View Full Version : One more step toward war
Doc Safari
01-09-12, 09:59
http://news.yahoo.com/iran-nuke-bunker-confirmed-115201184.html
"Iran nuke work at bunker is confirmed"
The fact that it's in an underground bunker makes it less likely Israel will be able to take it out. Some analysts on the financial shows this weekend were speculating that Iran doesn't have the guts to close the straits of Hormuz, but if Israel attacks Iran that will definitely cause a huge spike in oil and gas prices.
I'm going to make my prediction that this Iran thing is going to be the "big worry" of 2012 like the economy and the Euro crisis was the "big worry" of 2011.
If we use the same AWESOME foreign policy we have been using for the last 50 years, than yes. Except, we still have to 'worry' (?) about the Euro. The economy will continue to be a problem for the next 5-10 years in the best case. Worst case, Obamacare is fully implemented and we really crash the economy for a generation.
The best thing we can do right now is just sell our newest bunker busters to the Israelis and make nation strategic preparations for a spike in oil.
Or, we could just invade Iran like we did Iraq and occupy it for 10 years or so. Hopefully this time we actually bring in the 500k or so troops we would need to stabilize the country. It might also be worth considering starting a zero deferment draft that is tiered based on income. The children of the wealthiest Americans would do their patriotic duty first.
Rest assured, a war with Iran will be Obama's October Surprise. His September Surprise will be to close the war in Afghanistan. Remember, he only needs another 4 years to ensure Obamacare is fully implemented. After that, America becomes a full blown European style social democracy.
Or, we could just invade Iran like we did Iraq and occupy it for 10 years or so. Hopefully this time we actually bring in the 500k or so troops we would need to stabilize the country..
Are you reffering to the 500k troops that Oblama is cutting?
It would be perfect....if he wasnt getting rid of them
Are you reffering to the 500k troops that Oblama is cutting?
It would be perfect....if he wasnt getting rid of them
Obama says a lot of things, most of them are not true. I have yet to see a Federal budget that is cutting any troops. The current budget only goes up to March.
Ya I got ya. Who knows what he has in store though.
Has any sort of proof been presented or is it all hearsay? If in fact proof is presented will we intervene and if so, how? Will this be the start of WW III? Will Russia and China step in?
The sanctions that are being discussed and imposed on Iran are tantamount to a declaration of war on the Iranians and they are preparing for it.
Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, naval commander for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, said on Friday Iran will conduct a second military exercise in the Persian Gulf in February. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/06/tensions-gulf-iran-us-israel?newsfeed=true
The U.S. and Israel are currently planning a massive military exercise in the Gulf. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082961/Face-Gulf-U-S--Israel-Iran-launch-war-games-force-nuclear-plans-key-oil-route.html
On Saturday, the British Royal Navy annoucned it is sending its most advanced warship to the Persian Gulf. The HMS Daring is a Type 45 destroyer that has the world’s most sophisticated naval radar. http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/report-britain-dispatches-advanced-warship-to-persian-gulf-1.405969
Iran launched a military maneuver near its border with Afghanistan on Saturday, the semi-official Fars news agency reported, days after naval exercises in the Gulf increased tensions with the West and pushed up oil prices. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/07/us-iran-idUSTRE8041RA20120107
The Israeli intelligence asset DEBKAfile reports today that the Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov anchored at Syria’s Tartus port on the Mediterranean on Sunday and arrived with the destroyer Admiral Chabanenko and frigate Yaroslav Mudry.
US, Russian French and British air and naval forces streamed to the Syrian and Iranian coasts over the weekend on guard for fresh developments at the two Middle East flashpoints.
Reflecting Israel’s propaganda line on Iran and Syria, DEBKAfile claims that its “military sources report the constant escalation of military tension around Iran and Syria in recent days as not just stemming from the rapid advances Iran is making toward production of a nuclear weapon, but from fears in the West and Israel that Tehran and Damascus are in step over their military plans for the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean sectors.” http://www.debka.com/article/21633/
Sorry for the long post but I think all of these things are relevant to the situation. Sabres are rattling and the drums of war are pounding...
variablebinary
01-09-12, 14:03
Sabres are rattling and the drums of war are pounding...
Figure the formal Iranian military would be annihilated within 2 weeks.
The life of their air power and sea power would be measured in hours.
The Chinese and Russians will not have the support of the Iranian people, so that's a bridge to no where for them.
I'm not especially concerned. If Israel is, they better get on that.
crusader377
01-09-12, 14:20
The war drums are definitely pounding and I think this fear mongering over Iran threat is stuipid.
You hear of all the talking heads in the media stating what a big threat Iran is but if you look at reality, Iran has a quarter of the population of the United States and approximately 1/40th of the economy. Even if Iran acquires a primitive nuclear weapon, they have no delivery system. In addition, Iran has no real military tradition and have no recent expansionist tradition or desires.
IMO, the political and corporate elites in this country want the war in order to make huge profits off the increased oil prices which would easily go to $8-$10 per gallon and wall street can make a fortune off of oil speculation as well. In addition, it will move the focus of the American people towards the war and distract them from sheer fraud being committed by the mainstream of both political parties and the corporate elites towards the people.
variablebinary
01-09-12, 14:39
The war drums are definitely pounding and I think this fear mongering over Iran threat is stuipid.
You hear of all the talking heads in the media stating what a big threat Iran is but if you look at reality, Iran has a quarter of the population of the United States and approximately 1/40th of the economy. Even if Iran acquires a primitive nuclear weapon, they have no delivery system. In addition, Iran has no real military tradition and have no recent expansionist tradition or desires.
IMO, the political and corporate elites in this country want the war in order to make huge profits off the increased oil prices which would easily go to $8-$10 per gallon and wall street can make a fortune off of oil speculation as well. In addition, it will move the focus of the American people towards the war and distract them from sheer fraud being committed by the mainstream of both political parties and the corporate elites towards the people.
Our banks and oil industry want in as well.
New markets bring huge profits.
Then there is Israel; they really want us to whack the Mullahs
crusader377
01-09-12, 14:51
Our banks and oil industry want in as well.
New markets bring huge profits.
Then there is Israel; they really want us to whack the Mullahs
Plus more ways for defense and defense service contractors to fleece the American tax payer by either over charging for services or deliver under performing services that provide a poor value to the military and tax payers.
Doc Safari
01-09-12, 15:14
Great info, Irish (and everyone). (How does this guy find all these articles)? :D
As for proof? You mean proof like we had for the WMD's in Iraq? Or would that be the proof that OBL was hiding in Tora Bora?
I kind of agree with the first response. Afghanistan will wind down and Iran will be the October surprise. Wouldn't want to change presidents in the middle of a war, now would we? Nah, not smart. "Wouldn't be prudent."
Still, we cannot let Iran get the bomb. With all apologies to the Ron Paul fans in the audience, he is nuts if he thinks Iran can get the bomb and everything will be okay. They will find a way to use it even if they have to acquire the delivery means from Russian or China--if they haven't already. There's that "proof" again. Would the Mullahs be speaking so boldly if they didn't have something up their sleeves?
The war drums are definitely pounding and I think this fear mongering over Iran threat is stuipid.
You hear of all the talking heads in the media stating what a big threat Iran is but if you look at reality, Iran has a quarter of the population of the United States and approximately 1/40th of the economy. Even if Iran acquires a primitive nuclear weapon, they have no delivery system. In addition, Iran has no real military tradition and have no recent expansionist tradition or desires.
Except they have already said they would like to wipe Israel off the map.
montanadave
01-09-12, 18:20
All these different military forces, ours included, are engaged in an incredibly risky game of chicken in one of the most volatile areas on the planet. And it's close quarters with no room for error. Too much firepower packed into too small an area with no room to accurately assess threats before acting. USS Vincennes and Iran Air flight 655 ring any bells?
I'm reminded of Fred Thompson's line in Hunt For Red October when Admiral Painter looks out on the wreckage of a jet burning on his flight deck and says, "This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."
The ****ing crazy part is everybody knows it and continues to play the game. Almost like they're daring each other to start a shooting war. But that's crazy, right? :rolleyes:
Still, we cannot let Iran get the bomb. With all apologies to the Ron Paul fans in the audience, he is nuts if he thinks Iran can get the bomb and everything will be okay. They will find a way to use it even if they have to acquire the delivery means from Russian or China--if they haven't already. There's that "proof" again. Would the Mullahs be speaking so boldly if they didn't have something up their sleeves?
That is the ONLY thing I don't agree with about Ron Paul. Iran can not be trusted.
Heres my question.
Why must we attack Iran if they get a nuclear weapon?
Have we attacked North Korea? Russia? China? Nope.
Why Iran?
The fact of the matter is, IF iran got a nuclear weapon they would know exactly what those other countries know. Use it on us, and your country will be destroyed (probably before we're even hit).
I guess we just got lucky during the ENTIRE COLD WAR!!
Even if Iran acquires a primitive nuclear weapon, they have no delivery system.
Really?
Suicide bomber(s) plus:
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTkIQgRTy_yLC3_rL111ZK6nX9tUwJ2Mfwb8GaWM6YpOiuehV7S2Q
and/or
http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQxhnUk_pbUBoZ5hUmstGv_C21--9iKBDjf_dmWaNrkNEDcaxu5
Mauser KAR98K
01-09-12, 20:05
The proof will be in the mushroom cloud and where it looms over.
arizonaranchman
01-09-12, 20:08
The Iranian military and it's Navy are a complete joke, they'll be completely destroyed within minutes if we endeavor to do so. The straight of Hormuz would be closed for approx 5 minutes before we sank and/or destroyed everything they have. The waterways will have to be cleared of mines, etc before it can be safely re-opened afterwards.
The real weapon Iran has is the massive disruption all this would cause in the oil markets and in the world economy, which is teetering on the verge of collapse anyway.
The Iranian government is on a suicide mission if it decides to keep pushing the nuke thing. Israel will not tolerate it and eventually will act unilaterally since our current administration doesnt have the balls to shake a stick at a fly. Obama is anti-semitic and a closet radical himself, so he has no inclination to take dramatic action unless it's simply an election year tactic.
The proof will be in the mushroom cloud and where it looms over.
Where have I heard that before?....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxhIkzTg14M
Suwannee Tim
01-09-12, 20:46
The war drums are definitely pounding and I think this fear mongering over Iran threat is stuipid.
You hear of all the talking heads in the media stating what a big threat Iran is but if you look at reality, Iran has a quarter of the population of the United States and approximately 1/40th of the economy. Even if Iran acquires a primitive nuclear weapon, they have no delivery system. In addition, Iran has no real military tradition and have no recent expansionist tradition or desires.
IMO, the political and corporate elites in this country want the war in order to make huge profits off the increased oil prices which would easily go to $8-$10 per gallon and wall street can make a fortune off of oil speculation as well. In addition, it will move the focus of the American people towards the war and distract them from sheer fraud being committed by the mainstream of both political parties and the corporate elites towards the people.
Iran has terrorist proxies all over the middle east and, I believe, thousands of terrorist sleepers right here in the United States. This tiny, weak nation has been committing acts or war against the mighty United States for decades and getting away with it. If we let them they will develop sophisticated nuclear weapons and ballistic missile systems to deliver them to Europe and the US. The possession of such weapons will deter the US from attacking Iran proper while they engage us in an asymmetrical terrorist war. The idea that we would go to war to to permit corporate interests to profit from high oil prices is absurd. Corporations are bleeding us white by the trillion without war. War will upset their gravy train. They don't want that. As far as Iran being expansionist, that ain't the problem. The problem is Islamic imperialism. They intend to dominate the world. They intend to make Islam supreme over every institution throughout the world. I fear Iran. You will too in due course.
ForTehNguyen
01-09-12, 21:13
Iran cant even refine their own gasoline. Their air force and navy is a complete joke. Yet they can somehow develop a sophisticated ballistic system?
Suwannee Tim
01-09-12, 21:24
Heres my question.
Why must we attack Iran if they get a nuclear weapon?
Have we attacked North Korea? Russia? China? Nope.
Why Iran?
The fact of the matter is, IF iran got a nuclear weapon they would know exactly what those other countries know. Use it on us, and your country will be destroyed (probably before we're even hit).
I guess we just got lucky during the ENTIRE COLD WAR!!
J-Dub the Cold War cost tens of thousands of American lives in Korea and Vietnam and more in training accidents. The cost in treasure was colossal. And yet we managed to contain the Soviet Union. Those folks, though evil were rational. The mullahs are not rational. They seek war and death. They cannot be contained and deterred as the USSR was.
Suwannee Tim
01-09-12, 21:26
Iran cant even refine their own gasoline. Their air force and navy is a complete joke. Yet they can somehow develop a sophisticated ballistic system?
North Korea can't feed their people yet they developed an impressive nuclear industry and ballistic missile capability. The answer is yes, they can and will develop nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. Their navy is a joke only when compared to the US or British Navies. Their navy is impressive by third world standards.
Iran has put it's priorities towards propaganda and making weapons of war, not free speech and increasing their standard of living. It's not that they CAN'T feed their people, it's that their leaders CHOOSE not to. Since the leadership of the Iran wants missiles and they have the money, yes they can develop missiles. They send their intellectually capable people to European universities for western educations, bring them back to Iran, and they make what their government wants them to make. Don't think that because they lack something simple, that it means they can't create something sophisticated.
crusader377
01-09-12, 22:01
The proof will be in the mushroom cloud and where it looms over.
That the same arguement that the Neo-cons gave pre-invasion of Iraq, then they manufactured evidence of a looming WMD threat. Nearly 9 years, $1 trillion borrowed dollars, and most importantly 4500 American lives later, we never found any evidence of an active WMD program.
After careful consideration I think I much preferred it when Iran and Iraq were at war with each other and we were bombing Libya.
I think Reagan was a genius.
Sadly Bush Sr. had to go screw the pooch on the whole Kuwait stealing Iraqi oil thing.
Suwannee Tim
01-10-12, 05:36
That the same arguement that the Neo-cons gave pre-invasion of Iraq, then they manufactured evidence of a looming WMD threat. Nearly 9 years, $1 trillion borrowed dollars, and most importantly 4500 American lives later, we never found any evidence of an active WMD program.
Sadam's possession of WMD was half of one of twelve reasons we invaded Iraq. You can review the Iraq War Resolution here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War_Resolution). You are incorrect that there was no evidence of an active WMD program. Sadam retained the capability to build WMD particularly chemical weapons. There is not the slightest evidence that the "Neocons" fabricated anything. If they did they succeeded in decieving the Chinese, the Russians, the French, the Brits, and the Democrats and did so without leaving a trace of evidence of the deception. Then Senator Hillary Clinton assured us that she had sources independent of the Bush administration which confirmed what they were saying just before she voted for the Iraq War Resolution. Several other prominent Democrat Senators and Representatives made similar remarks. The Clinton administration was convinced Sadam possessed large quantities of chemicals and in fact it was under Clinton that US policy towards Iraq was changed from containment to regime change. That was the Iraq Liberation Act, signed into law by President Clinton Oct 31, 1998 which you can read about here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act) No one has ever shown that any Bush administration official knew, prior to the war, that Sadam had destroyed his chemical stockpiles. The endless chant of "No WMD, no WMD, no WMD" is nothing but a cynical ploy to discredit George W Bush and undermine public support for the Iraq war for the benefit of the Democrats.
montanadave
01-10-12, 06:55
Sadam's possession of WMD was half of one of twelve reasons we invaded Iraq.
The endless chant of "No WMD, no WMD, no WMD" is nothing but a cynical ploy to discredit George W Bush and undermine public support for the Iraq war for the benefit of the Democrats.
Not to put too fine a point on it but horseshit!
I don't give a rip what kind of language the politicians and bureaucrats buried in their resolution to cover their ass, the American public were sold the invasion of Iraq on one thing and one thing only-- the threat of Saddam Hussein possessing WMDs and the imminent threat to the United States.
As for a cynical ploy to discredit George W. Bush, gimme a break. The record of the Bush administration and the fact that he handed over the keys to a house on fire speaks for itself.
Not trying to pick a fight, Tim, but I could not disagree with the substance of your post more strongly. And the fact that we are witnessing a "instant replay" is deeply disturbing.
I don't discount the fact that the Iranian leadership is actively seeking a nuclear weapon. But, just as Saddam's threats and proclamations vis-a-vis nuclear weapons were shown to be more bluff than substance and intended to cow his enemies, the most inflammatory rhetoric coming out of Iran is from the mullahs and their puppet regime who are under intense pressure from a large segment of the Iranian people who have watched them turn one of the leading countries in the region into the Persian Gulf's economic equivalent of North Korea in a single generation.
I’m no fan of Iran, in fact I think they were the original target once we took down Afghanistan and Iraq had to be cleared away before knocking Iran off. Clearly Iran was smart enough to do as much as needed but not too much in both Iraq & Afghanistan. They have been a problem since 1979 and we have consistently mis-stepped. I was dealing with them in Beirut in 1982-84. They killed Americans through the 1980s and were also involved in Bosnia etc as well as Lebanon and the West Bank. They have expansionist desires.
Iran is a problem and will continue to be. The question is what is the ‘trigger’ event and what are we willing to do. They are good a crowding “the line” and backing off. They know they are up against the biggest kid on the block (us and act accordingly), they are not stupid.
IMHO the biggest threat to us from Iran is surface to surface missiles (like the silkworm) launched from the north side of the Straits of Hormuz. For us to keep it open would require taking the land on the north side to provide enough buffer so our missile defense systems.
Sadly Bush Sr. had to go screw the pooch on the whole Kuwait stealing Iraqi oil thing.
Are you saying that Iraq should have been allowed to keep Kuwait, or that Bush Sr. should have finished Saddam? I ask because I've never heard of anyone claiming that Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil.
montanadave
01-10-12, 07:53
Are you saying that Iraq should have been allowed to keep Kuwait, or that Bush Sr. should have finished Saddam? I ask because I've never heard of anyone claiming that Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil.
The Rumaila field in southern Iraq accounted for a significant portion of Iraq's oil production and a small portion of that field extended across the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border. Saddam, as one of several attempts to justify his invasion of Kuwait, had accused the Kuwaitis of using directional drilling techniques to tap into Iraqi reserves.
I know a lot of folks hate Wiki but it does provide a reasonable synopsis and has multiple links to news stories published during that period outlining the substance (or lack thereof) of Saddam's claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumaila_oil_field
We can argue whether or not Iran is a threat or not. In my opinion they are as much of a threat as N. Korea, China, Russia.
Heres whats going to happen. There will be a false flag event "that leaves us no choice" but to attack Iran.
Something along the lines of the "gulf of tonkin" "wmd's" ect. Our Government has gotten pretty good at fabricating whatever it needs in order to assert their agenda.
Its only a matter of time that we go 3 for 3 in the middle east. We will completely destroy their infrastructure, then pay to rebuild it. We will be involved in a quagmire just like Iraq. It will cost us Trillions, and if it doesnt bankrupt us i would be shocked.
The Rumaila field in southern Iraq accounted for a significant portion of Iraq's oil production and a small portion of that field extended across the Iraqi-Kuwaiti border. Saddam, as one of several attempts to justify his invasion of Kuwait, had accused the Kuwaitis of using directional drilling techniques to tap into Iraqi reserves.
