Israel & US: Partners in International Crime

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
Ok, fair enough.

But i believe you also stated it was an option to get out of the agreement? (correct me if i'm wrong)

But when you think about it, IF Iran would do that... they're basically saying that they're developing a nuclear weapon.

That in turn would give the US/Israel the 'green light' to unleash hell on Iran and get the so called war they desperately wanted.

Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea have not been attacked / invaded. They are all countries with nuclear weapons programs and they are all non signatories to the NPT. Using North Korea alone undermines the position that Iran might be attacked if it withdrew.

People seem to ignore the fact that absent the NPT, there is nothing that prevents a country from developing / deploying nuclear weapons within their military. The UN Charter makes specific and numerous references to national sovereignty.

If Iran withdraws, and Israel / US / other country attacks Iran, there is absolutely no basis to justify the action (or would be extremely hard pressed to support the action and even then I doubt it would be justified under UN criteria).

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
and here comes the bit from the report that i think is accurate.

The Brookings report would then go on to admit it was the intention of US-Israeli policy toward Iran to provoke a war they knew Iran would neither want, nor benefit from. The goal was to create such a provocation without the world recognizing it was indeed the West triggering hostilities:

The institutes stated mission is to "provide innovative and practical recommendations that advance three broad goals: strengthen American democracy; foster the economic and social welfare, security and opportunity of all Americans; and secure a more open, safe, prosperous, and cooperative international system."

"...it would be far more preferable if the United States could cite an Iranian provocation as justification for the airstrikes before launching them. Clearly, the more outrageous, the more deadly, and the more unprovoked the Iranian action, the better off the United States would be. Of course, it would be very difficult for the United States to goad Iran into such a provocation without the rest of the world recognizing this game, which would then undermine it. (One method that would have some possibility of success would be to ratchet up covert regime change efforts in the hope that Tehran would retaliate overtly, or even semi-overtly, which could then be portrayed as an unprovoked act of Iranian aggression.) "

And i could cite a couple more examples but i don't want to create a whole layer of text.

Combine that with the threats and sanctions already taking, the media hyping up the war machine.

This is where my argument about placing quoted material into context comes up. The information before and after the parts you quoted place the quoted parts into proper context.

The report is stating that if A occurs and continues down to possibility 3, then this is a possible outcome provided the US does this this and this.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
There's only one endstation for the train we're on and that endstation is war.

But we are not at war, and if anything Obama has consistently proven that he wont start a war (let alone take a stand, draw a line in the sand etc, but I digress )

Obama wants diplomacy above all else, and only when diplomacy fails (and I mean completely fails) would military be an option.

Israel on the other hand is in a different position and since they are sovereign, like Iran, they can do what they want.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w

Im not trying to be an ass or anything and if I come across that way my appologies. My position in this thread is based on the report and what it contains. Any one of the perspectives in the report can fit the facts we have going on today. My issue came from the (my perception) concentration on the militaristic approach while ignoring all else.

I hope i didn't imply you were.

Because i really do appreciate your input!

Nope you didnt imply it.. That was me trying to explain I was not meaning to come across as an ass.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
No problem at all, this is what ATS is and should be about.

Allthough i agree that is rarely the case.

You're welcome.

Thanks for keeping me down to earth

edit on 7-3-2012 by kn0wh0w because: (no reason given)

Agreed and same.

Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea have not been attacked / invaded. They are all countries with nuclear weapons programs and they are all non signatories to the NPT. Using North Korea alone undermines the position that Iran might be attacked if it withdrew.

Like the US is going to invade Israel


I've said before that i think that are other reasons for going to war with Iran.

According to some sources Iran is without a Rothschild controlled bank.

I think this might be a MAJOR reason for war.

They've already invaded 2 other countries that didnt had a Rothschild controlled bank.

But i digress.

Time will tell i guess.

I predict war within 3 months.

(btw don't flame me as this is my first prediction ever)

If this one fails, it'll be my last one as well

If Iran withdraws, and Israel / US / other country attacks Iran, there is absolutely no basis to justify the action (or would be extremely hard pressed to support the action and even then I doubt it would be justified under UN criteria).

Wouldn't be the first time the US ignored the UN. (iraq invasion)

Agreed and same.

We deserve a cookie for having a civil discussion

MODS can we have two of them ATS cookies? (not the ones that i find on my computer )

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
Like the US is going to invade Israel

True but look at it from the other side of the fence. What reasons would prevent Russia or China from taking action against Israel's program? Or China going after India's program? If Iran is attacked while still a member of the NPT, its going to be easier to justify the attack. If Iran withdraws from the NPT, its going to be close to impossible to validate the reason.

