Iran the Next Battlefield - Thread Renamed

[American Patriot]

Gaza's 'human chain' a few links short--Only 5,000 show up
Jerusalem Post ^ | 2-25-08

Despite concerns that Palestinian demonstrators against the continued blockade of the Gaza Strip would attempt to storm the border with Israel during a "human chain" demonstration Monday, the event itself proved an anticlimax and the thousands of Israeli security personnel manning the Israeli side of the border were not forced to cope with the nightmare scenario.


Gazans holding hands during Monday's "human chain" demonstration along the border with Israel. Photo: AP

Slideshow: Gaza protest About 5,000 people, many of them schoolchildren released from school early to attend the event and university students, joined the "human chain" outside the town of Beit Hanun, about six kilometers from the border.

The crowd hoisted banners in English and Arabic, saying "End the siege of Gaza now," and "Your siege will not break our will."

Organizers had hoped to form a chain running the length of the 40-kilometer Gaza Strip, but turnout was well below expectations.

After the protest ended, some 2,000 Hamas loyalists marched to a checkpoint several kilometers away from Erez checkpoint. Hamas police, however, blocked the main road leading to Erez and called on loyalists to obey the law.

In preparation for the protest, security forces mobilized along the security fence Sunday night in an effort to head off a replay of last month's Rafah border-storming at the Erez or Kissufim crossings.

An artillery battery was moved to the Gaza border for the first time in months, and rules of engagement were reviewed as troops prepared for the demonstration.

The IDF was unwilling to confirm or deny a Channel 2 news report saying soldiers would be instructed to fire at protesters' legs should they approach the security fence, in order to prevent a recurrence of what happened at the Gaza-Sinai border on January 23.

[American Patriot]

Iran 'number one world power': Ahmadinejad
Breitbart.com ^ | 28 Feb 08 | AFP

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared on Thursday that Iran was the world's "number one" power, as he launched a bitter new assault on domestic critics he accused of siding with the enemy. "Everybody has understood that Iran is the number one power in the world," Ahmadinejad said in a speech to families who lost loved ones in the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war.

"Today the name of Iran means a firm punch in the teeth of the powerful and it puts them in their place," he added in the address broadcast live on state television.

Ahmadinejad's comments come amid renewed Western efforts on the UN Security Council to agree a third package of sanctions against Tehran over its refusal to suspend sensitive nuclear activities.

They also came a day after former top nuclear negotiator Hassan Rowhani launched an unprecedented attack on Ahmadinejad's foreign policy, accusing him of using "coarse slogans and grandstanding".

"You can see how some people here... try to materialise the plans of the enemies and by showing that Iran is small and the enemy is big," added Ahmadinejad.

"These are the people who put the enemies of humanity in the place of God," said the deeply religious president.

He also told the families of the "martyrs" of the war that their loss was not in vain as the message of the Islamic revolution of 1979 that ousted the pro-US shah was spreading all over the world.

"Today the message of your revolution is being heard in South America, East Asia, in the heart of Europe and even in the United States itself," he said.

Ahmadinejad said he talked with people everywhere he travelled in the world and "it is like I am in district 17 in Tehran", referring to the low-income area in the south of the Iranian capital where he was giving his speech.

Ahmadinejad is due to travel to Iraq on Sunday in the first visit by a president of the Islamic republic to its western neighbour.

[Toad]

Omg. Whatever. If I had his home address I'd send him some Lithium and Seroquel for that bipolar/psychosis that clearly needs treatment.

[Jag]

Iran blames US for Iraq 'terror'

Ahmadinejad visited one of Iraq's most powerful Shia Muslim leaders On the first-ever visit to Iraq by an Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has accused the US of bringing terrorism to the region. He also called on Washington to change its standpoint towards Iran and said it had to understand that the Iraqi people did not like America. A BBC correspondent says many Iraqis see the visit as the culmination of a process of normalisation in ties. The two countries fought a war when Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. The BBC's Jim Muir adds that Mr Ahmadinejad has not been welcomed by all Iraqis, since some agree with the Americans' view that Iran supports extremist militias in Iraq and is to blame for much of the trouble there. US weapons call Mr Ahmadinejad, who arrived in Baghdad on Sunday, made his remark about the US and terrorism after US accusations that Iran was supporting militants. [Iraq] does not want the US Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Iranian in the Green Zone The visit in pictures Ahmadinejad's historic visit "Six years ago, there were no terrorists in our region," he said after talks with Abdel Aziz al-Hakim, head of Iraq's largest Shia Muslim political bloc, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (Sciri). "As soon as the others landed in this country and the region, we witnessed their arrival and presence." Earlier, at a news conference with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, the Iranian president said it was not Tehran's fault that Iraq "does not want the US". On Saturday, US President George W Bush, speaking at his ranch in Texas, called on Iran to "quit sending in sophisticated equipment that's killing our citizens". The Iranian leader is due to end his visit on Monday. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has said a number of agreements will be signed. US forces are not involved in security for the visit and did not provide helicopters. After talks with President Talabani, Mr Ahmadinejad said the visit had opened a "new page" in Iran-Iraq relations. Prime Minister Maliki said his talks with Mr Ahmadinejad had been "friendly, positive and full of trust". Despite the reconciliation between Baghdad and Tehran, many analysts believe that in the long term, the two countries are destined to be rivals for regional power. During the long war between them in the 1980s, many of the prominent Shia now in positions of power in Iraq fled to Iran as Saddam Hussein cracked down on internal dissent. The US-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime allowed them to return from exile. Trade is now growing between the two countries and tourism, in the form of Iranian pilgrims visiting major Shia shrines in Iraq, is booming. Was that a kick in our ass from Iraq? Jag

[American Patriot]

Russia, China block UN Iran resolution
Yahoonews ^ | March 4, 2008 | GEORGE JAHN

VIENNA, Austria - Russia and China on Tuesday scuttled a Western attempt to introduce a resolution on Iran's nuclear defiance at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, diplomats said.