I know a lot of folks hate Wiki but it does provide a reasonable synopsis and has multiple links to news stories published during that period outlining the substance (or lack thereof) of Saddam's claims: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rumaila_oil_field
Thank you. I learn something new every day.
I think it is kind of inevitable, absent a massive strike that makes Iran a sea of glass, that Iran will get "the bomb" if they want it. Not much we can do about it.
So we do the same thing that we did to Russia, China, etc. We show them a map of our nuclear capability and tell Iran:
"See these silos, these submarines, these B52s? They all have your coordinates and your name on them if you screw up. Any bomb with your return address on it goes off, you are slag and glass."
The problem is, we have to mean it. And I am not sure we would.
Suwannee Tim
01-10-12, 11:30
Not to put too fine a point on it but horseshit! I don't give a rip what kind of language the politicians and bureaucrats buried in their resolution......
If you don't give a rip about the Iraq War Resolution then what does matter? What the media says about the issue? What Democrats who voted "yea" than immediately began maneuvering to cover their asses with their base say about the issue? What the anti-war left says? What Cindy Sheehan says? I followed the debate closely at the time and there was a lot more to the decision than Sadam's possession of chemical weapons. Sadam was a menace and a threat to US national security which is why he was removed. I will repeat, the change in US policy from containment of Sadam to regime change came under the Clinton Presidency, the Iraq Liberation Act.
There was a lot more to Iraq than just WMD. Just because all the media talks about is WMD does not mean that was the whole picture, as Tim has pointed out. I followed it some back then and there were many issues leading up to it.
The biggest issue (in my mind) had to do with WMD, but was not the WMD itself. It was that Saddam's defiance of the UN demands needed to be answered or else it would lead to every 2-bit dictator ignoring the UN demands. (The issue of whether the UN should be making demands in the first place etc is a DIFFERENT question for another time and place -- my comments are based on the actual facts as they existed and not ideological or philosophical musings of how it should be).
I think it is kind of inevitable, absent a massive strike that makes Iran a sea of glass, that Iran will get "the bomb" if they want it. Not much we can do about it.
So we do the same thing that we did to Russia, China, etc. We show them a map of our nuclear capability and tell Iran:
"See these silos, these submarines, these B52s? They all have your coordinates and your name on them if you screw up. Any bomb with your return address on it goes off, you are slag and glass."
The problem is, we have to mean it. And I am not sure we would.
I'd vote cruise missiles and or "smart" bombs for anything that moves that isn't being pulled by a camel.
And the fact that we are witnessing a "instant replay" is deeply disturbing.
What do you mean? http://youtu.be/8KiRAMvAlpQ
Are you saying that Iraq should have been allowed to keep Kuwait, or that Bush Sr. should have finished Saddam? I ask because I've never heard of anyone claiming that Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil.
Kuwait was lateral drilling across the border into what most would consider Iraqi oil reserves. Saddam got pissed and Kuwait told him to suck it.
Saddam then asked about US involvement and was told the US did not want to interfere with Arab Arab relations in the region and was only concerned with stability. Basically the US didn't want to call Kuwait a thief because they were giving us good prices on oil.
Saddam took the message to mean "Do what you gotta do but do it quick and don't mess up the works." In addition to Kuwaits lateral drilling, Saddam also coveted the Kuwaiti oil fields because his war with Iran had devastating his economy and he felt he should have received more support from the West for fighting Iran.
I don't think Saddam should have been allowed to keep Kuwait but we definitely sent him some mixed messages when he sought help with resolution with Kuwait. Of course if we told him we would not tolerate an action against Kuwait then Saddam would have looked to us to solve the problem and we didn't want to get in the middle.
And yes, once we kinda hosed him the second big mistake was leaving him in power but that was a condition of the Arab coalition we formed. The net result was we took a quasi ally and the leader of the closest thing the Middle East can produce resembling a secular democracy and made him hate us.
I don't think he was in any way, shape or form anything other than a brutal dictator, but he did kinda get screwed on that one.
Doc Safari
01-10-12, 17:02
I don't think he was in any way, shape or form anything other than a brutal dictator, but he did kinda get screwed on that one.
It's really hard for me to have any sympathy for someone that put people alive into plastic shredders, but it probably did send a message to other regional powers not to trust the US.
It's really hard for me to have any sympathy for someone that put people alive into plastic shredders, but it probably did send a message to other regional powers not to trust the US.
The sad reality is in the Middle East you typically have your choice between an Ayatollah or an Assahollah. These are the only forms of government that seem to be tolerated by those populations, if they wanted Western style democracy they'd have it by now, it's been around a long time.
So those are the kinds of world leaders that are available to work with. The Shah wasn't a nice guy either sometimes.
And like I said, Saddam was clearly a "bad person" but we took the time to form an alliance with him because he was at war with Iran (another "bad person").
Bush Sr. should have been more mindful of the kind of person he was and careful about what kind of message we send. And as a supposed "ally" of the US we should have backed him a little bit in the whole "Hey you ****ers are stealing our oil" situation with Kuwait. But Kuwait was basically buying us off with cheap oil so we picked out side and Saddam became the crazy ex girlfriend.
I just think we could have handled it much better and been able to prevent the invasion of Kuwait and the first Persian Gulf War which of course would have eliminated the need for the invasion of Iraq since Saddam would still be a "quasi" ally of the US.
Why the UN wasn't forced to mediate the Iraq - Kuwait problem is beyond me. Well besides the fact that Kuwait probably was providing cheap oil to every member of the UN security council.
Suwannee Tim
01-10-12, 17:49
I'd vote cruise missiles and or "smart" bombs for anything that moves that isn't being pulled by a camel.
And so we will. We will mess around and they will mess around and they will interpret our messing around as weakness and mess around some more. One day they will go too far. Way too far. Then we will destroy them.
I don't think he was in any way, shape or form anything other than a brutal dictator, but he did kinda get screwed on that one.
That we were paying back in the 80's to fight Iran.
Hmmmm we overthrew their govt. in the 50's, we help fund a war against them. Geez i cant imagine WHY they wouldnt like us.....
must be because of our freedom (that we dont have) LOL get real people.
That we were paying back in the 80's to fight Iran.
Hmmmm we overthrew their govt. in the 50's, we help fund a war against them. Geez i cant imagine WHY they wouldnt like us.....
must be because of our freedom (that we dont have) LOL get real people.
Except the Iranian people does not hate America. Just the radical government and its hanger-ons. Lots of articles out there to read on this.
This old "we overthrew their govt in the 50s" bit is kind of getting old. That is an insignificant part of things. (And it is not even true -- there was a royalist group of people who supported the Shah, who had been in power previously, and we helped those people -- we did not simply "overthrow" their government -- do some research on it -- I have posted links in here previously)
variablebinary
01-10-12, 19:41
Except the Iranian people does not hate America. Just the radical government and its hanger-ons. Lots of articles out there to read on this.
This is very true. We start bombing their country and they will swing against us quickly and rally behind the nuts.
We'd be better off dropping off new iPhones and iPods loaded with cool apps, Lady Gaga and Kanye West. It'd be more effective than the FP-45 Liberator
Suwannee Tim
01-10-12, 20:20
.....Hmmmm we overthrew their govt. in the 50's, we help fund a war against them. Geez i cant imagine WHY they wouldnt like us......
We gave negligible assistance to both sides during the Iran / Iraq war. We did not fund either side. Nothing we did affected the outcome of the war. As far as overthrowing Mosaddegh, I was a college student at the time and hung with the Iranians. At the time of the revolution they divided up into pro and anti Shah camps. Neither side gave a rats ass about Mosaddegh. They hate us because they are Muslims Mr. Dub. Things like homosexuality, women's rights, drugs, alcohol, pornography, make them crazy. They also hate us because thy are Islamofascists. We are the only powerful force standing in the way of a modern day, world wide Caliphate.
Except the Iranian people does not hate America.....
Absolutely true and we have done little or nothing to exploit this grave weakness of theirs, something I fault W for.
variablebinary
01-10-12, 20:35
Absolutely true and we have done little or nothing to exploit this grave weakness of theirs, something I fault W for.
We should not be propping up or overthrowing dictators.
Let the nations, even Islamic ones, self govern, and our role should be to expand trade until we are put in a position to defend ourselves.
And no, attacking someone because you think they might have a big gun is not self defense.
Suwannee Tim
01-10-12, 20:50
They are at war with us right now variable, we just don't want to admit it.
Moose-Knuckle
01-10-12, 20:51
The dominos are falling according to plan. . .
Iran is the fly in the globalist’s ointment. It is the central challenge to US geo-political strategy in the region. Cabinet members like Zbigniew Brzezinski (the guy that recruited Barry) have been biting at the chomps to get back in there since '79.
variablebinary
01-10-12, 21:13
The dominos are falling according to plan. . .
Iran is the fly in the globalist’s ointment. It is the central challenge to US geo-political strategy in the region. Cabinet members like Zbigniew Brzezinski (the guy that recruited Barry) have been biting at the chomps to get back in there since '79.
You know scum like Brzezinski and Kissinger are salivating for a ground war with Iran
FromMyColdDeadHand
01-11-12, 00:00
This is very true. We start bombing their country and they will swing against us quickly and rally behind the nuts.
We'd be better off dropping off new iPhones and iPods loaded with cool apps, Lady Gaga and Kanye West. It'd be more effective than the FP-45 Liberator
You know what would be really nice is if the lefty liberal media in tv and movies made movies and standup comedy about how bad the theocracy in Iran and the Islamofacists are. Show how weak the leadership really is. Nothing is as corrosive to unquestionable leadership as a good satire. Instead the lefties still harp about Bush and pick on Santorum and Palin.
You know scum like Brzezinski and Kissinger are salivating for a ground war with Iran
If we are going to go to war, let's go to war to win. But we have not done that since Korea.
No, I am inclined to agree with the RP fanbois to just bring everyone home, and then "speak softly and carry a REALLY BIG STICK" and don't be afraid to use it if someone attacks us.
Attacking Iran is just dumb at this point.
That we were paying back in the 80's to fight Iran.
Hmmmm we overthrew their govt. in the 50's, we help fund a war against them. Geez i cant imagine WHY they wouldnt like us.....
must be because of our freedom (that we dont have) LOL get real people.
Operation Ajax wasn't us, that was England. Iran hated us because we allowed the Shah to come to the US for medical reasons and refused to send him back to Iran. Of course after the Islamic Revolution, they would have hated us no matter what we did or didn't do.
The dominos are falling according to plan. . .
Iran is the fly in the globalist’s ointment. It is the central challenge to US geo-political strategy in the region. Cabinet members like Zbigniew Brzezinski (the guy that recruited Barry) have been biting at the chomps to get back in there since '79.
We have to be mindful that the Middle East has a Sunni-Shia balance of power that the Islamic world must maintain. Iran used to be the balance for Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Of course lately Iraq has become a Shia majority nation and that may be shifting the balance.
Conspirators may claim this is by design and was one of the actual goals of the war in Iraq. This way Iran could be removed (due to their continuous desire to become a nuclear player) without upsetting the Sunni Shia balance in the Middle East.
Moose-Knuckle
01-11-12, 02:04
We have to be mindful that the Middle East has a Sunni-Shia balance of power that the Islamic world must maintain. Iran used to be the balance for Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Of course lately Iraq has become a Shia majority nation and that may be shifting the balance.
Conspirators may claim this is by design and was one of the actual goals of the war in Iraq. This way Iran could be removed (due to their continuous desire to become a nuclear player) without upsetting the Sunni Shia balance in the Middle East.
In keeping with the premise “never let a good crisis go to waste”, the globalists accomplished much with the GWOT. In Iraq they killed many birds with one stone. Offsetting the Sunni-Shia balance may have been one objective completed or merely a by-product.
Political parties and or ideologies be it Neo-Con Republicans or Pinko-Commie Democrats each have their respective pool of “experts”. These “think tanks” are above the table not under it; Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Affairs, Bilderberg Group, the Program for the New American Century, et al. Brzezinski is to the Democrats as Kissinger is to the Republicans. Funny neither one of these douche bags are Americans huh?
Video of Brzezinksi on C-SPAN laughing and talking about such groups:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOk6ENxyAh0&list=FL-C7OoROHyu1tUldSZD59mg&index=54&feature=plpp_video
As for Iran, here is an interesting little tid-bit by General Wesely Clark on an agenda created prior to 9/11 that had us going into various mid-east countries to include Iraq and Iran. Just ignore his Democrat diatribes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjd3bGQjN9U
Doc Safari
03-02-12, 10:57
Barry ups the ante:
http://news.yahoo.com/interview-obama-says-hes-not-bluffing-iran-130532562.html
"President Barack Obama warned that he is not bluffing about attacking Iran if it builds a nuclear weapon, but in an interview published Friday, Obama also warned U.S. ally Israel that a premature attack on Iran would do more harm than good.
In his most expansive remarks on the issue thus far, Obama told The Atlantic magazine that Iran and Israel both understand that "a military component" is among a mix of many options for dealing with Iran, along with sanctions and diplomacy. That is the most direct threat he has issued during months of escalating tension with Iran over its disputed nuclear development program."
"I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff," he said in the interview. "I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But (both) governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say."
Spurholder
03-02-12, 12:18
We'd be better off dropping off new iPhones and iPods loaded with cool apps, Lady Gaga and Kanye West. It'd be more effective than the FP-45 Liberator
This.
Too bad that we didn't really work to exploit this during the last Iranian election. Would've made a whopper of an IO campaign, too.
Here is the play:
Around October, before the election, Obama does the 'shock+awe' on Iran. Or, supports Israel in doing the same. There will be lot's of 'evidence' of WMDs that will get little scrutiny from the press.
Obama will look like a very serious president. He will win very narrowly against Romney (or Santorium, or The Newt) who also supports bombing Iran and can't say anything about it.
The Iranian moles who are already in the US and Europe will activate and begin a long campaign against the US. This will not be a single dramatic 911 type attack but 'death by a thousand cuts.'
Our response will be full bore police state. If you like what the DHS and TSA are doing now, you will love what is coming.
Oh, and Ron Paul is crazy, unelectable, and possibly a racist.
Barry ups the ante:
http://news.yahoo.com/interview-obama-says-hes-not-bluffing-iran-130532562.html
"President Barack Obama warned that he is not bluffing about attacking Iran if it builds a nuclear weapon, but in an interview published Friday, Obama also warned U.S. ally Israel that a premature attack on Iran would do more harm than good.
In his most expansive remarks on the issue thus far, Obama told The Atlantic magazine that Iran and Israel both understand that "a military component" is among a mix of many options for dealing with Iran, along with sanctions and diplomacy. That is the most direct threat he has issued during months of escalating tension with Iran over its disputed nuclear development program."
"I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as president of the United States, I don't bluff," he said in the interview. "I also don't, as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But (both) governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say."
Sanctions cripple the economy. Iran sells oil for gold, hey wait the dollar is the world reserve currency. The Fed controls the dollar. The globalists control The Fed. Obama is a globalist puppet. The globalists need/want to attack Iran. The rest is for show/diversion, we hit them at a time of our choosing. "diplomacy is waiting for your snipers to get into position."
Didn't Saddam sell oil for gold after sanctions too?????
Here is the play:
Around October, before the election, Obama does the 'shock+awe' on Iran. Or, supports Israel in doing the same. There will be lot's of 'evidence' of WMDs that will get little scrutiny from the press.
Obama will look like a very serious president. He will win very narrowly against Romney (or Santorium, or The Newt) who also supports bombing Iran and can't say anything about it.
The Iranian moles who are already in the US and Europe will activate and begin a long campaign against the US. This will not be a single dramatic 911 type attack but 'death by a thousand cuts.'
Our response will be full bore police state. If you like what the DHS and TSA are doing now, you will love what is coming.
Oh, and Ron Paul is crazy, unelectable, and possibly a racist.
I wonder how they got here? Oh yeah our borders are open. Bushes were globailsts too, so are the Clintons.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt2yGzHfy7s
TSA is Omaos well funded police/military/whatever he was calling for that mirrors the police/military back in 2008, except without the training our police/military have about our bill of rights. How convenient since NDAA was passed under the cover of night.
Doc Safari
08-03-12, 11:23
Time is running out.
I've heard various reports predicting an Israeli and/or US strike between July 2012 and October 2012. Some speculate this will be Barry's "October Surprise."
I'm posting this as noteworthy because it shows the perspective from the other side:
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=279980
Commander of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard Mohammad Jafari warns against West's "soft war" attacks; Ayatollah Jannati says Iran in midst of "economic crisis," warns country will not succumb to sanctions.
Jafari's comments came amid an uptick in public discussions over a potential Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear program. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Wednesday that US-led sanctions and diplomatic efforts have had no impact on the Iranian nuclear program, and warned that time is running out to peacefully resolve the issue. Former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy also fueled speculation of an impending Israeli strike, telling the New York Times on Wednesday that "If I were an Iranian, I would be very fearful of the next 12 weeks.” The Times reported that some American officials believe Israel might attack Iran this year.
Privately, I am planning to stock up on enough ammo to last at least a couple of years in case a new war causes shortages/price increases. Sadly, funds are lacking so this war may be underway before I can do so. :(
Make sure to put power generation in your preps. Large transformers and power lines will be prime targets for the Iranian moles that are already here.
Make sure to put power generation in your preps. Large transformers and power lines will be prime targets for the Iranian moles that are already here.
I've got a fairly new 5k watt generator..I'm thinkng you may want to add fossil fuel power plants to the list...Every one I worked at has been lightly guarded by unarmed guards...10-12 guys, armed,and with explosives, and knowing where to go, could easily damage one enough to put it out of commission for several weeks..And all it would take, would be to take out the boiler feed supply lines, as well as the emergency feed pumps, and let the boiler overheat, explode.. That's just one way, there several others that would also work well
Doc Safari
08-09-12, 15:29
http://www.timesofisrael.com/saudi-arabia-no-israeli-overflights/
Saudi Arabia says it would ‘intercept Israeli planes en route to Iran’
Saudi Arabia will not permit Israeli aircraft to cross its territory on the way to strike Iran, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Thursday. The message was passed to Jerusalem via Obama administration officials during recent talks in Israel, it claimed.
Senior Israeli officials reportedly see the move as a warning message from the US not to launch a unilateral strike, according to the paper.
Saudi Arabia is supplied with US military equipment and aircraft, and some estimate that if an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities were carried out in cooperation with the US, Saudi Arabia would permit an overflight.
But if Israel acts alone, Yedioth claimed, Riyadh told the US it would intercept any Israeli plane that tried to cross its territory on the way to Iran.
The closing of Saudi Arabian airspace would remove from Israel’s options one potential route to get to Iran, but others exist: north over Turkey, or straight east through Jordan and Iraq. However it is unclear whether those countries would allow Israel to use its airspace as well.