We see that dilemma with North Korea..

Any action taken against Iran will allow the other side of the fence the same possibility with Israel (or at least the argument).

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
I've said before that i think that are other reasons for going to war with Iran.

If by war you mean strikes on the nuclear facilities then yes, thats a real possibility. If you mean ground troops and occupation, I doubt it. The Pentagon today just put bases all over the Continental US on notice that major cuts are coming down the pipeline (no budget has been approved so the spending cuts automatically kicked in - military on 1/2 and domestic on the other 1/2).

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
According to some sources Iran is without a Rothschild controlled bank.

I think this might be a MAJOR reason for war.

Ive never bought into the Rothschild / global bankers control every nation theory (at least to the extent its portrayed on this site).

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
They've already invaded 2 other countries that didnt had a Rothschild controlled bank.

But i digress.

If you dont mind me asking how do you get invade and which countries are you referring to? Iraq and Afghanistan or Libya, Egypt, Tunisia?

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
Time will tell i guess.

I predict war within 3 months.

If it occurs I doubt the Us will be in it. To close to elections for Obama to risk a backlash.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
(btw don't flame me as this is my first prediction ever)

If this one fails, it'll be my last one as well

We actually disclose the address and names of the people who make predictions. That way we know where to send the masses with pitchforks and torches when the prediction fails. Instead of using the term Rothschild though we will simply label you a witch .

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
Wouldn't be the first time the US ignored the UN. (iraq invasion)

One can make the argument that the invasion was justified over the number and length of time Iraq was in violation of all the UN Resolutions. However thats another argument in another thread D.

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
We deserve a cookie for having a civil discussion

MODS can we have two of them ATS cookies? (not the ones that i find on my computer

)

Lol.. make my cookie plain. Last time I had an ATS cookie the "red sprinkles" had a weird after effect...

reply to post by kn0wh0w


Short of something I have not seen, it will be next year, probably in the spring. (ish) That appears the timing it will be, although you might be right, depending on a few unforeseen factors that I might not be taking into consideration.

Israel is pushing for very quickly and Iran likes the idea of Israel trying for now rather than later for good reasons of her own. Iran does not need a bomb. And keeps repeating this in the press over and over. And for whatever stupid reason no one is recognizing that. They think its a bluff.

Iran can never and will never attack first. Israel knows it now.

I think people should take a great deal of interest in Syria. What happens there is key.

reply to post by Jameela


Not to go off topic to much, what about Syria?

The other curiosity I have regarding Syria is Hamas's position on that mess. They are not taking sides, which to me was not expected. Hamas has also recently distanced itself from Iran, which again caught me off guard.

What do you know thats not making it into Western media?

and to try and bring it back around, why is the situation in Syria linked into Iran?

reply to post by Xcathdra


I was surprised to read today, thanks to another ATS poster, that released Stratfor e-mails show that Iran is working towards a coup against Assad to preserve their own interests in the region, knowing that Assad didn't stand a chance of surviving. This is precisely why the rest of the Middle East hates Iran. They play on both sides of the fence in every situation to preserve their own interests at the expense of their supposed "allies".

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I was surprised to read today, thanks to another ATS poster, that released Stratfor e-mails show that Iran is working towards a coup against Assad to preserve their own interests in the region, knowing that Assad didn't stand a chance of surviving. This is precisely why the rest of the Middle East hates Iran. They play on both sides of the fence in every situation to preserve their own interests at the expense of their supposed "allies".

Now that is surprising information.... Do you by chance have a link to the thread / source? I would like to read up on that. It sets up an interesting situation for Hamas, even more so now that they are not taking a side in Syria. Is Hamas privy to Irans plan for Syria and if so is the apparent fall out between Hamas and Iran just a smokescreen?

Thanks for the info..

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
reply to post by tothetenthpower

 

This has and always will be about controlling the ME and making sure that US/Israeli interests are preserved. I hope the war mongers read this and understand why I call them such.

right!

Only foolish people or people with direct interests in this war will support it.

I don't see what the big deal is with Iran developing nuclear capabilities.

Israel has at least 300 nukes and god knows how many the US has.

Why the hypocrisy?

Something tells me this isn't about nuclear capabilities....

