Page 20 of 55 FirstFirst ... 1016171819202122232430 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 400 of 1100

Thread: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

  1. #381
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    the following is an email recieved by the poster. Says he can not locate the source. Probably some conspiracy theorist, but who knows?

    Operation Bite Iran
    email | Webster G. Tarpley

    Posted on 04/01/2007 12:27:36 AM PDT by American in Israel

    Russian military sources warn

    By Webster G. Tarpley

    Online Journal Contributing Writer

    Mar 26, 2007, 01:02 WASHINGTON DC, -- The long awaited US military attack on Iran is now on track for the first week of April, specifically for 4 am on April 6, the Good Friday opening of Easter weekend, writes the well-known Russian journalist Andrei Uglanov in the Moscow weekly "Argumenty Nedeli." Uglanov cites Russian military experts close to the Russian General Staff for his account. The attack is slated to last for 12 hours, according to Uglanov, from 4 am until 4 pm local time. Friday is the sabbath in Iran. In the course of the attack, code named Operation Bite, about 20 targets are marked for bombing; the list includes uranium enrichment facilities, research centers, and laboratories. The first reactor at the Bushehr nuclear plant, where Russian engineers are working, is supposed to be spared from destruction.

    The US attack plan reportedly calls for the Iranian air defense system to be degraded, for numerous Iranian warships to be sunk in the Persian Gulf, and for the most important headquarters of the Iranian armed forces to be wiped out. The attacks will be mounted from a number of bases, including the island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Diego Garcia is currently home to B-52 bombers equipped with standoff missiles. Also participating in the air strikes will be US naval aviation from aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf, as well as from those of the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean. Additional cruise missiles will be fired from submarines in the Indian Ocean and off the coast of the Arabian peninsula. The goal is allegedly to set back Iran's nuclear program by several years, writes Uglanov, whose article was reissued by RIA-Novosti in various languages, but apparently not English, several days ago.

    The story is the top item on numerous Italian and German blogs, but so far appears to have been ignored by US websites. Observers comment that this dispatch represents a high-level orchestrated leak from the Kremlin, in effect a war warning, which draws on the formidable resources of the Russian intelligence services, and which deserves to be taken with the utmost seriousness by pro-peace forces around the world. Asked by RIA-Novosti to comment on the Uglanov report, retired Colonel General Leonid Ivashov confirmed its essential features in a March 21 interview: "I have no doubt that there will be an operation, or more precisely a violent action against Iran." Ivashov, who has reportedly served at various times as an informal advisor to Russian President Vladimir Putin, is currently the vice president of the Moscow Academy for Geopolitical Sciences. Ivashov attributed decisive importance to the decision of the Democratic leadership of the US House of Representatives to remove language from the just-passed Iraq supplemental military appropriations bill that would have demanded that Bush come to Congress before launching an attack on Iran.

    Ivashov pointed out that the language was eliminated under pressure from AIPAC, the lobbing group representing the Israeli extreme right, and from Israeli Foreign Minister Tsipi Livni. "We have drawn the unmistakable conclusion that this operation will take place," said Ivashov. In his opinion, the US planning does not include a land operation: " Most probably there will be no ground attack, but rather massive air attacks with the goal of annihilating Iran's capacity for military resistance, the centers of administration, the key economic assets, and quite possibly the Iranian political leadership, or at least part of it," he continued. Ivashov noted that it was not to be excluded that the Pentagon would use smaller tactical nuclear weapons against targets of the Iranian nuclear industry. These attacks could paralyze everyday life, create panic in the population, and generally produce an atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty all over Iran, Ivashov told RIA-Novosti. "This will unleash a struggle for power inside Iran, and then there will be a peace delegation sent in to install a pro-American government in Teheran," Ivashov continued.

    One of the US goals was, in his estimation, to burnish the image of the current Republican administration, which would now be able to boast that they had wiped out the Iranian nuclear program. Among the other outcomes, General Ivashov pointed to a partition of Iran along the same lines as Iraq, and a subsequent carving up of the Near and Middle East into smaller regions. "This concept worked well for them in the Balkans and will now be applied to the greater Middle East," he commented. "Moscow must exert Russia's influence by demanding an emergency session of the United Nations Security Council to deal with the current preparations for an illegal use of force against Iran and the destruction of the basis of the United Nations Charter," said General Ivashov.

    "In this context Russia could cooperate with China, France and the non-permanent members of the Security Council. We need this kind of preventive action to ward off the use of force," he concluded. *Resources:*http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070319/62260006.html, http://fr.rian.ru/world/20070321/62387717.html /Webster G. Tarpley http://www.tarpley.net/ is a journalist. Among other works, he has published an investigation on the manipulation of the Red Brigades by the Vatican's P2 Suite and the assassination of Aldo/ /Moro, a non-authorized biography of George H. Bush, and more recently an analysis of the methods used to perpetrate the September 11, 2001 attacks.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  2. #382
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    L'Iran serait attaqué début avril (experts militaires russes)
    21:05 | 19/ 03/ 2007

    Version imprimée

    MOSCOU, 19 mars - RIA Novosti. Les experts militaires russes estiment que la planification de l'attaque militaire américaine contre l'Iran a passé le point de non retour le 20 février, lorsque le directeur de l'AIEA, Mohammed ElBaradei, a reconnu, dans son rapport, l'incapacité de l'Agence de "confirmer le caractère pacifique du programme nucléaire de l'Iran".

    Selon l'hebdomadaire russe Argoumenty nedeli, une action militaire se déroulera au cours de la première semaine d'avril, avant les Pâques catholique et orthodoxe (cette année elles sont célébrées le 8), lorsque l' "opinion occidentale" sera en congé. Il se peut aussi que l'Iran soit frappé le vendredi 6, jour férié dans les pays musulmans. D'après le schéma américain, ce sera une frappe d'un seul jour qui durera 12 heures, de 4 heures de matin * 16 heures d'après-midi. Le nom de code de l'opération est * ce jour "Bite" en anglais (Morsure). Une vingtaine d'installations iraniennes devraient être touchées. A leur nombre, des centrifugeuses d'enrichissement d'uranium, des centres d'études et des laboratoires. Mais le premier bloc de la centrale nucléaire de Bouchehr ne sera pas touché. Par contre, les Américains neutraliseront la DCA, couleront plusieurs bâtiments de guerre iraniens dans le Golfe et détruiront les postes clefs de commandement des forces armées.