The decision appeared to be the result of lingering unhappiness by the two world powers about not being informed earlier of plans for such a resolution.

It came a day after the U.N. Security Council imposed another round of sanctions on Iran for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment. Iran defiantly vowed to continue its nuclear program, which it insists is aimed only at generating power.

Moscow on Monday had threatened not to back the new U.N. sanctions against Iran unless the West gave up its IAEA resolution plans.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...

[American Patriot]

Peres calls Iran 'greatest problem' in the world, but says Israel will not act alone
AP via IHT ^ | March 9, 2008 | Staff

JERUSALEM: President Shimon Peres on Sunday called Iran the world's "greatest problem" but said Israel would not act on its own against the Islamic nation's nuclear program.

"Iran is a danger not just for Israel but for the rest of the world, the combination of being a center of terror and developing a nuclear option is the most dangerous you can think of," he said at his official residence, a day ahead of an official visit France.

Last week, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Israel has the "might and power" to defend itself against any threat from Iran, indicating a willingness to use military force if necessary against Tehran's nuclear ambitions.

Iran has defiantly vowed to continue its nuclear program, despite new U.N. sanctions imposed last week for Tehran's refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, a process necessary to build an atomic bomb.

Israel has always said it favored a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear issue, and did not see itself taking the lead against Iran. Tehran insists its program is peaceful.

Still, Israel considers Iran a serious threat because it has an arsenal of long-range missiles that can be fitted with nuclear warheads and are capable of striking the Jewish state.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has repeatedly called for Israel to be "wiped off the map," and Iran provides support to extremist anti-Israel groups like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian areas.

(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...

[American Patriot]

Destruction of Iran's nuclear program good, if done by Israel, even better: Kuwaiti analyst
AP via IHT ^ | March 9, 2008 | Staff

KUWAIT CITY: The destruction of Iran's nuclear capabilities would be in the interest of the Arab nations in the Gulf, and it would be "less embarrassing" if it was done by Israel rather than the U.S., a top Kuwaiti strategist said in remarks published Sunday.

Officially Kuwait, like the other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, wants a peaceful solution to the nuclear standoff between Tehran and the West and will not allow the U.S. to use its territories for any attack on Iran.

But when asked in an interview with the daily Al-Siyassah about the consequences of an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear reactors, analyst and former government adviser Sami al-Faraj said it would not be such a bad thing.

"Honestly speaking, they would be achieving something of great strategic value for the GCC by stopping Iran's tendency for hegemony over the area," he said, adding that "nipping it in the bud by Israeli hands would be less embarrassing for us" than if the Americans did it.

Al-Faraj said Tehran was interfering in Iraq, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories, and inciting strife between Sunnis and Shiites.

"The question is what would it do if it were a nuclear nation? We have to call a spade a spade and say that burying the military nuclear Iranian project is in the interest of GCC states," and other countries in the area, added al-Faraj, who heads the independent Kuwait Center for Strategy Studies.

(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...

[American Patriot]

Analysis: Israel intel warns of new threat
UPI ^

WASHINGTON, March 10 (UPI) -- President George W. Bush had promised he would help usher in peace in the Middle East through his efforts to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian dispute -- the core conflict in the Middle East -- before his term as president expires in January 2009.

But try as he may, the U.S. president is not getting much help from those he is trying to help. Rather, what the president is getting are counterproductive measures being undertaken by both sides in the longstanding dispute.

From the Palestinian side: The only asset contributing to the peace process is Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who is eager to pursue peace talks, cognizant that peace is the sole viable solution for the Palestinians. But Abbas is in a rather weak position. Although in title he is president of the Palestinian Authority, an area comprising the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, in reality he rules over a divided house. Abbas controls only the West Bank while his political rivals in the Islamist movement, Hamas, rule over the Gaza Strip.

And it is from Gaza, surrounded by Israel's military, which has imposed a siege on the territory in efforts to contain the Islamist movement backed by Syria and Iran, that Hamas continues to launch rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli civilian population centers.

From the Israeli side: The Jewish state also finds itself in a somewhat similar predicament as its opponent, with a weak and unpopular prime minister at its head, as the country faces, according to its own intelligence services, a bleak picture of threats.

A senior government official in Jerusalem said the Cabinet was briefed during its weekly meeting by the country's intelligence chiefs on the findings of an annual report produced by Israel's intelligence agencies. The report warns of two immediate threats to the security of Israel: Iran's nuclear program and the continued firing of rockets at Israeli population centers by Hamas from Gaza.

"The main strategic threats are from Iran through its nuclear program and the pivotal role it is playing as a leader of the radical axis in the Arab and Muslim world," the official quoted the annual report as saying.

Israel sees a clear and present danger coming from the Islamic republic in view of the backing Iran is providing Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, as well as the strategic alliance Iran has developed with Syria, a country that remains at war with Israel. Israel also takes very seriously statements by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly called for Israel to be wiped off the map.