So you guys feel that because isreal and america has nukes that everyone should?

reply to post by Deetermined

They play on both sides of the fence in every situation to preserve their own interests at the expense of their supposed "allies".

hell. that's been the 'new black' for years .... all across the geo-political global spectrum.

they just keep ratcheting up the rhetoric and overall lack of transparency anymore nowadays.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Jameela

 

Not to go off topic to much, what about Syria?

The other curiosity I have regarding Syria is Hamas's position on that mess. They are not taking sides, which to me was not expected. Hamas has also recently distanced itself from Iran, which again caught me off guard.

What do you know thats not making it into Western media?

and to try and bring it back around, why is the situation in Syria linked into Iran?

edit on 7-3-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

Its just kind of a strange beside but its,,, let me try to explain. First, no matter what you hear, Iran is staying out of the Syrian situation in large part. Although what Iran wants is Assad to stay in power, because the alternative is going to be a million times worse, not only that but Assad is a good ally.

This is who America wants in power;

www.dailymotion.com...

www.dailymotion.com...

The second video is the actual Syrian shaikh who the friends of Syria (aka America etc) are supporting, the first is one of his friends, it is this second man who will get power in Syria if the 'revolution' wins. In the second video please note anything in parenthesis is not the words of the shaikh but the words of the person who did the translating, commentary if you will. Please watch both videos all the way through, they have been translated so you will have to read them.

Syria is comprised of not only sunni muslim but Alawites, Ismailis, Shia Christians and Druze. It is a very diverse country as far as religions go.

Many of the original protesters from my information were among the minority groups, but then these wahabis (the men you see on the videos) saw an opportunity to seize power and joined in.This is a very scarey sect of Islam, and the worst enemy of shia, and all these minority groups. They twist and use religion for their own ends, and that end is power.The other minority groups are very very upset about the protests being taken over and from what I hear they have stopped fighting because this group taking power is the worst thing that could possibly happen for any minority in Syria. Taliban style government is what they will produce. Any grievance with Assad would be nothing in comparison.

Now, here is the weirdest conspiracy theory you have probably ever heard, even for this forum. But everything points to it, and I have either gone crazy, (which is possible..lol) or this is true, which in my honest opinion I would almost rather find out I am crazy. But let me show you something;

First I want to point out, although I have previously pointed it out elsewhere on the forum (I posted a video with the first one saying this) , that the zionist leaders of Israel from their inception were tired of waiting on the Messiah (as)

This is important for many reasons, All these zionist leaders talk of the Messiah (as) and their religious rights A LOT. My thoughts really are, they are trying to force God's hand by attempting to force prophecy. They believe all this is supposed to happen, so they are attempting to make it happen.literally, because they are tired of waiting for it to on its own.

We have prophecies in our books, that talk about the coming of the Imam (atf) events that are foretold are as follows, the rising of three individuals, one from Iran, one from Yemen, and one from Syria. The one from Iran is good, the one from Yemen is good, and the one from Syria is a bad bad evil person. The one from Iran is told to rise first, way ahead of the other two. The other two, the yemeni and the sufyani (evil man from Syria) will rise at a time when there is war and unrest in almost every middle eastern country. (such as we are seeing today) These prophecies have been sitting in books for some 1200 + years.

If the Syrian rises in the Islamic calendar month of Rajab, this year it starts late May, and kills in a gruesome manner many people, this is actual fulfillment of Prophecy because that is what is foretold in the holy Books. And someone who will do just this, is who America is supporting my question is why?

The only thing I can think of, would be that Israel and America want the prophecies fulfilled, are actually desirous of it. America is ignoring the real protestors in Syria, the ones who want peace and democracy, I have also posted this before on forum, the peaceful democratic protesters and their group were not even invited to talks at the White House, only these terrorists I showed you.

The question is why, unless to attempt to force prophecy to come true. If they really are trying to force prophecy, its insane, really really insane.

reply to post by kn0wh0w

That PDF "Path to Persia" is about the most revealing thing I have read on Iran yet. Especially the section beginning on page 101 / Regime Change. It is a blueprint for how the US policy has been working in the region and the world for that matter. The options for fomenting insurrection, sanctions, terrorism and even coup, reads like a book of dirty tricks. The lowest of the low. Presented with a tone of inevitability. Good histories and synopsis of other conflicts with Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.

Multiple thread material buried therein. Check it out ATS!

Path to Persia PDF

Originally posted by KillerQueen
My question is who funds these papers? These think tanks? If the policies of the United States of America are to be influenced by them, then oughtn't we know who the actors are? What are their motivations?

"The first casualty of war is truth".