    Autant de mesures qui devraient ôter * Téhéran toute capacité de riposter. L'Iran projetait de couler plusieurs pétroliers dans le détroit d'Ormuz dans le but de couper l'approvisionnement des marchés internationaux en pétrole et de frapper au missile Israël.

    Les analystes affirment que les frappes américaines seront lancées depuis l'île de Diego-Garcia, dans l'océan Indien, d'où décolleront des bombardiers * long rayon d'action B-52 avec * leur bord des missiles de croisière ; par l'aviation embarquée des porte-avions américains déployés dans le Golfe et faisant partie de la 6e Flotte américaine en Méditerranée ; des missiles de croisière seront également tirés depuis les sous-marins concentrés dans le Pacifique et au large de l'Arabie.

    Résultat, le programme nucléaire iranien sera rejeté de plusieurs années en arrière. Dans des entretiens privés, des généraux américains supposent que les délais de déploiement de la défense antimissile américaine en Europe peuvent être reportés * plus tard. Autre événement prévu, le baril de pétrole pourrait s'envoler * 75-80 dollars et ce pour une période prolongée.

    Entre-temps, la nouvelle résolution sur l'Iran et dont le projet a été adopté par les cinq membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité et l'Allemagne devrait être votée au CS dès cette semaine. Le texte prévoit des sanctions * l'encontre de 10 entreprises publiques iraniennes et de trois compagnies relevant du Corps des gardiens de la révolution islamique, unité d'élite aux ordres du leader spirituel de la République islamique, l'ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Des sanctions sont aussi prévues contre 15 personnes physiques : huit dirigeants haut placés de sociétés d'Etat et sept personnages clefs au Corps des gardiens de la révolution islamique
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  3. #383
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Babel Fish Translation Help

    In English:
    MOSCOW, March 19 - RIA Novosti. The Russian military experts estimate that the planning of the American military attack against Iran passed the point of nonreturn on February 20, when the director of the IAEA, Mohammed El Baradei, recognized, in his report/ratio, the incapacity of the Agency "to confirm the peaceful character of the nuclear program of Iran".



    Babel Fish Translation Help

    In English:
    According to the Russian weekly magazine Argoumenty nedeli, a military action will proceed during the first week of April, before Easter catholic and orthodoxe (this year they are celebrated the 8), when the "Western opinion" is on leave. It may be also that Iran is struck Friday 6, public holiday in the Moslem countries. According to the American diagram, it will be a striking of only one day which will last 12 hours, 4 hours of morning to 16 hours of afternoon. The code name of the operation is to date "English Cock" (Bite). A score of Iranian installations should be touched. With their number, centrifugal machines of uranium enrichment, centers of studies and laboratories. But the first block of the nuclear thermal power station of Bouchehr will not be touched. On the other hand, the Americans will neutralize the DCA, will run several Iranian buildings of war in the Gulf and will destroy the key positions of command of the armed forces. As many measurements which should remove in Teheran any capacity to counteract. Iran projected to run several tankers in the strait of Ormuz with an aim of cutting the provisioning of the international markets of oil and of striking with the Israel missile. The analysts affirm that strike them American will be launched from the island of Diego-Garcia, in the Indian Ocean, from where will take off of the bombers with long operating range B-52 with on their board cruise missiles; by the embarked aviation of the American aircraft carriers deployed in the Gulf and forming part of the 6th American Fleet in the Mediterranean; cruise missiles will be also drawn since the submarines concentrated in the Pacific and with broad from Arabia. Result, the Iranian nuclear program will be rejected several years in back. In private talks, American Generals suppose that the times of deployment of American anti-missile defense in Europe can be postponed. Another event envisaged, the oil barrel could fly away to 75-80 dollars and this for one prolonged period. Meanwhile, the new resolution on Iran and whose project was adopted by the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany should be voted with CS as of this week. The text envisages sanctions against 10 Iranian public companies and to three companies concerned with the Body of the guards of the Islamic revolution, unit of elite to the orders of the spiritual leader of the Islamic Republic, the ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Sanctions are also envisaged against 15 physical people: eight leaders placed high of companies of State and seven key characters with the Body of the guards of the Islamic revolution. send by e-mail return to the banner page other articles 12:47 29/03/2007 Possible war against Iran: the United States is not ready (Iranian diplomacy) 19:01 28/03/2007 Putin-Bush Maintenance: the new resolution on Iran excludes the recourse to the force (the Kremlin) 15:32 28/03/2007 an American superbombe to strike Iran? (Russian expert) 17:30 23/03/2007 Iran challenged 15 British sailors (British Defense) 17:29 22/03/2007 Rumours of war against Iran: an Iranian military person in charge warns the USA 10:59 22/03/2007 UNO: Moscow hopes that the new sanctions against Iran will be without effect on the Russian interests 21:41 21/03/2007 Iranian nuclear Program: Teheran will answer the external pressures adequately (ayatollah Khamenei)
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  4. #384
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Bush to Iran: 'Give back the hostages'
    ap ^ | 3/31/07 | ap

    CAMP DAVID, Md. - President Bush on Saturday said Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines was "inexcusable" and called for Iran to "give back the hostages" immediately and unconditionally.

    Bush said Iran plucked the sailors out of Iraqi waters. Iran's president said Saturday they were in Iranian waters and called Britain and its allies "arrogant and selfish" for not apologizing for trespassing.

    "It's inexcusable behavior," Bush said at the Camp David presidential retreat, where he was meeting with the president of Brazil. "Iran must give back the hostages. They're innocent. They did nothing wrong."

    It was the first time that Bush had commented publicly on the captured Britons. Washington has taken a low-key approach to avoid aggravating tensions over the incident and shaking international resolve to get Iran to give up its uranium enrichment program.

    Bush did not answer a question about whether the United States would have reacted militarily if those captured had been Americans. The president said he supports British Prime Minister Tony Blair's efforts to find a diplomatic resolution to the crisis, now in its second week.

