If there is a war with Iran, will it derail disclosure

[Intranuclear]

I have a very strong sinking feeling that there will very soon be a war with Iran.
Worse, I see it completely derailing the whole UFO disclosure process that is finally accelerating. I was surprised that I did not find any posting in this forum addressing this issue, but maybe I have missed it.

I was not sure where to post this so for now I chose General Discussion as I didn't think it is Conspiracy, or UFO Disclosure and I did not see a War section.

[rgray222]

Trump is definitely going to respond but in a measured way. It is going to be tit for tat for a bit and then it will fade until some additional aggression by the Iranians. This may seem somewhat irrelevant to many but Trump is a money man. Watching him over the past two years it is clear to see he keeps his eye on money all the time. When I heard that this drone cost $180 million, it tells me that he is not going to let this go unpunished. So I fully expect him to react sooner rather than later.

I recently met an Iranian couple that immigrated to Canada shortly after the Shah fell in 1979. They now live in the USA. They just returned from Tehran where they spent 3 weeks visiting friends and family. They did not paint a nice picture of the current situation in the country. First off the said the environmental situation is appalling, the air and water quality is barely acceptable, people have taken to wearing a mask when they go out. Jobs are extremely limited, wages are low and she went on to say that many professional people are working menial jobs just to make ends met. They said that virtually everyone is intimated by the government, too afraid to speak out or protest. They said that everyone they know has had family members or close friends put in prison at one time or another for suspected anti-government behavior. I spoke with this couple for the better part of an hour and at the end of the discussion, the woman was so distraught that she was in tears.

I have spent a good deal of time in the Middle East, Saudi, Bahrain, Iran, etc. I have not been to Tehran since that late '70s and at the time it was a fairly modern city and people seemed reasonably well off. They were friendly with the west and it was a great place to visit. I think the conditions of today are much worse than we are being told. I also think that the U.S. is being provocative but I also think the mess coming out of Iran is of their own doing. Things must be really bad if they see a hot conflict with the USA a way of improving their lot in life. No doubt attempting to split the USA and Europe to ease the sanctions.

The mainstream media is going to ride this horse like we are entering WWIII but it will just be hype. Trump is not a guy that is going to go to war. He sees it as a waste of human and financial resources. The Iranians do not want to get into a war they could never win. This is all about money, they want the sanctions lifted.

So in my opinion, we will see a response extremely soon, we will watch the media heighten tensions around the world and it will be over before you know it.

[Intranuclear]

rgray222 I pray that you are right as that would be logical. When it comes to "measured" response, who sets the prices?
$180 million to US does not mean much, but what does it translate to Iran?
In this measured response, if lives are lost, and revenge takes over, what then?
In any case, I feel a little better that I at least got this off my chest.
Thanks.

[Patient]

Maybe they will use some new tech over Iran as a way to test their ability to stage a fake ET invasion?

If I was sitting on some technology that needed testing in a large environment, I would be pushing for the opportunity. May be something to keep a look out for.

[Bubu]

What happened in Syria would be similar to what is going to happen in Iran. to say that Iran is not going to win is to say that Syria never win. its not Iran alone, there is Russia China and maybe more. If Us did not win in Syria then they will not win in Iran now.

[Jayke]

Joe Rogan just had Bob Lazar on his platform last night. Big audience for disclosing some homegrown UFO building capabilities:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=BEWz4SXfyCQ

Who does disclosure have to be announced by before it becomes legit?

I’m still of the opinion there’ll be no ‘hot war’ with Iran. The MEK (rogue domestic Iranian group) are using their spokespeople on twitter to paint the image that a hot war is heating up, but ultimately, I feel Trump is savvy enough to not get drawn into an open conflict. Lots of posturing or token gestures of force, most definitely, but a full on war like that in Syria... ditto what rgray said above.

[Bubu]

Disclosure? I'm lost, is there such a thing? who is going to disclose? Did anyone disclose anything ever?

[Ernie Nemeth]

Mankind went to space with the intent of exploring the solar system with manned missions.