They are consumed by the motivation to dominate, to Lord over all in some kind of fantastic Fantasy to run everybody and have everything. To be God. Their euphemisms are New World Order and Globilization, etc., but all they really want to do rule the world. Pride and greed and envy and hate. Infantile behavior patterns of a brat.

reply to post by intrptr


Apparently you missed it, so I will point it out to you..

The Path to Persia is not a government document. It was put together by the Brookings institute and looks at various aspects of the Iranain situation, from Diplomacy, to containment, to military intervention and regime change.

It eve states its in no way linked to the Us government, its not a policy of the Us government, etc etc.

Please read before making a claim thats not true.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
What part of think tank do you not understand? The Brooking's Insitute, along with the other NGO's I posted that were named in the report, are all think tanks. So yes, they do sit around and analyze foreign policy of the US, as well as other countries. They take a look at all the information present and ask questions without the burden of policy.

The report clearly states the intent of the authors. I am assuming you did not get to that page yet?

Well... Sure, they do SAY those things.
The vacuum cleaner salesman also SAYS he wants to enrich our hygiene and the quality of our family life, right? And Shell wants to raise the standard of living of Nigeria... Along with improving coastal ecology.
Basically they are all such well-intentioned people... We should be sending them cocktails with olives...

Think tanks actually MAKE policy, not only analyse it. And politicians listen to them sometimes far more than to their electorates. Their role is especially clear on the right side of the spectrum - funded and founded by large corporations and personally by the richest people on Earth with agendas so Theocratic that they are nearing those of the various Ayatollahs.
Heritage and most others... I wouldn't buy a used car from these guys, you know. A lot of them get their funding from the Kochs and Murdoch.

reply to post by Kokatsi


Except in this case where you are ignoring where it specifically states its not offical policy as well as ignoring the intent of the report, which is hypothetical. As i stated the info in the report is good, but the attempt by people to make it into something its not while ignoring the non military aspects that also fit calls their intent into question.

Cherry picking information while ignoring the other aspects that dont support the view point is misleading.

I LOVE reading some people who have not a bit of ON THE GROUND EXPERIENCE or even have an inkling of what is REALLY GOING ON IN THE MIDDLE EAST creating topics such as this one. I wonder how they would feel if a Syrian Tank had just blown up a relatives Store Front just because that Syrian Tank Commander had seen a few KIDS with Anti-Government signs run ito the shop to evade PAID SYRIAN GOVERNMENT THUGS....who were beating to DEATH 14 to 20 year olds because they DARED PROTEST THE SYRIAN GOVERNMENT OR ASSAD....openly.

The KIDS run for cover...a FREEKIN' TANK ROUND GETS SHOT INTO A CITY STORE....indiscriminantly....killing anyone in the store whether they are pro or anti ASSAD supporters. The whole world has seen bodies of these kids lying on the streets and GOD help you if you are a WOMAN caught or cornered by a Government paid RAPE GANG! As this is what happens to female protesters.

Also...IRAN cannot withdraw from the Nuclear Nonprolifertion Treaty as they purchased Nuclear Tech. they did not have because they did not have the tech. to develop it themselves. They must abide by the rules of the treaty or suffer the consequences.

Only a Nation that has developed it's own Nuclear Tech. including building it's own Nuclear Bombs and reactors can withdraw from the NPT. IRAN cannot.

Israel is a muddy circumstance as it is well known that the U.S. provided Israel with Nuclear Weapons Grade Fuel from Oakridge...the site where the U.S. Dept. of Energy does most of it's Nuclear Weapons Grade Fuel development and testing. This was done after Egypt and Syria and a few others attempted to invade Israel and the old Soviet Union was heavily invested in Egypt. So even though Israel has not signed the NPT...and even though they had the Tech. know how to make Nukes....they did not have the Weapons Grade Fuel....so there is an issue there.

Still....Russia should never have built those Iranian Nuclear Facilities and it is finally seeing how this could bite it in the ASS as Russia has it's own issues with Radical Islam.....and Iran could very well at the LEAST send some Low Grade Uranium to be used in a Dirty Bomb to Chechen Rebels that would use it against a Russian Population Target. Split Infinity

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by intrptr

 

Apparently you missed it, so I will point it out to you..

I didn't miss anything. I read it.

The Path to Persia is not a government document. It was put together by the Brookings institute and looks at various aspects of the Iranain situation, from Diplomacy, to containment, to military intervention and regime change.