    Bush would not comment about Britain's options if Iran does not release the hostages, but he seemed to reject any swapping of the British captives for Iranians detained in Iraq.

    "I support the prime minister when he made it clear there were no quid pro quos," Bush said.

    Like Bush's words, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comments were his most extensive on the crisis. They tracked tough talk from other Iranian officials, an indication that Tehran's position could be hardening.

    "The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery," Iran's official news agency quoted Ahmadinejad as saying. "But arrogant powers, because of their arrogant and selfish spirit, are claiming otherwise."

    Britain, however, appeared to be easing its stance, emphasizing its desire to talk with Iran about what it termed a regrettable situation.

    "I think everyone regrets that this position has arisen," British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said at a European Union summit in Bremen, Germany. "What we want is a way out of it."

    Iran appeared unreceptive to possible talks with Britain.

    "Instead of apologizing over trespassing by British forces, the world arrogant powers issue statements and deliver speeches," Ahmadinejad told a crowd in southeastern Iran.

    The British sailors were detained by Iranian naval units March 23 while patrolling for smugglers near the mouth of the Shatt al-Arab, a waterway that has long been a disputed dividing line between Iraq and Iran. Britain also insists the sailors were in Iraqi waters.

    In London on Saturday, the political wing of the Iranian opposition group Mujahedeen Khalq said the capture was planned in advance and carried out in retaliation for U.N. sanctions over Iran's nuclear program. The group is listed as a terrorist group by Britain, the U.S. and the European Union.

    Blair has expressed disgust that the captured service members had been "paraded and manipulated" in video footage released by Iran. He warned Tehran that it faced increasing isolation if it did not free them.

    Britain has frozen most contacts with Iran. The U.N. Security Council has expressed "grave concern" about the incident. The EU has demanded the sailors' unconditional release and warned of unspecified "appropriate measures" if Tehran does not comply — a position the Iranian Foreign Ministry called "bias and meddlesome."

    Ahmad Bakhshayesh, a professor of politics in Tehran's Allameh University, said he's convinced that Iran is prepared to stand its ground and insist that the British violated Iranian territory.

    "Iran will seriously continue the case and will put them on trial," Bakhshayesh said. "Only an apology by Britain can stop it. Iran thinks that Britons trespassed to test Iran's reaction, and now London is trying to isolate Tehran instead of apologizing."

    But British officials are hopeful that diplomacy can resolve the crisis. The Foreign Office confirmed Saturday that Britain had replied to a letter received earlier in this week from the Iranian embassy. It declined to reveal the nature of either letter.

    "We have been exchanging letters with the Iranian government, and we will continue to conduct or diplomatic discussions in private," a spokesman said on the government's customary condition of anonymity.

    _____

    Associated Press writers Jill Lawless in London and Benjamin Harvey and Katarina Kratovac in Cairo, Egypt, contributed to this report.
    Last edited by American Patriot; April 1st, 2007 at 16:46.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  5. #385
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    'US ready to strike Iran on Good Friday'
    The Jerusalem Post ^ | April 1, 2007 | JERUSALEM POST STAFF AND AP

    'US ready to strike Iran on Good Friday'

    By JERUSALEM POST STAFF AND AP

    The United States will be ready to launch a missile attack on Iran's nuclear facilities as soon as early this month, perhaps "from 4 a.m. until 4 p.m. on April 6," according to reports in the Russian media on Saturday.

    According to Russian intelligence sources, the reports said, the US has devised a plan to attack several targets in Iran, and an assault could be carried out by launching missiles from fighter jets and warships stationed in the Persian Gulf.

    Russian news agency RIA Novosti quoted a security official as saying, "Russian intelligence has information that the US Armed Forces stationed in the Persian Gulf have nearly completed preparations for a missile strike against Iranian territory."

    The Russian Defense Ministry rejected the claims of an imminent attack as "myths." There was no immediate response from Washington.

    The reports come as the Iranian chief of staff, Hassan Fayrouz Abadi, was quoted on Saturday by Iran's Fars news agency warning leaders of Arab countries that Israel plans to open a "suicidal attack" on its neighbors this summer, to "prevent the withdrawal of the US troops from Iraq and the area."

    "I warn the dear leaders and Muslim brothers in the neighboring countries of the occupied territories that this suicidal attack of the Zionists is threatening them," he said.

    The countries in danger, he said, were "Lebanon and Syria, and later Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia."

    Also on Saturday, Russia urged Britain and Teheran to resolve the dispute over 15 British sailors and marines captured by Iran last week, a local news agency reported.

    Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin urged the two sides to provide the United Nations with their own assessments as to what happened and where exactly the detention occurred so that the body could conduct an independent probe.

    "We hope these actions will provide a foundation for the soonest possible resolution of the crisis," Kamynin was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency.

    Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad insisted that the captured British sailors and marines trespassed in Iranian waters and called world powers "arrogant" for failing to apologize, the country's official news agency reported.

    "The British occupier forces did trespass our waters. Our border guards detained them with skill and bravery. But arrogant powers, because of their arrogant and selfish spirit, are claiming otherwise," IRNA quoted Ahmadinejad as saying during a speech in the southeastern city of Andinmeshk.

    The European Union grappled with a double bind over Iran Saturday - the country's nuclear program and its seizure of the British troops - and reported no progress on either issue.

    A debate about Iran's nuclear ambitions had been scheduled as a key agenda item but "was overshadowed to a certain extent by the issue of the sailors and marines," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said after hosting a two-day EU foreign ministers meeting in Bremen, Germany.

    The Foreign Ministry in Iran dismissed the EU's "biased and meddlesome" comments on the captured troops, saying the dispute solely involved the governments of Iran and Britain.

    Speaking to reporters in Bremen, British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett urged Iran to resolve the crisis over the military personnel peacefully, saying London remains open to dialogue.

    "We encourage Iran to peacefully resolve this issue," she said.

    "We continue to express our willingness to engage in dialogue and discussions with Iran," she added. "That is very much in the best interest of our people and that is our foremost concern."

    "I think everyone regrets that this position has arisen," she said. "What we want is a way out of it."