My take: the U.S. is pressuring Israel not to act unilaterally, especially in an election year. Israel, on the other hand, will likely act in its own interests and disregard this "pressure" if the leadership feels it has to. This is an interesting quandary: do the Israelis bow to U.S. pressure, or risk a wider war by violating another country's airspace? To further muddy the waters, it has been said in the past that Saudi Arabia privately hopes Israel will attack Iran because they don't want the Iranians to have nukes either, but have to maintain the public anti-Israel stance for the sake of Muslim public opinion. This latter scenario seems to be the only viable one as far as Israel using Saudi Arabia's airspace without permission. Arabia publicly protests, but does little else. Israel takes out Iran's nukes. Everybody's happy (except "I'm-a-Nutjob").
Thoughts?
Another step toward war:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/irans-nuclear-program-designed-to-finish-off-israel-hezbollah-mp-says/
Doc Safari
08-10-12, 11:46
Looks like Israel is leaning toward acting unilaterally, and soon:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-and-barak-steadfast-in-gearing-up-for-iran-strike/
Netanyahu and Barak said to be pushing for an Iran strike this fall
Prime minister and defense minister reportedly unwilling to wait for Washington, fear US will be too slow to take action
the two may be looking to hit Iran before the US presidential elections in November
If this is true, in less than three months the world may be a very different place.
$6 a gallon gas, anyone?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2186506/Three-US-Marines-gunned-traitor-Afghan-police-commander-invited-dinner--THIRD-deadly-betrayal-allied-forces-week.html
Doc Safari
08-13-12, 09:19
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/158811
Attack on Iran Means Regional War, Says Ex-IDF General
An Israeli military attack on Iran would ignite a regional war...
“A strike could trigger an overt war without end… and an all-out missile war may escalate into something especially horrific, so in essence, Israel would be trading a theoretical war later for an actual war now,”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/reports-netanyahu-has-almost-finally-made-decision-to-attack-iran-nuke-plants-but-cabinet-colleagues-oppose/
Reports: Netanyahu Has ‘Almost Finally’ Made Decision to Attack Iran Nuke Plants — But Cabinet Colleagues Oppose
Doc Safari
08-13-12, 15:58
Supposedly this is an Israeli media site specializing in intel stories. Not sure if this should be taken as accurate or saber-rattling:
http://www.debka.com/article/22271/Iran-can-build-an-N-bomb-by-Oct-1-Cairo-coup-hampers-Israeli-action
At its present rate of enrichment, Iran will have 250 kilograms of 20-percent grade uranium, exactly enough to build its first nuclear bomb, in roughly six weeks, and two-to- four bombs by early 2013, debkafile’s military and intelligence sources report. Hence the leak by an unnamed Israeli security source Sunday, Aug. 12, disclosing Iran’s progress in developing the detonator and fuses for a nuclear warhead which can be fitted onto Shehab-3 ballistic missiles capable of reaching Israel.
And this one is, of course, major saber-rattling, but it indicates we are very close:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9471079/Israel-demands-nuclear-ultimatum-for-Iran.html
Israel demands nuclear ultimatum for Iran
Israel declared that international talks with Iran on its nuclear programme had failed as it demanded a deadline of "just a few weeks" be handed down to Tehran to scrap its atomic build-up.
My take: Israel knows or at least believes the US will sit this one out as long as Barry is president. As soon as Israel launches its strike it will likely anger Iran enough that they attempt to close the Straits of Hormuz, which will almost certainly drag the US into it.
Supposedly this is an Israeli media site specializing in intel stories. Not sure if this should be taken as accurate or saber-rattling:
http://www.debka.com/article/22271/Iran-can-build-an-N-bomb-by-Oct-1-Cairo-coup-hampers-Israeli-action
And this one is, of course, major saber-rattling, but it indicates we are very close:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/9471079/Israel-demands-nuclear-ultimatum-for-Iran.html
My take: Israel knows or at least believes the US will sit this one out as long as Barry is president. As soon as Israel launches its strike it will likely anger Iran enough that they attempt to close the Straits of Hormuz, which will almost certainly drag the US into it.
I believe you're quite right, We (the U.S.) may be at war with these people with the next 6-8 weeks, There's no doubt they will attempt to close the Straits, and force us into the fray,no matter if we want to or not. It's going to be us, and Israel.. Get ready for $10 a gallon gas....:rolleyes:
We'll probably win the war, and crash the economy doing it...
Belmont31R
08-15-12, 00:15
I believe you're quite right, We (the U.S.) may be at war with these people with the next 6-8 weeks, There's no doubt they will attempt to close the Straits, and force us into the fray,no matter if we want to or not. It's going to be us, and Israel.. Get ready for $10 a gallon gas....:rolleyes:
We'll probably win the war, and crash the economy doing it...
Not saying you're not right as I don't think there is a soul on earth who can figure out gas prices but what percent of the worlds oil comes from Iran?
Seems like gas prices are giving an ADD kid a bottle of no doz.
Not saying you're not right as I don't think there is a soul on earth who can figure out gas prices but what percent of the worlds oil comes from Iran?
Seems like gas prices are giving an ADD kid a bottle of no doz.
I don't claim to know what gas prices will be, nor do I know how much oil comes from Iran. However, my reasoning is that if/when this all starts, The Iranians know that they won't win..But while sending missles at Israel, they will no doubt send a few at the loading docks on the other side of the strait, as well as any processing facilitys, oil wells, in Saudi-Arabia,and target any tankers within range in the strait, as well as heavily mine the strait itself. This will no doubt raise havoc in the oil market, as well as disrupt supplys for several weeks/months. Now, if any of these missles will be armed with nukes, I'd say that's quite possible, and I would'nt be surprised if they target a U.S. ship, or military base with one.If that would happen, we would be fools not to respond in kind. I feel sorry for the people in Iran, they have a truely ****ed up Govt,who is willing to sacrifice all of them for Islam. These assholes are pining for a first hand demonstration of nuclear power, and they just might get it..
Doc Safari
08-15-12, 09:37
Not saying you're not right as I don't think there is a soul on earth who can figure out gas prices but what percent of the worlds oil comes from Iran?
Seems like gas prices are giving an ADD kid a bottle of no doz.
Unfortunately, it's not strictly a supply and demand issue. The speculators (I think that's the right term?) bid the price up based on what they expect to happen, not necessarily what is actually going on.
Not saying you're not right as I don't think there is a soul on earth who can figure out gas prices but what percent of the worlds oil comes from Iran?
Seems like gas prices are giving an ADD kid a bottle of no doz.
It doesn't matter how much of the worlds oil comes from Iran. A bigger percentage is shipped through the Straights, and any time anyone even SNEEZES over the ME, oil shoots up. If it gets to a real shooting war, multiply that shooting up by some big factor X.
--
Doc Safari
08-15-12, 10:52
I think the Israelis are being vastly over-optimistic on this one:
http://news.yahoo.com/israel-sees-month-conflict-possible-iran-war-085742765.html
War with Iran would probably turn into a month-long conflict on various fronts with missile strikes on Israeli cities and some 500 dead, Israel's civil defense minister said in an interview published on Wednesday.
Doc Safari
08-16-12, 13:07
Peres is trusting Obama to help them. "Well, good luck with that."
http://news.yahoo.com/israels-barak-says-iran-attack-decision-still-pending-131326116.html
Meanwhile, Ehud Barak wants to go now:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4269454,00.html
And Obama just wants to keep talking:
http://www.debka.com/article/22278/Obama-initiates-September-meeting-with-Netanyahu-to-renew-Iran-dialogue
GeorgiaBoy
08-16-12, 13:28
But I thought that Israel has never lost a war? Something about God being on their side or something? :rolleyes:
Why does a God-protected nation need the most powerful country in the world to beat up Iran?
But I thought that Israel has never lost a war? Something about God being on their side or something? :rolleyes:
Why does a God-protected nation need the most powerful country in the world to beat up Iran?
There was once a man who had a firm belief in God. One day, a dam broke and a flood came down the valley where he lived. On top of that, it was raining cats and dogs for days.
The water level was up to the bottom of the second floor and the man was stuck in his house. He prayed to God that he might be saved.
A little while later some neighbors in a rubber raft came by and asked if they could take him to safety. He said "No, God will protect and save me."
The water level went higher, to the bottom of the eaves of his house. The man retreated to his roof. A larger boat manned by rescue personnel came by and tried to get the man to come with them. He said "No, God will protect and save me."
The water level went higher and the man was forced to climb to the top of his chimney. As he hung on, praying to God that he might be saved, a Helicopter came by looking for people in need. It lowered a rescue basket to him and implored him to climb in. He yelled back, "No, God will protect and save me."
The water level rose even higher and the man drowned. After his death, his spirit went to that God in heaven to Whom he had been praying and from Whom he had expected to be rescued. When he got there, he asked God: "Father, I have been a devout follower my whole life, and have done much charity. When I was in need, and prayed that I might be save, why didst Though not save me?"
God replied: "I sent you a rubber boat, a rescue boat, and finally a helicopter. What more could you expect me to do?"
---
Doc Safari
08-17-12, 12:52
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/egypt-considering-violating-peace-treaty-with-israel/?cat_orig=world
Egypt considering violating peace treaty with Israel
Islamist president sending troops, tanks to border region
Egypt’s Islamist President Mohammed Morsi is studying the possibility of keeping tanks in the Sinai Peninsula on a permanent basis, according to a senior Egyptian military official who spoke to WND.
The military buildup would violate a key provision of peace accords signed with Israel in 1979 that calls for the total demilitarization of the peninsula.
And they promise they'll stay right there and not try to invade Israel. :rolleyes:
If the price of gas gets too high POTUS just might have to let pumping of oil in this country, just to look good and get re-elected.
I agree that we might not get much of our oil from Iran, but the rest of the world has been going around our bans for many years. A load of oil in a third world tanker can come from any where, it just takes a small 10,000$ bribe or two.
Here's some interesting reading regarding the 2002 Millennium Challenge war games. Let's hope the Iranians don't have anyone as shrewd as Van Riper.
The Worst US Naval Disaster Since Pearl Harbor
http://rense.com/general64/fore.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
Interesting read, and very true...One thing I think Iran may try would be to send a missle(s) tipped with a nuke out to a carrier group..one flash, and they're all gone...and that's looking more and more like a very real possiblty..I'd like to believe the U.S. Navy is'nt that stupid...
Doc Safari
08-19-12, 15:35
http://www.debka.com/article/22287/US-Israeli-deal-on-Iran-No-Israeli-strike-now-if-Obama-pledged-a-spring-attack
President Obama will formally inform the two houses of congress in writing that he plans to use military force to prevent Iran from arming itself with a nuclear weapon. He will request their endorsement. Aside from this step’s powerful deterrent weight for persuading Iran’s leaders to give up their pursuit of a nuclear bomb, it would also give the US president the freedom to go to war with Iran when he sees fit, without have to seek congressional endorsement.
In the coming months up until Spring 2013, the United States will upgrade Israel’s military, intelligence and technological capabilities so that if President Obama (whether he is reelected or replaced by Mitt Romney) decides to back out of this commitment, Israel will by then be in command of the resources necessary for inflicting mortal damage on Iran’s nuclear program with a unilateral strike.
VooDoo6Actual
08-19-12, 16:53
Just a heads up about Debka File. That website is/has been a Israeli Intelligence asset that has been know to use it's media/resources/sphere of influence for disinformation fyi in case you weren't aware.
Doc Safari
08-19-12, 18:47
Just a heads up about Debka File. That website is/has been a Israeli Intelligence asset that has been know to use it's media/resources/sphere of influence for disinformation fyi in case you weren't aware.
I know they are connected to Israeli intelligence. The disinformation part is a no-brainer.
By posting that article, they may be up to something like trying to force Obama's hand.
Barry doesn't want this to go full hot until after the election (if at all), and they may be selectively leaking stuff to produce a certain outcome. Or, it could be a trial balloon to give Barry some pointers as to what they might want him to do.
Except they have already said they would like to wipe Israel off the map.
No they didn't. Find a good Farsi to English translator or an actual Farsi speaker.
I KNOW the media states this over and over again but it doesn't make it true.
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-8a8a-b96d.jpg
Who is inciting whom here?
Read MacKinder, Brzezinski and Kissinger.
VooDoo6Actual
08-19-12, 21:58
Who is inciting whom here?
Read MacKinder, Brzezinski and Kissinger.
THIS.
Moose-Knuckle
08-19-12, 23:49
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-8a8a-b96d.jpg
Who is inciting whom here?
Read MacKinder, Brzezinski and Kissinger.
Looks like a map of the 'The Grand Chessboard' to me. ;)
A search for those three led me to this "interesting" read
http://www.theundergroundinvestor.com/2011/03/a-history-of-rigged-fraudulent-oil-prices-and-what-it-can-teach-us-about-gold-silver/
Not sure what to make of it.
VooDoo6Actual
08-20-12, 12:50
A search for those three led me to this "interesting" read
http://www.theundergroundinvestor.com/2011/03/a-history-of-rigged-fraudulent-oil-prices-and-what-it-can-teach-us-about-gold-silver/
Not sure what to make of it.
You would be wise to search some YouTube vids on what he KNOWS (not thinks) if your truly interested.
Dr. William Engdahl is switched on to the agenda & KNOWS all the players. He also knows more than just Oil. GMO foods, Agenda 21 etc.
Whether you believe it or not it is what's happening beyond your "sphere of influence" or what our media is covering..
You know scum like Brzezinski and Kissinger are salivating for a ground war with Iran
So are several ideological groups, including the neoconservatives, Political Zionists and a large percentage of fundamentalist Christian groups. I don't believe the majority of the rank and file followers of any or all of those "groups" know what's really going on.
http://img.tapatalk.com/a693688f-c5b4-9362.jpg
The proposed "New Middle East"...
You would be wise to search some YouTube vids on what he KNOWS (not thinks) if your truly interested.
Dr. William Engdahl is switched on to the agenda & KNOWS all the players. He also knows more than just Oil. GMO foods, Agenda 21 etc.
Whether you believe it or not it is what's happening beyond your "sphere of influence" or what our media is covering..
A VERY WELL-RESEARCHED author. His books are phenomenal.
Cagemonkey
08-20-12, 19:33
You would be wise to search some YouTube vids on what he KNOWS (not thinks) if your truly interested.
Dr. William Engdahl is switched on to the agenda & KNOWS all the players. He also knows more than just Oil. GMO foods, Agenda 21 etc.
Whether you believe it or not it is what's happening beyond your "sphere of influence" or what our media is covering..
Thanks for the info. I'll have to get one of his books. Any advise on which one would be most applicable to current events?
VooDoo6Actual
08-20-12, 20:31
Thanks for the info. I'll have to get one of his books. Any advise on which one would be most applicable to current events?
Sure Dawg here ya go:
Book links: He's does his research.
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=william+engdahl+books&tag=googhydr-20&index=stripbooks&hvadid=4299379075&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=377763092614483645&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=e&ref=pd_sl_55kl7sp8o9_e
Of all those books I'd go with :
1) Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order
2) Seeds of Destruction
I believe he has some audio books out as well if that's your preference etc.
Here's some Youtube stuff for free that he pretty much lays it all out.
Seeds of Destruction : World Seed Banks GMO foods etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siaajlCPnes&feature=plcp
This one has some interesting parts well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZVVo-M_-c8
Recent one that has some good insights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgYoZUOEExE
Here's another good one that yo can see the deception, agenda connect the dots w/ Microsoft / DARPA / Global Elite / Rockafeller etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064&feature=plcp
enjoy !
I watched some of the videos last night...If he's right, Then I see why a large part of the world dosen't like the U.S. We've created alot of problems in the world,just so a small group of people could profit from it..
It says in the Bible, that money is the root of all evil......
I watched some of the videos last night...If he's right, Then I see why a large part of the world dosen't like the U.S. We've created alot of problems in the world,just so a small group of people could profit from it..
It says in the Bible, that money is the root of all evil......
Money is not the root of all evil. Wealth is an ok thing in the Bible. The LOVE of money is the root of all evil..
Thread derail over.
Money is not the root of all evil. Wealth is an ok thing in the Bible. The LOVE of money is the root of all evil..
Thread derail over.
I was NOT attempting to derail, But rather make a point..IF all of this is true, Then these people have basically(through bribes,blackmail, etc) taken over the Govt, they control the President, and every move he makes..If this is the case, there is some credence to not voting as was the subject of another thread, After all, what's the point? whoever gets elected will do what's he's told, and NOT by the people either..
Every war we've fought in the Middle east was for nothing but these ****s profit... Because they propagated the myth that oil is in short supply and we, the U.S. need to control it.Where does it stop? When the rest of the world finally has enough, and nukes our ass? When they control all the food, oil, money? And we allow it to happen? IF all of this is true, Then we, (The U.S.) are truely evil..and their love of money will destroy us..
Doc Safari
08-21-12, 09:19
In a previous post, there appeared to be some suggestion that the Israelis might cut a deal with Obama to wait until next spring to attack Iran, if the US will get involved.
This seems to contradict that:
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-determined-to-attack-iran-before-us-elections-claims-israels-channel-10/
...Netanyahu was not waiting for a much-discussed possible meeting with US President Barack Obama, after the UN General Assembly gathering in New York late next month — indeed, “it’s not clear that there’ll be a meeting.” In any case, said Ben-David, “I doubt Obama could say anything that would convince Netanyahu to delay a possible attack.”
There is considerable opposition to an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the report noted — with President Shimon Peres, the army’s chief of the General Staff and top generals, the intelligence community, opposition leader Shaul Mofaz, “and of course the Americans” all lined up against Israeli action at this stage.
But, noted Ben-David, it is the Israeli government that would have to take the decision, and there Netanyahu is “almost guaranteed” a majority.
I was NOT attempting to derail, But rather make a point..IF all of this is true, Then these people have basically(through bribes,blackmail, etc) taken over the Govt, they control the President, and every move he makes..If this is the case, there is some credence to not voting as was the subject of another thread, After all, what's the point? whoever gets elected will do what's he's told, and NOT by the people either..
Every war we've fought in the Middle east was for nothing but these ****s profit... Because they propagated the myth that oil is in short supply and we, the U.S. need to control it.Where does it stop? When the rest of the world finally has enough, and nukes our ass? When they control all the food, oil, money? And we allow it to happen? IF all of this is true, Then we, (The U.S.) are truely evil..and their love of money will destroy us..
I was commenting on my thread derail, not implying you made one, sorry for the miss communication.
I was commenting on my thread derail, not implying you made one, sorry for the miss communication.
No Problem, Thanks for clearing that up..
VooDoo6Actual
08-21-12, 10:40
I watched some of the videos last night...If he's right, Then I see why a large part of the world dosen't like the U.S. We've created alot of problems in the world,just so a small group of people could profit from it..
It says in the Bible, that money is the root of all evil......
Yes indeed.
Actually it is the LOVE of money is the root of all evil. But I get your azimuth. Also when you control the "VoM" (Velocity of Money) you control the fact that nobody has as MUCH money so more people are apt to be enticed by corruption, collusion, coercion, policy-makers policies etc. ad nauseum. When "NPD's" (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) people make policy there is always a price to pay.
Slightly off the tangent but related on topic.