Unfortunately, when we got out there it became immediately apparent that there were at least remnants of advanced technology scattered all about us - on the moon, in orbit, on Mars and elsewhere.

The actual reason to halt all human exploration was and is because of the potential threat that some technology would be discovered by someone or some private organization that could propel them to the top of the corporate world - and by extension disrupt the world economy or worse, negate the financial stranglehold of the present corporate hegemony.

[Intranuclear]

Posted by Bubu (here)
Disclosure? I'm lost, is there such a thing? who is going to disclose? Did anyone disclose anything ever?

Oh boy, do I agree with that. I am very certain there will be many micro-avalanches of knowledge dumps, and after 10 years, who knows, it may be irrelevant.
Lots of technical papers are coming out many NAVY patents are being issued, but patents aren't terribly detailed and seem mostly a way to contain the quick commercialization.
The CIA seems bent intent to push Trump into a war and Trump's last minute turnabout shows his hesitation of causing hundreds of deaths which most certainly would escalate the situation beyond control.

[Bubu]

I think I read somewhere that the CIA disclose at least a thousand lies each day

[T Smith]

Posted by rgray222 (here)
Trump is definitely going to respond but in a measured way. It is going to be tit for tat for a bit and then it will fade until some additional aggression by the Iranians. This may seem somewhat irrelevant to many but Trump is a money man. Watching him over the past two years it is clear to see he keeps his eye on money all the time. When I heard that this drone cost $180 million, it tells me that he is not going to let this go unpunished. So I fully expect him to react sooner rather than later.

This assessment assumes Iran actually shot down the US drone over international waters. But I would ask, why should we assume this? In my view, that assumption doesn't hold water.

If Iran's motive was really some kind of hot response to US sanctions, would that level of provacative aggression against the US really be commensurate with the sanctions and the retaliatory consequences, let alone characteristic of Iranian geopolitical action? Historically, Iran doesn't start hot wars.

What's more likely, in my view, is the US (meaning Deep State factions within that are baiting Trump to respond) moved the drone into Iranian territory. Iran took the bait, which in turn was meant to bait Trump, who so far has refused the bait.

Interestingly, however, your analysis is spot on, in my estimation, only that it's founded on a faulty premise. Trump will hit back with a measured response in the manner you describe, which will save face for the US without escalating full-blown war. But I'm sorry to say I do not believe things will end there. This is far from over as far as I can see. There's more going on here.

Since this "last" plan apparently failed to trigger war, I expect the "next" provocation to entail casualties, which will be much harder for Trump to deal with. The worst case scenario, if the provocateurs cannot get Iran itself to take the bait, will entail the Deep State launching their own false flag against the US to force the issue.

What's interesting is Iran and Trump apparently both understand their countries are being railroaded into conflict. If we are to believe this report, the bait for Iran was meant to include casualties, but Iran didn't bite. They were smart enough to understand what not to do in this case. Acting on the intel, presumably, which illuminated to Trump that the downed drone was actually a moderate response to their borders being violated, he sent back a specific signal to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran when he publicly indicated the situation would have been much, much different, and worse, if "people died". This announcement to the world was before this information was public knowledge.

In my view what Trump is saying to Iran here, is, hey, our countries are being played. Don't fall for it. I may have to respond by doing something, but it will only be theater. Don't do anything stupid and neither will we. I'll control my rogue actors and put them in check, you do the same.. Recall in the announcement Trump specifically called out Iran's rogue actors as the possible perpetrators, which is really code to let them know US rogue actors violated their borders.

If those "rogue actors," however, continue down this road, the next false flag escalation may bring things to a head. Trump will face an extremely difficult choice. He will either have to out his own government as the false flag provocateur, which no President has ever done in real time, which would likely cause a major civil war and social upheaval inside the US, or he would be forced to engage in a major middle east war. He might just conclude door number 2 is the lesser of two evils...

