Who will attack Iran....???

[shooltzon]

Who is gonna attack Iran????


“Their mastermind, who is an imposter, creates diversions to mask their wicked deeds, and to divert attention from his ominously unfolding master-plan to eventually rule the world from Jerusalem, and to then declare himself to be the true Messiah. He seeks to mask this evil attack on Iran by resorting to the greatest diversion of all. That is the explanation for the nuclear ‘scarecrow’.”



It now seems certain that an unjust western war on Iran would be launched as soon as the managed formalities are over, and even while the equally unjust wars on Iraq and Afghanistan are still being waged.

We analyze possible consequences of that war and suggest that this time it might not be yet another Anglo-American war waged on Israel’s behalf.
Rather, Israel could step out from behind the curtains that have hitherto cleverly concealed her, and assume her pre-planned leadership role in waging her own war in her own interest.

USA and Britain would then play uncomfortably new supporting roles in this final stage of their unholy triple alliance. Such an Israeli-led war could witness the introduction of new weapons of warfare never used or even seen before.

Despite western calculations that paint a rosy picture of such a war delivering to the west, and hence to Israel, control over Iran’s oil and gas, in addition to the rest of the Gulf oil already under their direct and indirect control, the several uncertainties that attend such a war could precipitate events with calamitous consequences for USA in particular.

Israel, on the other hand, would ‘appear’ to succeed in that war while oblivious of the fact that an attack on Islamic Iran would trigger a much bigger war that would probably last for another fifty years.
War on Iran would certainly impact on the price of oil and that, in turn, could function as the catalyst that would cause the rapid meltdown of the utterly fraudulent US dollar, and culminate with USA losing its dominant position as the ruling State in the world.

In a surprise of all surprises, Israel could then replace USA as the new ruling State in the world, while controlling the new electronic money-system of the world that would then totally replace paper-money.
If and when Israel does achieve such a status it would appear to take the Euro-Jewish State one step closer to realizing her so-called Biblical messianic destiny.

Experts of strategic affairs, as well as political analysts of events now rapidly unfolding in the world, usually shy away from this topic for fear of loss of earnings and prestige, and because of an even greater fear of the charge of "anti-Semitism". They should no longer resist the compelling evidence that there is a crucially important religious (scriptural and eschatological) dimension to this subject which, if not embraced and carefully studied, would result in woefully inadequate understanding of those events. And unless one understands the ominously unfolding world in this, the last stage of history, one can never hope to respond correctly to its many challenges.


PREPARING FOR WAR


The deceptive Western-dominated international news media is now busy supporting a western diplomacy of intimidation and blackmail that targets Iran, and consequently prepares the world for an attack on Iran’s nuclear plants (and other related facilities). They must have made a secret deal with Russia, China and India, perhaps offering to share with them Iran’s oil and gas after they grab it, in order to win their support for referring Iran to the UN Security Council. There are many others who today vote with fear of the oppressor and are intimidated to reluctantly support him in his oppression. And then there is our Venezuelan neighbor, Hugo Chavez, who, like Malcolm X, has no fear and cannot be bought!


WHO WILL ATTACK IRAN?


Even as the case for Western war on Iran is being built with the same lies, deception and fanatical resolve which attended the commencement of the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, it is quite clear that a US President who faces increasing difficulties at home in defending an unpopular war on Iraq cannot readily or easily embark upon another war on Iran. There would be serious political risks for him, and for his party, in such a dangerous and misguided military adventure. Indeed if USA launches war on Iran, and occupies Iran’s oil belt, and then faces an immensely strengthened armed resistance to its occupation of Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran, and if the US dollar and, consequently, the US economy, were to meltdown, President Bush would surely be impeached. And if USA cannot lead the war on Iran then it is impossible for Britain to do so.

Whether it is by design or by chance, that leaves only one European nation capable of taking the lead in that war on Iran, and that is the Euro-Jewish State of Israel.

Iran neither wants war with Israel, nor is preparing to commence one. Iran would suffer immensely from war with Israel, while Israel would hardly suffer any significant losses from such a war for which she is more than adequately prepared. Israel would not wage war on a Muslim people at this time by invading and occupying their territory. The armies of the western world as well as their client-State allies have been used as cannon-fodder for such ground combat. Israel has been waging war on the Palestinian people with awesome firepower from the air, as well as with small fast-moving commando teams infiltrating their territory in hit-and-run missions. Israeli conventional wars have also been of very short duration (six days, for example) so that they do not allow the Muslim world sufficient time to mobilize for War.

