.S. politicians.

You get me wrong Phoenix. What I am against is the Neo Con control of American foreign policy that has existed since Reagan with the exception of Clinton, who wasn't much better. You'll find many of the same Neo cons in control now were in Regan’s and Bush Seniors cabinet. They see the only way to restore morality to the American public is focusing the population through shared myths of great threats, and that force itself can bring peace. I can see and understand their point, but I would never agree to it. I for one don't want to accept myths as facts, whatever social stability they think it would bring.

I'm not a pacifist by the way, and I don't oppose every US involvement in foreign wars.

Right, wrong or otherwise the U.S. has supported the Israelis in their endeavors to survive as a nation in the face of daunting odds many times over.

My wish is that the Israelis would have the respect to inform the U.S. of any military action against Iran before it in fact occurs so that we may have the oppurtuinity to properly respond.

Diplomatically or Militarily.

By Seekerof

Oh wait, you mean like the evidences and proofs by your own government concerning Saddam having those alledged WMDs? You know, the very same ones that they accumulated over the years? Like the UN did? Like the French did? Like Russia did? Like Spain did? Like Poland did? Like Germany did? This can go on and on.

For people such as you, its the hands on "I got to see it to believe it" mentality. The same mentality that will also only believe after a nuclear device has gone off in your backyard, too, huh? No matter though, right? After all, it was only strictly a "Neo-Con" bold plan of world domination right? Interesting that your very nation is side-by-side in that alledged goal, dern.

For the first point, what makes you think I trust my own government? I don't. And I don't like what they're doing. Patriotism is a very different beast outwith America. Over here it’s about trying to change it for the better, not blind loyalty to whatever entity exists.

The WMD's, we both know that's an argument that's been done to death. I know your points, I've read them and I respect them.

The rest of your post boils down to evidence. Are we talking about the type of evidence the CIA gives the government that the government then ignores for political aims (i.e. the Soviets) or the evidence the politician’s present then blame on the CIA?

The Monty python evidence I’m talking about is the reasoning that because you have no evidence that something exists, it means they have created means of avoiding your detection of the evidence. By this means no logical end can be found for any argument, because how can you possibly disprove what doesn’t exist? At the same time it affords countless opportunities for politicians, corporations, the military industrial complex and anyone else that can gain from the institutionalised fear of the population. As they all are, both in the US, the UK and elsewhere, right now.


Edit: Sorry, for your previous post Seekerof:

I've seen the reports.

I also saw every news report before the invasion of Iraq. Might be a little embarrassing looking back on them now though, don't you think?








[edit on 20-1-2005 by kegs]

Surely, the Israeli airstrike wouldn't come before the american troops in iraq have braced themselves against a possible sji'ite uprise in iraq and iranian response ?

For political reasons one would expect attacks to be done after the iraqi elections, but, BEFORE american troops actually leave iraq, otherwise iran could use an arial attack as pretext to mess inside iraq, finding an ill prepared iraqi army.

What about current american troop movements/ tank positions near the iranian border, any signs of a transition from preparing from insurgants attacks to meeting the iranian army ?

Oh and then you Syria and Israel as well, Israel, while a u.s. ally, sometimes got a mind of its own and mightwanna do things their way, AIPAC will repair the political damage in Washington, lots of things to concern before you open the whole can of worms in the middle east. Who knows maybe even the neocons are cautious enough to not let it come this far.

But no matter how this rollercoast ride will end, Bush can take all the credits for it!


[edit on 21-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

[edit on 21-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

IMHO the behaviour of the Russians lately is indicative of whats to come in the near future. They are distancing themselves from the US and becoming insular again. Why would they do this? Its does not make sense economically. Something is in the offing.

They probably know what the US and Iran have in mind for the Middle East and its not making them happy. Either way its a potentially nuclear # fight on their traditional "sphere of influence". Russian nuclear technology found in Iran in the aftermath? Hello Cold War 2

The Iranians would love nothing more than to take control of Iraq and become a major player internationally. Then to take over the holiest Islamic sites in Saudi Arabi. A literal Pan-Arabic Superpower controlling the majority of the Worlds Oil and a major trade route through the Suez. United in oblierating Israel and bringing the Western infadels to their knees.

The US forces on both sides of their country is their stumbling block. This is more than just a detterant to the Iranians, its a provocation and an intollarable situation for them.

Rightly or wrongly the Governments "imposed" by the US Government in Afghanistan and Iraq are the antithesis of Iran's ideals. Do they sit back, hog-tied and let their younger generations rise up against them and impose the same Westernised Government in Iran? Or would a full fledged national Jihad lashing out firstly towards Iraq distract Irans youth as well as test the US public resolve to fight yet another War?

The death toll would sky rocket on both sides and would not be tollerated by the US public unless something happend on US soil that was "without a doubt Iranian in origin". Nuclear in nature? Maybe at the front door of Michael Moore's house perhaps

It would be the only situation where the US could sustain a War against Iran that could well drag the entire region into War.

The Russians are retreating and reverting to more familiar behaviour. They dont like whats brewing and neither do I..

Edit: Some one had to edit out the bold!

[edit on 21/1/05 by subz]

It is VERY clear that Cheney is sending a direct message to the Israeli's.

Vice President's don't "voice fears" in interviews. He is sending a cold message.