    AP contributed to this report.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  6. #386
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Power struggle in Iran over hostages
    FOCUS News Agency ^ | 1 April 2007 | FOCUS News Agency

    London. The fate of the 15 British marines and sailors held in Tehran may depend on the outcome of a power struggle between two of Iran’s top generals, write Uzi Mahnaimi and Marie Colvin.

    According to an Iranian military source, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards has called for them to be freed, Sunday Times reported.

    Major-General Yahya Rahim Safavi is said to have told the country’s Supreme National Security Council on Friday that the situation was “getting out of control” and urged its members to consider the immediate release of the prisoners to defuse tension in the Gulf.

    However, Safavi’s intervention was reportedly denounced by another senior general at a meeting of high-ranking commanders yesterday.

    Yadollah Javani, the head of the Revolutionary Guards’ political bureau, was said to have accused him of weakness and “liberal tendencies”. Javani is said to have demanded that the prisoners be put on trial.

    Iranian military sources said the Supreme National Security Council had concluded on Friday evening that Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, should order the release of the British naval personnel on Safavi’s advice.


    Another version, same story:

    ower struggle in Iran over hostages

    * The Sunday Times
    * April 01, 2007

    THE fate of the 15 British marines and sailors held in Tehran may depend on the outcome of a power struggle between two of Iran's top generals, write Uzi Mahnaimi and Marie Colvin.
    According to an Iranian military source, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards has called for them to be freed.

    Major-General Yahya Rahim Safavi is said to have told the country’s Supreme National Security Council on Friday that the situation was “getting out of control” and urged its members to consider the immediate release of the prisoners to defuse tension in the Gulf.

    However, Safavi’s intervention was reportedly denounced by another senior general at a meeting of high-ranking commanders yesterday.

    Yadollah Javani, the head of the Revolutionary Guards’ political bureau, was said to have accused him of weakness and “liberal tendencies”. Javani is said to have demanded that the prisoners be put on trial.

    Reports of the clash emerged as Terry Waite, who was kidnapped in Beirut while trying to negotiate a hostage release in 1987, offered to travel to Tehran to try to secure the release of the 14 servicemen and one woman.

    “I don’t think one needs to be afraid of these people, but one does need to have respect for their point of view, whether you agree with it or not,” said Waite, who spent almost five years as the hostage of an Iranian-backed fundamentalist group in Beirut.

    “I would rather like it if they would prove their humanity by giving me access to the country and the people being detained.”

    In Tehran, tension was expected to increase further today with a huge demonstration by students outside the British embassy. The protest was being organised by the Basij, a paramilitary force of about 10m people paid by the regime.

    At similar protests in the past, they have shouted, “Death to Britain” and thrown stones. An Iranian official said security was being increased in case the embassy was besieged.

    The developments followed a warning by Safavi, the Revolutionary Guards commander, that Iran should prepare for a possible invasion, which he believes could come as early as next month.

    US military exercises in the Persian Gulf involving two aircraft carriers, 100 aircraft and 10,000 personnel have fuelled fears in Tehran that America may be on the verge of launching airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear programme.

    Many military officers believe the British naval party intercepted on March 23 was part of a ploy to test Iran’s readiness for an invasion. Tens of thousands of Basij, the force that provided the shock troops for the Iran-Iraq war, have been sent to the Iraqi border.

    Iranian military sources said the Supreme National Security Council had concluded on Friday evening that Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, should order the release of the British naval personnel on Safavi’s advice.

    However, according to one account, which could not be confirmed, Javani described Safavi’s recommendation as tantamount to treason.

    The demand for a trial was backed by advisers to Khamenei. “The British aggressors must be tried and dealt with according to Iranian laws,” said Ayatollah Mojtahed Shabestari, an influential cleric.

    Iran’s ambassador to Moscow, Gholamreza Ansari, said a legal process was already underway. “If there is no guilt, they will be freed,” he added. But he denied that he had said they could face trial. Other officials called on Britain to send a delegation to Tehran to resolve the crisis.

    Margaret Beckett, the foreign secretary, urged Iran to resolve the crisis peacefully and said London was open to talks.

    A reply was sent to an Iranian embassy letter asking London to acknowledge that its sailors had trespassed in Iranian waters and to confirm that it would not happen again. The Foreign Office refused to reveal its response.

    Javier Solana, the EU policy chief, said he hoped to talk directly to Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

    Additional reporting: Michael Smith
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  7. #387
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Fox News' Bill Hemmer just mentioned The Jerusalem Post as being interesting and noting that they mentioned several sources for their information. I posted that article yesterday here.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  8. #388
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    The Arab Press Assesses the Likelihood of a U.S. Strike Against Iran

    MEMRI
    March 30, 2007 - No. 1527
    http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD152707

    The Arab press has recently been focusing on the possibility of a U.S. attack on Iran, and has been publishing reports, investigations, and articles. Some of these have asserted the "certainty" of an attack, while others are reviews of attack plans and preliminary steps in advance of the coming conflict. However, some in the press reject the possibility of an attack and explain their reasons for doing so.

    The following are examples of discussion of the subject in the Arab press:
    Bahraini Daily Al-Watan: Evidence That War is At the Gates

    In an article headlined "Al-Watan Monitors the Signs of War at the Gates in the Gulf," the Bahraini daily wrote: "The occupancy rate in some Bahrain hotels has reached 90%, and in the near future it is expected that the rate will increase further due to the increase in U.S. military activity in the country... This is in light of the hardening of the international position towards Iran's nuclear dossier, and the increase of information on the possibility of a military attack against Iran.

    "Al-Watan has learned that American military circles have advised some investors with U.S. citizenship in Bahrain to finish up their business dealings quickly and take their money out of the region because of the security tension, hinting at 'a war against Iran.' At the same time, the number of [military] correspondents and American correspondents coming to Bahrain and to the Gulf region is increasing. This is in the framework of the policy of U.S. President George Bush, according to which the American media has to know the truth regarding the security situation in the region [in general] and in Iraq in particular...

    "Anyone who has been monitoring U.S. policy since the beginning of the year has noticed a state of alert and military mobilization of the American forces, particularly after Washington announced that Tehran is involved in the violent activities in Baghdad. Likewise, the commander of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, which is stationed in Manama, said that his country was planning to concentrate the largest naval force since Kuwait's 1990-91 war of liberation, and announced that three U.S. aircraft carriers and several submarines, whose number has not been revealed to date, have entered the Gulf waters.