If western troops hesitate to face the horrendously dangerous mission of physically occupying Iran’s oil belt, then the alternative would have to be a lightening Israeli aerial attack so powerful and destructive that it would pulverize and incapacitate Iran. Only nuclear warfare can deliver such a result.

The lightning Israeli attack on Iraq’s Osiraq nuclear reactor in June 1981, shortly before the reactor was scheduled to go into operation, resulted in its complete destruction. Yet Israel has not faced any significant retaliation or suffered any loss at all from that blatant act of aggression. US-led attacks on Iraq in 1991, and again ten years later, made it impossible for that country to ever respond effectively to the Israeli aggression.

If and when she does attack Iran, Israel would want to so cripple that country as to make it impossible for Iran, as well, to ever mount an effective armed response. Israel is therefore likely to expand her military targets beyond the Iranian nuclear sites, and while it is certain that fighter aircraft with guided missiles would be used to attack a host of targets scattered all over Iran, it is not unthinkable that Israel could resort to such a use of nuclear weapons that would leave Iran nursing many Hiroshimas and Nagasakis.

Nuclear weapons could be used, for example, to so destroy Iran’s oil installations that it would be impossible to restore the export of Iranian oil for years to come. The consequence for the Iranian economy, which is largely dependent on oil and gas revenues, would be disastrous. Indeed the economy would grind to a halt, and in the economic chaos that would follow, it would be unthinkable for Iran to launch any kind of conventional or nuclear war on Israel for many years to come.

It is more likely, however, that Israel would seek to seize control of Iran’s oil-belt in an Israeli bid to so control the world’s oil resources at a time when the price of oil has been deliberately driven up, that the world can be held to ransom by an Israel in quest of rule over the whole world. For that reason the use of nuclear weapons could be restricted to so incapacitating Iran that it would be impossible for that country’s armed forces to defend the oil-belt that the unholy triple alliance wants to seize.



REAL REASONS FOR WAR ON IRAN


It should be clear that the primary purpose of an Israeli attack on Iran would be political, economic and strategic (grabbing Iran’s oil and getting rid of a hostile Islamic regime) rather than strictly military, since Iran poses no significant military threat to either Israel or the west. What are the likely political, economic and strategic objectives of a war on Iran and how do they relate to Euro-Jewish State’s ultimate destiny?

The use of nuclear weapons against a weaker non-nuclear-weapons State would clearly represent a manifestly disproportionate, unjust and immoral response to a presumed distant potential threat.

But Israel’s use of nuclear weapons in an attack on Iran would advance her strategic objective of replacing USA as the ‘ruling State’ in the world since a ruling State must not only be a nuclear-weapons State but must also demonstrate its preparedness to use that nuclear power.

It is only when religious scholarship is combined with scholarship in international affairs that one can discover that ultimate Israeli strategic objective that is linked with the Jewish belief in the advent of “a Messiah who would rule the world from the throne of David, i.e., the Holy State of Israel”. The Messiah would thus restore the golden age of David and Solomon.


IRAN WOULD WITHDRAW FROM NPT AND BEGIN THE QUEST FOR A NUCLEAR WEAPONS DETERRENT


Whether or not nuclear weapons are used in an Israeli attack on Iran, the fact remains that such an attack would almost certainly result in an Iranian withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and in the Iranian people and government solemnly committing themselves to struggle, by any means necessary, to acquire an Iranian nuclear weapons deterrent with which to protect themselves from the bandits who now rule the world.

Indeed Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, has already warned that his country might resign its membership in the International Atomic Energy Agency and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The Iranians would also be following in the example of Pakistan whose then leader, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, responded to the carefully-timed intimidation of the Indian nuclear explosion in April 1974 (India’s response to the Lahore Islamic Summit Conference of February 1974) with a national commitment to develop a Pakistani nuclear deterrent “even if we have to eat grass”. Pakistan eventually succeeded in that effort and there is no reason to doubt that the Iranians would eventually do likewise. It would only be a matter of time. An attack on Iran would thus set the world up for an Armageddon that Christians already expect.