The Israeli intelligence report states that while Gaza remains the most "active front," it warns against an all-out offensive against the Hamas-held territory for fear it would reignite the northern front, bringing Hezbollah into the battle.

"If Israel launches a broad operation in Gaza, that could lead to violence on other fronts, most notably from Hezbollah," the official is reported to have said.

Following the Gaza flare-up last week Abbas announced he was calling off talks with Israel. This prompted U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to undertake an emergency trip to the region and pressure Israeli and Palestinian leaders into resuming their talks; both Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed to the U.S. secretary's request. However, in view of Sunday's decision by Olmert to approve the expansion of the Givat Zeev settlement in the occupied West Bank -- a move that has angered Palestinians -- the talks may be placed on hold once again.

Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat condemned the announcement, stating that "this is a provocative action by Israel that demonstrates its intention of further strengthening its illegal occupation and colonization of Palestinian territory."

Erekat called the timing of the decision "outrageous."

Coming on the eve of the trilateral meeting with the Americans, "this expansion of illegal settlements on Palestinian land by Israel constitutes yet another slap in the face of the peace process," said Erekat.

And from the U.S. side: Misconstrued U.S. foreign policy naively believed that the longstanding Middle East conflict could be solved in part by staging the Annapolis peace conference; the only real success of this conference was the ability of the Bush administration to bring together under the same roof representatives from Israel as well as from Syria and Saudi Arabia.

But the shortsightedness of U.S. Middle East foreign policy is that it failed to build on the momentum and bring Syria into the fold. The policy of the Bush administration of refusing to negotiate not only with Syria, but also with Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas, only hampers peace efforts.

Syria, much as Iran, continues to hold much influence over Hezbollah and Hamas. And much as the White House hates to admit it, the road to peace in the Middle East unavoidably passes through Damascus.

[American Patriot]

Iran Unveils Hezbollah Commander Stamp
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g...rt7rQD8VAOI800

The Associated Press -


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran issued a stamp Monday in commemoration of a top Hezbollah commander wanted by the US who was killed in a car bombing in Syria last ...

[Brian Baldwin]

It's interesting that we refuse to deal with terrorists yet are fully expecting Israel to do so. We'd have a lot fewer problems if we told Israel to do as they saw fit and that we'd back them.

[Jag]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...xt=va&aid=8301

6 Signs the U.S. May Be Headed for War in Iran


by Terry Atlas

Global Research, March 12, 2008
U.S. News & World Report - 2008-03-11

This report by the US mainstream press suggests in no uncertain terms that the US is heading for war with Iran and that opposition within the US high command has been significantly weakened with the forced resignation of Admiral William Fallon.


Is the United States moving toward military action with Iran?

The resignation of the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East is setting off alarms that the Bush administration is intent on using military force to stop Iran's moves toward gaining nuclear weapons. In announcing his sudden resignation today following a report on his views in Esquire, Adm. William Fallon didn't directly deny that he differs with President Bush over at least some aspects of the president's policy on Iran. For his part, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said it is "ridiculous" to think that the departure of Fallon -- whose Central Command has been working on contingency plans for strikes on Iran as well as overseeing Iraq -- signals that the United States is planning to go to war with Iran.

Fallon's resignation, ending a 41-year Navy career, has reignited the buzz of speculation over what the Bush administration intends to do given that its troubled, sluggish diplomatic effort has failed to slow Iran's nuclear advances. Those activities include the advancing process of uranium enrichment, a key step to producing the material necessary to fuel a bomb, though the Iranians assert the work is to produce nuclear fuel for civilian power reactors, not weapons.

Here are six developments that may have Iran as a common thread. And, if it comes to war, they may be seen as clues as to what was planned. None of them is conclusive, and each has a credible non-Iran related explanation:

1. Fallon's resignation: With the Army fully engaged in Iraq, much of the contingency planning for possible military action has fallen to the Navy, which has looked at the use of carrier-based warplanes and sea-launched missiles as the weapons to destroy Iran's air defenses and nuclear infrastructure. Centcom commands the U.S. naval forces in and near the Persian Gulf. In the aftermath of the problems with the Iraq war, there has been much discussion within the military that senior military officers should have resigned at the time when they disagreed with the White House.

2. Vice President Cheney's peace trip: Cheney, who is seen as a leading hawk on Iran, is going on what is described as a Mideast trip to try to give a boost to stalled Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. But he has also scheduled two other stops: One, Oman, is a key military ally and logistics hub for military operations in the Persian Gulf. It also faces Iran across the narrow, vital Strait of Hormuz, the vulnerable oil transit chokepoint into and out of the Persian Gulf that Iran has threatened to blockade in the event of war. Cheney is also going to Saudi Arabia, whose support would be sought before any military action given its ability to increase oil supplies if Iran's oil is cut off. Back in March 2002, Cheney made a high-profile Mideast trip to Saudi Arabia and other nations that officials said at the time was about diplomacy toward Iraq and not war, which began a year later.

3. Israeli airstrike on Syria: Israel's airstrike deep in Syria last October was reported to have targeted a nuclear-related facility, but details have remained sketchy and some experts have been skeptical that Syria had a covert nuclear program. An alternative scenario floating in Israel and Lebanon is that the real purpose of the strike was to force Syria to switch on the targeting electronics for newly received Russian anti-aircraft defenses. The location of the strike is seen as on a likely flight path to Iran (also crossing the friendly Kurdish-controlled Northern Iraq), and knowing the electronic signatures of the defensive systems is necessary to reduce the risks for warplanes heading to targets in Iran.