    "Also, U.S. military sources have said that in the near future, Patriot missile launchers will be placed in Bahrain, after three [other] Gulf countries have placed them on their soil, taking into account [the possibility of] an unexpected military incident in the near future...

    "On the local level, [Bahraini] General Khaled Al-'Absi, secretary-general of the general administration of civil defense, revealed that the warning siren system had been upgraded, as have the systems for detection of chemical, biological, and radioactive materials." [1]

    Egyptian Daily in Special Supplement: "War Expected"

    In its "Firing Line" section, the Egyptian opposition daily Al-Masri Al-Yawm published a series titled "The Next Gulf War - A Crushing American Blow and a Thundering Iranian Response." The preface to the first article in the series reads: "The Firing Line [section] is the appropriate place to deal with the [Iranian] issue by means of monitoring and analysis. Since the [existing] crisis is a warning of expected war, or of [a war] that will necessarily come, there was a need for [an investigation] into the [Iran] issue, to be published in several parts..."

    The first part in the series was dedicated to a review of "steps taken by the U.S. administration in preparation for an attack against Iran." The beginning of the article stated: "Before presenting the expected scenario of the American strike, and before we go into its details, logical order requires first a quick review of the nature of the preparations towards readying the arena for the operations..."

    This part contains a review of U.S. military preparations in the Gulf, such as "the deployment of a new generation of Patriot missiles beyond the borders of the U.S., for the first time since their manufacture, and their placement in the [U.S.] bases in the Gulf region and in Iraq; the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis joining the aircraft carrier USS Dwight [D.] Eisenhower in the waters of the Gulf," alongside decisions such as "increasing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq" and "changes in the senior U.S. command, including Bush's personally choosing the admiral of the U.S. Navy."

    This article also noted political activities by the U.S. administration, including "the U.S.'s [desperate] effort to reinforce security in Iraq"; "the [U.S.'s] surprising show of interest in the Palestinian issue"; "the green light given to the Ethiopian government to attack the Union of Islamic Courts"; "the attack being conducted against the Pakistani government"; "the recent agreement with North Korea"; "the activation of a propaganda machine in order to prime public opinion against Iran, alongside the resolutions condemning [Iran] in the U.N. Security Council and the ongoing escalation of these resolutions"; "the deepening of the disputes between Sunnis and Shi'ites, in order to isolate Iran"; and "the increase in the economic sanctions against Iran." [2]

    Editor of Syrian Government Paper: It's Iran's Turn

    The editor of the Syrian government daily Teshreen, 'Issam Al-Dari, wrote in a February 28, 2007 article: "Yesterday it was Afghanistan's turn. Today it's Iraq's turn, and tomorrow it will be Iran's turn, if the American reports and data are correct. Thus, the American terrorist mentality leads the world from one destructive war to even more destructive aggression...

    "For a long time, information leaked from Washington has pointed to the plans that the White House, U.S. State Department, and the Pentagon have finished preparing, all of which, nearly without exception, deal with military strikes against Iran. [Only] the versions are different: One speaks of attacking the nuclear facilities, a second of a broader attack that will include sites [belonging to] the military and the leadership, while a third speaks of a U.S. military operation that extends to the replacement of the Iranian regime...

    "In short, it appears that the atmosphere today is to some extent like that which preceded the American-British aggression against Iraq, and that the target this time is Iran." [3]

    Kuwaiti Columnist: U.S.-Iran War Certain

    In an article headlined "The Certainty of the U.S.-Iran War" in the London daily Al-Hayat, Kuwaiti columnist Muhammad Al-Rumihi wrote: "It appears that the West, for reasons known to only a few, is determined to enter into the 'mother of all wars' - that is, the war against Iran. This is for several reasons, among them:

    "1) Iran's obtaining nuclear weapons within a relatively short time will give it control in a region that is economically vital to the West - [a situation] that Western interests cannot accept. Likewise, this situation [i.e. Iran's nuclear armament] launches a nuclear [arms] race in the region, which threatens regional and even world peace.

    "2) Iran's expansion in the Arab region, particularly in Lebanon and Palestine, and also the propagation of an atmosphere of unquiet in countries with Shi'ite minorities, are tempting Iran to disseminate its agenda - i.e. opposition to Western interests - towards new horizons, even by unconventional means. What is happening in Iraq is only an example, that might recur when Iran's growing influence spreads [even further]...

    "Ideas of this kind find broad echoes among analysts in the West, and it is conceivable that they will serve as a justification for an Iranian-Western (and primarily an Iranian-American) clash aimed at stopping Iran's appetite for spreading spiritually, ideologically, and economically through the region, and at saving what can be saved in Afghanistan and Iraq...

    "Some Iranians are not interested in [understanding] the preparation [of U.S. public opinion for war] and the planning against the actual or imaginary Iranian project... They rush to throw down a challenge, or to demand or hasten conflict - which suits [the intentions] of these Western hawks by giving them new opportunities to rake in greater international support against Iran. In fact, this is what is happening with the worsening of the tone of the international resolutions against Iran at the Security Council and the relevant international agencies..." [4]

    Four Reasons Why the U.S. Won't Strike Iran

    In an article titled "There Won't Be a Military Attack On Iran" in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, Abd Al-Mun'im Sa'id, director of the Al-Ahram Center for Strategic Studies in Cairo, rejected the possibility of a strike against Iran, and gave four reasons for doing so:

    "I disagree with those who are saying that the U.S. will deal a military blow to Iran's nuclear facilities so as to eliminate its nuclear capabilities and to prevent it from reaching the stage of nuclear armament.

    "[Those who are saying] that the U.S. will do this in the near future [point out] historical reasons connected to the U.S, strategic reasons unique to the Middle East, and tactical reasons concerning [the U.S.'s] situation in Iraq. Nevertheless, logical considerations [lead us to conclude] that the U.S.[will not attack Iran] - not because of lack of motives or paucity of targets, but because it does not have sufficient capability to carry out the mission.

    "1) A country like the U.S. cannot execute a large-scale operation with military involvement without great popular support - and there is no such support, not in the two houses of Congress nor in U.S. public opinion, a very low percentage of which supports the current U.S. administration.