ATTACK ON IRAN CAN DESTABILIZE PAKISTAN’S PRO-AMERICAN REGIME


An Israeli attack on Iran can result in even more ominous consequences for the Euro-Jewish State since it could provoke an already agitated Muslim people in Pakistan to such a boiling-point of resentment and anger that could threaten the very survival of the pro-American and pro-Israeli Musharraf regime in Pakistan. That regime is already universally despised in Pakistan.

If the present client-regime in Pakistan were to be replaced through a military coup, or a bloody insurrection, by a leader with credentials of opposition to American and Israeli oppression and aggression against Muslims, Israel would certainly reverse her current ‘blind-eye’ towards Pakistan’s nuclear-weapons capability and argue that those weapons pose a threat to her very survival. The world would then witness yet another crusade against a non-European Muslim people.

Already it is clear that Muslim public opinion around the world is firmly in favor of such leaders who can resist western and Israeli oppression and their dirty war . It was because an opportunity presented itself for such that the last presidential election in Iran resulted in a maverick and diplomatically immature but anti-American and anti-Israeli Mayor of Teheran soundly defeating ex-President Rafsanjani who was mature and diplomatically astute but whose credentials of standing up to the oppressor were less than impressive.

It was again precisely such an opportunity which explains the electoral victory of the Palestinian Hamas Islamic resistance movement that has courageously resisted Israeli oppression, over a secular Fatah with a tarnished record of resisting the oppressor in the occupied Holy Land. Indeed a western attack on Iran would almost certainly inflame Muslim public opinion around the world to such an extent that at least some pro-American leaders and regimes in the Muslim world may fall. Such a development would be a tremendous loss of face for the US administration.



ATTACK ON IRAN WOULD CAUSE A DRAMATIC RISE IN PRICE OF BOTH OIL AND GOLD WITH OMINOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR THE US $


It is certain that an attack on Iran would result in an instantaneous and dramatic rise in oil prices as well as the price of gold. Few people seem to realize that when the price of gold ‘goes up” it actually amounts to the value of the US dollar ‘going down’. In September 1971 the US government, having solemnly pledged its word, broke its word and scrapped the Breton Woods Accord. Britain had acted in September 1971 in accordance with her rights under the Breton Woods Accord in demanding that the US government redeem for gold (at $35. per ounce of gold) a few billion dollars of British-held US dollars. USA was legally obliged to do so under international law, but did not have the gold to redeem all the dollars it had printed and put in circulation both domestically and overseas. That was fraud. It should have led to war. But all that happened was that US simply broke her word, reneged from her treaty obligations and scrapped the Breton Woods Accord.

The value of the US dollar has been generally based since then on market demand around the world. Specifically, however, the US dollar has kept its strength because of imperial America’s control over its oil-exporting client-States -- ensuring that the dollar be the currency that must be used for the purchase of oil.

USA was clever enough to get the world to accept that it could take any amount of paper and make money with it, and so long as mankind accepted that paper-money, and there was demand for it, USA did not have to worry about where it would find the money to pay for imports, goods, services, etc. It would simply print the paper. But USA was clever and wicked enough to ensure that there would be a substantial and significant demand for US paper dollars by imposing upon oil exporting countries the obligation to sell their oil for that US paper-money. The result was that the demand for US dollars remained forever strong, indeed stronger by far than the demand for any other paper money.

But war on Iran would certainly disrupt oil supplies from that country and could, conceivably, also result in a shut-down of the strategic Straits of Hormuz through which tankers laden with Gulf oil must pass to get to the open seas.

"If Europe does not act wisely with the Iranian nuclear portfolio and it is referred to the U.N. Security Council and economic or air travel restrictions are imposed unjustly, we have the power to halt oil supply to the last drop from the shores of the Persian Gulf via the Straits of Hormuz," said Mohammed-Nabi Rudaki, deputy chairman of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission.

Twenty-five percent of the world's oil production passes through the Straits of Hormuz, which connects the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean. If Iran were to carry out such a threat, other big oil producers in the region, such as the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, would be unable to export oil.

Oil prices could conceivably increase to $200 plus a barrel or more, and as the price of gold also escalates as it did in January 1980 ($850. an oz.) the US dollar would so lose value as to become a very significant liability. If some Central Banks and large corporations respond to the falling value of the dollar by turning away from the US dollar in search of a more stable currency which could store value with greater reliability, and if the proposed Iranian oil bourse succeeds in offering an alternative to the dollar for the purchase of oil, this would have disastrous consequences for the dollar. If the US dollar loses its current status as the international currency such could doom the dollar to a collapse that would bring down with it all the paper-money in the world. It would also mark the end of the era of American dominance over the rest of the world as the ruling State in the world. That would be an entirely positive development for an Israel that is just biding its time to replace USA as the ruling State in the world.