4. Warships off Lebanon: Two U.S. warships took up positions off Lebanon earlier this month, replacing the USS Cole. The deployment was said to signal U.S. concern over the political stalemate in Lebanon and the influence of Syria in that country. But the United States also would want its warships in the eastern Mediterranean in the event of military action against Iran to keep Iranian ally Syria in check and to help provide air cover to Israel against Iranian missile reprisals. One of the newly deployed ships, the USS Ross, is an Aegis guided missile destroyer, a top system for defense against air attacks.

5. Israeli comments: Israeli President Shimon Peres said earlier this month that Israel will not consider unilateral action to stop Iran from getting a nuclear bomb. In the past, though, Israeli officials have quite consistently said they were prepared to act alone -- if that becomes necessary -- to ensure that Iran does not cross a nuclear weapons threshold. Was Peres speaking for himself, or has President Bush given the Israelis an assurance that they won't have to act alone?

6.Israel's war with Hezbollah: While this seems a bit old, Israel's July 2006 war in Lebanon against Iranian-backed Hezbollah forces was seen at the time as a step that Israel would want to take if it anticipated a clash with Iran. The radical Shiite group is seen not only as a threat on it own but also as a possible Iranian surrogate force in the event of war with Iran. So it was important for Israel to push Hezbollah forces back from their positions on Lebanon's border with Israel and to do enough damage to Hezbollah's Iranian-supplied arsenals to reduce its capabilities. Since then, Hezbollah has been able to rearm, though a United Nations force polices a border area buffer zone in southern Lebanon.

Defense Secretary Gates said that Fallon, 63, asked for permission to retire. Gates said that the decision, effective March 31, was entirely Fallon's and that Gates believed it was "the right thing to do." In Esquire, an article on Fallon portrayed him as opposed to President Bush's Iran policy and said he was a lone voice against taking military action to stop the Iranian nuclear program. In his statement, Fallon said he agreed with the president's "policy objectives" but was silent on whether he opposed aspects of the president's plans. "Recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president's policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts in the Centcom region," Fallon, said in the statement issued by Centcom headquarters in Tampa, Fla. "And although I don't believe there have ever been any differences about the objectives of our policy in the Central Command area of responsibility, the simple perception that there is makes it difficult for me to effectively serve America's interests there," he said. Gates announced that Fallon's top deputy, Army Lt. Gen. Martin Dempsey, will take over temporarily when Fallon leaves. A permanent successor, requiring nomination by the president and confirmation by the Senate, might not be designated in the near term.

Jag

[American Patriot]

From The Times

April 11, 2008

Spy photos reveal 'secret launch site' for Iran's long-range missiles

A close examination of the photographs has indicated that the Iranians are following the same path as North Korea






Michael Evans



The secret site where Iran is suspected of developing long-range ballistic missiles capable of reaching targets in Europe has been uncovered by new satellite photographs.


The imagery has pinpointed the facility from where the Iranians launched their Kavoshgar 1 “research rocket” on February 4, claiming that it was in connection with their space programme.
Analysis of the photographs taken by the Digital Globe QuickBird satellite four days after the launch has revealed a number of intriguing features that indicate to experts that it is the same site where Iran is focusing its efforts on developing a ballistic missile with a range of about 6,000km (4,000 miles).


A previously unknown missile location, the site, about 230km southeast of Tehran, and the link with Iran's long-range programme, was revealed by Jane's Intelligence Review after a study of the imagery by a former Iraq weapons inspector. A close examination of the photographs has indicated that the Iranians are following the same path as North Korea, pursuing a space programme that enables Tehran to acquire expertise in long-range missile technology.
Related Links

• Bush: Iran is one of two greatest threats to US

• Iran: we now have 6,000 nuclear centrifuges

• Iran joined militias in battle for Basra

Geoffrey Forden, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that there was a recently constructed building on the site, about 40 metres in length, which was similar in form and size to the Taepodong long-range missile assembly facility in North Korea.


Avital Johanan, the editor of Jane's Proliferation, said that the analysis of the Iranian site indicated that Tehran may be about five years away from developing a 6,000km ballistic missile.


This would tie in with American intelligence estimates and underlines why President Bush wants the Polish and Czech components of the US missile defence system to be up and running by 2013.


The Czech Republic has now agreed to have a special radar system on its soil and the Polish Government is still negotiating with Washington over the American request to site ten interceptor missiles in Poland.


The Kavoshgar 1 rocket that was launched in the presence of President Ahmadinejad of Iran was based on the Shahab 3B missile, a version of the North Korean Nodong liquid-propellant missile.


Dr Forden said that the Kavoshgar launch did not demonstrate any significant advances in ballistic missile technology. “But it does reveal the likely future development of Iran's missile programme,” he said.


At a meeting on February 25 between the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Iranians, UN inspectors confronted them with evidence of design studies for mounting nuclear warheads on long-range missiles. The Iranians denied any such aspirations.


However, according to Jane's Intelligence Review, the satellite photographs prove that the Kavoshgar 1 rocket was not part of a civilian space centre project but was consistent with Iran's clandestine programme to develop longer-range missiles.


