Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iran. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Iran needs to get a grip

Really Iran ? Really ? As if the US Navy would stop traveling through the Straits of Hormuz just because you said not to....Iran needs to get a Grip.

These fools need a reality check. Iran is not in the position to dictate where the US Navy travels. Old Beady Eyes and the Mullahs must be smoking some pretty powerful stuff if they think this type of "warning" will amount to a change in tactics from the US Navy.


UPDATE - The Pentagon on Tuesday pushed back on Iranian warnings against returning a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf.

"The deployment of U.S. military assets in the Persian Gulf region will continue as it has for decades," Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said in a statement sent to Yahoo News Tuesday. "These are regularly scheduled movements in accordance with our longstanding commitments to the security and stability of the region and in support of ongoing operations."

"The U.S. Navy operates under international maritime conventions to maintain a constant state of high vigilance in order to ensure the continued, safe flow of maritime traffic in waterways critical to global commerce," Little's statement continued. "We are committed to protecting maritime freedoms that are the basis for global prosperity; this is one of the main reasons our military forces operate in the region."

Bravo Zulu to our US Navy - To Iran, pound sand.



At end of drill, Iran army chief warns US aircraft carrier not to return to Persian Gulf

By Associated Press,Tuesday, January 3

TEHRAN, Iran — Iran’s army chief on Tuesday warned an American aircraft carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf in Tehran’s latest tough rhetoric over the strategic waterway.

Gen. Ataollah Salehi spoke as a 10-day Iranian naval exercise ended near the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Gulf. The drill was a show of strength at a time when Iranian officials have warned they could try to shut down the vital oil passage if the United States enacts tough new sanctions over Iran’s nuclear program.

“We recommend to the American warship that passed through the Strait of Hormuz and went to Gulf of Oman not to return to the Persian Gulf,” Salehi was quoted as saying by the state news agency IRNA.

Motives behind Salehi’s statement were not immediately clear.

He said Iran’s enemies have understood the message of the naval exercises, saying, “We have no plan to begin any irrational act but we are ready against any threat.”

The U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet has said that USS John C. Stennis and another vessel headed out from the Gulf and through the Strait of Hormuz last Tuesday, after a visit to Dubai’s Jebel Ali port. The Fleet did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Salehi’s comments.

On Thursday Iran said its surveillance planes and vessels recorded video and photographed a U.S. aircraft carrier during Iran’s ongoing navy drill near a strategic waterway in the Persian Gulf.

Gen. Shahrokh Shahram, an air defense commander, said Iranian forces had warned off several foreign aircraft that he claimed entered Iranian airspace during the drill. He said the craft left the airspace after warnings from Iranian air defense units. He did not say which country the aircraft belonged to.

Iran had said the sea maneuvers would cover a 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) stretch of water beyond the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, as well as parts of the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.

A leading Iranian lawmaker said Sunday the maneuvers served as practice for closing the strait if the West enacts sanctions blocking Iranian oil sales. Top Iranian officials made the same threat last week.

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Israel refuses to tell US its Iran intentions...and this should surprise anyone?

Iran should be concerned as when the Israelis stop talking, they are usually ready to let their actions speak for them. Old Beady Eyes (Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad,a.k.a. Whack-amin-nutjob) better sleep with one eye open. he might find his sleep being disturbed by the Israeli Air Force.

Then there is the issue of our President, making a fool of himself mouthing off about PM Netanyahu to France's Sarkozy. Our President embarrassed our country and that is all the ammunition that Iran needs. Here is a good overview, and when it actually happens, we shouldn't be surprised as ISRAEL doesn't play around. If you don't believe that, ask Syria or Iraq. They found out the hard way.

Israel refuses to tell US its Iran intentions
Israel has refused to reassure President Barack Obama that it would warn him in advance of any pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear capabilities, raising fears that it may be planning a go-it-alone attack as early as next summer
.

By Adrian Blomfield, UK Telegraph in Jerusalem
7:49PM GMT 12 Nov 2011

The US leader was rebuffed last month when he demanded private guarantees that no strike would go ahead without White House notification, suggesting Israel no longer plans to "seek Washington's permission", sources said. The disclosure, made by insiders briefed on a top-secret meeting between America's most senior defence chief and Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel's hawkish prime minister, comes amid concerns that Iran's continuing progress towards nuclear weapons capability means the Jewish state has all but lost hope for a diplomatic solution.