Here's more about "VoM"
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/velocity.png
"No matter what color Kool-aid you prefer, a Harvard Law School graduate who wipes his ass with the constitution will occupy the White House until 2016. Any flavor difference you think you detect is artificial. Neither party has any intention of balancing the budget or stopping the generational rape of America. They exist only to give you the illusion of choice."
"The Fed’s refusal to recognize the importance of velocity of money quickly goes from idiotic to insidious. Here’s a question: If I give you 50¢ and as a result of that transaction, you owe me $1.00, what interest rate have I charged you? Obviously, I’ve charged you 100% interest and I don’t give a rat’s ass about you or your kids. I’m pure evil and you’re pure stupid. But believe it or not, this kind of master-slave arrangement isn’t enough to satisfy a true narcissist. The narcissist needs to be exalted for his actions, no matter how unjust. "
Any Politician, News Media source etc. who espouses or spews vile Bravo Sierra that things or the Economy are getting better I have a bag of **** You for them.
http://inflationdata.com/articles/2011/09/17/velocity-of-money/
Back on Target: Obama threatens to attack Syria today:
http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-syria-weapons-president-153/
Yes indeed.
Actually it is the LOVE of money is the root of all evil. But I get your azimuth. Also when you control the "VoM" (Velocity of Money) you control the fact that nobody has as MUCH money so more people are apt to be enticed by corruption, collusion, coercion, policy-makers policies etc. ad nauseum.
Slightly off the tangent but related on topic.
Here's more about "VoM"
VooDoo..your link dosen't work...I'll checkback later, I'd like to follow this..
Doc Safari
08-21-12, 13:14
This is an opinion piece, but it's an interesting analysis on our election is influencing things and vice-versa:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/when-israel-strikes-iran-in-october/
But here’s the quandary – not only for Israel but for Americans who want to see Obama defeated in 2012: Will that kind of “October surprise” indeed help Obama to win the election?
The only thing that might change the equation is if Mitt Romney soars far ahead of Obama in the polls, effectively buying Israel more time to make its strike without major political fallout from the U.S.
As it stands now, the election is too close to call – and, in the minds of Israeli leaders, the strong possibility of an Obama re-election must be considered in the equation. As long as that is the case, you can take it to the bank that October is the likely time for a strike on Iran.
VooDoo6Actual
08-21-12, 14:06
Netanyahu ‘determined to attack Iran’ before US elections, claims Israel’s Channel 10
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-determined-to-attack-iran-before-us-elections-claims-israels-channel-10/
Doc Safari
08-21-12, 14:23
Another interesting piece on whether Israel might decide to lauch an EMP attack instead of a full-blown military strike:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/is-israel-planning-emp-attack-on-iran/
Cagemonkey
08-21-12, 18:22
Sure Dawg here ya go:
Book links: He's does his research.
http://www.amazon.com/s/?ie=UTF8&keywords=william+engdahl+books&tag=googhydr-20&index=stripbooks&hvadid=4299379075&hvpos=1t1&hvexid=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=377763092614483645&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=e&ref=pd_sl_55kl7sp8o9_e
Of all those books I'd go with :
1) Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order
2) Seeds of Destruction
I believe he has some audio books out as well if that's your preference etc.
Here's some Youtube stuff for free that he pretty much lays it all out.
Seeds of Destruction : World Seed Banks GMO foods etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siaajlCPnes&feature=plcp
This one has some interesting parts well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZVVo-M_-c8
Recent one that has some good insights:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgYoZUOEExE
Here's another good one that yo can see the deception, agenda connect the dots w/ Microsoft / DARPA / Global Elite / Rockafeller etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WQtRI7A064&feature=plcp
enjoy !Thank you very much. Its much appreciated.
VooDoo6Actual
08-21-12, 19:00
Thank you very much. Its much appreciated.
No worries.
I salute you for taking the initiative to LEARN "outside the box". There are many layers to the deception from what we are taught to believe.
Most people are too lazy & will not.
The knowledge you reap will help you & those you care about survive this labyrinth generated by the NPD's.
It's not going away until there is a conscientiousness realized by the general population.
Catch a man a fish feed him for a day, TEACH him to fish feed him & his family for a lifetime....
Yes indeed.
Actually it is the LOVE of money is the root of all evil. But I get your azimuth. Also when you control the "VoM" (Velocity of Money) you control the fact that nobody has as MUCH money so more people are apt to be enticed by corruption, collusion, coercion, policy-makers policies etc. ad nauseum. When "NPD's" (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) people make policy there is always a price to pay.
Slightly off the tangent but related on topic.
Here's more about "VoM"
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/velocity.png
"No matter what color Kool-aid you prefer, a Harvard Law School graduate who wipes his ass with the constitution will occupy the White House until 2016. Any flavor difference you think you detect is artificial. Neither party has any intention of balancing the budget or stopping the generational rape of America. They exist only to give you the illusion of choice."
"The Fed’s refusal to recognize the importance of velocity of money quickly goes from idiotic to insidious. Here’s a question: If I give you 50¢ and as a result of that transaction, you owe me $1.00, what interest rate have I charged you? Obviously, I’ve charged you 100% interest and I don’t give a rat’s ass about you or your kids. I’m pure evil and you’re pure stupid. But believe it or not, this kind of master-slave arrangement isn’t enough to satisfy a true narcissist. The narcissist needs to be exalted for his actions, no matter how unjust. "
Any Politician, News Media source etc. who espouses or spews vile Bravo Sierra that things or the Economy are getting better I have a bag of **** You for them.
http://inflationdata.com/articles/2011/09/17/velocity-of-money/
Back on Target: Obama threatens to attack Syria today:
http://rt.com/usa/news/obama-syria-weapons-president-153/
VooDoo:
Thanks for the info..I've been looking up the term "velocity of money" and reading, while I know I'm not anywhere near up on the subject as many of you are, The more I find out, the more scared/sickened I get...Ultimately, I have to wonder, just how bad will this get? What IS the end game? Total World Domination? For those of us who don't want to play ball,what happens to us? living in the woods on our wits, evading capture? Not exactly how I invisioned retirement...Anyway, Thanks again, Pardon the thread drift, I'll go back to reading up on it......
VooDoo6Actual
08-21-12, 19:21
VooDoo:
just how bad will this get?
As bad as WE let it. The US is last & ONLY bastion of a armed (alleged) Republic (which clearly) is out of plumb....
IS the end game? Total World Domination?
YES. Geopolitical Technocracy by consent or conquest. Using Financial, Food, Resources, World Army (UN, NATO expanded) Makes Global Warming look PG 13. Just wait for the other shoe to drop w/ a HUGE cutback in Military. Then the naysayers will see the light.
those of us who don't want to play ball, what happens to us? living in the woods on our wits, evading capture?
The answer for NOW is depends how far they get & what parts of their agenda they accomplish. Unprecedented so no one TRULY knows the answer. The resources are there if they accomplish their goal. FEMA, re-education it's all out there & talked about openly @ CFR meetings by Brzezinski. Most won't talk about Eugenics publicly yet. The documents & evidence is/are out there & readily available. They know they have to disarm before they can do that. They have to change ROL to get that agenda accomplished or Martial Law.
exactly how I invisioned retirement...Anyway, Thanks again, Pardon the thread drift, I'll go back to reading up on it......
No one did myself included other than those who got the MEMO or have a chair left when the music stops playing.
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/dddd-61521427952.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/dd395-Sheeple4-site.jpg
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/dd395-Sheeple3-site.jpg
Moose-Knuckle
08-21-12, 20:09
Spot on VooDoo! :help:
Doc Safari
08-22-12, 10:28
Another trial balloon? Iran's leaders potentially threatened with assassination:
http://www.debka.com/article/22293/Iranian-leaders-in-Israel’s-sights-after-calling-for-its-destruction
My take: clearly the war is already on. The Israelis are deliberately spamming the news sources in response to Iran's threats. The idea is to keep Iran guessing but afraid of everything.
Meanwhile, I would say it's almost a done-deal that some kind of military action is going to take place.
I'm thinking it will be smart to do some preps like buy more ammo in case the US gets dragged into it and there's another ammo shortage.
VooDoo:
Thanks for the info..I've been looking up the term "velocity of money" and reading, while I know I'm not anywhere near up on the subject as many of you are, The more I find out, the more scared/sickened I get...Ultimately, I have to wonder, just how bad will this get? What IS the end game? Total World Domination? For those of us who don't want to play ball,what happens to us? living in the woods on our wits, evading capture? Not exactly how I invisioned retirement...Anyway, Thanks again, Pardon the thread drift, I'll go back to reading up on it......
Those who resist are to be "cleansed" according to the Elite who choose to comment...
The_War_Wagon
08-22-12, 12:24
War is a DEMOCRAP's BEST friend!
Can't have hundreds of thousands of our best & brightest, wandering around America UN-employed! Just look at wotta PITA one retired Marine with a website causes! Look at what a PITA Allen West is to the DEMOCRAP establishment! A couple hundred THOUSAND of them, putting their ingenuity & creativity to work to solve domestic issues, would put the welfare establishment/enablers out of a job, and we CAN'T have that!!! :eek:
Best to keep 'em halfway around the world, kicking rocks and getting shot at, while we fight 7th century goat humpers with the Marquis de Queensbury rules. :rolleyes: It's easier to disenfranchise their vote that way - easier to keep them on the gummint dole (hey - military pay is STILL cheaper than ILLEGAL FOREIGN INVADER welfare, and we KNOW how the INVADERS will VOTE!) - it's easier to keep their dissident opinions OUT of the free marketplace of ideas, and it's easier to look "tough" when you send the troops out to do your bidding!
What's NOT to like about it in a re-election year?!?!
Doc Safari
08-22-12, 12:50
War Wagon you may have hit upon it: the US will either start something or join it a week or so before the election so that our service people in that part of the world will be too busy to go to the polls and vote against Barry.
Moose-Knuckle
08-22-12, 15:52
The way it will go down is either the US or the Israelis will stage some false flag op, blame it on Iran, and abracadabra we will be in a land war in Iran. The one that the bankers have wanted for a century now.
VooDoo6Actual
08-22-12, 16:21
The way it will go down is either the US or the Israelis will stage some false flag op, blame it on Iran, and abracadabra we will be in a land war in Iran. The one that the bankers have wanted for a century now.
This.
Since we're just spitballin'
I think that the US wants Israel to initiate the deed (due to complicated KSA/Jordanian/Lebanese/Turkish et al relationship), the US will justify reason for Syria direct involvement then under cover to aid it's ally Israel. Russia & China's hand will be forced. Then w/ US proxy / Satellite bases everywhere for containment/domination/supplies the stage is set.
Food drought, gas prices, and Euro close to collapsing, unemployment, social unrest, people unhappy w/ current administration it's a perfect storm created & brewed deliberately. Hang on should be a doosey.
ETA: CDC West Nile Virus red alert now. Fukushima Daiichi, Japan rearing it's head now & again w/ Radiation/Exposure leaks etc.. should be perfect storm.
Doc Safari
08-22-12, 16:32
Food drought, gas prices, and Euro close to collapsing, unemployment, social unrest, people unhappy w/ current administration it's a perfect storm created & brewed deliberately. Hang on should be a doosey.
The war's effect on all of this was actually the reason I started this thread. This country's economy is already shaky. We do not need shortages caused by a war to add to it.
Although I do sincerely believe that Israel has a right to exist and that Iran should never be allowed to get the bomb, I am certain both Israeli and US planners are trying to steer this with an eye to politics as much as military necessity.
Israel should have hit Iran months ago. Barry will probably stage some sort of "false flag op" as has been previously stated, so that his poll numbers go up and people rally around THE PRESIDENT.
Unfortunately, unless Israel does launch an EMP attack and the thing is over in twenty minutes, then I think we are in for a long drawn-out period of misery and deprivation not seen since World War II.
Every nation should reside in its own lane. Striking months ago? Perhaps we'd be at war with a pissed off Russia and China... Maybe we'd be nuked by now...
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-7371-3160.jpg
Doc Safari
08-22-12, 20:47
Every nation should reside in its own lane. Striking months ago? Perhaps we'd be at war with a pissed off Russia and China... Maybe we'd be nuked by now...
Israel has made these airstrikes before. Take Iraq's nuclear program for example. I know we are not talking about a direct comparison, but I think China and Russia would probably not come to Iran's aid over a few blown up buildings.
Somebody is going to have to take out Iran's nuclear capability sooner or later. They will use it on Israel, or us. A lot of analysts lately have become more and more concerned that Iran might actually launch an EMP attack on the US.
Unfortunately, we are in a world where we may not have a whole lot of "good" choices in this whole scenario. Israel may have to "take one for the team" even if it pisses off the Russian bear.
I do not believe we can stand by and let Iran get nukes any more than we could allow Hitler to take over Europe, North Africa, and whatnot.
I hate to say it, but World War III may be inevitable. Either we play pacifist, let Iran obtain nukes, and regret it down the road, or, we go to war, get a bunch of people killed, and a bunch of places destroyed, only to find out we didn't really accomplish much (or made things worse).
This is why I don't play chess. I hate games where you have to concede that you are beaten no matter what you do. I'm sorry to say that our "heads of state" over the years have let certain problems fester (and made other problems worse), and now we may all live to suffer for it.
But hey, that's why heads of state make the big bucks....:blink:
Israel has made these airstrikes before. Take Iraq's nuclear program for example. I know we are not talking about a direct comparison, but I think China and Russia would probably not come to Iran's aid over a few blown up buildings.
Somebody is going to have to take out Iran's nuclear capability sooner or later. They will use it on Israel, or us. A lot of analysts lately have become more and more concerned that Iran might actually launch an EMP attack on the US.
Unfortunately, we are in a world where we may not have a whole lot of "good" choices in this whole scenario. Israel may have to "take one for the team" even if it pisses off the Russian bear.
I do not believe we can stand by and let Iran get nukes any more than we could allow Hitler to take over Europe, North Africa, and whatnot.
I hate to say it, but World War III may be inevitable. Either we play pacifist, let Iran obtain nukes, and regret it down the road, or, we go to war, get a bunch of people killed, and a bunch of places destroyed, only to find out we didn't really accomplish much (or made things worse).
This is why I don't play chess. I hate games where you have to concede that you are beaten no matter what you do. I'm sorry to say that our "heads of state" over the years have let certain problems fester (and made other problems worse), and now we may all live to suffer for it.
But hey, that's why heads of state make the big bucks....:blink:
I am not willing to take a chance of a combined Russian and Chinese response over a nuclear POWERPLANT that WE supplied Iran back in 1976.
There IS no evidence of weaponry; therefore "I don't care". Actually, nuclear waste is a huge issue so we ALL should put down the war toys and develop alternatives.
But this whole thing is a continuation of "The Great Game". It has nothing to do with "nuclear weapons" but everything to do with absolute regional dominance.
Dirk Williams
08-23-12, 09:29
Interesting. I see you point yet, can't seem to get over the notion that Iran would be a nuke powered Muslim country. I see nothing good in that scenario.
Perhaps I'm a bit short sighted, however we have a solid Christian friend there who I believe we need to stand by in bad times and good times.
That Christian nation is and has been a nuke armed country for many many years, and not pressed the issue. Not so with Iran, they are openly saying they will nuke others to achieve their agenda, of Muslim dominance in the region and eventually globally.
Hope this makes sense.
DW
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 09:38
I get all the regional dominance/all wars are economic argument. You won't hear me dispute many points in that one except for minor details.
The difference here is that a Muslim fanatic has openly stated he wants to destroy the US and Israel. Some very smart people believe I'm-a-Nutjob intends to do exactly that.
I'd be the first to admit that the war in Iraq was Bush Family Ego. "I'll get him for ya, Daddy," the joke goes. We were winning in Afghanistan when we sent in elite hit teams to destroy the enemy like a modern day Sheriff's posse. Then some greedy individuals decided that nation building was a way to make lots of money and make the world safe for--er--democracy, or dollars, or something like that. And we started losing.
If we go to war with Iran (and I say we get dragged into it no matter what), then we need to make sure we are doing it for the right reasons this time. China and Russia may have to be dealt with, but I don't see letting Iran have nukes to be an acceptable alternative.
Jeez, that EMP blast 200 miles over Tehran is looking better and better....
(On a religious note: ever wonder why the armies in the Book of Revelation are on horses? Could it be that a bunch of EMP bombs have taken out all modern technology that was above ground in that part of the world? Things that make you go "Hmmmmm....")
Dirk Williams
08-23-12, 11:07
I'm constantly amazed at how In Tune the men and women on this site are. What I enjoy is the fact that I'm constantly challenged to review my position, based on the facts not emotion. Thank you all for pushing my pee brain, to be better informed. I love this shit.
As for Russia and China standing with Iran, is this posturing, OR is this a clear and present danger to the US and her allies.
The million dollar question is which threat is eminent. Which threat is manageable via diplomacy. My money's on the Iran issue.
DW
(On a religious note: ever wonder why the armies in the Book of Revelation are on horses? Could it be that a bunch of EMP bombs have taken out all modern technology that was above ground in that part of the world? Things that make you go "Hmmmmm....")
I'll try to answer respectfully and not get combative - as hard as that is for me.
But no, I've never wondered that. It seems obvious that it's because the Bible was written by a primitive people who didn't have access to technology. There are no references to advanced technologies in the Bible; you'd have to be the Gabby Douglas of hermeneutical gymnastics to get there. Remember, these people were of the "take no hope for tomorrow" persuasion. Most legitimately thought the second coming would happen in their lifetimes (as do over 40% of Americans, BTW, thousands of years later).
Ask yourself, what is more likely - that the Bible DIDN'T specifically mention advanced technology but DOES contain a veiled reference to EMP's - OR that it was written by primitive people who thought the world was about to end, who when they thought of armies, thought of men on horseback?
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 13:39
Ask yourself, what is more likely - that the Bible DIDN'T specifically mention advanced technology but DOES contain a veiled reference to EMP's - OR that it was written by primitive people who thought the world was about to end, who when they thought of armies, thought of men on horseback?
Obviously my post was meant for believers. Nothing personal. I realize it takes some faith to believe what I posted so I know non-believers will dispute it. :)
Here's some more info on why we need to fear an Iranian EMP attack:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/emp_the_greatest_threat_to_america_and_what_we_can_do_about_it.html#ixzz1jpLuXjXo
At the press conference organized by EMPactAmerica on September 23, 2011, this dangerous threat to our national security was exposed for what it truly is -- the most likely event to happen to the U.S., naturally or man-made, that has the potential to bring the country to its knees.
An EMP, if not deflected, will shut down and paralyze our country. Just think about the role electricity plays in water, food, heating and cooling, communications, transportation, distribution, the economy and banking. Congressman Roscoe Bartlett, who made a statement on the floor of the House in support of the HR 5026, told Congress that an EMP attack would create $1-$2 trillion in damages and take four to ten years to recover. The truth is that within one year we would no longer be a sovereign nation.
An EMP will be Iran's best way to "economically destroy our way of life by taking out large portions of our infrastructure."
And:
http://www.wnd.com/2010/05/149117/
“Within a year of that attack, nine out of 10 Americans would be dead, because we can’t support a population of the present size in urban centers and the like without electricity,” said Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy. “And that is exactly what I believe the Iranians are working towards.”