[Intranuclear]

Posted by T Smith (here)

Posted by rgray222 (here)
Trump is definitely going to respond but in a measured way. It is going to be tit for tat for a bit and then it will fade until some additional aggression by the Iranians. This may seem somewhat irrelevant to many but Trump is a money man. Watching him over the past two years it is clear to see he keeps his eye on money all the time. When I heard that this drone cost $180 million, it tells me that he is not going to let this go unpunished. So I fully expect him to react sooner rather than later.

This assessment assumes Iran actually shot down the US drone over international waters. But I would ask, why should we assume this? In my view, that assumption doesn't hold water.

If Iran's motive was really some kind of hot response to US sanctions, would that level of provacative aggression against the US really be commensurate with the sanctions and the retaliatory consequences, let alone characteristic of Iranian geopolitical action? Historically, Iran doesn't start hot wars.

What's more likely, in my view, is the US (meaning Deep State factions within that are baiting Trump to respond) moved the drone into Iranian territory. Iran took the bait, which in turn was meant to bait Trump, who so far has refused the bait.

Interestingly, however, is your analysis is spot on, in my estimation, only that it's founded on a faulty premise. Trump will hit back with a measured response in the manner you describe, which will save face for the US without escalating full-blown war. But I'm sorry to say I do not believe things will end there. This is far from over as far as I can see. There's more going on here.

Since this "last" plan apparently failed to trigger war, I expect the "next" provocation to entail casualties, which will be much harder for Trump to deal with. The worst case scenario, if the provocateurs cannot get Iran itself to take the bait, will entail the Deep State launching their own false flag against the US to force the issue.

What's interesting is Iran and Trump apparently both understand their countries are being railroaded into conflict. If we are to believe this report, the bait for Iran was meant to include casualties, but Iran didn't bite. They were smart enough to understand what not to do in this case. Acting on the intel, presumably, which illuminated to Trump that the downed drone was actually a moderate response to their borders being violated, he sent back a specific signal to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran when he publicly indicated the situation would have been much, much different, and worse, if "people died". This announcement to the world was before this information was public knowledge.

In my view what Trump is saying to Iran here, is, hey, we're being played. Don't fall for it. I may have to respond by doing something, but it will be only be theater. Don't do anything stupid and neither will we. I'll control my rogue actors and put them in check, you do the same.. Recall in the announcement Trump specifically called out Iran's rogue actors as the possible perpetrators, which is really code to let them know US rogue actors violated their borders.

If those "rogue actors," however, continue down this road, the next false flag escalation may bring things to a head. Trump will face an extremely difficult choice. He will either have to out his own government as the false flag provocateur, which no President has ever done in real time, which will likely cause a major civil war and social upheaval inside the US, or he will be forced to engage in a major middle east war. He might just conclude door number 2 is the lesser of two evils...

Unfortunately I 100% agree with your assessment, which sucks!
These hidden and not so hidden actors do this continuously.
A quote from Princess Bride:

Vizzini: I've hired you to help me start a war. It's an prestigious line of work, with a long and glorious tradition.

[Bubu]

Posted by T Smith (here)

Posted by rgray222 (here)
Trump is definitely going to respond but in a measured way. It is going to be tit for tat for a bit and then it will fade until some additional aggression by the Iranians. This may seem somewhat irrelevant to many but Trump is a money man. Watching him over the past two years it is clear to see he keeps his eye on money all the time. When I heard that this drone cost $180 million, it tells me that he is not going to let this go unpunished. So I fully expect him to react sooner rather than later.

This assessment assumes Iran actually shot down the US drone over international waters. But I would ask, why should we assume this? In my view, that assumption doesn't hold water.

If Iran's motive was really some kind of hot response to US sanctions, would that level of provacative aggression against the US really be commensurate with the sanctions and the retaliatory consequences, let alone characteristic of Iranian geopolitical action? Historically, Iran doesn't start hot wars.

What's more likely, in my view, is the US (meaning Deep State factions within that are baiting Trump to respond) moved the drone into Iranian territory. Iran took the bait, which in turn was meant to bait Trump, who so far has refused the bait.