On Tuesday, UN weapons inspectors released their most damning report to date into Iran's nuclear activities, saying for the first time that the Islamic republic appeared to be building a nuclear weapon. It was with that grave possiblity in mind that Leon Panetta, the US defence secretary, flew into Israel last month on what was ostensibly a routine trip.

Officially, his brief was restricted to the Middle East peace process, but the most important part of his mission was a private meeting with Mr Netanyahu and the defence minister, Ehud Barak. Once all but a handful of trusted staff had left the room, Mr Panetta conveyed an urgent message from Barack Obama. The president, Mr Panetta said, wanted an unshakable guarantee that Israel would not carry out a unilateral military strike against Iran's nuclear installations without first seeking Washington's clearance.

The two Israelis were notably evasive in their response, according to sources both in Israel and the United States.

"They did not suggest that military action was being planned or was imminent, but neither did they give any assurances that Israel would first seek Washington's permission, or even inform the White House in advance that a mission was underway," one said.

Alarmed by Mr Netanyahu's noncommittal response, Mr Obama reportedly ordered the US intelligence services to step up monitoring of Israel to glean clues of its intentions.

What those intentions might be remains distinctly murky. Over the past fortnight, Israel's press has given every impression that the country is on a war footing, with numerous claims that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Barak are lobbying the cabinet to support the military option.

Two weeks ago Israel tested a long-range ballistic missile capable of reaching Iran, its first since 2008. Shortly before, the Israeli airforce took part in Nato exercises in Sardinia that involved air-to-air refuelling, a key component of an aerial strike on Iran. A separate exercise in and around Tel Aviv tested civilian readiness in the event of a missile strike against the city. In a sign of the febrility of the public mood, many beach-goers apparently mistook the air raid sirens for a genuine Iranian attack and fled in panic for their cars. There were similar jitters in Iran yesterday, when a huge but apparently accidental explosion at arms dump outside Tehran killed at least 27 soldiers and shook the city.

Speculation about an imminent Israeli military action has been a regular occurrence over the years, but rarely as fevered as now. Last week, a British official even suggested that an attack could come before Christmas.

Few in Israel believe that is likely and the difficulty of mounting an operation over winter, when cloud cover hampers aircraft targeting systems, means that if military action is being considered it will not come before the spring or summer of next year.

Many observers also believe that the bellicose rhetoric voiced by a number of senior Israeli figures in recent days is largely bluff, designed to goad the international community into imposing sanctions of such severity that Iran would be forced into economic ruin if it persisted with its nuclear ambitions. Israel says that if Iran's central bank were sanctioned and a ban on Iranian oil exports enforced by an international naval blockade, military action would not be necessary.

Mr Barak has already publicly stated that he does not believe the West can overcome Russian and Chinese opposition to the sanctions Israel wants, leaving military action increasingly as the only alternative.

Mr Netanyahu may have another reason to bluff. In recent months, Meir Dagan, who retired as director of Mossad at the beginning of the year, has made a series of unprecedented speeches countenancing against Israeli military action - describing it as "the stupidest idea I've ever heard".

His comments have infuriated the Israeli establishment - senior officials have said they would like to see him behind bars - because they fear it could convince Iran's Mullahs that Israel's sporadic talk of war is a fiction.

Hints by Mr Netanyahu that he is considering the military option may be designed to resurrect Iran's paranoia of Israel, something seen in the Jewish state as a powerful deterrent, says Yossi Melman, a leading intelligence analyst and journalist.

"Meir Dagan made a laughing stock of military action," Mr Melman said. "Netanyahu believes he damaged the deterrent and he wants to repair it."

Yet the fact that Mr Dagan chose to speak out - extraordinary in itself for a just-retired Mossad chief - suggests that he believes Mr Netanyahu is intent on attacking Iran.

Tellingly, until last year, Israel's four most powerful military and security chiefs, including Mr Dagan, were all strongly opposed to military action. All four have now been replaced by younger men who may be less able to stand up to Mr Netanyahu, not that Israeli prime ministers are necessarily bound to heed objections from their top military advisers anyway. In 1981, Menachem Begin did just that when he bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor at Osirak.

If Israel is to attack Iran, many in the country believe time is running out. Last week's report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) highlighted Iran's apparent determination to build a nuclear warhead, but did not indicate how long it might take.

Some in Israel, however, believe it is very close.

