Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

[Guest]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

... If the Iranians would back off trying to de-stabilize Iraq, they would get what it is they desire: a stable, Shia controlled and friendly neighbor to their west. ... Bottom line: No US attack on Iran anytime soon.

Voice of sanity in the ocean of overwrought hysteria.

[touchring]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

i think frmo now onwards, we can really discount all iran attack rumors are "rumor".

[Guest]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

Here is some more background on Iran. What the Hon. Paul Craig Roberts would call "filthy neo-con scare mongering" no doubt.

I bet there are a lot of people among the readership here who are "utterly convinced" these are all "maliciously contrived rumors and innuendo about Iran". I'm trying to analyze my own feelings towards such "true believers" - stalwart ambassadors from the all encompassing "US is the only evil empire worth examining" school of thought.

Yes, due to a rash, hot-headed, immoderate Republican Administration currently in office, the United States of America are rapidly progressing towards tattered has-been status (Banana Republic is getting closer - at the very least, fiscally) - but alas, that does not do much to repress my incorrigible urge to pour a bucket of cold water (maybe with some ice cubes in it) over the heads of the Paul Craig Roberts of this world.

They wake up every morning, and while shaving and doubtless admiring their own reflections in the bathroom mirror, they see a "stalwart ambassador for peace" reflected there. If only we could wipe away a little of the mirror-fog and show them their real reflection. What an eye opener their 'reality adjusted' countenance would be! :rolleyes:




SOON TO BE VOTED 'PUNDIT OF THE YEAR' ? : QUOTE: "By next Thursday we will know from how the Petraeus-Crocker dog and pony show plays in the US Congress and media whether the Bush Regime will commit yet another war crime by attacking Iran".

[ helpful 'ORIENTATION' hint: people here who believe the below assessment is a "pure fabrication" because "everybody knows Petraeus is a congenital liar" are willfully blinkering their own capacity for direct observation. A very precarious state of mind to inflict upon oneself! Do a little elementary digging of the links between Iran and Hamas & Hezbollah, and then tell yourself this same "benign sponsor nation" has managed to resist the temptation to do some of the same "sponsoring" of the Shia splinter groups in Iraq. ]

Bottom line: No attack on Iran any time soon - but lots of justifiable exasperation

_________________

Petraeus Says Iranian-Backed Groups Are Greatest Threat to Iraq

By Nicholas Johnston and Tony Capaccio

April 9 (Bloomberg) -- Shiite militia groups backed by Iran are the greatest long-term threat to Iraq's stability, according to Army General David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq. The so-called ``special groups,'' which are funded, trained and armed by Iran, played a ``destructive role'' in the recent clashes between extremist militias and Iraqi government forces in Basra and Baghdad, Petraeus said.

``Iran has fueled the violence in a particularly damaging way,'' he told the House Armed Services Committee today in Washington, his second day of testimony to lawmakers. ``Unchecked, the `special groups' pose the greatest long-term threat to the viability of a democratic Iraq.''

Petraeus, testifying yesterday in the Senate and today in the House, said Iraq is too ``fragile'' to allow U.S. troop levels to fall below about 140,000 earlier than September. The general recommended a 45-day period of evaluation after the final brigade from last year's ``surge'' of troop reinforcements into Iraq is withdrawn in July. Only after that period should officials begin to consider further withdrawals, he said.

Petraeus said today that troop increases this year, if the security situation in Iraq deteriorates, are ``a remote thought'' because of progress he has seen with Iraqi security forces, especially an elite special operations brigade. The U.S. currently has more than 150,000 troops in Iraq. As of today, 4,017 U.S. personnel have died in Iraq since the conflict began in March 2003, and 29,676 Americans have been wounded, according to the Defense Department.

Assessing Withdrawal

In response to a question today from Committee Chairman Ike Skelton of Missouri, Petraeus said his commanders are reviewing four to five locations in Iraq that could be candidates for U.S. withdrawals after July.

``Over time,'' Petraeus said, ``I think all of'' the brigades will be withdrawn. ``The question is at what pace will that take place.''

The U.S. is withdrawing about 21,000 troops deployed last year to quell violence in Iraq, especially in Baghdad. In testimony yesterday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, criticized Iran for continuing to ``undermine the efforts of the Iraqi government to establish a stable, secure state.''

``At the same time, we support constructive relations between Iran and Iraq,'' Crocker said. ``Iran has a choice to make.''

Of Iran's 65 million people, about 90 percent are Shiite Muslim. About 60 percent of Iraq's 27 million people are Shiite, according to U.S. Central Intelligence Agency data. ``Iran has said publicly it will fill any vacuum in Iraq and extremist Shia militias would reassert themselves,'' Petraeus said yesterday and again today. ``We saw them try in Basra and Baghdad two weeks ago.''