The examination of the launch site revealed that it was part of a large and growing complex “with very high levels of security and recent construction activity”. It was clearly “an important strategic facility”, Dr Forden said.


The former Iraq weapons inspector said that Iran was benefiting from the North Korean missile programme and following its designs. The Taepodong 1 consisted of a liquid-propellant Nodong (like the Shahab 3) first stage, a liquid-propellant Scud second stage and a solid-propellant third stage.


“The production and testing facility next to the Kavoshgar 1 launch site would seem well positioned to contribute to this third stage,” Dr Forden said.

[American Patriot]

Navy fired Warning Shots at Iranian Boat
Foxnews ^ | 4/11/08 | Foxnews

Nothing followed.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


FNV:Breaking News > Navy Fires Warning Shots at Iranian Boat in Persian Gulf - (headline only)
Fox News ^ | 4-11-08

Another source:

http://cbs2chicago.com/national/iran....2.697662.html

The Navy says a ship encountered a small Iranian high-speed boat in the central Persian Gulf and warned it away by firing a flare.

Two other similar Iranian boats in the area did not come as close.

The USS Typhoon tried unsuccessfully to establish radio contact with the Iranian boat after it came within an estimated 200 yards of the Typhoon on Thursday, outside Iranian territorial waters. A Navy official says the ship then fired the flare and continued on its way without incident.

The official says there were no signs any boat was armed.

It was at least the second encounter with an aggressive Iranian high-speed boat this year.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...

[American Patriot]

USS TYPHOON is the fifth CYCLONE - class patrol coastal boat. From November 2001 on, the CYCLONE - class ships were temporarily operated under US Coast Guard control for homeland defense.
General Characteristics: Awarded: August 3, 1990
Keel laid: May 15, 1992
Launched: March 3, 1993
Commissioned: February 12, 1994
Builder: Bollinger Machine Shop & Shipyard, Lockport, Louisiana
Propulsion system:4 Paxman diesels
Propellers: four
Length: 170 feet (51.8 meters)
Beam: 25 feet (7.6 meters)
Draft: 7.5 feet (2.3 meters)
Displacement: approx. 331 tons
Speed: 35 knots
Aircraft: none
Armament: 2 25mm Mk-38 machine guns; 2 .50 cal machine guns;
2 Mk-19 automatic grenade launchers; 6 stinger missiles
Homeport: Little Creek, Va.
Crew: 4 officers, 24 enlisted and 8 Special Forces personnel

[American Patriot]

Iran is building 6,000-km. missile
Jerusalem Post ^ | Aprl 11, 2008 | Staff

New satellite imagery exposed a site where Iran was developing long-range ballistic missiles, the Times of London reported Friday.

According to the report, on February 4, Iran announced it had launched a "research rocket" as part of its space program. Experts have estimated since then, however, that the rocket launch was in fact a field test of Shihab-type ballistic missile.

But four days after the launch another intriguing feature of the test became apparent: analysis of photographs taken by the Digital Globe QuickBird satellite indicated that the launch site of Kavoshgar 1, as the Shihab missile was dubbed by the Iranians, is also the site where Iran is busy developing ballistic missiles with a range of about 6,000 km.

The site, about 230 km southeast of Teheran, was previously unknown and its link with the Iranian weapons program was revealed by Jane's Intelligence Review after the images were studied by a former Iraq weapons inspector.

Using a space program as a façade for a weapons program was the path chosen by Korea until it declared it had passed the nuclear weapon threshold.

Geoffrey Forden, a research associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said that there was a recently constructed building on the site, about 40 meters in length, which was similar in form and size to the Taepodong long-range missile assembly facility in North Korea.

Jane's Proliferation editor Avital Johanan said analysis of the Iranian site indicated that Teheran may be about five years away from developing a 6,000 km ballistic missile. This would tie in with American intelligence estimates and underlines why President Bush wants the Polish and Czech components of the US missile defense system to be up and running by 2013.

(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...

[American Patriot]

Source: U.S. Strike on Iran Nearing
Newsmax ^ | April 14, 2008

April 14, 2008

By: Jim Meyers

Contrary to some claims that the Bush administration will allow diplomacy to handle Iran’s nuclear weapons program, a leading member of America’s Jewish community tells Newsmax that a military strike is not only on the table – but likely.

“Israel is preparing for heavy casualties,” the source said, suggesting that although Israel will not take part in the strike, it is expecting to be the target of Iranian retribution.

“Look at Dick Cheney’s recent trip through the Middle East as preparation for the U.S. attack,” the source said.

Cheney’s hastily arranged 9-day visit to the region, which began on March 16, included stops in Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Turkey, and the Palestinian territories.

Tensions in the region have been rising.

While Israel was conducting the largest homefront military exercises in its history last week, Israel’s National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer warned Tehran about expected attacks on the Jewish state.

“An Iranian attack will prompt a severe reaction from Israel, which will destroy the Iranian nation,” he said.

He predicted that in a future war, “hundreds of missiles will rain on Israel,” but added that Iran “is definitely aware of our strength.”

In addition to long-range missiles Iran has been developing to strike Israel, Israel’s military strategists see the Iranians using terror groups they back like Hamas operating from Palestine and Hezbollah from Lebanon to launch attacks.

Iran has supplied Hezbollah with an arsenal that now contains “tens of thousands of missiles,” according to the Washington Post.