Interestingly, however, your analysis is spot on, in my estimation, only that it's founded on a faulty premise. Trump will hit back with a measured response in the manner you describe, which will save face for the US without escalating full-blown war. But I'm sorry to say I do not believe things will end there. This is far from over as far as I can see. There's more going on here.

Since this "last" plan apparently failed to trigger war, I expect the "next" provocation to entail casualties, which will be much harder for Trump to deal with. The worst case scenario, if the provocateurs cannot get Iran itself to take the bait, will entail the Deep State launching their own false flag against the US to force the issue.

What's interesting is Iran and Trump apparently both understand their countries are being railroaded into conflict. If we are to believe this report, the bait for Iran was meant to include casualties, but Iran didn't bite. They were smart enough to understand what not to do in this case. Acting on the intel, presumably, which illuminated to Trump that the downed drone was actually a moderate response to their borders being violated, he sent back a specific signal to the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran when he publicly indicated the situation would have been much, much different, and worse, if "people died". This announcement to the world was before this information was public knowledge.

In my view what Trump is saying to Iran here, is, hey, our countries are being played. Don't fall for it. I may have to respond by doing something, but it will only be theater. Don't do anything stupid and neither will we. I'll control my rogue actors and put them in check, you do the same.. Recall in the announcement Trump specifically called out Iran's rogue actors as the possible perpetrators, which is really code to let them know US rogue actors violated their borders.

If those "rogue actors," however, continue down this road, the next false flag escalation may bring things to a head. Trump will face an extremely difficult choice. He will either have to out his own government as the false flag provocateur, which no President has ever done in real time, which would likely cause a major civil war and social upheaval inside the US, or he would be forced to engage in a major middle east war. He might just conclude door number 2 is the lesser of two evils...

Good analogy. But you lost me with the "theater" whats the point is he afraid of someone? Why not tell the Americans outright, That the plane mistakenly violated Iran airspace. Are you saying that Trump is trying to convince the deep state that he is on their side which is of course impossible for him to hide if he is not. Perhaps you can clarify.

[T Smith]

Posted by Bubu (here)

Good analogy. But you lost me with the "theater" whats the point is he afraid of someone? Why not tell the Americans outright, That the plane mistakenly violated Iran airspace. Are you saying that Trump is trying to convince the deep state that he is on their side which is of course impossible for him to hide if he is not. Perhaps you can clarify.

Well, for one, it wasn't a mistake. It was intentional. By intentional, I mean by the Deep State (not by Trump), which controls 90% of the government day-to-day activity. And the DoD and MSM had already disseminated the official narrative. The public was meant to have this info, and Trump was supposed to respond to it. Those who manipulate Trump understand the best way to get at him is through the management of his own public image. If he makes a mistake, this is the arena in which he will likely do so.

He could have backtracked (or admitted that the "official" narrative was mistaken) I suppose, but that's not typically Trump's modus operandi. That would make the US look weak or incompetent, or more to the point, imply the Executive Branch is "weak or incompetent" or not in control of its foot soldiers. Or it might provide fuel to his detractors (meaning every institution disseminating information to the public) that the U.S. is really the provocateur in the current conflict with Iran. But let me be clear: The U.S. didn't send a drone (and P8 aircraft with 35 souls on board) into Iranian terrority to provoke or spy on Iran; they sent a drone and the aircraft into Iranian territory to provoke Trump.

The other complication of being forthright (or more forthright) might be how the media would respond to a Trump administration admission of error. That would likely be a disastrous "gotcha" moment for the Trump Administration's handling of foreign policy.

In my estimation Trump is not afraid of someone in particular, or afraid of the Deep State in general (but that's not the same thing as being able to reign them in) and he's certainly not signaling he's on their side by playing along with the narrative. If anything, he is afraid, however, of the out-of-control "spin" or public fall out that might ensue by directly challenging the Deep State gambit.