There is renewed alarm about the possibility of an EMP attack – electromagnetic pulse – on the United States because of Iran’s work on a multi-stage Space Launch Vehicle, according to a report from Joseph Farah’s G2 Bulletin.
My take: we are whistling past the graveyard with the EMP threat just like we did with Pearl Harbor's vulnerability in World War II, and by not recognizing there would be another attack on the World Trade Center after the attack in the 1990's.
Moose-Knuckle
08-23-12, 18:39
My take: we are whistling past the graveyard with the EMP threat just like we did with Pearl Harbor's vulnerability in World War II, and by not recognizing there would be another attack on the World Trade Center after the attack in the 1990's.
"America’s military must rule out even the possibility of a serious global or regional challenger anywhere in the world. The regime of Saddam Hussein must be toppled immediately, by U.S. force if necessary. And the entire Middle East must be reordered according to an American plan. PNAC’s most important study notes that selling this plan to the American people will likely take a long time, "absent some catastrophic catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."
(Project for the New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses (1997), p.51)
Interesting. I see you point yet, can't seem to get over the notion that Iran would be a nuke powered Muslim country. I see nothing good in that scenario.
Perhaps I'm a bit short sighted, however we have a solid Christian friend there who I believe we need to stand by in bad times and good times.
That Christian nation is and has been a nuke armed country for many many years, and not pressed the issue. Not so with Iran, they are openly saying they will nuke others to achieve their agenda, of Muslim dominance in the region and eventually globally.
Hope this makes sense.
DW
Iran has NOT stated what is being claimed and oft repeated.
I get all the regional dominance/all wars are economic argument. You won't hear me dispute many points in that one except for minor details.
The difference here is that a Muslim fanatic has openly stated he wants to destroy the US and Israel. Some very smart people believe I'm-a-Nutjob intends to do exactly that.
I'd be the first to admit that the war in Iraq was Bush Family Ego. "I'll get him for ya, Daddy," the joke goes. We were winning in Afghanistan when we sent in elite hit teams to destroy the enemy like a modern day Sheriff's posse. Then some greedy individuals decided that nation building was a way to make lots of money and make the world safe for--er--democracy, or dollars, or something like that. And we started losing.
If we go to war with Iran (and I say we get dragged into it no matter what), then we need to make sure we are doing it for the right reasons this time. China and Russia may have to be dealt with, but I don't see letting Iran have nukes to be an acceptable alternative.
Jeez, that EMP blast 200 miles over Tehran is looking better and better....
(On a religious note: ever wonder why the armies in the Book of Revelation are on horses? Could it be that a bunch of EMP bombs have taken out all modern technology that was above ground in that part of the world? Things that make you go "Hmmmmm....")
Do you speak Farsi? Do you know anyone who does?
Grab the video and have them translate for you.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 19:21
Don't get me wrong. Everyone has a right to their opinion and I certainly would defend to the death the right to speak one's mind, but I'm a little surprised at the rush to defend Iran.
I could understand if we were talking about Jordan, or Saudi Arabia.
But Iran?
At this point I don't even care if their rhetoric is being exaggerated or mistranslated, or whatever.
I do not believe for one microsecond that their desire to go nuclear is peaceful.
Since the hostage crisis of 1979, the Mullahs of Iran have been our enemies. Taking hostages and storming an embassy is an act of war, and we should have dealt with it then. Except for a weak president in Jimmy Carter, we probably would have. I guess some of you may be too young to have been alive for that. The country was pretty angry. A lot of people, including me, wanted to do something about them back then.
They are the enemy and it's time to destroy their ability to attack us or we will live to regret it.
We have wasted far too many decades without doing anything about Iran.
Dirk Williams
08-23-12, 19:42
Mjoinir, what am I missing. I have heard their holy men state on national tv make those statements. Are you suggesting that those interpreting the language are purposely changing the statement to rustle US feathers.
For the past two years I have followed closely this subject matter. I've read everything I can get my hands on that was suggested by possible sources.
I think Iran has been quit clear on their objective. Nuke power is not in anybody's best interest. They are zealots and simply can not be trusted with the truth. Their words and deeds speak volumes on their intent.
Call me jaded after 24 years as a cop, but I simply don't believe in coincidence especially in these matters.
Can you suggest reading material in support of a kinder gentler Iran.
I enjoy your opinion, it seems to be informed.
DW
Interesting.
U speak well of Saudi Arabia... The House of Saud?
And you "don't care if Ahmadinejad was misrepresented by our controlled press."
That about sums it...
Then you claim that they are "zealots" and pursuing nuclear weapons.
We will have to politely agree to disagree strongly.
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-cf39-f729.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-cf75-fb27.jpg
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-cf96-6dd0.jpg
Cagemonkey
08-23-12, 19:46
Don't get me wrong. Everyone has a right to their opinion and I certainly would defend to the death the right to speak one's mind, but I'm a little surprised at the rush to defend Iran.
I could understand if we were talking about Jordan, or Saudi Arabia.
But Iran?
At this point I don't even care if their rhetoric is being exaggerated or mistranslated, or whatever.
I do not believe for one microsecond that their desire to go nuclear is peaceful.
Since the hostage crisis of 1979, the Mullahs of Iran have been our enemies. Taking hostages and storming an embassy is an act of war, and we should have dealt with it then. Except for a weak president in Jimmy Carter, we probably would have. I guess some of you may be too young to have been alive for that. The country was pretty angry. A lot of people, including me, wanted to do something about them back then.
They are the enemy and it's time to destroy their ability to attack us or we will live to regret it.
We have wasted far too many decades without doing anything about Iran.
I have no love for the Mullahs and the Iranian Gov't. If you willing to learn a little History, you can at least understand their point of view. Look up Operation AJAX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_ajax. The reason for the Hostage crisis was based on the fact that the US wouldn't return the money the Shah had looted from his people back to Iran. The Shah was not a very popular ruler and the US had put him in power and backed him until his death. Those ingrate Iranians have no reason what so ever to be bitter towards the US.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 19:52
U speak well of Saudi Arabia... The House of Saud?
I don't "speak well of them". I simply said I could understand someone coming to their defense as opposed to Iran.
And you "don't care if Ahmadinejad was misrepresented by our controlled press."
That about sums it...
I don't care if he's been misrepresented. The current Iranian regime has been our enemy since 1979. I'm-a-Nutjob is just the latest clown in charge of the circus. Our buildup around them is entirely understandable.
If Iran gets nukes they will use them. They are sponsors of terrorism. They are an enemy of Israel and that pretty much automatically makes them an enemy of mine.
Other states that hate Israel but don't pose a credible threat I'm not so concerned with, but I sincerely believe Iran is the modern equivalent of Nazi Germany and their regime is utterly indefensible even if a few media outlets "haven't got it right" as far as what I'm-a-nutjob is saying.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 20:00
I have no love for the Mullahs and the Iranian Gov't. If you willing to learn a little History, you can at least understand their point of view. Look up Operation AJAX. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_ajax. The reason for the Hostage crisis was based on the fact that the US wouldn't return the money the Shah had looted from his people back to Iran. The Shah was not a very popular ruler and the US had put him in power and backed him until his death. Those ingrate Iranians have no reason what so ever to be bitter towards the US.
So even if our past actions are not perfect then we are not supposed to go to war to stop them from getting nukes, is that it?
Take our medicine and let them get the bomb because we are not perfect either?
I can't believe I'm even reading this.
We are talking about a regime that will soon have the capability and the will to launch nuclear strikes on us and Israel.
I just can't believe there are so many people who want to have empathy with a regime that may soon be trying to sink our ships in the Persian Gulf.
But, hey, maybe if we translate "Kumbaya" into Farsi it will be all better.
Horseshit.
Clearly, this back-and-forth is going nowhere.
I'm going to try to keep updating this thread with new information because it's supposed to be a chronologue of a possible build-up to war, but honestly I don't see continuing this argument because no one will change their minds.
Cagemonkey
08-23-12, 20:00
I don't "speak well of them". I simply said I could understand someone coming to their defense as opposed to Iran.
I don't care if he's been misrepresented. The current Iranian regime has been our enemy since 1979. I'm-a-Nutjob is just the latest clown in charge of the circus.
If Iran gets nukes they will use them. They are sponsors of terrorism. They are an enemy of Israel and that pretty much automatically makes them an enemy of mine.
Other states that hate Israel but don't pose a credible threat I'm not so concerned with, but I sincerely believe Iran is the modern equivalent of Nazi Germany and their regime is utterly indefensible even if a few media outlets "haven't got it right" as far as what I'm-a-nutjob is saying.You know Israel has had a Nuclear deterrent for over 30 years. Iran knows this and the consequences if they attack. The North Koreans and the Pakistanis have nukes and I don't trust either of them. I guess we should add them to the hit list too.
You know Israel has had a Nuclear deterrent for over 30 years. Iran knows this and the consequences if they attack. The North Koreans and the Pakistanis have nukes and I don't trust either of them. I guess we should add them to the hit list too.
You know, this never ends. People listen to the media and ASSUME they've "got all angles covered."
Maybe we should assault the entire world because they just might think of having a weapon that would hurt if we ran into it...
Maybe we have to destroy ourselves totally to learn the obvious?
Cagemonkey
08-23-12, 20:05
So even if our past actions are not perfect then we are not supposed to go to war to stop them from getting nukes, is that it?
Take our medicine and let them get the bomb because we are not perfect either?
I can't believe I'm even reading this.
We are talking about a regime that will soon have the capability and the will to launch nuclear strikes on us and Israel.The US is less perfect to say the least. Iran is not going to nuke the US. One Ohio class sub and a few missiles can wipe Iran off the map.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 20:09
You know Israel has had a Nuclear deterrent for over 30 years. Iran knows this and the consequences if they attack. The North Koreans and the Pakistanis have nukes and I don't trust either of them. I guess we should add them to the hit list too.
Pakistan may be a threat one day. I don't deny it. North Korea is a paper tiger.
Frankly, I believe Turkey will be a threat within twenty years.
Yes, you read that right. They are supposedly our NATO ally now, but give it time. The Arab Spring and this worldwide Islamic caliphate movement will eventually cause them to sincerely desire a return of the Ottoman Empire.
And as for Israel's nuclear deterrent, I do believe these Islamic fanatics are just crazy enough to eventually think they can attack and overwhelm Israel with "acceptable losses."
Cagemonkey
08-23-12, 20:14
You know, this never ends. People listen to the media and ASSUME they've "got all angles covered."
Maybe we should assault the entire world because they just might think of having a weapon that would hurt if we ran into it...
Maybe we have to destroy ourselves totally to learn the obvious?
I hear you. Its not easy opening your mind and thinking outside the box. For a long time, I gobbled down the shit the system threw at me. If the past decade and todays current events don't make you finally question things and start to wake up, you'll never get it until its too late.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 20:20
I'll say one thing more and then I'm going back to looking for news updates.
You keep referring to "thinking outside the box" or "swallowing media lies" or whatever. From my perspective even if the enemy's point of view is being mistranslated at this end, whatever you think you are getting from the "other side" in terms of information could just as easily be propaganda or deliberate disinformation.
As long as there's a choice, I prefer to sift through our inaccuracies than to believe a word of theirs.
So we are going to have to agree to disagree.
Cagemonkey
08-23-12, 20:36
Fair enough. Just realize that most of this information is from our own sources. Even many associated with the Israeli Mossad, say that Iran is not an imminent threat. This is all about Empire. The British Empire dissolved and the US gradually took over. Initially this seemed justifiable due to the Cold War and the Spread of communism. Well the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact are no longer. Still NATO continues to thrive. I sympathize with the Israeli people, but they have some hard questions to ask themselves. As far as US commitment to Israel, their exists no official defense treaty. technically, the US is more committed to Taiwan, than Israel.
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 20:43
This is all about Empire.
Agreed. And I'd rather have an American-European empire than an Islamic, Asian, or Soviet Empire.
I guess this discussion has ultimately proved why wars are so convoluted and why you have to constantly keep in mind that the victors write the history books.
I'll say one thing more and then I'm going back to looking for news updates.
You keep referring to "thinking outside the box" or "swallowing media lies" or whatever. From my perspective even if the enemy's point of view is being mistranslated at this end, whatever you think you are getting from the "other side" in terms of information could just as easily be propaganda or deliberate disinformation.
As long as there's a choice, I prefer to sift through our inaccuracies than to believe a word of theirs.
So we are going to have to agree to disagree.
One must study in earnest to determine what is what. Your comments betray you as one who has not done his due diligence.
There is not one credible article or report that can say with a str8 face that Iran is pursuing a nuke weapon program.
You may wish to some serious study of the entities that control our media. Then it will make sense.
Agreed. And I'd rather have an American-European empire than an Islamic, Asian, or Soviet Empire.
I guess this discussion has ultimately proved why wars are so convoluted and why you have to constantly keep in mind that the victors write the history books.
And the news reports, too. Don't forget them...
http://img.tapatalk.com/62d5ebb4-ef41-ca49.jpg
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 22:35
One must study in earnest to determine what is what. Your comments betray you as one who has not done his due diligence.
There is not one credible article or report that can say with a str8 face that Iran is pursuing a nuke weapon program.
You may wish to some serious study of the entities that control our media. Then it will make sense.
On the contrary. I watch this and other stories constantly. At least I am willing to admit that I tend to filter them through a pro-American, pro-Christian, pro-Israel bias.
You believe your set of facts and I believe mine. I am up front with it.
Ever since you've joined this thread you have pursued almost a dedicated attempt to defend Iran, and I have come to believe you have an agenda for whatever reason, be it liberal peacenik, anti-Semitic, or something else.
But don't accuse me of not doing "due diligence" when you don't know me. There are stories I ignore, and yours is one of them. :)
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 23:01
http://www.timesofisrael.com/syria-can-destroy-israeli-nuclear-facilities-with-20-missiles-boasts-ambassador-to-jordan/
Syria can destroy Israeli nuclear facilities ‘with 20 missiles,’ boasts ambassador to Jordan
Syria has acquired surface-to-surface missiles from Russia and North Korea which cover most of the territory of Israel. In September 2007, the Israeli Air Force reportedly destroyed a nuclear reactor Syria was developing with the assistance of North Korea, although Israel never officially claimed responsibility for the strike.
My take: that last quote is the most interesting. Israel never officially claimed responsibility for the strike on Syria's nuclear reactor.
Could an attack on Iran proceed accordingly? Wasn't the Stuxnet virus that attacked Iran's computers attributed to Israel even though they never admitted it?
Could Israel opt for a covert war instead of/or in addition to an open strike?
(That is, if the Obama administration doesn't leak the information). :secret:
Doc Safari
08-23-12, 23:11
This next one is from a religious website, but don't let that bother you. I've excerpted only the portion that has been presented from other secular sources as well.
It offers some perspective on why Iran might not mind doing something that some consider "suicidal" like going to war with other nuclear powers once it acquires nukes:
http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2012/July19/192.html
Khamenei warned of the imminent return of the Mahdi, or the 12th imam. “The issue of Imam Mahdi is of utmost importance, and his reappearance has been clearly stated in our holy religion of Islam,” he said. “We must study and remind ourselves of the end of times and Imam Mahdi’s era. … We must prepare the environment for the coming so that the great leader will come.”
The belief of a returning Mahdi, or 12th imam, is a defining doctrine within the most populous group of Shiites known as Ithna Ashari, or “Twelvers.” In addition to Iran’s supreme leader, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also belongs to this influential group. According to Twelver theology, the Mahdi’s return will be precipitated by planet-engulfing wars, the likes of which will destroy one third of the world’s population, and another third as a result of widespread hunger, disease and social unrest. Finally, the destruction will be capped with the annihilation of the Jewish state and the killing of all infidels, after which the seed of Islam will be planted in the four corners of the Earth.
Here in the West, most people mistakenly ignore this theology and the depth of commitment Khamenei, Ahmadinejad and their followers have to it. This is to our own peril. Twelvers don’t just believe the Mahdi will soon return: They consider it a personal responsibility to create the apocalyptic conditions that will surround his return.
Pakistan may be a threat one day. I don't deny it. North Korea is a paper tiger.
Frankly, I believe Turkey will be a threat within twenty years.
Yes, you read that right. They are supposedly our NATO ally now, but give it time. The Arab Spring and this worldwide Islamic caliphate movement will eventually cause them to sincerely desire a return of the Ottoman Empire.
And as for Israel's nuclear deterrent, I do believe these Islamic fanatics are just crazy enough to eventually think they can attack and overwhelm Israel with "acceptable losses."
Absolutely true. They don't give a rip about survival if it means wiping Israel off the map. I've talked at length with otherwise rational Iranians (civil engineers) and they are not shy about their utter commitment to someday destroy Israel, even if it means Iran us turned into a glazed parking lot.
Regardless of what one thinks the US should or should not do in the ME, no one should doubt the words of the Iranians leaders about eliminating Israel when they think they can achieve it, even if by a oneway trip.
I'll try to answer respectfully and not get combative - as hard as that is for me.
But no, I've never wondered that. It seems obvious that it's because the Bible was written by a primitive people who didn't have access to technology. There are no references to advanced technologies in the Bible; you'd have to be the Gabby Douglas of hermeneutical gymnastics to get there. Remember, these people were of the "take no hope for tomorrow" persuasion. Most legitimately thought the second coming would happen in their lifetimes (as do over 40% of Americans, BTW, thousands of years later).
Ask yourself, what is more likely - that the Bible DIDN'T specifically mention advanced technology but DOES contain a veiled reference to EMP's - OR that it was written by primitive people who thought the world was about to end, who when they thought of armies, thought of men on horseback?
Your missing another option. I agree they were primitive people. However, let's say they (or at least their holy men) did see visions of the future. They very well could have seen an EMP. Would they know what that is? No. They would describe what they saw in terms that they understood.
Your two options are not the only two, or do not exclude additional information or explanations.
Obviously, descriptions of things in the Bible would be written in the frame of reference and context of the writers.
--
Your missing another option. I agree they were primitive people. However, let's say they (or at least their holy men) did see visions of the future. They very well could have seen an EMP. Would they know what that is? No. They would describe what they saw in terms that they understood.
Your two options are not the only two, or do not exclude additional information or explanations.
Obviously, descriptions of things in the Bible would be written in the frame of reference and context of the writers.
--
Nope, you missed the point. The question was if the specific vision of men on horseback in a future war was due to an EMP - not about the various scenes also mentioned in Revelation about the skies rolling up like scrolls, etc.
The original assertion was that the horse-mounted soldiers could possibly be due to an EMP disabling technology in the future. My point was a rebuttal of this specific notion. I simply mentioned that it's more likely that the "prophets" applied their limited knowledge to their manufactured / hallucinated eschatological visions (which, BTW, most early believers thought would be fulfilled within their lifetimes).
You can do the hermeneutical gymnastics that I mentioned to get descriptions of technology elsewhere in the text, but my binary dichotomy for this specific vision (assuming it's accurately relayed in the text), is valid.
Nope, you missed the point.