STAB IN THE BACK FOR US FORCES IN IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN BUT OPPORTUNITY FOR ISRAEL


An Israeli attack on Iran and a western occupation of Iran’s oil belt would provoke an instantaneous and dramatic increase in the size and power of the armed Muslim resistance to US occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan. Even more ominously, both Sunni and Shia Muslims would now jointly wage the armed struggle to liberate these territories from US occupation. In addition US troops in places such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Turkey and so many other Muslim countries would either have to withdraw or go into hiding. This would imply both military and political disaster for USA and would precipitate her rapid decline as the ruling State in the world.

A nuclear attack on Iran would also expose US troops in Iraq to dangerous nuclear radio-active fallout.

But it would also present to the world a carefully engineered spectacle of an Israel bereft of US protective security, hemmed in by the so-called rising tide of militant Islam, and threatened with destruction. Thus the necessary conditions would have been cleverly and deliberately created for Israel to claim a causus bellum that would justify Israel’s great war that would deliver, in turn, a dramatic territorial expansion of the State (“from the river of Egypt to the great river – the river Euphrates”). Israel would seize control of the Suez Canal as well as all the oil in the Persian Gulf while finally embracing the fraudulent Biblical frontiers of Holy Israel.

And so, an Israeli attack on Iran would lay the foundations for, and create the conditions that would eventually justify, Israel’s greater war that is to come which, in turn, would confirm her status as the new ruling State in the world.


This is no conspiracy theory but, rather, the truth about a monstrously evil plan that continues to be confirmed as events unfold in the world.
Nor is this essay anti-Jewish. There are Jews who oppose the wickedness of the Euro-Jewish State of Israel. There are Jews who found refuge and security in the Muslim world and lived peacefully with Muslims with honor, respect and religious freedom for more than a thousand years until they were deceived into leaving their residence with us and to take up residence in the Imposter State of Israel. There are Jews who do not wage wars, nor support those who do so.

An excerpt from “WILL ISRAEL ATTACK IRAN?”
BY Imran Nazar Hosein

[shooltzon]

Guys i know its long.... but got to bear with it for its purpose.

[faceless]

The poll questions aren't extensive enough really. They pretty much leave only one conclusion - that Israel is in control of world politics, which is something I simply don't believe.

They are nothing but a strategic staging post in the same way as the Falklands were for britain.

[nekokate]

Isn't it a bit pessimistic to be asking people who WILL attack Iran? I'm not voting here at all, because it would feel almost like submitting to it.

[shooltzon]

Was just asking whether u could forecast a possible threat of war which would unfortunately unfold in the near future. It's an inevitable requirement and all i have to say is just wait and see - watch out for this post of mine.

I know it is a bit pessimistic. But its just a supposition which i am trying out here...Neither do i want it to happen. My question is; if at all there happens a war... Whom do you think would take it up...??

Faceless you are rite. The polls options are not extensive enough... i could not possibly think of any other option. Could you suggest any options...???

[shooltzon]

But do you guys hold a view that there are war gossips around which is targeted at IRAN...?? Just curious?
If you don't hold that, then this topic could be irrelevant. I am sorry if the Article dint make any kind of sense to you.

[Salim201]

you sound like you're part of a millenarian movement of the nineteenth century.

"Israel’s use of nuclear weapons in an attack on Iran would advance her strategic objective of replacing USA as the ‘ruling State’ in the world "

you are mental.

Israel serves no purpose but to get US senators and presidents elected, without the lobby the state would have fallen apart a long time ago, and it doesn't look like surviving too long on its current course. I think one of a few things Ahmadinejad is actually right about is the declivity of the Zionist state in the context of the ever shifting paradigms of world politics. Also if you think an attack on Iran is "inevitable" then you have an oversimplified understanding of those dynamics. Its not 'all in the bible' this is the real world.

[faceless]

there's no doubt that Bush and others want to attack Iran, but it could all end up being bluster for the moment. There is no reason to invade Iran at the moment (talk of nuclear weaponry is just the excuse) but if the American government decides that fuel prices are too high then who knows what will happen in the future.

If they spent all the money on developing new fuel technology rather than defending the status quo it would be a different story though.