The Coming Catastrophy in Iran - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 06-24-2008, 06:16 PM   #1
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 06:58 PM
The Coming Catastrophe in Iran

David Debatto is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence officer and Iraqi War Veteren. In this article he gives several scenerios that he believes may happen soon. Many in the media are writing about an attack following the coming U.S. election. Just days ago the Isaeli air force launched a massive air "practice drill" leading most observers to think that it was the predecesor to the coming attack on Iran. I have always personally held the belief that the Bush administration would never just fade away in the typical "lame duck" manner - that there was this one card hidden away in Dick Cheney's sleeve if you will. Unfortunately this may be the card.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=ra&aid=9437

I tested this link but for some reason it didn't work. Sorry. Damn, can anyone fix it???
__________________

__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 06:22 PM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Thats all we need $300 for a Barrel of oil.
__________________

__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 06:26 PM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 01:58 AM
The Coming Catastrophe?
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 06:31 PM   #4
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 06:58 PM
Thanks!!!

Sorry for spelling Catastrophe wrong too.
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 06:54 PM   #5
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 06:58 PM
Israel 'will attack Iran' before new US president sworn in, John Bolton predicts - Telegraph
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 07:09 PM   #6
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaz02 View Post
Thats all we need $300 for a Barrel of oil.
Just to note, it's been argued that Iran's oil infrastructure is decaying from neglect, as no serious maintenance has been done since the late 1970s, prior to the Iranian Revolution. If they are correct, Iran will cease to produce oil around 2012--no military attacks required.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 08:15 PM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 12:58 AM
^ Wont the Saudi's start fiddling around to show their disaproval ?

To be quite honest all i care about is oil going up further.
__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 09:06 PM   #8
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaz02 View Post
^ Wont the Saudi's start fiddling around to show their disaproval ?

To be quite honest all i care about is oil going up further.
Geez, great answer...no concern about the thousands who would be killed on both sides, the reprecussions to the whole middle-fuckin-east, the possible domino effect of such an attack etc. etc. Hmmm.
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 06-24-2008, 09:26 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
vaz02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: manchester
Posts: 7,447
Local Time: 12:58 AM
^ They dont care about me. We all have our own problems.
Im not going to lose sleep over some saber rattling.
If a nuke drops, its over for us all. Why worry about it.
__________________
vaz02 is offline  
Old 07-03-2008, 10:35 PM   #10
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 01:58 AM
[q]Iran hints at nuclear talk progress, but world still wary of possible conflict

By Arthur Bright
Christian Science Monitor, July 03


Reuters reports that Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki, in New York for a meeting at the UN, told reporters Wednesday that he did not think Israel or the United States would attack Iran before next January, when President Bush leaves office, and added that he saw a "new sort of atmosphere" in talks with the West over Iran's nuclear program:

Speaking through an interpreter, Mr. Mottaki told reporters that "constructive statements and approaches" and an earlier proposal by Iran had "paved the way for creating a new sort of atmosphere." On behalf of the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and China, EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana handed over an offer on June 14 of trade and other benefits designed to help persuade Tehran to curb its nuclear work. "Very soon I will respond to the letter given to me by the six foreign ministers," Mottaki said at the United Nations.

CNN reports that Mottaki also suggested that Iran would be willing to open diplomatic contacts with the US. CNN notes that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has approved preliminary examination of opening an "interests office" in a third-party foreign embassy in Tehran. Such an office would open diplomatic channels with Iran in the absence of a US embassy:

"Contacts between Iranians and the American people will be a useful step for better understanding of the two nations," Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said, according to the Islamic Republic News Agency...

Rice said recently that the United States has for some time been attempting to reach out to the Iranian people. "We want more Iranians visiting the United States," she said. "We want the efforts that we've engaged in to have Iranian artists in the United States, American sports people in Iran. We're determined to find ways to reach out to the Iranian people."

Mottaki, in New York to attend a meeting of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, said Iran supports academic and sports exchanges between the two countries, IRNA reported. "Iranian academics and students have invited their American counterparts to the country to share their research and scientific achievements," Mottaki said, according to IRNA.


The more upbeat diplomatic overtures from Tehran come as both President Bush and the Pentagon expressed interest in avoiding armed conflict with Iran. The Los Angeles Times reports that when asked at a White House press conference Wednesday whether he would try to discourage Israel from a rumored preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, Bush said that "the first option ought to be to solve this problem diplomatically." Shortly after Bush's press conference, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, who recently returned from a meeting with Israeli military leaders, told reporters at the Pentagon that an attack on Iran by Israel would have very negative consequences for the US:

"Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful for us," [Admiral Mullen] said, referring to the prospect of a direct clash with Iran while fighting continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. "This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don't need it to be more unstable." In his trip to Israel, Mullen met with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of the Israeli defense staff. Mullen declined to say whether an air strike was broached in his meetings but acknowledged that the Iranian threat was discussed and said he agreed that Tehran was a destabilizing force in the region. Mullen has expressed his concerns for several months about the risks posed to U.S. troops in Iraq by a strike on Iran, Defense Department officials said, but those warnings have been made mostly in private. Mullen declined to say whether he had delivered his assessment to the White House in recent days.

The comments from both Iranian and US officials Wednesday follow heated rhetoric from both sides. The Associated Press reports that earlier this week, Iran threatened to close off the Strait of Hormuz, choking the world's oil supply, should any attack be made against it. But Vice Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the US 5th Fleet based in Bahrain, said that the US "will not allow Iran to close" the Strait and would regard such an attempt to be an act of war. Agence France-Presse reports that if Iran were attacked, OPEC Secretary General Abdallah el-Badri said the price of oil would likely surpass $145 per barrel, since "it is difficult to replace [the] 4.1 or 4.2 million barrels a day" that Iran produces.

This week also saw the release of a New Yorker article by Seymour Hersh that warned the US may be preparing to invade Iran by increasing covert operations within the country. Mr. Hersh wrote that at Bush's request, Congress approved a $400 million funding increase of such operations, which "are designed to destabilize the country's religious leadership" and "involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations" as well as further intelligence gathering on Iran's nuclear activities. Agence France-Presse reports that the White House declined to comment on Hersh's report.[/q]
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 07-04-2008, 05:17 AM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 01:58 AM
I don't think the US does want to start any war during election time. And Israel probably will be very hesitant to do anything as long as they don't have the full support of the US in their backhand.
However, should Israel do any shit there and a war break out Germany would be in and the US and the rest of Europe either.
We can't let that happen.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 07-04-2008, 05:50 AM   #12
War Child
 
thatsnotmypuppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 909
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Having read the article I think the overall scenario is unlikely. While I could believe a pre-emptive strike to be on the cards from the Israeli point of view - however I doubt the US would be silly enough to get involved. I doubt the Saudi's would get too upset as they don't tend to like the Shiite's anyhow - though they run the risk of inflaming their own Shiite minority which is based near the major eastern oilfields. I would be more concerned with what Pakistan and Russia's reaction would be.
__________________
thatsnotmypuppy is offline  
Old 07-04-2008, 06:00 AM   #13
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 07:58 PM
Israel has quietly been picking off supposedly non-existant nuclear weapons facilities all over the middle east for years, and we've (US) has been quite happy about that.

Change our position now?
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 07-04-2008, 06:03 AM   #14
Refugee
 
MadelynIris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Craggy Island
Posts: 1,504
Local Time: 07:58 PM
Quote:
"Opening up a third front right now would be extremely stressful for us," [Admiral Mullen] said, referring to the prospect of a direct clash with Iran while fighting continues in Iraq and Afghanistan. "This is a very unstable part of the world, and I don't need it to be more unstable." In his trip to Israel, Mullen met with Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, chief of the Israeli defense staff. Mullen declined to say whether an air strike was broached in his meetings but acknowledged that the Iranian threat was discussed and said he agreed that Tehran was a destabilizing force in the region. Mullen has expressed his concerns for several months about the risks posed to U.S. troops in Iraq by a strike on Iran, Defense Department officials said, but those warnings have been made mostly in private. Mullen declined to say whether he had delivered his assessment to the White House in recent days.
We're fighting the Iranians now in Iraq, albiet quietly. An open war with them would stretch us. If this did happen, I'm guessing we would leave Afganistan an concentrate on Iraq/Iran.
__________________
MadelynIris is offline  
Old 07-06-2008, 12:30 AM   #15
Refugee
 
A stor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: U.S.A. East Coast
Posts: 2,464
Local Time: 12:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Vest View Post
David Debatto is a former U.S. Army Counterintelligence officer and Iraqi War Veteren. In this article he gives several scenerios that he believes may happen soon. Many in the media are writing about an attack following the coming U.S. election. Just days ago the Isaeli air force launched a massive air "practice drill" leading most observers to think that it was the predecesor to the coming attack on Iran. I have always personally held the belief that the Bush administration would never just fade away in the typical "lame duck" manner - that there was this one card hidden away in Dick Cheney's sleeve if you will. Unfortunately this may be the card.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=ra&aid=9437

I tested this link but for some reason it didn't work. Sorry. Damn, can anyone fix it???
Good lord, I hope not. But, you are not the only one who fears this. Many of us, states side are worried that the current admid will get the next term president into a situation, they may not have foreseen or can handle.
__________________

__________________
A stor is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com