Courting Iraq's Shiites

Crocker acknowledged yesterday that Iran has a relationship with every Shiite group in Iraq, not just Moqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army, which was the government's main adversary in the fighting in Basra. That includes the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council, one of Sadr's greatest rivals in the struggle for power in Iraq, Crocker told Senator Jack Reed, a Rhode Island Democrat.

``Iran has a dialogue with everyone'' in the Shiite community, Crocker said.

Petraeus told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee yesterday that he will provide further details about how closely some Iraqi militias are linked to Iranian groups and Lebanese Hezbollah. In response to a question about how to counter Iranian influence, Petraeus said much is being learned from detained members of the Iranian-backed special groups. That information soon will be discussed, he said.

``We'll lay that out, and we'll lay out the various weapons caches and other finds that we have had that, again, show the very, very clear involvement of Iran in Iraq,'' he said.

To contact the reporters on this story: Nicholas Johnston in Washington at njohnston3@bloomberg.net;

Last Updated: April 9, 2008 12:22 EDT

[Guest]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

My question to all the readers who may find news articles such as this one distasteful (because what they perceive here is merely shameful "neo-con Iran-baiting" or "Neo-Con Iran-Victimizing"). Question for you: Those of us who find your views are bending over backwards to accomodate this Iranian Premiere's mildly erratic public assertions (he is in fact "Iran's formal voice to the world" at present, no?), would appreciate it if you would consent to dig up some evidence here to exonerate Mr. Ahmedinejad of his latest (arguably slightly deranged) remarks.

A need to impose one's own vision over historical events and label it the "new reality" evidences a somewhat feverish state of mind.

If you fail to dig up evidence that Ahmedinejad never actually publicly stated any of these "quirky" views (he presumes he has the stature in the world to rewrite history and have the rest of us believe him on the strength of his charisma - i.e. no holocaust ever occurred, 09/11 never occurred) - what then is your view of the "rationality" of this Iranian Premier? Do you argue he is in fact "eminently rational", and the rest of us are the deluded parties, for trumpeting his personally hallucinated version of recent history to the world, in his capacity as premier of a very important ME nation?

Do these "policy statements" from the de-facto leader of the Shia world, represent any kind of potential international hazard? Is he adequately and cautiously fulfilling his duties as diplomatic and political leader of Iran? Yes? No? Maybe? Sooner or later, apologists for the "misunderstood Iran" thesis, and of the redoubtable Iranian Premier Ahmedinejad, will have to explain to the rest of us what this chap is "really saying", as he's leaving a good part of the global public in a state of considerable bewilderment and consternation.

_________

AHMEDINEJAD DENIES AL QUAEDA'S 9/11 ATTACK ON AMERICA

April 8, 2008, 3:35 PM (GMT+02:00)



In his most provocative anti-US speech to date, Iran’s president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad raised doubts about whether al Qaeda's Sept. 11, 2001 attack on New York actually took place. He was addressing Iran’s Nuclear Technology day, April 8, DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources report.

He went on to ask why the US had never released the names of the thousands of dead in the Trade Center attacks and how the most advanced security, intelligence and tracking devices in the world had failed to detect the hijackers’ planes before they struck the two New York towers.

Ahmadinejad is famous also for denying the Nazi Holocaust.

Announcing earlier that Iran had begun installing 6,000 new advanced (P2) centrifuges for uranium enrichment at Natanz, the Iranian president claimed his country’s nuclear program had passed the point of no-return technologically and politically. America is disintegrating politically, militarily and economically, according to Ahmadinejad, who boasted that Iran’s nuclear achievement is a turning-point in history that will change the international order prevailing since World War II. (???)

He asked why everyone jumps on Iran’s nuclear program when “a band of international pirates has stores crammed with nuclear bombs.”

DEBKAfile adds: By going full steam ahead with uranium enrichment, Iran is flouting three UN Security Council resolutions and standing fast against threats, sanctions and incentives offered by the West to halt a process capable of producing nuclear weapons.

Instead, Tehran is installing a new generation of advanced P2 centrifuges to replace the older P-1 machines and accelerate enrichment. He claims they are five times cheaper than the commercial machines.

The five Security Council members and Germany meet later this month for their umpteenth discussion on Iran’s nuclear activities. However, aside from “sweetening” their incentives package and tighter sanctions, they have run out of ideas for curbing Iran’s rapidly-advancing nuclear plans.

[Rajiv]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

JS tears the Patreaus report apart

[The Outback Oracle]

Re: Rumors: Iran bombing April 4th-6th

Thanks Metalman...I've written something similar on another thread. I am not quite as succinct as you!!
But...an individual can go anywhere on the web and get irrational, semi-rational, and, perhaps even occcasionally rational argument on political events. Frankly this place was a refuge for me.
Please, please, please...can't we go back a step!!!