It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Provoking a war and then blaming the enemy for carrying out an act of aggression is no longer part of a hidden agenda, a safely guarded secret as in the case of Pearl Harbor (1941) which was used by the FDR administration as a justification for America’s entry into the Second World War.
Similarly, the Gulf of Tonkin incident (1964) was part of a covert operation which served to trigger the adoption by the US Congress of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. The latter granted President Lyndon B. Johnson with the “legal justification” for deploying U.S. troops against North Vietnam.
Recent developments, including US-NATO war games and the deployment of a powerful naval armada in the Persian Gulf, `”create conditions” which favor a Gulf of Tonkin type incident
“If the Iranians aren’t going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war.”
Washington is calling for the implementation of acts of provocation directed against Iran, so that Iran would so to speak “fire the first shot”.
Former Secretary of State James Baker III states quite categorically: “we ought to take ‘em out [Iran]“. Hillary Clinton retorts: “Well, we’re working hard [on that]. We’re working hard.”
Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by newcovenant
He's against an attack on Iran, which is abundantly obvious having read his OP.
It's a warning that a false flag could come at any time now. We Must not believe it if it happens. Anyone in the know should come out and say what it will be so they cannot carry it out.
Originally posted by newcovenant
Originally posted by Dustytoad
reply to post by newcovenant
He's against an attack on Iran, which is abundantly obvious having read his OP.
It's a warning that a false flag could come at any time now. We Must not believe it if it happens. Anyone in the know should come out and say what it will be so they cannot carry it out.
I guess I'll have to take your word the OP is AGAINST an attack on Iran.
I am judging simply by the thread and the title which to me virtually screams out.... ATTACK IRAN.
And I am against that whole heartedly.
The article says , US government is working hard to start war with Iran . Washington wants to provoke Iran to a limit where Iran will fire the first shot .
did it bother you I wrote my name?
Epic reading comprehension fail The OP in no way endorsed the position taken by the regime in the opening post. He only had two lines or his own content; which in itself is disappointing.
Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Dustytoad
This is his thread and anything outside of quotes are all his words.
Are they out of their mind?