IIsrael’s recent war exercises, including preparations for chemical and biological weapons attacks, drew a sharp response from Syria which held its own military drills. The Syrian government accused Israel of preparing for a war which Damascus predicted would be begin anytime between May 1 and the end of June.

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently told foreign journalists that Israel needs to confront the threat posed by Iran. Privately he has been telling associates his number one priority is have the Israeli military strike Iran if the U.S. is unwilling.

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz disclosed that Israel is concerned that North Korea has transferred technology and nuclear materials to Iran to aid Tehran’s secret nuclear weapons program.

Iran remains intransigent to international pressure that it offer full transparency relating to its nuclear program. On Sunday the head of Iran’s nuclear program “abruptly canceled a meeting with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, dealing a blow to the U.N. monitor's efforts to investigate allegations that Iran tried to make nuclear arms, an agency official said,” according to an AP report.

“But a senior diplomat had told the AP that IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] head Mohamed ElBaradei likely planned to use the meeting with Gholam Reza Aghazadeh, the head of Iran's nuclear program, to renew a request for more information on allegations Tehran had tried to make atomic arms.”

A number of signs indicate that, contrary to the belief President Bush is a lame duck who will not act before he leaves office, the U.S. is poised to strike before Iran can acquire nuclear weapons and carry out the threat of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to “wipe Israel off the map”:

According to intelligence sources, the administration now rejects the National Intelligence Estimate report issued in December that asserted Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program in late 2003.

The French daily Le Monde reported in March that newly surfaced documents show that Iran has continued developing nuclear weapons. In late 2006, U.S. intelligence reportedly intercepted a phone conversation in Iran’s Defense Ministry in which the nuclear weapons program was discussed.

The commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, Admiral William Fallon, resigned in March amid media reports that he broke with President Bush’s strategy on Iran and did not want to be in the chain of command when the order comes down from the President to launch a strike on the Islamic Republic.

Democrats suggested he had been forced out because of his candor in opposing Bush’s Iran plans, and Esquire magazine contended that Fallon’s departure signaled that the U.S. is preparing to attack Iran.

According to a Tehran-based Iranian news network, Press TV, Saudi Arabia is taking emergency steps in preparing to counter any “radioactive hazards” that may result from an American attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

The Saudi newspaper Okaz disclosed that the Saudi government has approved nuclear fallout preparations, and the Iranian network reported that the approval came a day after Cheney met with the kingdom’s high-ranking officials, further stating that the U.S. “is now informing its Arab allies of a potential war.”

The American commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, has stepped up criticism of Iran, telling Congress last week that Iranian support for Shiite militias posed the most serious threat to Iraq’s stability. He told senators : “Iran has fueled the violence in a particularly damaging way.” Last week, the U.S. said Iran was providing insurgents with missiles that were killing Americans and hitting targets within the U.S. occupied Green Zone in Baghdad.

MSNBC Commentator Pat Buchanan said Petraeus’ remarks to Congress lay the groundwork for a U.S. attack on Iran.

President Bush said in a speech at the White House on April 10 that Iran, along with al-Qaida, are “two of the greatest threats to America.”

He said Iran “can live in peace with its neighbors,” or “continue to arm and train and fund illegal militant groups which are terrorizing the Iraqi people … If Iran makes the wrong choice, America will act to protect our interests and our troops and our Iraqi partners.”

He later told ABC News that if Iran continues to help militants in Iraq, “then we’ll deal with them.”

Members of Congress are said to have been briefed by the administration about the rising Iran threat.

Iran did little to cool tensions when it announced that it had begun installing 6,000 new centrifuges at its uranium enrichment plant in Natanz.

Centrifuges can enrich uranium to a low level to produce nuclear fuel or a high level for use in weapons.

The announcement of the new centrifuges by President Ahmadinejad came on April 8, Iran’s National Day of Nuclear Technology, which marked the second anniversary of Iran’s first enrichment of uranium.

Iran already has about 3,000 centrifuges operating in Natanz, and the new announcement was widely seen as a show of defiance to international demands to halt a nuclear program that the U.S. and its allies insist is aimed at building nuclear weapons.

[American Patriot]

Get out the beer and popcorn....

[Ryan Ruck]

Popcorn... Check!

[American Patriot]

Middle East
Apr 12, 2008


US edges closer to engaging Iran
By M K Bhadrakumar

April is the cruelest month, breeding
Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain.

T S Eliot's famous opening lines from The Waste Land come to mind as Washington confirms that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is heading for the Middle East to attend an international conference regarding the Iraq situation, in Kuwait on April 22. This will be no ordinary run-of-the-mill international conference. It's about Iraq. And Rice may well bump into her Iranian counterpart, Manouchehr Mottaki.

The big question is, as Eliot wrote, will they "drink coffee, and talk for an hour?" Indeed, will Mottaki call Rice "the hyacinth girl"? All that US State Department spokesman Sean McCormack would say at his press briefing on Wednesday was that "there's nothing
on the schedule for them to meet". He wouldn't make promises, nor rule out anything. But then Tehran hasn't yet announced Mottaki's participation at the Kuwait conference.

McCormack, however, volunteered an estimation that the Iranians have incrementally thawed in recent months. He added, "There was a sort of avoidance [initially] on the part of the Iranians. But that's changed ... They [Rice and Mottaki] didn't have what I would describe as any substantive conversations, but there was some interaction [at a previous Istanbul meet on Iraq]."