Exactly how did I miss the point? It looks rather that you missed the point.
The question was if the specific vision of men on horseback in a future war was due to an EMP - not about the various scenes also mentioned in Revelation about the skies rolling up like scrolls, etc.
The original assertion was that the horse-mounted soldiers could possibly be due to an EMP disabling technology in the future. My point was a rebuttal this specific question. I simply mentioned that it's more likely that the "prophets" applied their limited knowledge to their manufactured / hallucinated eschatological visions (which, BTW, they thought would be within decades).
You can do the hermeneutical gymnastics that I mentioned to get descriptions of technology elsewhere in the text, but my binary dichotomy for this specific vision (assuming it's accurately relayed in the text), is valid.
You did not in any way disprove anything I said.
I was not referring to any other scenes from the Book of Revelation. I merely said that your claims are not the only explanation.
People don't have to know what EMP is to be able to describe its after effects, if they were to see a picture of it for some reason.
If they were to see a vision of the future, post EMP, they would use their primitive knowledge and words to describe it. And you would find such words and knowledge similar to writings found in the Bible.
For the record: I am not saying it does describe EMP or anything. I only am saying that your explanation is basically worthless as it does not discount anything.
---
Exactly how did I miss the point? It looks rather that you missed the point.
You did not in any way disprove anything I said.
I was not referring to any other scenes from the Book of Revelation. I merely said that your claims are not the only explanation.
People don't have to know what EMP is to be able to describe its after effects, if they were to see a picture of it for some reason.
If they were to see a vision of the future, post EMP, they would use their primitive knowledge and words to describe it. And you would find such words and knowledge similar to writings found in the Bible.
For the record: I am not saying it does describe EMP or anything. I only am saying that your explanation is basically worthless as it does not discount anything.
---
The vision is of men on horseback dude. Not an actual EMP going off or any other after-effects. There's nothing about men on horseback that they wouldn't have been able to explain or describe. So when you say "they would describe what they saw in terms that they understood," I don't consider that relevant, given that we're talking about a scene that was fully understandable to them given their place in history. What we're discussing is the likelihood that the CAUSE of a vision of men on horseback is DUE to an EMP. Your point, while potentially valid for some scenarios, does not apply here.
ETA: If you're saying that the "horses" could really be something else - yea, sure, maybe. But that's not what he was asserting, and not what I was addressing.
The vision is of men on horseback dude. Not an actual EMP going off or any other after-effects. There's nothing about men on horseback that they wouldn't have been able to explain or describe. What we're discussing is the likelihood that the CAUSE of a vision of men on horseback is DUE to an EMP. Your point, while potentially valid for some scenarios, does not apply here.
Sorry, I must really be dense. No one was claiming that the people in the Bible were trying to explain EMP or something that they couldn't explain. The visions in Revelation are usually explained as being in the end times. Since the end times as we understand it have not come yet, and combat today is not usually done on horseback, someone mused if the reason might not be that people had to revert to earlier forms of combat due to an EMP. While not my first thought, it could be a possibility. The primitives who wrote the Book of Revelation would not have to know anything or even be trying to explain something that they cannot explain. They would have used their knowledge and words to describe what they saw, though, so we could not expect them to describe EMP or its after effects in a way that would clue us in to that necessarily.
Given you explanation here, I fail to see how your initial post has any relevance.
ETA: If you're saying that the "horses" could really be something else - yea, sure, maybe. But that's not what he was asserting, and not what I was addressing.
You didn't seem to address anything. You claimed that there are no references to advanced technology in the Bible (debatable) and that the primitives then would have had no knowledge of such.
no one claimed they did in the first place and they would not have to have knowledge of it to try and describe what it looked like.
So, please, what was the point of your original posting and what were you trying to claim?
---
Your entire argument, whether you realize it or not, is predicated on the prophets not being able to depict or describe men on horseback. This is not the case, therefore my original set of binary options is valid (which is what you were arguing against). If you re-read the posts and still don't see why that's true, I'm not sure what else I can say. But really, this discussion is pretty pointless anyway. So no big deal and no hard feelings. Have a good one.
Your entire argument, whether you realize it or not, is predicated on the prophets not being able to depict or describe men on horseback. This is not the case, therefore my original set of binary options is valid (which is what you were arguing against). If you re-read the posts and still don't see why that's true, I'm not sure what else I can say. But really, this discussion is pretty pointless anyway. So no big deal and no hard feelings. Have a good one.
No, my argument is not predicated on that.
I asked you some specific questions, like exactly what was your point in the first place?
No hard feelings, but I would appreciate it if you would explain what your original point was?
Your answer seems to point to the fact that YOU Missed the point of the original question about armies on horseback and EMP. Or you set up a straw man instead. Your choice.
--
Doc Safari
08-24-12, 10:52
US aircraft carrier heads to the region ahead of schedule:
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/us-deploys-aircraft-to-gulf-amid-syria-iran.aspx?pageID=238&nid=28455
The USS John Stennis and its strike group will set forth shortly for the Persian Gulf, a deployment ordered four months ahead of time to minimize the gap in which the United States has only one carrier in the region.
Meanwhile, Iran ain't slowin' down, no-how:
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?ID=282388&R=R1
Diplomatic sources in Vienna say Iran added more uranium enrichment machines at underground bunker in Fordow.
Meanwhile, Barry may be trying to hamper a predicted Israeli strike:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/159239#.UDdsVhzlnLg
The United States is colluding with a top Israeli newspaper to stymie Israel's efforts to strike Iran's nuclear weapons program, and the IDF knows it, according to a leading nationalist pundit.
Writing in Friday's edition of Makor Rishon, one of the Israel's veteran journalists, Amnon Lord, paints a picture of intense U.S. meddling in internal Israeli political and security-oriented processes in an effort to prevent a successful Israeli strike on the weapon program meant to make it extinct.
You seem to pray for conflict. WE have the military bases surrounding THEM. Not the other way around. Iran is no threat to the USA.
Unless you're just bigoted towards Islamists your position makes little sense. I think that's a stretch but... Do keep in mind that the Mainstream Media that constantly tells you that Arabs and Islamists are all cowardly murderers is the very same people who tell convincingly to the very same people that gun are bad as are their owners.
Just sayin'...
You seem to pray for conflict. WE have the military bases surrounding THEM.
Not really. Most of those "bases" are limited use facilities already embroiled in their local conflicts (Iraq, which we have basically pulled out of) and Afghanistan (where they are already fully occupied). They are not general use bases that could be used for any sort of effort against Iran.
Not the other way around. Iran is no threat to the USA.
That really makes a lot of sense :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I guess a bunch of goat herders in Afghanistan were no threat to the US either pre 09/11
In asymmetrical conflict you don't measure who is a threat to whom by counting "bases" or anything like that.
Iran has probably infiltrated lots of agents over our southern porous border. It would not be that hard for them to smuggle a suitcase nuke or a dirty bomb or biologic agents in to the country.
Unless you're just bigoted towards Islamists your position makes little sense. I think that's a stretch but... Do keep in mind that the Mainstream Media that constantly tells you that Arabs and Islamists are all cowardly murderers is the very same people who tell convincingly to the very same people that gun are bad as are their owners.
The difference is that there is lots of independent evidence to support the "Islamist as cowardly murderer" theme.
--
Now, personally, I am going more and more to the withdraw ourselves from those parts of the worlds that are not direct threats, shore up or borders, and carry a big stick to make sure that those other people behave. (You will turn to glowing glass if you harm us).
I don't think that an attack on Iran will do much good.
--
Dirk Williams
08-24-12, 20:02
Your representation of the US surrounding Iran would is laughable.
Your portrayal of Iran as a peaceful nation is also laughable.
General Jerry Boykin today stated in an interview that he and his people are CERTAIN that Iran already possess at least one nuke. Boykin further stated that what Iran lacked was a dependable delivery system.
Went on with a group of others to outline the history of violence Iran represents. Also affirmed the intent of Iran to do genocide on the jews and the US if given the opportunity.
What confuses me about your view is simply that you use posts from the same news sources to support your views. Yet when others using those same source to support their views you call them or infer that those sources are tainted and agenda driven.
How can it be both ways.
Irans leadership are in deed ZELOTS and would gladly wipe out their own people's to achieve their agenda of global sharia.
I can understand you ideology regarding the Iranian people, they are very much like us in many many ways.
DW
Ok, maybe I missed something. How can they make a bomb with 20% Uranium?
Sounds like media frenzy to me. Im not saying we shouldnt watch them, but 20% enriched?
Ok, maybe I missed something. How can they make a bomb with 20% Uranium?
Sounds like media frenzy to me. Im not saying we shouldnt watch them, but 20% enriched?
Exactly. People think they are getting truth in the media when what they are getting is propaganda.
God, forgive them for they know not what they profess...
Ok, maybe I missed something. How can they make a bomb with 20% Uranium?
Sounds like media frenzy to me. Im not saying we shouldnt watch them, but 20% enriched?
Supposedly, getting to the proper level of enrichment from 20% is not that hard and there is enough of the 20% enriched stuff to make what they need at a higher enrichment for at least a bomb.
--
Doc Safari
08-25-12, 12:57
Exactly. People think they are getting truth in the media when what they are getting is propaganda.
By all means, please post some links supporting your version of the truth. Oh, that's right, they are all in Farsi, aren't they?
Curious how a person posting on an American chat forum professes to know so much about Iran, including whether translations from Farsi are accurate or not.
I would have accused you of being an Iranian sympathizer. Now I begin to think you are actually an Iranian expatriate--LOL.
Nothing wrong with that, but at least clue us in to your bias (whatever it may be) as I have clued the members in to mine.
I have no problem with the Iranian people. Truth be told they probably would have appreciated the liberation that G.W. Bush offered the Iraqis moreso than the Iraqis appreciated it.
I think it is sad that their evil regime will probably get millions of them killed when World War III breaks out.
As for praying for conflict? That's insane. I pray it waits until I'm no longer walking this Earth.
Unfortunately, I do not believe we have much time.
Israel thinks this war will last 30 days and result in a surprising (to me) low number of casualties.
I'm concerned this war will change our way of life more than the economic problems faced by the country right now.
$8 a gallon gas...rationing of things like fuel, materials, and ammo...increased public security that makes the TSA's shenanigans look like just a warm-up.
Only a crazy person would pray for that.
Dirk Williams
08-25-12, 13:42
Glockster I was just reading an interesting report over on survivalblog.com.
In substance it actually supports our friends position. It's a good read. About half way down, titled something like Syria/Iran dominos.
Other then being on that web site I don't recall ever reading any of this authors stuff. Food for thought if nothing else.
DW
Doc Safari
08-25-12, 14:10
Link?
Dirk Williams
08-25-12, 14:58
I looked it back up. It's on a site called
ALT-MARKET.com written by Brandon Smith
Titled
Syria and Iran dominos leading to world war III.
It's and interesting read.
Sorry i don't know how to actually put the link in. I've never seen this site before yesterday, don't know it's credentials.
DW
DW
VooDoo6Actual
08-25-12, 15:42
"By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise."
Adolf Hitler
"All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach."
Adolf Hitler
"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think."
Adolf Hitler
"Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."
Adolf Hitler
"The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."
Adolf Hitler
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
Joseph Goebbels
Dirk Williams
08-25-12, 16:27
Voodoo, does the fact that we Americans see the world thru American eyes as Muslims see the world thru Muslim eyes, as do Hindus thru Hinduism.
Do you think people of different nations can review the same data and come to the same conclusion as people from different nations.
Do you think our faiths and upbringing specific to different nations will influence how we view that same data and our conclusions of that same data.
Do you believe that all media mis represent the news as presented to the people they provide that info to.
After hanging out on this site for a couple of years now, I see that these folks are well informed.
How does one determine what media is straight forward and what media is tainted.
Anymore I seem to be questioning my own beliefs when it comes to world politics.
Dirk
Moose-Knuckle
08-25-12, 17:24
"Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." - Hermann Göring
VooDoo6Actual
08-25-12, 17:54
Voodoo, does the fact that we Americans see the world thru American eyes as Muslims see the world thru Muslim eyes, as do Hindus thru Hinduism.
True. With NO consistant or constant enforcement of standards it's headed for collision & entropy.
Do you think people of different nations can review the same data and come to the same conclusion as people from different nations.
Yes I think it's possible BUT not probable or plausible. If there is a clear definition of data's interpretation universally/ubiquitously it's possible but heretofore we as a planet have not been able to do so yet. I doubt if that is truly possible due to such varied ideologies/nature vs. nurturing, ERO beliefs, fraud, abuse of power, double standards, human nature, corruption, anxiety etc.
If it's meaning (LAWS, RULES, CODES etc.) in totality w/o exceptions including religious/creed/beliefs/sects/races/collusion/special interest groups/favors/partisanism/cronieism/polarizing etc. can be implemented then it's possible.
My issue is we can strive towards all these high altruistic paradigms of ideologies but it has not been done to date so pragmatically speaking I don't trust it or believe it's possible. Seen it too many times all over the world already. Rules being bent, blood $, Diplomatic immunity, abuse of power, abuse of color & authority, favoritism, partiality, turn the other cheek, no governmental accountability to the people, financial fraud et al etc.
Do you think our faiths and upbringing specific to different nations will influence how we view that same data and our conclusions of that same data.
Yes, I do. Entitlements included.
Do you believe that all media mis represent the news as presented to the people they provide that info to.
For the most part yes & more so now than ever. Some are better than others at being objective rather than subjective. The compass of truth & importance of that as a priority as an INDEX or reference has been distorted to levels are a big part of the problem. Until that's resolved in our society or the World, chaos, anarchy & entropy are the eventual result. History shows that over & over in many ways. I will never trust the the US news until I can be placated that they are on the level. So that will most likely not happen unfortunately. Far too much importance placed on pushing their agenda vs. truth, vs. accuracy of facts vs. spin etc. Those w/ the $ control that for their propaganda & agenda. Personally I think it's the worst I have ever witnessed in the US.
After hanging out on this site for a couple of years now, I see that these folks are well informed.
I agree. Those that I know are full of Bravo Sierra I ignore or put on my coveted ignore list which is admittedly small compared to the totality of membership here. It's simply not worth the anxiety. Those who get it I regularly converse with, exchange emails, data, texts etc. Birds of a feather etc. They are intelligent to keep an open mind, not engage or pedantic/trivial issues etc.
How does one determine what media is straight forward and what media is tainted.
My opinion is become as educated as possible. W/O the NET we would be dead in the water. Be able to separate facts from speculation. Look for indentifiers of truth vs. fiction. As a PI I have to do this all the time in my profession. Believe me I have seen some dousey's like most out there. Learn how to source the media, corroborate facts/reports. You'll get to know the players, Op Ed's who are switched on. People who are truthful usually/generally are willing to put up the evidence from my experience to exonerate themselves of any suspicion. if they aren't or don't ask why not ?
4GW & 5GW is a demon & if we are not careful we will lose this great Republic to those tactics. Read up on it & learn how if functions. Again educate yourself w/o getting it from a ulterior motived source.
Anymore I seem to be questioning my own beliefs when it comes to world politics.
Brother ain't that the truth. Know yourself first & what your CORE of beliefs are. Become a sponge & soak up it all then turn your filter on & process. Craziest time I have ever seen. This current torpor is unprecendented in our lifetimes & history will record it as that. So hang on as there is no answer yet. Read Halford Mackinger's Heartland of Global Power one of the quotes that spills the beans ("Who rules East Europe commands the Heartland; Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island; Who rules the World Island commands the World."), The Grand Chess Board, understand the CFR more will become clearer for you I'm positive & you will be glad you did. It helps compartmentalize it all & easier to process.
Dirk
A lot of great questions DW.
#1 The truth is where you find it. It is absolute unless you obfuscate/prevaricate the facts or have issues w/ semantics.
So when I get into these & other types of discussions people more than ever are playing semantic games. I simply get definitions up front NOW & that helps me determine what types of people they are, their agenda etc. I get it in writing on anything in my profession now as that avoids conflicts, disappointments, fraud, deception etc.
If your not into the Constitution then state that up front at least then I know the type person you are. If you are into interpreting it differently (which seems to be this administration's & other's MO then state that up front.) differently than we have for over 200 years then state that. But to deceive, obfuscate, prevaricate to TRICK people into your ulterior motive is actually treasonous in many aspects.
I recently had a discussion w/ a member here who we really were on the same page but we somehow ended up adversarial due to semantic misunderstandings. After we shared some PM's we both agreed on what we both were saying. Sometimes the internet does that as it's 2 dimensional rather than 3. There is no inflection, inference or innuendo intuitive interface w/ the net. I'm glad we worked it out.
Have fun on your journey & hang on !
Dirk Williams
08-25-12, 19:27
Thanks for sharing your views.
Dirk
So, here is the game:
Either Syria, Iran or both will be 0bama's October Surprise. Anyone still confused?
So, here is the game:
Either Syria, Iran or both will be 0bama's October Surprise. Anyone still confused?
It won't be "Obama's" surprise. Netanyahu is threatening to initiate a conflict prior to the election. This was just reported last week. It would draw the US in as many are wholly ignorant and will rush headlong "against those Arabs" only to draw Russia and China shoulder to shoulder against us.
Some good sources for articles on geopolitics:
[1] whatreallyhappened.com
[2] globalresearch.ca
[3] atimes.com
[4] rense.com
Try the CFR and Trilateral Commission's websites. They have good articles. There are many investment websites that do a helluva job, too, though they are interested in the financial implications.
"Bet they are all in Farsi"? Really? Says more about you, my friend...
I looked it back up. It's on a site called
ALT-MARKET.com written by Brandon Smith
Titled
Syria and Iran dominos leading to world war III.
It's and interesting read.
Sorry i don't know how to actually put the link in. I've never seen this site before yesterday, don't know it's credentials.
DW
DW
Dirk, I googled that site and found it..I read that article, Frankly, It worries me greatly...Not because I suspect it's content is fiction, But because I feel the author is exactly right....
VooDoo6Actual
08-25-12, 23:11
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e225/teehee321/h4zatgifw500.gif
Supposedly, getting to the proper level of enrichment from 20% is not that hard and there is enough of the 20% enriched stuff to make what they need at a higher enrichment for at least a bomb.
--
hard is relative. The more pure it is, the harder it becomes to purify it further. Diminishing returns. These are isotopes, and they are VERY expensive and technology and energy-costly to separate from one another.
Getting from .711 to 20 is gonna be way easier than going from 20-90. (%)
Honestly, I think the media hears people talk, then try to paraphrase. I know they dont pick up a book or even wiki this stuff to verify what they think they heard since MOST of what I hear on the news is factually wrong.
hard is relative. The more pure it is, the harder it becomes to purify it further. Diminishing returns. These are isotopes, and they are VERY expensive and technology and energy-costly to separate from one another.
Getting from .711 to 20 is gonna be way easier than going from 20-90. (%)
Honestly, I think the media hears people talk, then try to paraphrase. I know they dont pick up a book or even wiki this stuff to verify what they think they heard since MOST of what I hear on the news is factually wrong.
