Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on February 11, 2007, 12:41:48 PM
-
U.S. ties Iranian leader to bombs killing U.S. troops
POSTED: 2:17 p.m. EST, February 11, 2007
Story Highlights• NEW: U.S. shows evidence it says proves Iran behind deadly bombings
Adjust font size:
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The U.S. military Sunday presented evidence it says shows an elite Iranian force under the command of Iran's supreme leader is behind bombings that have killed at least 170 U.S. troops in Iraq.
U.S. officials have made general statements in the past year about Iranian involvement in Iraq, but haven't provided many details.
The charges came at a Baghdad briefing by a senior defense official, a senior defense analyst and an explosives expert, all of whom asked to remain unnamed.
The officials focused on EFPs, or explosively formed penetrators, as evidence that Iran is involved in arming Iraqi insurgents. EFPs can punch through heavily armored vehicles.
The U.S. military officials said EFPs are manufactured in such a specific way that they can be traced to Iran.
Also, the U.S. military says 81 mm mortar shells used in deadly attacks in Iraq can also be directly traced to Iran.
The U.S. military said the munitions are being provided to Shiite groups in Iraq by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard's Quds force, which answers directly to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The military officials said a senior operations officer for the Quds force was among several Iranian officers arrested in Irbil, Iraq, in the past few weeks.
According to the U.S. military, other Iranian officers have provided information that Iran also is arming a prominent Iraqi political organization.
The officers were detained during a December raid on the Baghdad compound of Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, a powerful Shiite political group with close ties to Iran.
The raid also netted documents that confirmed the arms sale, the U.S. military said.
Officials with the political organization said the munitions were used for security purposes. However, the U.S. military officials disputed that, saying the kind of mortars and sniper rifles provided are not used for self-defense.
Iranian U.N. ambassador claims 'fabricated evidence'
In an interview Friday with National Public Radio, Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations Javad Zarif said Iran has not provided weapons to Iraqi insurgents and does not want to do so.
"Iran has no interest in providing weapons to any insurgent groups in Iraq. But the problem is that the United States has decided on a policy and is trying to find or fabricate evidence if it cannot find one -- and I believe it hasn't been able to find an evidence -- in order to substantiate and corroborate that policy," he said.
"And that seems to be at the bottom of this problem, and it's an alarming problem because if you're looking for a crisis, then you're certainly not looking for solutions."
Some Iraq war critics are skeptical about the U.S. military's contention that Iran -- which has good diplomatic relations with Iraq -- is trying to foment warfare there.
They liken the Bush administration's highlighting of Iranian involvement in Iraq to the administration's run-up to the war in Iraq, contending officials are attempting a find a reason to invade Iran. The administration denies this.
Before the Iraq war, the administration warned that Saddam Hussein's regime harbored weapons of mass destruction and hinted of an operational link between al Qaeda terrorists and Iraq -- information never proven.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/02/11/iraq.main/index.html
-
If you don't think the scumbag Iranians aren't operating in the shadows in Iraq, then you're an idiot. I'd put my life on it.
-
If you don't think the scumbag Iranians aren't operating in the shadows in Iraq, then you're an idiot. I'd put my life on it.
Join the service if you wanna gamble your life on Bush war intel. 3100 already have, sadly.
We'll be invading Iran on March 28, according to a Russian parliamentary official.
-
Join the service if you wanna gamble your life on Bush war intel. 3100 alread have.
We'll be invading Iran on March 28, according to a Russian parliamentary official.
Could care less. I've believed for years now that it was only a matter of time before we went into Iran.
You don't think the Iranians aren't in Iraq operating in the shadows? Considering Iraq is the only other predominantly Shiite Islamic country in the middle east besides Iran, it's pretty obvious they're in there. It's foolish to think they aren't when they've been backing rebel groups in multiple countries for years now.
-
Could care less. I've believed for years now that it was only a matter of time before we went into Iran.
You don't think the Iranians aren't in Iraq operating in the shadows? Considering Iraq is the only other predominantly Shiite Islamic country in the middle east besides Iran, it's pretty obvious they're in there. It's foolish to think they aren't when they've been backing rebel groups in multiple countries for years now.
Sure. Every minute longer they keep US busy in iraq keeps us from invading them.
if someone invaded canada and mexicao and surrounded us and was doing black ops in the USA, YOUD BETTER BELIEVE we'd be aiding mx/can in their struggles. Why? Cause mex/can resources will be used against you once their ownership is transferred to the invaders.