So, if the "iceman cometh" from Tehran, this could undoubtedly turn out to be one of the most crucial missions undertaken by Rice in her diplomatic career. The entire Middle East will be watching, attentively looking for clues in Rice's gait, her demeanor. They will want to know whether Washington is taking the plunge for unconditional talks with Tehran.

Everyone knows that when the Americans talk to the Iranians, finally, the kaleidoscope of Middle Eastern politics will have irrevocably shifted. The stakes are particularly high for the Middle East's "pro-West" sclerotic rulers. There is already serious unrest in Egypt, a key US ally. Helena Cobban, the contributing editor of the Boston Review and veteran writer on the Middle East, promptly put down in her blog a recollection from the great Cairo riots of 1977, when the late Mohammed Hassanein Heikal told her as he sat in his lovely Nile-side office at the al-Ahram newspaper that "the Egyptian people are like the Nile: they run deep and apparently quietly - until the point where suddenly they burst their banks".

There is surely expectation in the air, as Egypt is still in many respects the weightiest of all Arab countries. En route to Kuwait, Rice is taking care to stop in Bahrain for an exclusive meeting on April 21 with her counterparts from Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. McCormack was short on specifics, merely saying, "I would expect they'd talk a lot about Iraq." Surely, there is a lot on their minds - especially regarding Iran.

The pro-West regimes in the Middle East will be keen to hear from Rice the import of a series of signals in recent days suggestive of a maneuvering in the Iran policy of the George W Bush administration. What is very obvious is that a lot of back-channel contacts are going on - rearranging the deckchairs, as it were. On balance, it certainly appears that the US Congressional testimonies by the top US commander in Iraq, General David Petraeus and the US ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, earlier in the week in Washington, turned out to be a low-key affair that was deliberately, almost ostentatiously, mild in rhetoric against Iran.

Crocker at one point said, "We support constructive relations between Iran and Iraq," and he went on to acknowledge, "Iran has a dialogue with everyone" - the good, the bad and the ugly - in the Iraqi Shi'ite community. There was the customary criticism of Iran arming and training "special groups", but Crocker balanced it by saying Iran has a relationship with every group in Iraq, not just Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army, which was the US's main adversary in the recent fighting in the southern Iraqi city of Basra. These are important signals by way of exchanging glances.

Tehran promptly responded at the Foreign Ministry level on Wednesday, but with a routine statement to the effect that the US, by accusing Iran, was finding an alibi for the failure of its "surge" policy in Iraq and was "playing with words". But the statement concurred that Iran had no favorites in Iraq. The Foreign Ministry spokesman said Tehran accepted that the measures taken by the Nuri al-Maliki government in Baghdad against the "militants" aimed at establishing "security and stability in that war-ravaged country". No senior Iranian leader bothered to join issue with Petraeus or Crocker. Why should they? The Iranians said the minimum needed by way of a rejoinder for the sake of record, and indicated they'd move on.

On its part, Tehran would have noticed that its own announcement on Tuesday regarding the addition of another 6,000 centrifuges to its nuclear reprocessing plant at Natanz also turned out to be an uneventful affair. Washington barely took notice. There were no threatening noises of fire and brimstone. The mood was almost one of stoic calm. In fact, coinciding with the Iranian announcement, senior US officials were quoted in The New York Times as offering further "incentives" to Iran, if only Tehran suspended uranium enrichment and negotiated with the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany. "We are willing, within the boundaries of what is acceptable to us, to consider an elucidation of the incentive track," said a US official, who of course asked not to be named.

Similarly, Iran also took in its stride the massive five-day civil defense drill starting on April 6 ordered by Israel, which was the first under the National Security Authority established last September and involving the entire Israeli security apparatus and billed as its largest-ever mobilization. Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak was uncharacteristically blunt in his statement that the drill aimed at preparing the country for a new conflict. Israeli National Infrastructure Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer threatened that the "Iranians are provoking us through their allies Syria and Hezbollah, [providing] them with much weaponry, and with that we have to contend".

But Tehran shrugged off the Israeli temper tantrums. No senior figure felt it necessary to comment publicly. A lone commentary by the Tehran Times newspaper observed philosophically that the Israeli "move has raised suspicions in regional countries, which are well aware of the evil nature of the Zionist regime". On the other hand, Iranian Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najar explained that the Iranian missile capability is only intended as a "deterrent defense power", which Iran is entitled to have, given the missile attacks during the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988).

Such restraint is unusual in Israel-Iran rhetoric. Ironically, Iran's Fars news agency, which is close to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), leaked a story virtually absolving Israel of the responsibility for the murder of top Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh on February 12 in Damascus, over which tensions were building in the region, even as the Syrian investigation report on the murder was due to be released. Fars quoted "well-informed sources" to the effect that Saudi Arabia was behind the murder.

Fars named Saudi Prince Banda al-Sultan, formerly Saudi ambassador in Washington, as responsible and that the Saudis were retaliating for the 1996 car bomb attack at the Abdul Aziz airbase in Khobar near Dahran in Saudi Arabia, which was allegedly planned and executed by Mughniyeh. The Fars report would have brought a welcome relief to Israeli intelligence, since the prevailing impression in the region was that Syria would accuse Israel of involvement in Mughniyeh's assassination, which in turn would be the signal for Hezbollah to retaliate and for Israel to hit at Lebanon and possibly even Syria.