    "2) All military experts in the U.S. know that the idea of a 'surgical' air strike has no grounding in the reality of military operations, and happens only in the imagination of neophyte experts. The air forces cannot win a battle of this scale when ultimately they do not have sufficient support from ground forces. Furthermore, there is a great risk in an air strike, [in that it] would cause Iran to speed up its nuclear weapons production, and then the outcome will be the polar opposite of what the U.S. wants.

    "3) Iran has many cards [to play when] responding to a U.S. strike. While it is not a country with great strategic depth, it has the capability to deploy its military and revolutionary branches to the oil wells throughout the Gulf. Likewise, it has the capability to cause the U.S. great losses in Iraq, if Iran's allies among the Shiites turn their backs on their American friends.

    "4) A strike against Iran would certainly not serve the goal [of stability in Iraq and in the Middle East that would make possible a respectable U.S. withdrawal]; it will deepen the U.S.'s battle in Iraq and in the region for years to come." [5]


    [1] Al-Watan (Bahrain), March 1, 2007.

    [2] Al-Masri Al-Yawm (Egypt), March 9, 2007.

    [3] Teshreen (Syria), February 28, 2007.

    [4] Al-Hayat (London), February 28, 2007.

    [5] Al-Sharq Al-Awsat (London), January 31, 2007.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  9. #389
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Iran fears U.S. attack in summer: Israeli general
    Reuters ^ | 2007 Apr 1 | Jonathan Saul

    JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Iran is making defensive preparations for what it fears will be a U.S. military attack this summer, Israel's military intelligence chief said on Sunday.

    Major-General Amos Yadlin also told the Israeli cabinet that Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrillas and Syria believed they could be targeted in any U.S.-initiated war against Iran, an Israeli government official said, briefing reporters on his remarks.

    "What we are seeing is their preparation for the possibility of war in the summer. My assessment is that they are defensive preparations for war," Yadlin was quoted as saying, referring to Iran, Syria and Hezbollah.

    (Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  10. #390
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Names of those caught in the Ibril raid
    verumserum.com/ ^ | March 26th, 2007 | Posted by John



    January 11, 2007: A US led raid on a consular office in Irbil, Iraq leads to the capture of six Iranians including:



    Hassan Abbassi, a strategist “close to” President Ahmedinejad and the only individual with any diplomatic credentials.

    Mohammad Jaafari, an aid to National Security advisor Ali Larijani
    Jalal Sharifi, a professional intelligence officer.


    Brig. Gen. Mohammad Djafari Sahraroudi, a Kurdish affairs expert wanted by Interpol Mojhadi Safderi, two Revolutionary Guard officers.


    One of the six, (Hassan?) is released. The other five remain in custody.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  11. #391
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    These are the men caught in the Ibril raid on January 11,2007... the British newspaper The Independent tonight claims tonight lead to the Iranians seizing their 15 sailors and Marines. Note the names of a couple of very high ranking members of the Iranian regime.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  12. #392
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    U.S. could strike Iran but not win: Russian general_(bit more info from earlier)
    ap ^ | 4/3/07 | Reuters



    MOSCOW (Reuters) - The United States cannot inflict a military defeat on Iran and any attack would be a huge political mistake, Russia's top general said on Tuesday.


    It is possible to damage Iran's military and industrial potential, but it is impossible to win," Russian news agencies quoted General Yuri Baluyevsky, head of the Russian general staff, as saying.


    "The United States has a contingent in the region capable of launching a strike on Iranian territory.


    "However, such possible strikes would be a huge political mistake.
    Shockwaves from this attack could be felt around the world."


    Washington and its Western allies accuse Iran of wanting to build nuclear bombs, a charge Tehran denies. Tensions have been further aggravated by Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines in the northern Gulf on March 23.


    Russia sells weapons to the Iranian military and is helping Tehran build a nuclear power station on the Gulf although work there is on hold over a payment dispute.


    Russian media late last month quoted unnamed sources in Russian military intelligence as saying the United States could launch a strike on Iran as early as April 6.


    RIA news agency quoted a Russian security source as saying Moscow has military intelligence reports that the U.S. has already approved a list of Iranian targets for bomb and missile strikes. The source said a land operation could follow.


    U.S. President George W. Bush has said he will pursue diplomatic means to persuade Iran to drop its uranium enrichment plan but he has refused to rule out the use of force.


    Baluyevsky said military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan showed the United States would face a fiasco if it took on Iran as well.


    "The Americans must think twice (about attacking Iran)," he said. "They have already got stuck in Afghanistan and Iraq."
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  13. #393
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Oh boy.

    Russia selling weapons to them.

    Russia helping them build a nuclear plant....

    Which means if we hit something, like, say a nuclear site, we will "accidently" kill Russians???

    Wow.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  14. #394
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Yeesh. As much as we'd like to remove capabilities and make a point, the consiquences could be exceptionally high.

  15. #395
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,961
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick Donaldson View Post
    These are the men caught in the Ibril raid on January 11,2007... the British newspaper The Independent tonight claims tonight lead to the Iranians seizing their 15 sailors and Marines.
    The United States government, in an official government-to-government intelligence briefing, warned the British government on January 12, 2007 that our detention of these Iranian's WOULD LEAD to attempts by Iran to seize Coalition Forces as bargaining hostages.

    The Iranian's have tried to seize US troops in Iraq. They did seize the Brits. And they still hold an American, Robert A. Levinson.

    Ollie North says these Iranian's captives have been released - the US and the UK capitulated to the Ayatollah's regime.

    More about Levinson...