-
Sure. Every minute longer they keep US busy in iraq keeps us from invading them.
if someone invaded canada and mexicao and surrounded us and was doing black ops in the USA, YOUD BETTER BELIEVE we'd be aiding mx/can in their struggles. Why? Cause mex/can resources will be used against you once their ownership is transferred to the invaders.
So what you're saying is that it's ok for their black op forces to be killing off American soldiers with their better weaponry they're bringing over and leading raids in broad daylight kidnapping soldiers, etc?
-
So what you're saying is that it's ok for their black op forces to be killing off American soldiers with their better weaponry they're bringing over and leading raids in broad daylight kidnapping soldiers, etc?
no, that's what berserk fury said.
i answered your question: "You don't think the Iranians aren't in Iraq operating in the shadows?" and explained their motivation.
In no way did I say it was "OK"
You addressed their actions and asked if I believed it. I said "sure" I believe it, and explained why they do it.
I never endorsed it.
-
no, that's what berserk fury said.
i answered your question: "You don't think the Iranians aren't in Iraq operating in the shadows?" and explained their motivation.
In no way did I say it was "OK"
You addressed their actions and asked if I believed it. I said "sure" I believe it, and explained why they do it.
I never endorsed it.
It sounds to me like you're justifying them coming over into Iraq and helping the Shiite militias to kill Iraqis and American forces because it's in their best interests. I look at as if the scumbags didn't have anything to hide and worry about us deciding to send them back to the stone ages, then they wouldn't have any reason being in Iraq.
Sounds an awful lot like someone justifying the killing of Americans because Iraq happens to be next door.
-
They don't really have a choice as they're surrounded on both side and the US has shunned them diplomacy wise.
-
It sounds to me like you're justifying them coming over into Iraq and helping the Shiite militias to kill Iraqis and American forces because it's in their best interests. I look at as if the scumbags didn't have anything to hide and worry about us deciding to send them back to the stone ages, then they wouldn't have any reason being in Iraq.
Sounds an awful lot like someone justifying the killing of Americans because Iraq happens to be next door.
It's not.
You're making a monster assumption. I would happily draw the glock and execute ten jihadists right now before you cleared your throat. I'm all for killing the fckers. Just explaining their actions from their POV.
It sounds to me like you're the kind of guy who likes to make shit up about people, not cool.
-
It's not.
You're making a monster assumption. I would happily draw the glock and execute ten jihadists right now before you cleared your throat. I'm all for killing the fckers. Just explaining their actions from their POV.
It sounds to me like you're the kind of guy who likes to make shit up about people, not cool.
I'm not making shit up. Guess I interpreted it the wrong way.
They don't really have a choice as they're surrounded on both side and the US has shunned them diplomacy wise.
And I wonder why they're shunned diplomacy wise? Iran, a country with more problems at home than they can count, trying to be a world superpower. They can't even fix the massive unemployment rates in their country, but they're willing to spend millions on massing fuel for bombs and threatening America. They're asking to be destroyed. Plain and simple.
By the way, rumors are saying a third US carrier is about to depart to join the other two in the Gulf.
-
berserker, throw out whether or not they deserve it.
Can the US afford a 3rd war?
(Also NKorea deserves it worse - they fired ICBMs directly at hawaii on the 4th of july!)
-
By the way, rumors are saying a third US carrier is about to depart to join the other two in the Gulf.
holy shit, really?
it's so weird that Bush can decide to start a war and neither congress, nor the will of the people can stop him.
-
berserker, throw out whether or not they deserve it.
Can the US afford a 3rd war?
(Also NKorea deserves it worse - they fired ICBMs directly at hawaii on the 4th of july!)
No, they can't. But I'm just pointing out why they're shunned in diplomatic relations. They're doing everything in their power to set them on track for having the living shit knocked out of them when they should stick to worrying about their problems in their own country.
I think Iran is more of a problem than NK. Isn't North Korea willing to abandon their nuke program now for financial aid?
holy shit, really?
it's so weird that Bush can decide to start a war and neither congress, nor the will of the people can stop him.
Yeah, it was mentioned in an online newsweek article I was just reading.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17086418/site/newsweek/
How credible it is, I don't know. Just pointing it out.
-
No, they can't. But I'm just pointing out why they're shunned in diplomatic relations. They're doing everything in their power to set them on track for having the living shit knocked out of them when they should stick to worrying about their problems in their own country.