"It is my personal opinion that, if the Iranian regime decides to do so, it can produce a nuclear explosive device within a year, plus or minus a few months," said Ephraim Asculai, a former IAEA official and leading Israeli expert on Iran's nuclear programme.

Not everyone agrees. Some argue that a covert espionage operation has caused such delays that Iran still needs another three years to build a bomb. Sabotage efforts by Israeli, American and British intelligence have successfully slowed Iranian progress, most notably via the Stuxnet computer virus that caused the centrifuges at Iran's Natanz uranium enrichment plant to explode. Mossad agents on motorbikes are also believed to have planted magnetic explosives on the cars of at least two key Iranian nuclear scientists as they weaved through Tehran's traffic jams. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the scientist and Revolutionary Guards officer who is thought to be the ultimate mastermind of the nuclear programme, is now believed to be under round-the-clock protection as a result. But, whatever the time frame, some in Israel believe there is additional cause for urgency that could prompt military action sooner rather than later.

According to western intelligence assessments, Tehran is preparing to move the bulk of its nuclear production to a plant beneath a mountain near the holy city of Qom that would be far harder to hit from the air.

According to Ronen Bergman, senior military analyst for Israel's Yediot Ahronot newspaper and the author of a forthcoming book on Mossad, that makes a strike necessary well before Iran actually perfects its programme.

"Today Israeli intelligence talks of what is known as the 'framework of immunity'," he said. "In other words, it is not the point at which Iran acquires a nuclear device, but the point at which the project has reached such an advanced stage that a strike any time after would be ineffective."

An Israeli attack could probably manage at most a dozen targets, using more than 100 F-15 and F-16 aircraft.

Three German-designed Dolphin submarines equipped with conventional cruise missiles could also be ordered into the Persian Gulf to take part, although it is thought that Israel's Jericho-3 ballistic missiles are to inaccurate to play a role.

But how effective the mission would be is another matter. At best, Israel can hope to delay Iran from building a bomb by two to four years, experts assess. Optimists hope that within such a period, Iran's Islamist regime could collapse and give may to a more moderate government. But it could equally redouble its nuclear efforts, this time arguing that it now had every right to produce a weapon.

As Mr Panetta warned during a Pentagon briefing last Thursday, such a strike would also have a "serious impact" on the region. Iran could blockade the Straits of Hormuz, through which 25 per cent of the world's oil exports are shipped, sending energy prices soaring. US military assets in the Gulf could come also come under attack from Iranian Scud missiles.

Iran would almost certainly fire its Shahab ballistic missiles at Israeli cities and press Hizbollah and Hamas, the militant Islamist groups it funds and equips, to unleash their huge rocket arsenals from their bases in Lebanon and Gaza.

Despite this, last week Mr Barak - making a rare venture in such sensitive territory - predicted that fewer than 500 fatalities would arise "if people stayed at home".

Such are both the political and military risks involved that many Israelis say it is inconceivable that Mr Netanyahu would go to war without the United States alongside him.

"I think personally that if such action is taken, there will be come kind of consultation with the United States," said Ilan Mizrahi, Mossad's former deputy director and Israel's national security adviser until 2007.

"If Iran breaks all the rules, then military action will be needed, but definitely not alone by a tiny country like Israel," added Uzi Eilam, a retired general who held senior positions at the Israeli defence ministry.

But not everyone is so sure. Mr Obama's willingness to take on Iran militarily is openly questioned in Israel. And while many Israelis do not believe Iran has any intention of actually firing a nuclear missile at them, the the key question is whether their prime minister is one of them.

In Mr Netanyahu's eyes, Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is another "Hitler" whose aim is to complete what the Holocaust failed to do by wiping out the Jewish race.

"People outside Israel don't understand how profound memories of the Holocaust are, and how they affect future policy making," said Mr Bergman, the military analyst. "At the end of the day, this policy of 'never again' would dictate Israel's behaviour when intelligence comes through that Iran has come close to a bomb."

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Iranian Admiral says Iran could deploy navy near U.S. coast

We in the US have a message for the Mullahs and Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari of the Iranian Navy -

" Hey, you got some real nice ships there.....It would be shame if something was to happen to them...It's a big ocean and terrible things happen to ships out there all the time..."

Translation - C'mon over to our side of the pond....The US Navy would love some live fire practice.


Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast
September 27, 2011
Reuters

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran raised the prospect on Tuesday of sending military ships close to the United States' Atlantic coast, in what would be a major escalation of tensions between the long-standing adversaries.

"Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders," the head of the Navy, Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said, according to the official IRNA news agency.

Speaking at a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the start of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, Sayyari gave no details of when such a deployment could happen or the number or type of vessels to be used.

The declaration comes just weeks after Turkey said it would host a NATO early warning radar system which will help spot missile threats from outside Europe, including potentially from Iran. The decision has angered Tehran which had enjoyed close relations with Ankara.

And it comes a few months after Iran sent warships through the Suez canal, after the fall of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the first time the Islamic Republic had deployed navy vessels in the Mediterranean.

The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to stop it getting nuclear weapons. Tehran denies it is developing nuclear arms saying its atomic program is for purely peaceful purposes.

Iran has dismissed the threats, warning that it will respond by hitting U.S. interests in the Gulf and Israel if any such attack happened.

Analysts say Tehran could retaliate by launching hit-and-run strikes in the Gulf and by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway where about 40 percent of all traded oil passes.

The Islamic state often launches military drills in the country to display its military capabilities amid persistent speculation about a possible U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities

Wednesday, August 3, 2011

And the hits just keep on coming....More Pain at the Pump as IRAN now controls OPEC

More of what we DON'T need.

Gasoline was $1.86 in January 2009 when the Doofus in the White House took over and now it averages DOUBLE that in the range of $3.70 - 3.80+ a gallon. Well we all know that the President campaigned that he would deal with the Oil companies....RIGHT. The "Pain at the Pump" is now twice as bad as it was in 2009 and for many families, that means doing w/o other items because we have to put more in the tank....Don't forget winter will be rolling around in a few months so the pain will be trying to keep your home warm also.

Now there's this piece of pissa news - Iranian President Whack-amin-Nutjob and his pals are in control of OPEC.

But then again, POTUS made sure he apologized to the world for all the terrible things we have allegedly done...what a PUTZ.

The "Bad Guys" overseas don't give a rat's arse for apologies, they only recognize dealing from a position of strength. They see apologies like the ones that POTUS has made as a sign of weakness and lack of will to defend yourself.

As Tom Cruise's character said in A FEW GOOD MEN, " And the hits just keep on coming.."


POTUS won't have to worry about any of this as he & his minions are on the government dole for the rest of their lives....The pain will be borne by the rest of the 250 million Americans who try to earn a paycheck & don't have the US Government picking up the tab for everything.


Iran revolutionary guards commander becomes new president of Opec
Rostam Ghasemi joins Ahmadinejad cabinet as oil minister, automatically making him head of global oil organisation

Saeed Kamali Dehghan guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 03AUG2011


A commander of Iran's revolutionary guards has taken over presidency of Opec.

A senior Iranian revolutionary guards commander targeted by international sanctions has taken over the presidency of Opec after he became Iran's oil minister on Wednesday.

Rostam Ghasemi, head of the Khatam al-Anbia military and industrial base, was one of four ministersnominated by president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to join his cabinet last week and approved by Iran's conservative-dominated parliament.

Ghasemi is currently subject to US, EU and Australian sanctions and his assets have been blacklisted by US Treasury and western powers. He took 216 votes from the 246 deputies present in the 290-seat parliament.

Iranian state media interpreted the vote as a reaction by Iran's parliament to international sanctions against the country, especially those which have targeted the revolutionary guards and the country's nuclear programme.

"The clever and decisive vote of Iranian MPs for engineer Ghasemi to become the oil minister is a meaningful and crucial response to the attacks against the guards from the west's media empire," said Ramedan Sharif, the head of the revolutionary guards public relations' unit, in quotes carried by Iran's semi-official Fars news agency.

In a parliamentary debate before the vote, however, Ali Motahari, a prominent conservative MP who has previously threatened to impeach Ahmadinejad, spoke out against the involvement of the revolutionary guards in Iran's politics.

"The integration of the guard, as a military force, in political and economic power is not in the interests of the system," Motahari told the parliament. "In neighboring countries, military officials are distancing themselves from politics and power, while it's the opposite in Iran."

The appointment of Ghasemi as Iran's oil minister automatically makes him the head of Opec which has a crucial role in determining oil prices.

As its second-largest crude oil exporter, Iran took the presidency of Opec after 36 years last October and Ghasemi's position will give the revolutionary guards a unique opportunity to influence an international organisation.