    Missing American in Iran being "Detained": The Spying, Antisemitism, or Counterfeiting Connection?

    http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/187259.php



    Iranian sources are indicating that an American missing in Iran, Robert A. Levinson, isn't really "missing", he's being "detained". I'm willing to bet that he was detained because he is a) American b) has a Jewish sounding name. Press TV (a pro-regime source) via a hat tip in the comments from Rodger Morrow:
    The truth of the matter is he has been in the hands of Iranian security forces since the early hours of March 9, and his inability to communicate with his family or his company, has raised the alarm about his health, safety and whereabouts. Speaking to PRESS TV on condition of anonymity the sources made clear that aside from the obvious inconvenience, the person is being well looked after.....
    The sources also said that the matter, though routine, has been complicated by the mounting tensions stemming from repeated American threats against Iran, actual ongoing covert actions within Iran run by the Americans and the particulars of the man's background with the FBI.....
    His visit to Kish was supposed to be a one day affair but drew the attention of the security forces because his Iranian national host registered in the same hotel room as he did and local police thought they had discovered some discrepancy in the Iranians identification papers routinely handed into the hotel....
    It is a case of ordinary business running into extraordinarily bad circumstances. It is expected the matter will be over in a few days time.
    It mentions that he was "detained" during a time when U.S. - Iranian tension were high and when "ongoing covert actions within Iran run by the Americans" were happening. This suggests he was picked up because he was suspected of being a spy. But later the Iranians try to explain his detention as asimple mix up. But the mix up theory still doesn't explain why the local police were interested in him in the first place, other than the fact that he was an American.

    But I'm willing to bet that the one thing which led police to suspect he was "spy" had nothing to do with his FBI past. How could it? There's no way the Iranians knew this about his former life with the FBI at the time of his initial detention. No, being an American was probably enough.
    But having the last name of Levinson sealed the deal. Because in Iran, being a Jew makes you automatically suspect. Jews in Iran today are forbidden from even calling Israeli relatives on the phone.
    That is, if there even was a reason for picking him up. Sounds to me like this could be yet another case of the Iranians capturing a Westerner and then acting as if they are being benevolant by letting him go. The closest American might do just fine.
    You know: Ignore the gun we're holding to your head. The fact that we haven't pulled the trigger is proof that we're the good guys.
    Seems to be a common theme coming out of the regime these days.
    We hope, as the article suggests, that he will be released ASAP.
    Brian from Snapped Shot has another angle on this. He speculates that maybe Levinson was in the country working on the connection between the Iranian financing of Hezbollah through counterfeit U.S. currency. Interesting theory, I've no idea. Most accounts, though, suggest he was there in a private capacity.
    Let's also not forget that Levinson is a real man with a real family that is worried about his safety and well being. Here he is.






    His family is worried:
    "We miss him and love him very much. We are worried about him and want him home safe and sound as soon as possible," his wife, Christine Levinson, and other relatives said in a statement to The Associated Press.
    "This has been a very difficult time. In the past 48 hours, as this has become public, we've heard from many of our friends. We are touched and so grateful for the support and prayers we've received," the statement said.
    The family asked for privacy "as we do everything possible to bring Bob home."

  16. #396
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Exclusive: The Interview You Didn't See

    The captain in charge of the 15 marines detained in Iran has said they WERE gathering intelligence on the Iranians. Watch what Captain Chris Air told Sky news while on patrol three weeks ago.(2mins)

    http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/vi...r_1730,00.html

    Video.

    Ok, watched it. More like they are trying to stop piracy, and the skynews folks are making more out of it. However..... all military "incursions" are for collecting intelligence. ALL.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  17. #397
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Video

    Blair's Disgust At Iran

    The Prime Minister has expressed disgust at the way the captured personnel have been "paraded and manipulated". He said the most important thing is to make sure they are freed safe adding that Iran cannot gain anything from the situation. (1min 47secs)



    http://news.sky.com/skynews/video/vi...7_1230,00.html
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  18. #398
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    The Price Of Appeasement (Oliver North)
    GOPUSA ^ | April 6, 2007 | Oliver North

    April 6, 2007

    "Where is the outrage?" Those are the words of one of five former U.S. hostages I have spoken with since March 23, when 15 British sailors were taken hostage by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Another previous victim of the mullah's malice inquired, "Doesn't anyone realize that the Iranians will continue to seize Westerners until they have to pay a price for doing so?" And a third American, held captive in Tehran by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his colleagues back in 1979-80, asked: "Why, after all these years, hasn't anyone stopped them?"

    The answer, in a word: oil.

    No Western leader -- not Tony Blair, not George Bush, certainly none of the leaders of "Old Europe" and surely no one at the United Nations -- dares risk the wrath of the ayatollahs and the possibility that Iran might shut off 20 percent of the world's oil. Just the chance that the most recent hostage crisis might worsen pushed the price of oil over $66 per barrel -- a 7 percent rise -- in less than a week.

    Here in California, where we have been shooting interviews for an upcoming episode of "War Stories" for FOX News Channel, the headlines read: "Crisis Fuels Oil-Supply Fears" and gasoline prices hit $4 per gallon before the potential calamity was resolved. "Experts" -- there are always experts -- said that if the situation had escalated, the price of crude could have soared to "$100 per barrel, plunging the world into a depression."

    If ayatollahs laugh, the tin-horned theo-despots ruling Tehran must be chortling in their beards. For nearly two weeks, the Islamic radicals running the world's pre-imminent terrorist state once again had leaders of the civilized world cowering and cutting backroom deals. But the clerics are confident there will be no consequences, all because of oil.

    Other than terrorism, Iran has no ability to project power -- yet. Its air force is hardly worthy of the name. The United States has the capacity, in the words of one senior retired military officer, now a Pentagon consultant, "to eliminate the entire Iranian Navy in less than an hour." But Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's hollow threat, "If the Americans make a wrong move toward Iran, the shipment of energy will definitely face danger," is taken seriously in capitals around the globe, because the United States set the gold standard for how to appease terrorists during the first Iranian hostage crisis.

    On Jan. 19, 1981, the day before he left office, Jimmy Carter accepted the conditions of the so-called Algiers Accord -- a secretly negotiated agreement between the Iranian regime and the U.S. government that gave Tehran everything they asked for in exchange for the release of 52 Americans who had been seized 444 days before. Later that day, while White House stewards and ushers prepared the Executive Mansion for Ronald Reagan, Carter was a very busy man -- signing no less than 10 executive orders implementing the onerous provisions of the Algiers pact. Among them: E.O. 12283, prohibiting anyone subject to U.S. law from ever bringing a claim against the Iranians for sacking our embassy or taking hostages. It was total capitulation. And it taught the Iranians a lesson about appeasement they have never forgotten.