Originally posted by Nerdling
It is VERY clear that Cheney is sending a direct message to the Israeli's.

Vice President's don't "voice fears" in interviews. He is sending a cold message.

Yeah, it would be rather good for the US Goverment if Israel did first strike on Iran and then the US could go out to help Israel.
I don't think that the US citizens or of any other nation would stand by if the US went after Iran by themselves.

Sure, PUBLICLY he's going to voice "concern" about an Israeli strike on Iran, but PRIVATELY, he's likely praying to God that they do, hehe...

Perhaps he'll let George know too, after all, since Dubya seems to be on such good speaking terms with the almighty and all...

1. if israel were to launch an attack on Iran (pre-emptive or otherwise), they will alert the US covertly so that we can prepare for it (get spec. ops out etc). We will deny any knowledge, for if we knew and did nothing to stop it, we will be viewed as having attacked Iran.

2. If Israel attacks Iran, the people will not accept that as a means of changing leadership in Iran. They will be united in their hatred of Israel and the war could have a negative impact on our plans for regime change.

3. If the EU cannot reign in the nuke issues with Iran it will be brought up before the Corrupt, sorry United Nations who will pussy foot and lolly gag around the issue until either the EU or the US says enough is enough and the matter is brought to a head.


In my opinion, Iran will slowly unveil the plan to the EU, thinking they can hide what they are doing, allowing themselves the necessary time to complete the work they started. There won't be time for any UN discussions anymore and the EU will sit back while the US has to go in and clean up this mess, all the while publicly crying foul, saying we aren't giving enough time to the matter

So, basically Cheney says to Israel, don't start the party without consulting us

[edit on 21-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

Iran will not play ball with the EU or the UN untill such time as it holds it first succesful test of a working nuke, then it will go, ok i confess ive been a bad boy and have been delevoping nukes all along, now what u gonna do about? take them away, Try it and start world war 3.

And as for a isreali first strike, you can put money on that unless bush can hold cheron in check till he ready to go in to iran. but more than likely within hours of iran's test,irsael will be bombing the snot out of iran,

then egypt and syria will come to their follow muslim country aid by invading israel in conjuction with a major uprising in iraq and palastine, the US will have no choice but to commit to irseal side, (Like there any doubt which side of the fence bush will come down on) and of course the uk will back bush all the way, the eu will have a hissing fit at irsael and the US for starting anthor war.

I hope that we manage to go 4 years without bush getting us all nuked or starting world war 3,but i not banking on it, iran is playing a dangerous game of hide the wmds. If US special forces are on the ground already, then we may just be weeks away from all hell breaking loose

I don't think that the US citizens or of any other nation would stand by if the US went after Iran by themselves.

Interpretation is a cage indeed, Matrix... such as your interpretation of what would happen if the US strikes Iran! Your partiality for the US government is just blinding you from the obvious reality that China and Russia will NEVER let the US taking over Middle-East and Asia, as it is trying to do with the War on Terror... and yes, these countries DO have the means to resist such an aggressive imperialistic policy. Russia got his army massively rebuilded since the last few years, and China's economy and military are both growing at tremendous speeds as we speak. The only solution for peace and security in the Middle-East -and in the world!- is that the US brings its troops home and leave the Iraqis to their own democratic fate.

oh... I meant EURASIA, not Asia...

...So there is a moderate niche oppertunity for Iran to exploit this fear for WW3 to keep developing their nuclear capabillity and get into the big boys league , but on the other hand, with Bush in Washington and sharon in Tel Aviv, I wouldn't dare place bets on what's going to happen....

keeping all fingers crossed overhere...


[edit on 21-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

Something to bear in mind is that if Israel sent in air-strikes against Iranian targets, they could only get there by crossing US controlled airspace. They can't go across Turkey, Syria or Jordan. Only route left is a long one down the Red Sea and around to the Arabian Sea, meaning tanker support.

Of course. The Israeli's still fight with the objective of tangible victory. Air strikes to soften the enemy or destroy materiel, special operations ground troops for cleanup, and larger deployments of soldiers only if the objective is to control territory.

Which is why the current situation in Iraq can barely be called a war, since at one time America fought wars with a discrete objective in mind, and all-out ferocity until that objective was reached.

Only in recent history has America's "waffle-y" passive-agressive warfighting philosophy tainted their military.

Originally posted by Phoenix

Originally posted by AceOfBase
I don't want there to be a war with Iran but if there is to be one, I'd prefer that the Israelis put their troops on the line instead of getting the US and UK to kill for Israel and die for Israel.

AoB, I'm with you on that sentiment.

I don't think any action by Israel involves troops on the ground (maybe a few commando's) but thats about it.

The issue comes into play that the U.S. has or is percieved to support anything Israel does in a military fashion outside of its borders.

So their is no way that the arab world (maybe european) will not connect Israels actions to U.S. support and permission.

It is these aspects that can lead to another world war as other non-middle eastern countries line up behind their various economic hegomenys.

Israel will not attack Iran.

If they do they will be attacked back. Unless I am mistaken Iran now has conventional missles that can reach Israel. Other countries under those circumstances may see it is an opportunity to attack Israel.

Israel if they have any sense, know this. I am sure they are not stupid enough to attack.