According to this, a facility of approximately the capacity in Iran (based on the chart in this which may not be up to date) can create enough weapons grade uranium from 4% to make 4-8 bombs in 8 days to 1 month
http://www.princeton.edu/~aglaser/lecture2007_makingheu.pdf
Once they have purged and reset the facility for the higher enrichment.
According to this, a facility of approximately the capacity in Iran (based on the chart in this which may not be up to date) can create enough weapons grade uranium from 4% to make 4-8 bombs in 8 days to 1 month
http://www.princeton.edu/~aglaser/lecture2007_makingheu.pdf
Once they have purged and reset the facility for the higher enrichment.
Thats fine. My point was 20% enriched does not go boom any more than natural uranium does. The media panicing over 20%, as far as I know, is rediculous. Unless you have specific reactors, you need to enrich U to have a powerplant so they need the centrifuges. They(media) make it seem as if 20% is some magincal number. Its just a step in the process... and not even halfway.
Its easier in that going 70ft is easier and faster than going 87ft. They could be going with 20% if newer centrifuges are more efficient so they can mix it with natural U and save $. They might be trying to make a bomb. Keep an eye on them but I see no reason to panic when they are this far away.
Thats fine. My point was 20% enriched does not go boom any more than natural uranium does. The media panicing over 20%, as far as I know, is rediculous. Unless you have specific reactors, you need to enrich U to have a powerplant so they need the centrifuges. They(media) make it seem as if 20% is some magincal number. Its just a step in the process... and not even halfway.
Its easier in that going 70ft is easier and faster than going 87ft. They could be going with 20% if newer centrifuges are more efficient so they can mix it with natural U and save $. They might be trying to make a bomb. Keep an eye on them but I see no reason to panic when they are this far away.
Now don't go undermining the Globalists' position - and those that honestly believe them - with pure logic and technical understanding.
SO...
Why would the West wish to destabilize the region then?
Google: "A Clean Break Strategy"
"The Grand Cheasboard"
"Sir Halford MacKinder"
It won't be "Obama's" surprise. Netanyahu is threatening to initiate a conflict prior to the election. This was just reported last week. It would draw the US in as many are wholly ignorant and will rush headlong "against those Arabs" only to draw Russia and China shoulder to shoulder against us.
And after 0bama wins his second term, as he has already told Russia, 'he will have more flexibility after the election.' Get it?
Doc Safari
08-26-12, 15:12
"Bet they are all in Farsi"? Really? Says more about you, my friend...
You take this way too seriously. That was a tactic to draw you out with some specifics and it worked.
Some good sources for articles on geopolitics:
[1] whatreallyhappened.com
[2] globalresearch.ca
[3] atimes.com
[4] rense.com
I will bookmark these and check them out.
Try the CFR and Trilateral Commission's websites. They have good articles. There are many investment websites that do a helluva job, too, though they are interested in the financial implications.
Seriously? The CFR and the Trilateral Commission are pretty close to the last places I'd find credible--right down at the bottom with CNN, Fox, and any major MSM outlet. But the CFR and Trilateral Commission also have a globalist agenda, and that makes them worse IMHO.
I have gotten some information in the past from Investors' Business Daily and Gerald Celente's site, although I've let my interest in those lapse of late.
Still, none of it is going to change my opinion that Iran is a dangerous rogue, radical Islamist state that is a threat to humanity.
Here is an article that makes one ask, "If they are not guilty, then why are they doing things that make it look like they are hiding something?"
http://news.yahoo.com/diplomats-iran-shrouds-suspected-nuclear-193620813.html
Iran has shrouded a building that the U.N. nuclear agency suspects was used for secret work on atomic weapons, meaning spy satellites can no longer monitor Tehran's alleged efforts to clean up the site, diplomats told The Associated Press on Friday.
The diplomats said the main building is now covered with what appears to be plastic sheeting, shielding any activity there from the outside world and effectively shutting down the IAEA's only way of monitoring the site with its eyes in the sky through spy and commercial satellite imagery.
Dirk Williams
08-26-12, 16:57
I took the time to review a couple of those web sites. I found them very interesting. Their perspective is clearly slanted not unlike sites in support of the us agenda.
The contempt for American and her ally's is not even vailed, which is understandable. I'm goi g to keep them up and review them for a few months to try and broaden my view of the world and where it may be headed.
Thanks for the links.
DW
VooDoo6Actual
08-26-12, 21:01
Putin dangles his Balls in the USA's face (if it's true)
Bah Bah Bah
http://freebeacon.com/silent-running/
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDIQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fm.yahoo.com%2Fw%2Flegobpengine%2Fnews%2Ftexas-senator-cornyn-demands-answers-russian-sub-gulf-183300516.html%3Forig_host_hdr%3Dnews.yahoo.com%26.intl%3DUS%26.lang%3Den-US&ei=69A6ULaGF7HliQLkjIHoBA&usg=AFQjCNFW7_5DYdZCbXtIoZWhTR8VkJndAg&sig2=v36rZBDISHDBEhJgRFJ0ew
Thats fine. My point was 20% enriched does not go boom any more than natural uranium does. The media panicing over 20%, as far as I know, is rediculous. Unless you have specific reactors, you need to enrich U to have a powerplant so they need the centrifuges. They(media) make it seem as if 20% is some magincal number. Its just a step in the process... and not even halfway.
Its easier in that going 70ft is easier and faster than going 87ft. They could be going with 20% if newer centrifuges are more efficient so they can mix it with natural U and save $. They might be trying to make a bomb. Keep an eye on them but I see no reason to panic when they are this far away.
I think you missed the point. They can VERY EASILY go from 20% to 90%+ percent VERY QUICKLY (btw, you can make a bomb with 20% -- just a very heavy one that you probably couldn't put on a missile).
They've proven that they have mastered the technology and supposedly have a facility of capacity needed to produce bomb level material in 8 days.
That is pretty darn far along the road.
--
Doc Safari
08-27-12, 09:21
The future of warfare?
http://www.npr.org/2012/08/24/159959300/massive-cyberattack-act-1-of-israeli-strike-on-iran
The alleged war plan that was recently leaked said an Israeli strike would begin with an unprecedented cyberattack designed to paralyze the Iranian regime and blind it to what was happening on its territory. The Internet, telephones, radio and television transmissions, the electrical grid would all be taken out.
Or just more disinformation?
Security analyst Jeffrey Carr, the author of Inside Cyber Warfare, says he doubts the Israelis could even take down Iran's power grid, let alone its entire high-tech sector. A grid, Carr points out, is made up of multiple power plants, each with its own network configuration.
"An attacker has to map out the network before it can plan an attack. The scenario that's been described on this war plan, or whatever you would call this, is just fantasy," he says. "There's no way that anyone could create a piece of software or weaponized malware that could just wipe out multiple power plants and multiple grids with one strike. It's nonsense."
And after 0bama wins his second term, as he has already told Russia, 'he will have more flexibility after the election.' Get it?
No, I do not "get it" at least how you perceive it to be. BANKERS control the place and the president leads the controlled Congress and the people to accept their goals.
Ask yourself this: if I, Mjolnir, held $6 trillion or represented powerful interests who did, do u think the governor in my state could do anything I didn't ALLOW him/her to do? To answer anything but a resounding "No!" would be dangerously naive.
I think you missed the point. They can VERY EASILY go from 20% to 90%+ percent VERY QUICKLY (btw, you can make a bomb with 20% -- just a very heavy one that you probably couldn't put on a missile).
They've proven that they have mastered the technology and supposedly have a facility of capacity needed to produce bomb level material in 8 days.
That is pretty darn far along the road.
--
22% faster? The time is less, but the rate is the same.
so if they can make weapons grade U in 8 days from 20%, then they can do it in 10 days from natural U. Like I said, unless I missed some information about 20% changing the chemical properties of U, its not a magical number in which the isotopes seperate quicker than <20%. In fact, nearly all separation processes slow down at higher purity, but I dont work with U so it may be different.
As for making a bomb with 20% U, theoretically, yes. In reality...
:no:
As I said before, Im not saying its benign. But Im not freaking over it either. We should just watch them for right now.
22% faster? The time is less, but the rate is the same.
so if they can make weapons grade U in 8 days from 20%, then they can do it in 10 days from natural U. Like I said, unless I missed some information about 20% changing the chemical properties of U, its not a magical number in which the isotopes seperate quicker than <20%. In fact, nearly all separation processes slow down at higher purity, but I dont work with U so it may be different.
You are still missing the point. Very much so. The experience enriching uranium to the 20% level is what they gain -- experience and testing of their equipment and process. Once they have gotten to 20%, there is nothing standing in the way of going all the way. And they can do it in a little over a week according to that academic presentation. So there is no time to "catch" them doing it and to react.
And of course, it takes less time since they aren't starting from scratch, as you pointed out.
As for making a bomb with 20% U, theoretically, yes. In reality...
:no:
As I said before, Im not saying its benign. But Im not freaking over it either. We should just watch them for right now.
By the time we noticed they had gone all the way, it seems like it would be too late.
You are still missing the point. Very much so. The experience enriching uranium to the 20% level is what they gain -- experience and testing of their equipment and process. ....
I didnt miss anything. You did not say that.
Now may I ask how this is a significantly different experience or operation than enriching to... oh lets say 3%.
I dont work in the Nuke industry, so I dont know, but I'm curious as to what the difference is. Better equiptment, maybe. But the process is the same... just longer, maybe faster(rpm).
If we should be alarmed at 20%, what about 15%?
Is it cheaper to enrich to 20 and mix with natural? Should we force them to waste money due to this percieved threat(if it is, in fact cheaper)? What percentage should the cut-off be and why? These all seem to be important questions to find out before supporting a bombing raid(you didnt, but Im dramatizing to make a point;))
Also, they cant churn out nukes in 8 days. its not rolling up gunpowder in a pipe and lighting a fuse. There are probably more possible problems, and more work involved than I can imagine. Simple theories do not mean simple excecution.
If they really wanted to do it, they could build a small purification plant in a coffe shop and make what they need 1microgram at a time... but they are not doing this. I think its more bark than bite.
Doc Safari
08-28-12, 11:28
Iran to send troops to Syria:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444230504577615393756632230.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Iran to send troops to Syria:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444230504577615393756632230.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Not at all likely.
Doc Safari
08-29-12, 09:46
Iran Confirms Revolutionary Guards in Syria
Iran has publicly confirmed that its government has sent elite Revolutionary Guards to support government troops in the Syrian civil war.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/159409#.UD30nBzlnLg
The general, Abd a-Din Huram, was one of 48 Iranians captured by Syrian rebels. According to the opposition groups, Huram is responsible for Revolutionary Guard operations in the Azerbaijan region of Iran. The rebels holding the Iranians threatened to execute them unless the Syrian government freed hundreds of prisoners.
Have a link from an Iranian source?
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 08:57
Have a link from an Iranian source?
I wouldn't believe in an Iranian source right now any more than I would have believed a Nazi source in World War II.
Have a link from an Iranian source?
Goebbels would be proud.
VooDoo6Actual
08-30-12, 12:35
I wouldn't believe in an Iranian source right now any more than I would have believed a Nazi source in World War II.
How about an US / American source currently ? :dirol:
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 12:49
How about an US / American source currently ? :dirol:
Not sure 100% these are all American, but at least I think they are credible sources:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444230504577615393756632230.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.businessinsider.com/iran-confirms-they-have-troops-on-on-the-ground-in-syria-2012-8
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2012/08/28/Iran-said-to-supply-Syria-with-elite-force/UPI-30821346135400/
VooDoo6Actual
08-30-12, 12:53
Not sure 100% these are all American, but at least I think they are credible sources:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444230504577615393756632230.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
http://www.businessinsider.com/iran-confirms-they-have-troops-on-on-the-ground-in-syria-2012-8
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2012/08/28/Iran-said-to-supply-Syria-with-elite-force/UPI-30821346135400/
My comment was directed at your comment about TRUSTING vs. KNOWING/THINKING they are credible vs. the other sources.
I'm well aware of US / American sources of the content the agenda & the WHY.
If there is an obvious 4GW/5GW disinformation campaign then.....
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 13:06
My comment was directed at your comment about TRUSTING vs. KNOWING/THINKING they are credible vs. the other sources.
I'm well aware of US / American sources of the content the agenda & the WHY.
If there is an obvious 4GW/5GW disinformation campaign then.....
I get your point that in a way you never know who's telling the truth without filtering through the propaganda unless we witness something firsthand.
Ultimately ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances.
I just don't get this willingness to side with the Iranians. What the Hell possesses someone to want to give a bunch of murdering Islamist radical thugs the benefit of the doubt all of a sudden?
Unreal. Just unreal.
VooDoo6Actual
08-30-12, 13:19
I get your point that in a way you never know who's telling the truth without filtering through the propaganda unless we witness something firsthand.
Ultimately ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances.
I just don't get this willingness to side with the Iranians. What the Hell possesses someone to want to give a bunch of murdering Islamist radical thugs the benefit of the doubt all of a sudden?
Unreal. Just unreal.
OK glad you get that. It's important because of the obfuscation/prevarication/disinformation campaign going on.
I don't think he's necessarily supporting Iran per se. I get that he's saying to be cautious of buying into the agenda, the BIG PICTURE etc. Consider the sources etc. But I could be wrong.
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 13:32
OK glad you get that. It's important because of the obfuscation/prevarication/disinformation campaign going on.
I don't think he's necessarily supporting Iran per se. I get that he's saying to be cautious of buying into the agenda, the BIG PICTURE etc. Consider the sources etc. But I could be wrong.
That's all fine and dandy, but if you're going that route you have to consider the possiblity that no one knows what's really going on, or that no one is saying what's really going on, and if you have to have The Truth then you're wasting your time discussing it because you'll never have The Truth .
No matter what, you have to have some "faith" if you will that what you're putting out is at least accurate enough that it has some worthwhile info.
And don't forget the quote from W.I. Thomas: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences".
That used to be my sig line for a reason. In fact it might be again.
It doesn't really matter what's true . What matters is what's perceived to be true.
You will never, I don't care how many forums you visit or articles you read, never---know the absolute truth of anything.
The point of this thread is that the Mid East is moving toward war again, this time over Iran's nuclear program.
It may not be for reasons articulated, but it's apparently going to happen. And that's the important part. The rest is just a chronology of "how close it is."
VooDoo6Actual
08-30-12, 14:05
That's all fine and dandy, but if you're going that route you have to consider the possiblity that no one knows what's really going on, or that no one is saying what's really going on, and if you have to have The Truth then you're wasting your time discussing it because you'll never have The Truth .
I disagree w/ the "no one" part. There are people who do really know what is going on. We're just not privy to it.
don't forget the quote from W.I. Thomas: "If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences".
I have not, nor will I ever forget that reality as I live it. We are witnessing the reality of that as well.
doesn't really matter what's true . What matters is what's perceived to be true.
While I understand this, I have the opinion that it does matter what the truth is. It is my personal compass & barometer for comporting & conducting my life. I also feel this mindset your speaking of is going to be regretted & not appreciated by many people down the road soon.
will never, I don't care how many forums you visit or articles you read, never---know the absolute truth of anything.
Disagree here. While I understand what your saying, I can pretty much usually figure out w/ certitude what the real deal is.
point of this thread is that the Mid East is moving toward war again, this time over Iran's nuclear program.
Agreed.
may not be for reasons articulated, but it's apparently going to happen. And that's the important part. The rest is just a chronology of "how close it is."
Sure looks that way.
I didnt miss anything. You did not say that.
Your right, I did not say that explicitly. I did not explicitly say anything about why 20% was significant.
Now may I ask how this is a significantly different experience or operation than enriching to... oh lets say 3%.
I dont work in the Nuke industry, so I dont know, but I'm curious as to what the difference is. Better equiptment, maybe. But the process is the same... just longer, maybe faster(rpm).
If we should be alarmed at 20%, what about 15%?
I am not sure the 20% has significance above 15% or 25% or 17% or whatever, except that that is about where they are at now IIRC.
Is it cheaper to enrich to 20 and mix with natural? Should we force them to waste money due to this percieved threat(if it is, in fact cheaper)? What percentage should the cut-off be and why? These all seem to be important questions to find out before supporting a bombing raid(you didnt, but Im dramatizing to make a point;))
Also, they cant churn out nukes in 8 days. its not rolling up gunpowder in a pipe and lighting a fuse. There are probably more possible problems, and more work involved than I can imagine. Simple theories do not mean simple execution.
I did not say they can churn out nukes in 8 days. This academic source was saying it would take 8 days to go from plain old U (not even 20%) to 93% at a facility of approximately the size in Iran. For enough material for 4-8 bombs. No one said that was 8 days for the complete bomb.
However, they could be working on the rest of the bomb in secret and only need the actual HEU as the last step.
If they really wanted to do it, they could build a small purification plant in a coffe shop and make what they need 1microgram at a time... but they are not doing this. I think its more bark than bite.
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 16:31
An interesting development. Russians bugging out?
http://www.debka.com/article/22314/
Russian naval vessels have unexpectedly departed the Syrian Mediterranean port of Tartus and Russian arms shipments to Syria have been suddenly discontinued. debkafile’s military sources reveal that those and other steps indicate that the Russians are rapidly drawing away from the Syrian arena to avoid getting caught up in the escalating hostilities expected to arise from military intervention by the US, Europe and a number of Arab states. Russian intelligence appears to have decided that this outside intervention is imminent and Moscow looks anxious to keep its distance for now.
If debka reports it, then it is usually not true.
Doc Safari
08-30-12, 17:33
If debka reports it, then it is usually not true.
I looked around for other articles and it has not been picked up by major news outlets, yet.
Could be part of the propaganda war to make the Islamist states think they can't count on the help of the Russian bear?
I wouldn't believe in an Iranian source right now any more than I would have believed a Nazi source in World War II.
How's that helping trying to discern Truth? BOTH/ALL sides conduct propaganda campaigns.
I wouldn't outright discount ANY side. Not if I were truly wanting to make up my own mind, that is.
Just because one side or the other claims something to be true does not make it so.
Read EVERYTHING then think for self.
No, chad, Goebbels would have had me hung.
....
Alright, I think I was misinterpreting your posts, reading INTO them too much. If so I apoligize.
Im picking up what you're throwing down now.
crusader377
08-30-12, 23:00
An interesting development. Russians bugging out?
http://www.debka.com/article/22314/
I could also just be that the Syrian government is running out of money and can no longer purchase arms from abroad. Remember that Syria is a poor country and doesn't have the oil reserves that many nations in the middle east have.
Alright, I think I was misinterpreting your posts, reading INTO them too much. If so I apoligize.
Im picking up what you're throwing down now.
I don't know what to think or what should be done. However, their playing like they want to build a bomb (hiding what they do, trying to get around inspections, enriching way past what they might legitimately might need) despite saying they don't does not I've me warm and fuzzies.
I am tending to say we should get out of the area, remind them that we have a much bigger stick, and that if they attack us or their weaker neighbors who are our friends, we will be back and swinging the stick.
But I don't know.
----
Doc Safari
09-04-12, 11:22
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/159610#.UEXe8Bzlk84
Israel May Delay Attack in Return for MOP Bunker Buster Bombs
Maariv reports U.S. may supply Israel with refueling planes and "ginormous" MOP bunker-busters.