Just written by people in and of the government. Report hides behind gentisms like "regime change" and "intervention", but really describes step by step subjugation of a sovereign nation no matter how nice it sounds. That is anti American. Who are we to pass judgment on another nation who has yet to attack anybody the way the US and it's crony Nato have time and again?

It eve states its in no way linked to the Us government, its not a policy of the Us government, etc etc.

Deny, deny, deny...

The assertion that Brookings Institute and this document is no way affiliated with the government is laughable. Even before the government adopted this "play book" as policy in the mideast, similar versions of this "game plan" have been used worldwide in numerous other countries as long as empires have existed. Not just the US.

No? How else would you take down another nation if not like this? Subjugation of nations handbook. This "Path to Persia" report is not how to build a nation... but rather how to destroy one, from within and without. So you can stop trying to pull wool over mine or anyone else's eyes...xcathdra.

By the way you left out the "e" in your user name. "Cathdra" is spelled:

Cathedra

A throne of false judgment and disinformation.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Kokatsi

 

...where you are ignoring where it specifically states its not offical policy as well as ignoring the intent of the report, which is hypothetical.

Ludicrous. Try asking the people of Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya about "hypotheses".

Cherry picking information while ignoring the other aspects that dont support the view point is misleading.

Yah, we all get led around the Mulberry bush, don't we? It's right there in the choice of words for all to see:

"Intervention"
"Regime Change"
"Globalization"
"New World Order"

Sounds like a "Game Plan" to me...

reply to post by SplitInfinity


www.abovetopsecret.com...

words are telling

Originally posted by intrptr
I didn't miss anything. I read it.

Then apparently you didn't understand it. Go back and try again.

Originally posted by intrptr
Just written by people in and of the government. Report hides behind gentisms like "regime change" and "intervention", but really describes step by step subjugation of a sovereign nation no matter how nice it sounds. That is anti American. Who are we to pass judgment on another nation who has yet to attack anybody the way the US and it's crony Nato have time and again?

Actually they dont work for the government. If you read the report and understood it you would know this since it spells it out in the report. Secondly its not a step by step subjugation, and again had you read the report and understood it you would know this.

The US nor Israel is telling Iran what to do. The UN, specifically IAEA, is telling Iran they are in violation of their treaty obligations. I love how you and others decide to ignore every other country on the planet except for Israel and the US when it comes to Iran. Typical yet not surprising. Your comment on NATO is also not surprising.

Originally posted by intrptr
Deny, deny, deny...

Exactly what Iran has been doing, as well as people who are trying to defend Iran by laying blame solely on 2 countries, while denying the existence f many others who also share the view of the IAEA on Iran. I guess bringing that up though throws a wrench in your plans. What are you going to blame the other countries of who dont agree with Irans actions? Being puppets of the US?

Originally posted by intrptr
The assertion that Brookings Institute and this document is no way affiliated with the government is laughable. Even before the government adopted this "play book" as policy in the mideast, similar versions of this "game plan" have been used worldwide in numerous other countries as long as empires have existed. Not just the US.

Again, you didn't bother to read it if you are still going down this road. Read it, understand it, then get back to us.

Originally posted by intrptr
No? How else would you take down another nation if not like this? Subjugation of nations handbook. This "Path to Persia" report is not how to build a nation... but rather how to destroy one, from within and without. So you can stop trying to pull wool over mine or anyone else's eyes...xcathdra.

Iran is doing just fine in taking itself down... They dont need the assistance of the US or Israel.

Originally posted by intrptr
By the way you left out the "e" in your user name. "Cathdra" is spelled:

By the way your ignorance is showing. My screen name is short for ExCathedra -

ex ca·the·dra
   [eks kuh-thee-druh, kath-i-druh] Show IPA

noun
from the seat of authority; with authority: used especially of those pronouncements of the pope that are considered infallible.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Origin:
1810–20; < Latin ex cathedrā literally, from the chair

Originally posted by intrptr
A throne of false judgment and disinformation.

Since you apparently didn't bother to read the report, you did not bother to understand the report, you have no concept of what Brooking's is, let alone who the authors of the report work for and where there funding came from, or even realized the report is more than just military options, including also diplomatic, containment to name a few more that you ignored, why does it not surprise me that your arrogance would lead you to the wrong conclusion about my screen name.

Without even knowing the facts, you presume to know and lie in the process.

I think the name Cathedra is perfect for you.... It accurately describes your last post and intent in this thread.

With people like you in Iran's corner, as I stated before, they dont need the US or Israel to take them down. They are doing that on their own with the help of people like you.