There is some precedent for this, btw. Trump has publicly rejected his own intelligence propaganda before and the media and (to some degree) even his most loyal followers went absolutely berserk. Gasp! Are you saying our own intelligence is wrong, Mr. President? All of them? If not, what exactly ARE you saying? This may be the closest time Trump actually came to stepping on a third rail.

Of course the correct answer to that question would have been an emphatic, That's EXACTLY what I'm saying!! They not only wrong, they're treasonous! Not something you really want to say, however, without risking all-out civil war..

[Bubu]

Posted by T Smith (here)

Posted by Bubu (here)

Good analogy. But you lost me with the "theater" whats the point is he afraid of someone? Why not tell the Americans outright, That the plane mistakenly violated Iran airspace. Are you saying that Trump is trying to convince the deep state that he is on their side which is of course impossible for him to hide if he is not. Perhaps you can clarify.

Well, for one, it wasn't a mistake. It was intentional. By intentional, I mean by the Deep State (not by Trump), which controls 90% of the government day-to-day activity. And the DoD and MSM had already disseminated the official narrative. The public was meant to have this info, and Trump was supposed to respond to it. Those who manipulate Trump understand the best way to get at him is through the management of his own public image. If he makes a mistake, this is the arena in which he will likely do so.

He could have backtracked (or admitted that the "official" narrative was mistaken) I suppose, but that's not typically Trump's modus operandi. That would make the US look weak or incompetent, or more to the point, imply the Executive Branch is "weak or incompetent" or not in control of its foot soldiers. Or it might provide fuel to his detractors (meaning every institution disseminating information to the public) that the U.S. is really the provocateur in the current conflict with Iran. But let me be clear: The U.S. didn't send a drone (and P8 aircraft with 35 souls on board) into Iranian terrority to provoke or spy on Iran; they sent a drone and the aircraft into Iranian territory to provoke Trump.

The other complication of being forthright (or more forthright) might be how the media would respond to a Trump administration admission of error. That would likely be a disastrous "gotcha" moment for the Trump Administration's handling of foreign policy.

In my estimation Trump is not afraid of someone in particular, or afraid of the Deep State in general (but that's not the same thing as being able to reign them in) and he's certainly not signaling he's on their side by playing along with the narrative. If anything, he is afraid, however, of the out-of-control "spin" or public fall out that might ensue by directly challenging the Deep State gambit.

There is some precedent for this, btw. Trump has publicly rejected his own intelligence propaganda before and the media and (to some degree) even his most loyal followers went absolutely berserk. Gasp! Are you saying our own intelligence is wrong, Mr. President? All of them? If not, what exactly ARE you saying? This may be the closest time Trump actually came to stepping on a third rail.

Of course the correct answer to that question would have been and emphatic, They aren't only wrong, they're treasonous! Not something you really want to say, however, without risking all-out civil war..

That statement if true could only mean Trump is held hostage and can be taken out anytime.

[Intranuclear]

Posted by Bubu (here)
That statement if true could only mean Trump is held hostage and can be taken out anytime.

First, anyone can be taken out. That is crazy easy.
The question is what would be the repercussions of "taking" Trump out. How does Trump "gone" help their agenda?
Taking anyone out immediately suggests that the person is of no use.
They would only do that if he is an existential threat, which so far does not appear to be the case. Trump has not embraced the intelligence community obviously but he has not "spilled the beans" so to speak.
The funny thing is that to me it is most obvious that the CIA is begging for war as exemplified by Pompeo being dissatisfied of Trump pulling back at the last minute.
Second, it was after all a CIA asset that was "lost", and war simply allows for unlimited funds to continue to be channeled into the CIA.
For now they will play the "weak" card, meaning attacking Trump for being weak and forcing him to act in a belligerent way to get what they want. If that doesn't work, I'm sure there are many other contingency plans.

These people are sitting on insane amounts of "intelligence" and as long as that information is protected, there is little to act upon. Demanding access to that information is trivially easy to dismiss using the "national security" card. Anyone fighting that is immediately a non-patriot and treasonous and their voice is killed.

