Iran Sneak Attack on April 6???

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
21

[quote]haney1 wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
haney1 wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
Rockscar wrote:
How many of these stupid things will you post?

Why are they stupid?

Because they are wrong.

Hopefully it never happens, and most likely they’ll be wrong…I agree, but you never know.

lol…

so you keep crying wolf because you don’t know?

Reuters is talking about the summer, is that better for you?
http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyid=2007-04-01T142139Z_01_L0181904_RTRUKOC_0_US-ISRAEL-IRAN.xml

Reuters sensationalizes things for money. It makes sense for them to cry wolf. Everytime they do money falls from the sky.

You on the other hand do it because…

I bet you got all worked up over y2k as well.

[/quote]

Not really, y2k was a scam, how about you?

22

[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
Not really, y2k was a scam, how about you?[/quote]

How in the world can you say y2k was a scam?

As someone in the IT industry at the time, it most certainly was a cause for concern – and that is why so many companies spent money to make sure their systems (which had previously used two digit years) were updated.

Now, there may have been needless hype, but the underlying issue was certainly real, and it had the potential to cause disruptions in a lot of systems that had naive date based calculations…

There is a Unix “epoch” in the future which may cause similar concerns. It worries me that you, of all people, don’t know what a hoax actually is!!!

23

Since the U.S.S. Nimitz just left San Diego Monday afternoon en route to the Persian Gulf, I find it unlikely that the U.S. would launch a sneak attack before one of its carrier groups made it to the party.

Unless our carriers have Hyperdrive nowadays…

24

[quote]vroom wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
Not really, y2k was a scam, how about you?

How in the world can you say y2k was a scam?

As someone in the IT industry at the time, it most certainly was a cause for concern – and that is why so many companies spent money to make sure their systems (which had previously used two digit years) were updated.

Now, there may have been needless hype, but the underlying issue was certainly real, and it had the potential to cause disruptions in a lot of systems that had naive date based calculations…

There is a Unix “epoch” in the future which may cause similar concerns. It worries me that you, of all people, don’t know what a hoax actually is!!![/quote]

Well , you said it, it was a lot of hype that made a lot of money for some people who trumpeted that the sky was going to fall.

25

[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
Well , you said it, it was a lot of hype that made a lot of money for some people who trumpeted that the sky was going to fall.[/quote]

There’s a difference between “there” being a lot of hype and “it” being a lot of hype.

Some of that “hype” was generated because of management liability due to the foreseeable nature of the problem if they did not take action to handle the outcome.

Or, are you suggesting CNN et al made tons of money or something at our expense on a made up issue?

Why am I even bothering…

26

[quote]vroom wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
Well , you said it, it was a lot of hype that made a lot of money for some people who trumpeted that the sky was going to fall.

There’s a difference between “there” being a lot of hype and “it” being a lot of hype.

Some of that “hype” was generated because of management liability due to the foreseeable nature of the problem if they did not take action to handle the outcome.

Or, are you suggesting CNN et al made tons of money or something at our expense on a made up issue?

Why am I even bothering…[/quote]

I would say it is because you are a glutton for punishment. Then again I keep getting caught up in the religion threads so what does that say about me? :frowning:

27

[quote]jlesk68 wrote:

Not really, y2k was a scam, how about you?[/quote]

That is a really silly question.
When have you seen me make a sensational post?

I don’t follow the likes of texe marrs.

28

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=4652§ionid=3510101

Olmert: Attack on Iran baseless rumor
Mon, 02 Apr 2007 08:49:06

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has dismissed as baseless suggestions that Israel is working with the United States in drawing up plans for conflict with Iran.

“Declarations that there is an American plan to strike Iran is not familiar to me, and is a baseless rumor,” Olmert told a news conference in al-Quds on Sunday.

“I hope no one takes action based on baseless rumors,” he added.

Standing alongside German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Olmert, who is a target of criticism for the regime’s military fiasco during the war on Lebanon last summer, insisted Israel had no plan for a fresh conflict in the region.

“Israel is not planning an attack and does not wish for (another) war,” he said.

Olmert’s comments followed a briefing given to the Israeli cabinet earlier Sunday by military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin in which he insisted that the regime had no intention of waging another conflict in the region.

Olmert and Israeli minister Amir Peretz have been under mounting public pressure to resign over the government’s handling of last year’s 33-day war against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

About 70 Israeli politicians and military officials, including Olmert, have testified before the Winograd committee under pressure from thousands of military reservists who demanded a full-scale inquiry into the war.

The Israeli regime has been internationally criticized for the devastating use of firepower in Lebanon, where more than 1,200 people, the vast majority civilians and about one-third of them children, were killed.

MM/BG

? Press TV 2007. All Rights Reserved.

29

Thanks for the update, J! I was really starting to get worried about that sneak attack! Good to know it was just baseless rumor…

Waitaminnit! Ulmert is one of those stinking Jew Zionwhatzits! That means he lies with every breath - so I guess the sneak attack must have been prevented by the ever-watchful and completely unbiased media after all - score one for the good guys!

30

Multiple sources have stated that a U.S. attack on Iran is set for April. This is not coming out of the blue and it’s not a lone voice. People who pay attention to international news have been aware of this since January.