VooDoo6Actual
09-04-12, 12:33
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/159610#.UEXe8Bzlk84
Cracks me up.
Old news regarding the Mega Bunker Busters. Re-spin, Redux, disinformation at it's finest & old INTEL.
Doc Safari
09-04-12, 12:47
Bolton urges Israel not to wait for Obama:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/08/31/John-Bolton-Confirms-Israel-is-alone
There is no way at this stage to prevent Iran from going nuclear without use of force. It is very unfortunate in my opinion, but I see no possibility that Obama will use military force, and therefore it falls upon Israel. I think that even though the Administration says that containment is not its policy, it will become its policy the day after Iran possesses nuclear weapons.
VooDoo6Actual
09-04-12, 13:21
Bolton urges Israel not to wait for Obama:
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2012/08/31/John-Bolton-Confirms-Israel-is-alone
Wow.
I don't believe that for a New York minute.
Doc Safari
09-04-12, 16:23
I hate getting anything off of Fox, but at least this credits AP:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/09/04/iran-navy-aims-to-sail-off-us-shores-soon/
The head of Iran's navy says the country aims to put its warships in international waters off the U.S. coast "in the next few years."
I hope you don't believe that.
That's also old propaganda.
Maybe two years ago.
Makes little sense: they need every piece of hardware and every man they have IN Iran.
Doc Safari
09-05-12, 09:18
I hope you don't believe that.
That's also old propaganda.
Maybe two years ago.
Makes little sense: they need every piece of hardware and every man they have IN Iran.
You guys have to understand: a lot of this I'm posting because it illustrates how certain factions are trying to ratchet up the beating of the war drums.
Remember this thread is about how the world is moving toward war, not whether it's right or wrong, or whether the reasons are entirely out in the open.
I was actually hoping people would post in this thread what they're doing to get ready for it, not this back and forth of whose news source is accurate or not.
VooDoo6Actual
09-05-12, 14:39
Iran on the verge of severe financial crisis: intelligence report
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/05/236200.html
Doc Safari
09-05-12, 16:19
Quoting this one because it sets dates, and because it mentions the EMP attack again:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/israel-readies-secret-weapon-for-iran-attack/?cat_orig=world
Middle East expert Mike Evans says his discussions with top Israeli officials this week suggest there is a strong likelihood the attacks will take place between Sept. 15 and Oct. 15.
Evans estimates a 75 percent chance that strikes will be carried out in that 30-day window. Evans says high-ranking Israeli leaders also tell him they have a secret weapon they intend to deploy for any strikes, but they would not tell Evans what that weapon is. He believes the likely weapon is an electromagnetic pulse (EMP), which would cripple Iran’s power grid.
Interesting how these claims are starting to be all over the place. Previously other places were beginning to claim that Israel had made some sort of deal with the US not to attack.
Is this the "keep Iran guessing" stage, or is Israel keeping the media guessing?
You guys have to understand: a lot of this I'm posting because it illustrates how certain factions are trying to ratchet up the beating of the war drums.
Remember this thread is about how the world is moving toward war, not whether it's right or wrong, or whether the reasons are entirely out in the open.
I was actually hoping people would post in this thread what they're doing to get ready for it, not this back and forth of whose news source is accurate or not.
Understood. I like it.
VooDoo6Actual
09-05-12, 20:33
Interesting how these claims are starting to be all over the place. Previously other places were beginning to claim that Israel had made some sort of deal with the US not to attack.
Is this the "keep Iran guessing" stage, or is Israel keeping the media guessing?
It's the latest craze haven't you heard ? 4GW/5GW disinformation at
it's finest.
OODA Loop reprogramming... LOL
Doc Safari
09-07-12, 12:58
Canada cuts ties with Iran:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Canada+closes+embassy+Iran/7206256/story.html
Canada cuts ties with Iran, closes embassy, orders Iranian diplomats home
Baird says the Canadian embassy in Tehran will close immediately and Iranian diplomats in Canada have been given five days to leave.
The skeleton staff that was operating Canada's Tehran mission has already fled the country.
Baird says he's worried about the safety of diplomats in Tehran following recent attacks on the British embassy there.
"The Iranian regime has shown blatant disregard for the Vienna Convention and its guarantee of protection for diplomatic personnel," he said.
VooDoo6Actual
09-07-12, 14:24
Canada cuts ties with Iran:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Canada+closes+embassy+Iran/7206256/story.html
Who Knew, amazing ain't it....
Doc Safari
09-07-12, 15:48
Israel may be forced to back down?
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=8784
the headline story is about the way in which Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign to threaten war against Iran has run up against a big obstacle, and more than an obstacle, which is that the Obama administration has now had the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, in Britain make a statement that has really shaken up the political system in Israel and I think undoubtably will cause the government of Benjamin Netanyahu to have to reconsider its strategy here. What Dempsey said was in the context of talking about the fact that Israel—an attack by Israel on Iran would not be successful, it would not be able to destroy the Iranian nuclear program, it would set it back. And, of course, as the Israeli national security officials themselves have been pointing out ad nauseum in recent months, it would actually have the effect of almost certainly causing Iran to rush to get a nuclear weapon as fast as possible.
But then the real punchline in Martin Dempsey's statement to the press was: if they were to attack Iran, I wouldn't want to be complicit. And, of course, by that he really meant that the Obama administration does not want to be complicit. And that has been, I think, quite correctly read in Israel as a firm no from President Obama to Netanyahu about all this talk of war against Iran. And so, you know, the feeling there, as expressed by a former national security adviser to the Israeli government, Giora Eiland, is that Netanyahu really doesn't have much choice but to back down, to step back from this campaign, which seems like it's been going on for years, to convince the world that he and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, are really serious about attacking—or seriously considering about attacking Iran, bringing it to a close, trying to find a face-saving withdrawal from that clearly untenable position.
I think the fear there in Israel is very palpable that Netanyahu is leading Israel into a situation where it could very easily lose the credibility, the good-faith, you know, relationship with the United States, with the U.S. public, that the U.S. public would draw back from support for Israel, and then Israel would be in very, very serious trouble. And that is an issue that the opposition party, Kadima, has publicly raised quite explicitly. They're attacking Netanyahu on that ground, and the military as well has been raising that problem. So I think that this is definitely at the center of the political calculus they are now [crosstalk] shifting away from continuing.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/05/us-navy-warned-of-attack-by-israel/
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/05/us-navy-warned-of-attack-by-israel/
Terry Baca · Top Commenter · University of Northern Colorado
Wow. Apologize? The greatest liars in the history of the world? The hoarders of all the gold of the entire planet? The very people that have sent billions into destitution so their own opulence can be held on high? These are the creators of government. They are behind every shadowy filthy fraudulent political murderous system since time was recorded, and made sure that they had a book claiming their dominance and innocence since. There is no accurate record of history released since these devils have had a lock on it for centuries.
No, those that claim first shall be set as last. These frauds will be the toothbrush yielding toilet cleaners of all time, forever. Those that pity them will be considered them, and placed into equal status.
You had better be very careful of who your God is. You may consider the bible to be the word of God, but you also may be in the folds of the most insidious and long lived culture to ever damn this planet.
Oh effit, you're not even listening anymore. I lost you at apologize. Good luck, EGO, we all wish you, well, gone....
Great thread, punctuated with the typical irrational twenty-something Paulbotic fanatical jew hatred. Did you even take the time to read the little comments in the link you posted? :rolleyes:
Denali: Because THINKING, RESEARCH and QUESTIONING should be a death sentence, Hunh?
The crew of the USS LIBERTY would be damned proud of your outlook, brother. They really would.
Try again.
Doc Safari
09-10-12, 09:59
This is NOT going to turn into a "whose worse, Israel or Iran" thread. I have been hovering over the "report" button because I've been waiting for you to show us your hatred for the Jews and Israel for several pages now, and you are just about there.
Iran threatens to attack US ships:
http://www.examiner.com/article/iran-planning-to-attack-u-s-warships-the-persian-gulf
Israeli PM believes Iran is weeks away from a nuclear bomb:
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/12939005-israeli-pm-believes-iran-is-four-to-eight-weeks-away-from-developing-nuclear-bomb
Iran threatens to bring war to US:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/iran-threatens-to-bring-war-to-u-s-shores/
This is NOT going to turn into a "whose worse, Israel or Iran" thread. I have been hovering over the "report" button because I've been waiting for you to show us your hatred for the Jews and Israel for several pages now, and you are just about there.
Iran threatens to attack US ships:
http://www.examiner.com/article/iran-planning-to-attack-u-s-warships-the-persian-gulf
Israeli PM believes Iran is weeks away from a nuclear bomb:
http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/12939005-israeli-pm-believes-iran-is-four-to-eight-weeks-away-from-developing-nuclear-bomb
Iran threatens to bring war to US:
http://www.wnd.com/2012/09/iran-threatens-to-bring-war-to-u-s-shores/
What are you talking about? "Hatred"?
Really?
Just post articles found online like we are ALL doing. Just as YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE to prove all of the links I provide neither do I. But it's a data point.
Consider the possibility or dismiss it.
Doc Safari
09-11-12, 16:55
This one has been all over the place, so many of you have probably already seen it:
http://channels.isp.netscape.com/news/story.jsp?floc=FF-APO-+&idq=/ff/story/1001%2F20120911%2FEEE1148.htm&sc=+&photoid=20728811XRZ111&floc=NW_1-T
Netanyahu is taking a bold gamble. He clearly hopes to rattle the U.S. into doing more, for fear that Israel might otherwise soon attack Iran on its own. But he risks antagonizing President Barack Obama during a re-election campaign and straining relations with Israel's closest and most important ally. Relations between the two leaders have often been tense in the past.
Israeli officials say American politics do not factor into their thinking, but that the sense of urgency is so grave that the world cannot hold its breath until after the November election.
"The world tells Israel, 'Wait. There's still time,'" Netanyahu said Tuesday. "And I say: 'Wait for what? Wait until when?' Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel."
Doc Safari
09-11-12, 17:24
What are you talking about? "Hatred"?
Really?
Just post articles found online like we are ALL doing. Just as YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE to prove all of the links I provide neither do I. But it's a data point.
Consider the possibility or dismiss it.
But at the same time you don't deny it. Interesting. And very telling.
Most people would have vehemently protested being accused of hating Israel, some even to the point of emphasizing their support of the Jewish state.
Yet you come back with "you have no evidence."
Curious in light of the fact that almost all of your posts have been anti-Israel in one way or another.
But at the same time you don't deny it. Interesting. And very telling.
Most people would have vehemently protested being accused of hating Israel, some even to the point of emphasizing their support of the Jewish state.
Yet you come back with "you have no evidence."
Curious in light of the fact that almost all of your posts have been anti-Israel in one way or another.
Perhaps I don't find you to be relevant enough to answer your emotionally ridden accusation. Just a thought.
I am most assuredly not "most people".
U have stated that your mind is already made so why in Hades would a sane person argue with someone who, for whatever reasons, cannot take the time to consider all angles?
Oh, the only nation I have any love for is the USA. I'll NEVER apologize for that. Nor is one owed. You are EXTREMELY misinformed to call patriotism "anti-Semitism". On this subject you are so incorrect you're not worthy of debating. You have a hard on for war with Iran; I get it. I'm certain YOU can hop on a C130 and duke it out with whatever forces they have. And pay your own damned way.
Good luck and let the rest of us who are rightfully concerned about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, the Rule of Law, our economy and internal security the Hell alone.
VooDoo6Actual
09-12-12, 00:29
One official killed as U.S. missions in Libya, Egypt stormed over anti-Islam film
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/11/237439.html
Angelina Jolie visits Jordan camp for Syrian refugees
(She does not have a clue to what's really going on as I know her Security people)
http://english.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/09/11/237344.html
Doc Safari
09-12-12, 09:12
Oh, the only nation I have any love for is the USA. I'll NEVER apologize for that. Nor is one owed. You are EXTREMELY misinformed to call patriotism "anti-Semitism". On this subject you are so incorrect you're not worthy of debating. You have a hard on for war with Iran; I get it. I'm certain YOU can hop on a C130 and duke it out with whatever forces they have. And pay your own damned way.
Good luck and let the rest of us who are rightfully concerned about the Constitution, Bill of Rights, the Rule of Law, our economy and internal security the Hell alone.
Very good. Now at last we're getting somewhere. I was beginning to think I was in a back-and-forth with a Muslim brotherhood sympathizer. I'll respect your loyalty to the USA.
I have an equal loyalty to the US, but I also support Israel 100%, and I bristle when people start defending a known enemy of the US and Israel.
And yes, if I were younger and had the money I probably would want to do something more than argue about this on the innernetz.
*****
As for the embassy attacks, Barry O just made another step toward being Jimmy Carter. Since all this administration can do is apologize I wonder how long it will be until we are discussing another batch of hostages like in 1979? We should at least cut off the billions of dollars we send them.
Very good. Now at last we're getting somewhere. I was beginning to think I was in a back-and-forth with a Muslim brotherhood sympathizer. I'll respect your loyalty to the USA.
I have an equal loyalty to the US, but I also support Israel 100%, and I bristle when people start defending a known enemy of the US and Israel.
And yes, if I were younger and had the money I probably would want to do something more than argue about this on the innernetz.
*****
As for the embassy attacks, Barry O just made another step toward being Jimmy Carter. Since all this administration can do is apologize I wonder how long it will be until we are discussing another batch of hostages like in 1979? We should at least cut off the billions of dollars we send them.
Don't know how u could come up with your assumption (and crazy assed accusations) but m'kay...
Doc Safari
09-19-12, 13:20
http://news.yahoo.com/sabotaging-iran-nukes-084500157--politics.html
The chief of Iran’s nuclear program says the power lines to his nuclear facilities were sabotaged. U.S. Special Forces have trained for operations inside Iran for years. Do these latest disclosures suggest they are already on the ground?
A retired U.S. intelligence officer who still works as a contractor with the U.S. military on operations with regard to Iran told The Daily Beast that U.S. Special Forces have trained for sabotage missions inside Iran for years. “From the first reports, this attack looks like something from our guys,” this source said.
Overall the shadow war against Iran’s nuclear program is one reason some top national-security officials in Israel have said they have more time. Meir Dagan, the chief of Israel’s Mossad between 2002 and 2010, said in an interview aired by CBS’s 60 Minutes in March that bombing Iran would be the “stupidest idea” he’d ever heard. Dagan said other measures conducted by Israel and the United States, which he did not elaborate on, had done enough to delay Iran’s quest for a nuclear weapon.
VooDoo6Actual
09-19-12, 13:34
http://news.yahoo.com/sabotaging-iran-nukes-084500157--politics.html
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-12/news/30618729_1_majid-shahriari-iranian-nuclear-scientists-nuclear-program
SOP
6-8 Iranian Scientists/Stuxnet/Flame et al
VooDoo6Actual
10-01-12, 14:19
Syria says US and allies support terrorism
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/10/2012101163758660881.html
Doc Safari
10-05-12, 15:40
This could be a game-changer if true. And if not true, it could still influence the Iranians into doing something out of the ordinary:
http://www.debka.com/article/22412/Defecting-Iranian-cameraman-brings-CIA-priceless-film-of-secret-nuclear-sites-
Defecting Iranian cameraman brings CIA priceless film of secret nuclear sites
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s personal cameraman, Hassan Golkhanban, who defected from his UN entourage in New York on Oct. 1, brought with him an intelligence treasure trove of up-to-date photographs and videos of top Iranian leaders visiting their most sensitive and secret nuclear and missile sites.
The Iranian cameraman has given US intelligence the most complete and updated footage it has ever obtained of the interiors of Iran’s top secret military facilities and various nuclear installations, including some never revealed to nuclear watchdog inspectors. Among them are exclusive interior shots of the Natanz nuclear complex, the Fordo underground enrichment plant, the Parchin military complex and the small Amir-Abad research reactor in Tehran.
Some of the film depicts Revolutionary Guards and military industry chiefs explaining in detail to the president or supreme leader the working of secret equipment on view. Golkhanban recorded their voices.
VooDoo6Actual
10-05-12, 17:01
Posted he're already but no biggee to me.
It also serves to bolster/garner support/sympathy for action just as false WMD has in the past & many times in the past
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=114077
Doc Safari
10-05-12, 17:05
I actually thought you'd post something about Turkey's saber rattling with Syria...
Turkey has opened it's borders to Western-back foreign rebels so it has, de facto, BEEN waging war against Syria.
If Mexico allowed Al Qaeda to wage war on US soil what do you have?
Shades of our campaigns all over the world in our "War on Terror(ism)."
What prevents you/everyone from seeing this in its proper perspective?
Doc Safari
10-09-12, 15:45
Speculation of an "October Surprise" rears its ugly head again.
Now that Barry needs to shore up his Oval Office cred, I'd give this one almost a 50-50, even though other sources have said that Israel plans to wait until next Spring now.
http://www.debka.com/article/22422/US-sources-US-Israel-plan-October-Surprise-Others-Israel-can-do-it-alone
US intelligence recently warned President Barack Obama that Iran’s nuclear breakthrough point is much closer than formerly estimated, i.e. approximately 7 weeks off. In late November, therefore, Iran will enough 20 percent plus enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb. American and Israeli intelligence see eye to eye on this estimate.
After the Congressional Research Center published these findings, David Rothkopf, who is close to US Democratic Party leaders, tested the ground with a report Monday, Oct. 8, in Foreign Policy, which said that the United States and Israel are considering the possibility of a joint "surgical strike" against Iran's nuclear facilities as an “October surprise.”
He quoted a source said to be close to the discussions, which claimed that “a small-scale attack is currently viewed as the most likely military option by air, using bombers and supported by drones,” which Israel would not be able to carry out on its own.
What Rothkopf was saying is that President Obama has no more than 20 days to decide if and when to conduct this US-Israel attack on Iran.
I don't buy "Obama October Surprise" at all. Netanyahu looked the clown during his UN speech. If Obama wished for overt, over the top warfare he'd not have to have Netanyahu acting a clown in front of the world would he? No. He has thus far been avoiding overt confrontation with Iran and the neocons have been coming up with all manner of reasons to do otherwise.
Two words for the "hawks" out there: Russia, China.
montanadave
10-09-12, 19:01
Another take on the potential for a joint US-Israeli raid on Iranian nuclear facilities from Foreign Policy's website: A Truly Credible Threat to Iran (http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/10/08/wanted_a_truly_credible_military_threat_to_iran).
Moose-Knuckle
10-12-12, 20:07
US: Hackers in Iran responsible for cyberattacks
http://news.yahoo.com/us-hackers-iran-responsible-cyberattacks-072429280--finance.html
I find it odd that Panetta blames Iran for computer virus attacks against their own infrastructure.
Moose-Knuckle
10-12-12, 20:59
I find it odd that Panetta blames Iran for computer virus attacks against their own infrastructure.
Not to mention where these viruses originate from.
This part stuck out to me.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the cyberthreat from Iran has grown, and he declared that the Pentagon is prepared to take action if American is threatened by a computer-based assault.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.