[T Smith]

Posted by Bubu (here)

Posted by T Smith (here)

Posted by Bubu (here)

Good analogy. But you lost me with the "theater" whats the point is he afraid of someone? Why not tell the Americans outright, That the plane mistakenly violated Iran airspace. Are you saying that Trump is trying to convince the deep state that he is on their side which is of course impossible for him to hide if he is not. Perhaps you can clarify.

Well, for one, it wasn't a mistake. It was intentional. By intentional, I mean by the Deep State (not by Trump), which controls 90% of the government day-to-day activity. And the DoD and MSM had already disseminated the official narrative. The public was meant to have this info, and Trump was supposed to respond to it. Those who manipulate Trump understand the best way to get at him is through the management of his own public image. If he makes a mistake, this is the arena in which he will likely do so.

He could have backtracked (or admitted that the "official" narrative was mistaken) I suppose, but that's not typically Trump's modus operandi. That would make the US look weak or incompetent, or more to the point, imply the Executive Branch is "weak or incompetent" or not in control of its foot soldiers. Or it might provide fuel to his detractors (meaning every institution disseminating information to the public) that the U.S. is really the provocateur in the current conflict with Iran. But let me be clear: The U.S. didn't send a drone (and P8 aircraft with 35 souls on board) into Iranian terrority to provoke or spy on Iran; they sent a drone and the aircraft into Iranian territory to provoke Trump.

The other complication of being forthright (or more forthright) might be how the media would respond to a Trump administration admission of error. That would likely be a disastrous "gotcha" moment for the Trump Administration's handling of foreign policy.

In my estimation Trump is not afraid of someone in particular, or afraid of the Deep State in general (but that's not the same thing as being able to reign them in) and he's certainly not signaling he's on their side by playing along with the narrative. If anything, he is afraid, however, of the out-of-control "spin" or public fall out that might ensue by directly challenging the Deep State gambit.

There is some precedent for this, btw. Trump has publicly rejected his own intelligence propaganda before and the media and (to some degree) even his most loyal followers went absolutely berserk. Gasp! Are you saying our own intelligence is wrong, Mr. President? All of them? If not, what exactly ARE you saying? This may be the closest time Trump actually came to stepping on a third rail.

Of course the correct answer to that question would have been and emphatic, They aren't only wrong, they're treasonous! Not something you really want to say, however, without risking all-out civil war..

That statement if true could only mean Trump is held hostage and can be taken out anytime.

Well, yeah... That's how I see it anyway. Being held hostage may be a little extreme description on what's going on, but for sure they are in a game of chess. If Trump starts winning the match, they could just as easily upend the board and send the pieces into a thousand directions and stand up and put a bullet in his head, but I would say it's just a little more complicated to JFK a president, however, in the day and age where certain factions of the military are for the POTUS agenda and certain factions are against it -- and undergirding it all being a good number of the citizenry (who own guns) who aren't as gullible as they were in 1963 ...

[T Smith]

Posted by Bubu (here)

That statement if true could only mean Trump is held hostage and can be taken out anytime.

Posted by T Smith (here)

I mean by the Deep State (not by Trump), which controls 90% of the government day-to-day activity.

Btw, I would clarify if you are referring to the quote you bolded (didn't see that before). I don't mean to imply Trump is not in control of government activity ... just that he's not micro managing every little bit of DoD activity and everyday day-to-day drudgery, e.g., ordering military drills, executing war games, etc. These are standard military procedures that ensue every single day that are carried out well below the pay grade of the executive branch.

If/when the time comes to specifically order such a provocative maneuver, however, (crossing across an enemy border for example), yes, that would typically be a decision made by the POTUS.

But I don't mean to imply this breech of protocol is commonplace or a 90% occurrence.

[kfm27917]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...unter-pressure

One Quadrillion Reasons Why Washington Fears Iran's "Maximum Counter-Pressure"

[kfm27917]

there are NO international waters where the drone was shot down.
Half belongs to the UAE and half to IRAN !