31

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
Multiple sources have stated that a U.S. attack on Iran is set for April. This is not coming out of the blue and it’s not a lone voice. People who pay attention to international news have been aware of this since January.[/quote]

And when April comes and goes with out a single shot fired. I will remember to not be one of those “People who pay attention to international news”.

Of course I will also question what you consider “international news” as well.

32

Apparently, that’s the worst kept secret in the world if it’s in the paper. I think I consider the Singing Psychic a better source that that rag your reading.

33

[quote]pat36 wrote:
Apparently, that’s the worst kept secret in the world if it’s in the paper. I think I consider the Singing Psychic a better source that that rag your reading.[/quote]

Do you think you can hide an army in your pocket and pull it out when you’re ready to strike?

There is a shitload of information out there, and all the major intel networks (US/Russian/Israeli) keep tabs on a 24/7/365 basis.

There is no inherent reason to discredit this. On the other hand, it should be treated for what it is - contemporaneous information related to events that are still transpiring. Not a prophecy from an oracle.

Overall, strong idiocy on this thread. Impressive.

[quote]haney1 wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Multiple sources have stated that a U.S. attack on Iran is set for April. This is not coming out of the blue and it’s not a lone voice. People who pay attention to international news have been aware of this since January.

And when April comes and goes with out a single shot fired. I will remember to not be one of those “People who pay attention to international news”.

Of course I will also question what you consider “international news” as well.[/quote]

You are equating this to betting on horses. For this, I would consider you a dumbass. Perhaps you’ve never made the realization that everything written and discussed on this board is speculation? Speculation is all there is. Speculation with varying degrees of credibility behind it. Information can always be useful, even when it’s wrong.

…

Provided you’re not one of those true believer types who only deal in platitudes (otherwise known as an idiot).

34

Still waiting…we usally start well before dawn…but the “international news sources” have been silent on the matter.

Time for a new conspiracy to keep the brave seekers of truth occupied.

35

[quote]hedo wrote:
Still waiting…we usally start well before dawn…but the “international news sources” have been silent on the matter.

Time for a new conspiracy to keep the brave seekers of truth occupied.[/quote]

Well, int’l news sources got it wrong again…Thank God for american news media, at least they stick to the script.

And you’re right, the conspiracy theory that jet fuel brought down the wtc is keeping us truth seekers very occupied.

36

[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
hedo wrote:
Still waiting…we usally start well before dawn…but the “international news sources” have been silent on the matter.

Time for a new conspiracy to keep the brave seekers of truth occupied.

Well, int’l news sources got it wrong again…Thank God for american news media, at least they stick to the script.

And you’re right, the conspiracy theory that jet fuel brought down the wtc is keeping us truth seekers very occupied.

[/quote]

Hey look on the bright side, if one of the wacko theories ever comes true it will sustain you guys for years. Even a blind squirell finds a nut sometimes.

The truth is out there!

37

Breaking News!
Tokyo
December 6th, 1941

“It is our intention to attack the United States Naval Base at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. We don’t care who knows and we’re letting all media outlets in on the coming attack! I think everyone would agree that this allows the greatest chance of success against the imperialistic dogs in the United States.”

Prime Minister Tojo went on to say that the attack was brought on by President Roosevelt and his decision to ‘cut off vital supplies for our conquest of China’, a decision he called ‘immoral’.

The attack has been scheduled for the morning (Hawaii time) of the 7th.
— Associated Press

38

[quote]Nominal Prospect wrote:
haney1 wrote:
Nominal Prospect wrote:
Multiple sources have stated that a U.S. attack on Iran is set for April. This is not coming out of the blue and it’s not a lone voice. People who pay attention to international news have been aware of this since January.

And when April comes and goes with out a single shot fired. I will remember to not be one of those “People who pay attention to international news”.

Of course I will also question what you consider “international news” as well.

You are equating this to betting on horses. For this, I would consider you a dumbass.
[/quote]

nice ad hom. I never said I bet on it.
Lets look at this though from a military perspective.

It is a sneak attack that is being covered in international news. Only a fool would still go through with it at that point. So by default this is a retarted thread.

Perhaps you have never considered there is credible speculation, and just some whack jobs post. The op qualifies as the second.

which this thread lacks all credibility! Way to back up a winner!

This only works in science. If your an accountant and your information is wrong guess how long you will have a job? Look at Enron for wrong information that is wrong! oh wait…

…

[quote]
Provided you’re not one of those true believer types who only deal in platitudes (otherwise known as an idiot).[/quote]

Have you ever thought there are some stories that are probable, and some that are not probable. This thread is one of those not probable. Now had this thread said the U.S. is coming up with attack strategies for Iran I would believe that.

As I stated earlier, the news gets paid to over sensationalize things! Look at all the tabloids. Unless you consider those as credible international news sources.

39

Well…I am waiting…

40

[quote]hedo wrote:
jlesk68 wrote:
hedo wrote:
Still waiting…we usally start well before dawn…but the “international news sources” have been silent on the matter.

Time for a new conspiracy to keep the brave seekers of truth occupied.

Well, int’l news sources got it wrong again…Thank God for american news media, at least they stick to the script.

And you’re right, the conspiracy theory that jet fuel brought down the wtc is keeping us truth seekers very occupied.

Hey look on the bright side, if one of the wacko theories ever comes true it will sustain you guys for years. Even a blind squirell finds a nut sometimes.

The truth is out there!
[/quote]

You’re right.