Iran's president Adhmiedijad - he doesn't have the power to declare war, and his legislative branch is against it. he just says it cause he hates jews/usa, most of his people do, and it rallies his election base to keep his power.
Russia talked about destroying us for 40 years. We let them talk. Until someone acts, you can't just take them out.
-
I'm not making shit up. Guess I interpreted it the wrong way.
And I wonder why they're shunned diplomacy wise? Iran, a country with more problems at home than they can count, trying to be a world superpower. They can't even fix the massive unemployment rates in their country, but they're willing to spend millions on massing fuel for bombs and threatening America. They're asking to be destroyed. Plain and simple.
Well, they have reasons. Do you know about Mossadeg the former presiden of Iran? He tried to nationalize the Iranian oil industry that was controled by the US and British. What happened to him? The CIA and British intelligence remmoved him from power and appointed a murderous monarch to replace him. The US also sided with Saddam when he was gasing his own people mainly because he hated Iran. This is what lead to rising of the Ayatollah.
Maybe they wouldn't have reason to amass a nuclear arsenal if the US hadn't threatened them in the first place. Seems like the US loves Saudia Arabia and Pakistan, countries that have supported terrorists that have murdered many Americans. The Iranians haven't done us any harm, but we hate them anyways just because they don't want us meddling in their affairs.
-
Iran's president Adhmiedijad - he doesn't have the power to declare war, and his legislative branch is against it. he just says it cause he hates jews/usa, most of his people do, and it rallies his election base to keep his power.
Russia talked about destroying us for 40 years. We let them talk. Until someone acts, you can't just take them out.
Yeah, but Iran is operating in Iraq killing US operatives. If they get caught in the middle one mistake they make, shit's going to hit the fan. The thing with the Russians also, is that they were a much bigger superpower than Iran and we could've expected 100x more consequenes, deaths, costs if we were to attack Russia.
In Iran's local elections a couple months ago, most of Adhmiedijad's supporters lost their seats on the councils. Their public is fed up with him, also.
Well, they have reasons. Do you know about Mossadeg the former presiden of Iran? He tried to nationalize the Iranian oil industry that was controled by the US and British. What happened to him? The CIA and British intelligence remmoved him from power and appointed a murderous monarch to replace him. The US also sided with Saddam when he was gasing his own people mainly because he hated Iran. This is what lead to rising of the Ayatollah.
Maybe they wouldn't have reason to amass a nuclear arsenal if the US hadn't threatened them in the first place. Seems like the US loves Saudia Arabia and Pakistan, countries that have supported terrorists that have murdered many Americans. The Iranians haven't done us any harm, but we hate them anyways just because they don't want us meddling in their affairs.
Weren't we selling weapons to them in the 70's? They bring it on themselves. You stick your neck out acting like a bad boy and it's going to get cut. Plain and simple. They are doing harm. They're killing American forces in Iraq and just adding to the troubles there.
-
the Us will invade Iran, I have no doubt about that. They keep stalling the release, but there is a going to be a report from teh White House justifying it.
However, as the evidence is now showing that Buch/Cheney exaggerated thrat from iraq, would they do that with iran?
-
We were selling them weapons when the Shah was in power and he was a lapdog of the US. Once he was removed in a coup we basically put iran on our blacklist.
-
the Us will invade Iran, I have no doubt about that. They keep stalling the release, but there is a going to be a report from teh White House justifying it.
However, as the evidence is now showing that Buch/Cheney exaggerated thrat from iraq, would they do that with iran?
I'd say that I don't think they can because everyone is going to want hard proof after the Iraq debacle, but they do what they want. I think Iran needs to be wiped off the map eventually, just not now.
-
You sound like Iran's prez man.
-
You sound like Iran's prez man.
I don't like arabs. If that makes me sound like their president, so be it. Countries that lack the ability to fix their own economies, populace and other major issues should not be threatening superpowers and operating in other countries or funding militias.
-
I'm not making shit up. Guess I interpreted it the wrong way.
And I wonder why they're shunned diplomacy wise? Iran, a country with more problems at home than they can count, trying to be a world superpower. They can't even fix the massive unemployment rates in their country, but they're willing to spend millions on massing fuel for bombs and threatening America. They're asking to be destroyed. Plain and simple.
Umm... which country you talkin about again? I'm a little confused, your description could fit a number of nations. ;)
-
Umm... which country you talkin about again? I'm a little confused, your description could fit a number of nations. ;)
Ahh yes, the most powerful country in the world isn't a superpower. You should stick to talking about pyramid schemes and your GED, Jag. Our country's "unemployment" problems are nowhere near the levels of Iran's, which are up around 30% at this point in time. So don't bother filling this thread with your anti-American agenda you seem to have.
When you're some little shithole towelhead hole in the wall, you don't waste your time killing people in other countries when you have more problems than you can count at home.
-
We were selling them weapons when the Shah was in power and he was a lapdog of the US. Once he was removed in a coup we basically put iran on our blacklist.
No, you continued to sell Iran weapons to fight their war with Iraq, (despite your US led embrago against Iran, you continued to sell them weapons) ...just as you sold Iraq weapons to fight against Iran, ...prolonging the war and the mutual destruction of both countries. And all the profits were used to fund illegal wars, terrorists ummm, I mean "Freedom fighters" and death squads in Nicaragua.
-
No, you continued to sell Iran weapons to fight their war with Iraq, (despite your US led embrago against Iran, you continued to sell them weapons) ...just as you sold Iraq weapons to fight against Iran, ...prolonging the war and the mutual destruction of both countries. And all the profits were used to fund illegal wars, terrorists ummm, I mean "Freedom fighters" and death squads in Nicaragua.
Looks like we got another towelhead on board. ::)
-
Ahh yes, the most powerful country in the world isn't a superpower. You should stick to talking about pyramid schemes and your GED, Jag. Our country's "unemployment" problems are nowhere near the levels of Iran's, which are up around 30% at this point in time. So don't bother filling this thread with your anti-American agenda you seem to have.
Nice attempt at deflection, ...but no dice.
When you're some little shithole towelhead hole in the wall, you don't waste your time killing people in other countries when you have more problems than you can count at home.
Well if Bush and his warhawks have their way, ...I have a feeling your country will then have the opportunity to put your theory to the test. hopefully for your sake, the Dems will be in charge by then, and the attention will then be turned to fixing problems domestically before creating more foreign ones.
-
I don't like arabs. If that makes me sound like their president, so be it. Countries that lack the ability to fix their own economies, populace and other major issues should not be threatening superpowers and operating in other countries or funding militias.
Good! Now go tell that to Bush & Cheney! (if they'll listen to ya) :)
-
Nice attempt at deflection, ...but no dice.
Well if Bush and his warhawks have their way, ...I have a feeling your country will then have the opportunity to put your theory to the test. hopefully for your sake, the Dems will be in charge by then, and the attention will then be turned to fixing problems domestically before creating more foreign ones.
Nice deflection? When you're the most powerful country in the world and your influence is worldwide, you do what you want. When you're some primitive land of angry towelheads trying to emulate said country, you're in for trouble.
Looks like we got another towelhead on board. ::)
Bump.
-
Looks like we got another towelhead on board. ::)
Moi... a towelhead? Well... I have to confess I do wrap my head in a towel after washing my hair,
...but it's only for a few minutes before I blow dry. Does that count as a towelhead? ???
-
I'd say that I don't think they can because everyone is going to want hard proof after the Iraq debacle, but they do what they want. I think Iran needs to be wiped off the map eventually, just not now.
Actually -
Afghanistan - The United States NEVER provided the world with proof that Bin laden was behind 911. Condi went on Meet the Press and said a 'white paper' would be out shortly, telling the world why we were invading. it never came.
Iraq - The United States never had proof of WMD. UN team / hans blix was in there, and didn't find a thing. We promised we'd provide evidence and we never did.
Iran - The United States has "classified info" they can't release. But they do assure us it will come out eventually. Um, the last two wars show we'll never see it.
-
I don't like arabs. If that makes me sound like their president, so be it. Countries that lack the ability to fix their own economies, populace and other major issues should not be threatening superpowers and operating in other countries or funding militias.
So you don't like Arabs, then I gues you want the US out of Iraq? We don't have the right to be there in the first place. AND How do you expect them to react when their oil is being taken from them? You think they don't have the right to protest this? Especially when they never asked us for help in the first place.
So much for their new found democracy..
-
Here's the de-classified part of the National Intelligence Estimate that was released by the US government ~ 1 week ago (Feb 02, 2007 I believe): http://dni.gov/press_releases/20070202_release.pdf
The outlook is pretty grim. I wonder what was in the classified version?
-
Turns out one of the 6 Iranian's detained in January was the operation commander of the Quds force, Iran's black ops.