These are unusual happenings. All this while through the past week, Middle Easterners have been furiously chatting away that war is imminent. The prevailing mainstream opinion seems to be that "the prospect of a US military strike against Iran is increasing", as Gao Zugui, deputy director of the Institute of Security and Strategy, wrote in the government newspaper China Daily on Thursday.

But it is over Iraq that Tehran is making overtures. Tehran knows the US position is eroding fast in Iraq. The continuing mortar attacks on the Baghdad Green Zone are indeed a great humiliation for Washington. An Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman issued a statement on Wednesday condemning the attack on the Green Zone, the intention being to distance itself from provocative acts against the US. The statement was issued a day after the Iranian spokesman acknowledged the receipt of an official communication from the US suggesting a next round of talks on the Iraq situation.

Equally significant was the visit by former Iraqi prime minister Ibrahim Jaafari to Tehran this week. It is well known that Jaafari has close links with the US and Britain. In all likelihood, he acted as a "back channel". The Iranian hosts took great pains to emphasize in talks with Jaafari that Tehran could be depended on as a collaborator for the stabilization of the Iraqi situation. The secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, Saeed Jalili, assured Jaafari, "Iraq's security is of utmost importance for Iran and Iran will spare no efforts to help maintain security in Iraq." The head of the Expediency Council, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, also spoke in similar vein. Conceivably, Jaafari's consultations were aimed at preparing the ground for US-Iran talks regarding Iraq.

It is difficult to be judgemental about back-channel contacts. But, at any rate, following Jaafari's consultations in Tehran, the mass demonstration that Muqtada had threatened on the streets of Baghdad on Wednesday on the fifth anniversary of the US occupation of the city was abruptly called off. As Patrick Cockburn, the Independent newspaper's ace hand in Iraq, told Mother Jones magazine in a recent interview, the idea that Muqtada is a maverick cleric and a firebrand is completely contrary to his track record - "one of those absurd journalistic cliches that takes on a life on its own". Cockburn adds that Muqtada is in fact "very cautious, never pushing things too far, trying not to be pushed into a corner". And there are rumors Muqtada is sheltering at present in the holy city of Qom in Iran.

How do these trends add up? First, Iran is taking care to ensure that tensions with Israel remain under check. It doesn't appear to be Iran's game plan to encourage Hezbollah to have a go at Israel. The Fars news agency report on the death of Mughniyeh forecloses a Hezbollah revenge attack on Israel, which would have in all probability triggered a chain reaction provoking Israel into a war, in which Iran might unwittingly or accidentally get embroiled.

Second, Iran is constantly taking precautions not to provoke the US unnecessarily. The emphasis, on the other hand, is on the positive role that Tehran can play as a factor of stability in the Iraq situation. The overall Iranian strategy of maximizing its influence with the various Iraqi groups remains very much in place. But according to a survey by WorldPublicOpinion.org (WPO) released in Washington on Monday, the Iranian public believes that the threat of a military attack by the US has substantially reduced, though the deep distrust of American intentions remains.

In sum, Tehran is displaying flexibility, which is possible with the consolidation the regime has managed in domestic politics. There is no doubt that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is in absolute control. The IRGC is riding high. According to the American poll by WPO, two-thirds of Iranians found satisfaction with both Iran's form of government and the performance of President Mahmud Ahmadinejad. Indeed, 74% of Iranians trusted their government to act in the best interests of the nation.

Any long time observer of Iran will agree that the regime possesses the authority today to talk one-to-one with the US and won't have to look over the shoulder and worry about lone snipers in the corridors of power taking a pot shot at it while it engages the "enemy" at the gates.

From Washington's point of view, for the first time in a long while, perhaps, it may set aside the gnawing worry that in the Byzantine world of Iranian politics, it is indeed talking to the right person in Tehran and won't end up pinned and wriggling on the wall in embarrassment. If diplomacy is all about timing, Rice should engage Mottaki.

M K Bhadrakumar served as a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service for over 29 years, with postings including India's ambassador to Uzbekistan (1995-1998) and to Turkey (1998-2001).

[American Patriot]

Ahmadinejad Calls Sept. 11 Attacks 'Suspicious Event'

Wednesday, April 16, 2008
AP

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad



TEHRAN, Iran — Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad cast doubt Wednesday over the U.S. version of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, calling it a pretext used to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Though Iran has condemned the Al Qaeda attacks on New York and Washington in the past, this was the third time in a week Ahmadinejad questioned the death toll, who was behind the attacks and how it happened.


"Four or five years ago, a suspicious event occurred in New York. A building collapsed and they said that 3,000 people had been killed but never published their names," Ahmadinejad told Iranians in the holy city of Qom.


"Under this pretext, they (the U.S.) attacked Afghanistan and Iraq and since then a million people have been killed only in Iraq," said Ahmadinejad in the speech broadcast live on state-run television.


On the last anniversary of the attacks, the names of 2,750 victims killed in New York were read aloud at a memorial ceremony there.



Last year, Ahmadinejad raised questions over the September 11 attacks, saying "what caused it, what were the conditions that led to it, who truly was involved" needed to be examined.


In the past, Ahmadinejad has said that the attack was "a result of mismanaging and inhumane managing of the world by the U.S." and it should not be turned into another Holocaust and "be used for slaughtering people."


Although Iran has condemned the U.S. invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the campaigns toppled the Taliban and Saddam Hussein, two regional threats to Iran.