    Though they do not share it, the ayatollahs in Tehran understand the value Westerners place on human life. They grasp the power of images in our media, and the willingness of a pliant press to show our citizens in peril. And they know that we will do almost anything to save our countrymen. Been there, done that.

    Equally important, the Islamic radicals running Iran have just reaffirmed that by threatening the world economy by hazarding the supply of oil, they can be lawless with impunity. They use their own oil -- about 2.5 billion barrels a day -- to fuel their apocalyptic nuclear weapons program, with certainty that no one will act against them because Western governments are afraid of energy supply disruptions.

    Speculation as to why the Iranians precipitated this most recent seizure is meaningless. Tehran's penchant for prisoners has nothing to do with the Shatt al-Arab being a "disputed waterway," or "hostage swaps" or even fomenting a split between the United States and the United Kingdom. The Iranians take hostages because they get their way by doing so.

    Now that the most recent hostage incident is over, there are the usual calls for action against the brutal, corrupt Islamic radicals ruling in Tehran. Though concerted covert support for regime opponents ought to be at the top of the list, Western leaders will settle for more negotiations -- ignoring the need to back up diplomacy with the credible threat of force.

    The Iranians have learned much from our inaction and appeasement. But they shouldn't be the only ones to learn something from this most recent "hostage event."

    Between 1942 and 1945 the United States launched the Manhattan Project to build a bomb that would end World War II. At the time, it was the largest, most expensive scientific and engineering project ever undertaken, costing about $2 billion -- roughly $20 billion in today's dollars. To stop hostage taking as an instrument of Iranian state policy requires freeing the world from bondage to oil. A Manhattan Project to develop an alternative energy source would make appeasing radical Islamic hostage holders unnecessary.

    ---------

    Oliver North is the host of "War Stories" on the FOX News Channel.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  19. #399
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Russia says US would incur 'losses' in attack on Iran_(ruskies confident in their equipment)
    daily star ^ | April 06, 2007 | Reuters

    The United States would suffer losses if it attacked Iran but weight of numbers would ensure it eventually achieved air supremacy, Russian generals said on Thursday. Pakistan meanwhile rejected on Thursday a US media report that the US government was secretly aiding a militant group for attacks across the border in Iran as "tendentious."

    "According to our estimates, Iran's air-defense system is pretty strong," General Yuri Solovyov, head of Moscow's air defenses, told a news conference. "Iran's weapons, among others, include our anti-aircraft systems which allow them to fight all types of flying objects currently in service in the US ... Besides, we all remember our specialists have trained them since Soviet times."

    Russia said in January it had completed delivery of TOR-M1 anti-aircraft missile systems to Iran, provoking an outcry from Washington and Israel, which said the sale undermined regional security.

    Moscow said the missile systems were short-range and purely defensive. Russian media have quoted unidentified sources in Russian military intelligence as saying the United States could launch a strike on Iran as early as April 6.

    "Today's situation is such that the attacking side [the US] has more modern and powerful weapons and enjoys supremacy in quantity, compared to Iran's defenses," said General Sergei Razygrayev, chief of staff of Moscow's air defense system.

    "They [the Americans] will be able to create such a quantitive supremacy that they will accomplish the set task, though they will also suffer losses," Razygrayev said.

    On Tuesday, Russian Chief of General Staff Yuri Baluyevsky was quoted as saying the US could damage Iran's military and industrial potential but "it is impossible to win.".

    Razygrayev said that to project a possible scenario for Iran, Russian military experts had analyzed US air strikes on former Yugoslavia and Iraq. He said the US would seek to suppress Iran's radar systems and launch a massive cruise missile strikes.

    On another front, a report on the Web site of US televistion station ABC News on Wednesday said US officials have secretly encouraged and advised a Pakistani tribal militant group responsible for several deadly attacks inside Iran.

    The Sunni group Jundullah comprises members of the Baluchi tribe and operates out of Pakistan's southwestern Baluchistan Province, the report said.

    "The Foreign Office takes serious note of the tendentious ABC News report alleging that a group called 'Jundullah (Soldier of God)' was operating from inside Pakistan to carry out raids across the border into Iran," an official Pakistani statement said.

    It said the notion that Pakistan was part of a "secret campaign" against Iran was an "absurd and sinister insinuation."

    The report quoted Pakistani tribal sources as saying that money for the group is funneled to its young leader, Abdel-Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states.

    It quoted official Pakistani sources as saying that the Jundullah campaign was on the agenda when US Vice President Dick Cheney met with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf in February. - AFP, Reuters
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  20. #400
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,961
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

    Re: my Post http://www.transasianaxis.com/vb/sho...&postcount=378


    Subject: Official Corroboration

    http://www.onenewsnow.com/2007/04/ad...nians_clas.php



    Admiral confirms Iranians clashed with US troops in September

    Chad Groening
    OneNewsNow.com
    April 9, 2007



    A U.S. defense expert says the recent crisis over the seizure of 15 British sailors by the Iranians was just one of several incidents of Iranian incursions in recent months.

    Rear Admiral Mark Fox, U.S. Chief of Strategic Effects in Baghdad, recently briefed Pentagon advisor Bob Maginnis, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, and confirmed that Iraqi and U.S. forces engaged Iranian troops who had crossed the border into Iraq in September.

    "An entire Iranian platoon came up and started to engage us with fire," Maginnis says. "They were firing primarily at U.S. forces, not at Iraqi forces. Unfortunately, four Iraqis were killed and an Iranian was killed, and the Iranians withdrew into their own territory," he notes.

    This incident should have been big news when it happened, the defense analyst observes. "This, as far as I'm concerned, is a fairly underreported [event] but not untypical of the type of behavior we're seeing," he says, "certainly [with the Iranian] security forces and the like. And I think it's tantamount to the type of incident that took place with the 15 Britons."
    Rear Admiral Fox "confirmed the incident in September ... that our forces were attacked by Iranians that were inside Iraq," Maginnis asserts. He says the U.S. Navy official is going to provide more details as they become available.

    The fact that this and other such incursions have occurred "is not well known," the Pentagon advisor says, "but people on the ground know it for a fact, and it is something that is really not new."

    Heat this report MP3:

    http://www.onenewsnow.com/audio/2007...nnisVoicer.mp3

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •