the US Invasion of Iran
couple of things have occurred to me in the last 24 hours:
1a) while I knew there must have been some way that the "Allies" (against terror) orchestrated the recent "hostage"/prisoner crisis with the British sailors, I totally couldn't figure out how they'd done it: the Iranian government clearly wasn't complicit in a staged crisis, but with Iran being the world's fourth largest oil producer (after 1 Saudi Arabia, 2 Canada, and 3, you guessed it, Iraq), they are obviously next on the list, so a crisis of this sort just might be what the US Government is looking for to justify attack.
1b) (it was such a simple plan I didn't see at at first:) I believe the British government - in lieu of the US government because it would be way too obvious - ordered those sailors to cross that border in the water (either that or they misled those soldiers about where the border was), and then denied it when Iran said they had done it, thereby purposely creating the current crisis.
2) Iran must have nukes. I say this because a) it would be their only recourse against such an invasion, and the only feasible way they could keep the US from invading. If the US invaded (even if the Iranians don't have long-range missiles), they would retaliate by blowing Israel - one of the US's major allies and trading partners, and Iran's top enemy - off the map. So even if they don't actually have any manufactured yet, Iran is almost certainly working its ass off to build WMDs ASAP simply in order to ensure their safety.
3) In light of 2, it stands to reason that Iraq really never had any WMDs. We know this now, but I think there's still speculation that they somehow got rid of or hid them just before the invasion. If Iraq had had them, what would've stopped them from using their nukes when they knew they were about to be invaded? We all knew it was going to happen, and they must have known too, possibly even before we did. If they did have them, wouldn't they have used them, knowing what would ultimately happen to Iraq in the end anyway? Clearly the US felt safe enough to invade Iraq, and the only way that would have been possible was if they knew there was no actual threat of an Iraqi nuclear attack.
1a) while I knew there must have been some way that the "Allies" (against terror) orchestrated the recent "hostage"/prisoner crisis with the British sailors, I totally couldn't figure out how they'd done it: the Iranian government clearly wasn't complicit in a staged crisis, but with Iran being the world's fourth largest oil producer (after 1 Saudi Arabia, 2 Canada, and 3, you guessed it, Iraq), they are obviously next on the list, so a crisis of this sort just might be what the US Government is looking for to justify attack.
1b) (it was such a simple plan I didn't see at at first:) I believe the British government - in lieu of the US government because it would be way too obvious - ordered those sailors to cross that border in the water (either that or they misled those soldiers about where the border was), and then denied it when Iran said they had done it, thereby purposely creating the current crisis.
2) Iran must have nukes. I say this because a) it would be their only recourse against such an invasion, and the only feasible way they could keep the US from invading. If the US invaded (even if the Iranians don't have long-range missiles), they would retaliate by blowing Israel - one of the US's major allies and trading partners, and Iran's top enemy - off the map. So even if they don't actually have any manufactured yet, Iran is almost certainly working its ass off to build WMDs ASAP simply in order to ensure their safety.
3) In light of 2, it stands to reason that Iraq really never had any WMDs. We know this now, but I think there's still speculation that they somehow got rid of or hid them just before the invasion. If Iraq had had them, what would've stopped them from using their nukes when they knew they were about to be invaded? We all knew it was going to happen, and they must have known too, possibly even before we did. If they did have them, wouldn't they have used them, knowing what would ultimately happen to Iraq in the end anyway? Clearly the US felt safe enough to invade Iraq, and the only way that would have been possible was if they knew there was no actual threat of an Iraqi nuclear attack.
posted by BT at 9:12 AM
2 Comments:
...here's a well-informed article suggesting the same thing - http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHI20070330&articleId=5238
Not related to your topic - but are you going to post more pics of Abby soon?
Post a Comment
<< Home