Monday, July 18, 2011

Iran's parliament passes a bill criminalizing dog ownership - One more sign that the Mullahs have their heads stuck up their own Six


Jeffrey Massoon in his article " Dogs never lie about love" writes this about our best friend, The Dog:

"...no other species has ever indicated that it regularly prefers the company of a human to that of members of its own species, with the single exception of the dog. While we have domesticated many animals, only the dog has domesticated us. The dog chooses us, not because it is confused about our identity, not because dogs think we are the marvel of creation, but merely because dogs love us. It is such an amazing fact, and so counterintuitive (so profoundly unlovable do we think we are) that almost nobody can accept it as fact. Dogs love us not only because we feed them, or walk them, or groom them, or protect them, but because we are fun. How astonishing! "

Man and our K-9 Friends made an unwritten agreement about 15000 years ago. We would provide them warmth, shelter and easy access to food - In return, they would protect us from the dangerous things in the dark that wanted to have us for dinner. This "pact" is likley the longest unbroken agreement in the history of mankind.

So, when you come across a segment of our species that mistreats our K-9 friends, calls them "unclean" and further outlaws having a K-9 in your home, it makes me wonder if those folks have a major screw loose. The common-folk in Iran have obviously figured out that the Dog is a perfect companion but the Mullahs and their farked-up version of reality are in serious need of a "check-up from the neck up"

I have serious issues with any group that doesn't recognize our 4-legged companions for what they are...Man's best friend.

A Craze for Pooches in Iran Dogs the Morality Police
Western TV Makes Owning Pups Fashionable, Despite Ayatollah's Fatwa
Farnaz Fassihi/The Wall Street Journal

Iranians have turned to the Internet to organize antigovernment protests. Now they're flocking online to defy another Islamic Republic edict: buying and selling dogs.

Pooch lovers in Iran are clicking on popular websites like Woof Woof Iran Digital Pets and Persianpet to pick their favorite canine, study dog grooming or swap pet tales.

Buying and selling dogs is illegal in Iran, unless they are guard dogs or used by police. Dogs are considered "haram," or unclean, in Islam. Until recently, keeping dogs as pets was limited to a small circle of Westernized Iranians.

But access to satellite television—and American programs depicting families playing with pups—has turned dog ownership into a sign of social status in Iran.

"It's the latest fashion now to buy each other puppies as birthday gifts," says Amin, a 25-year-old. He had never pet a dog until traveling to a village two hours outside Tehran to obtain a German Shepherd puppy.

Authorities are striking back. Last year, Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi issued a fatwa, or religious edict, denouncing dog ownership. In April, Iran's parliament passed a bill to criminalize dog ownership, declaring the phenomenon a sign of "vulgar Western values."

This summer, so-called morality police are cruising the streets looking to enforce the anti-dog law. The punishment varies from a fine of up to $500 if the dog is seen in a public space to temporarily confiscating cars and suspending drivers' licenses if the dog isn't contained in a carrier inside the car.

To evade detection, pooch owners are resorting to middle-of-the-night walks and driving hours to the countryside just so their pets can roam. Vendors charge the equivalent of up to $10,000 for top dogs and operate so covertly that some blindfold potential buyers en route to the kennel.

"It was crazy," says Ali Shekouri, a 32-year-old businessman who pursued three dicey strategies before obtaining a local beagle. "After a while I didn't know if I was buying a dog or dealing in an international drug trade."

When Mr. Shekouri set out to buy a puppy last year, a friend first took him to a small electronics shop in downtown Tehran near the grand bazaar. In actuality, it was a front for a middle-aged man selling dogs. After enduring a one-hour intense interview to make sure he wasn't an undercover cop, Mr. Shekouri was whisked away in a car to the kennel's secret location. During the ride, he says, he was blindfolded. He didn't find a pet he liked.

Mr. Shekouri then turned to the Internet for his puppy hunt. A quick Google search provided over a dozen domestic websites scattered across Iran from Rasht, a coastal city in the north, to the southern city of Ahwaz.

The Rashtpet website offers puppies from a database of photos. First the buyer must wire a payment—between $500 and $10,000 depending on the breed—into a bank account. Then the illicit pet is delivered within two weeks by a truck driver who hides the dog amid the cargo, according to Mr. Shekouri and the website.

The Petpars website promises a puppy equipped with a faux international passport hand-carried from Ukraine via a flight passenger. Mr. Shekouri says he was told he would receive his puppy in the arrival lounge of Tehran's international airport. Fed up with the hassle, he eventually settled for a beagle from a local breeder.

Dog-selling websites like Rashtpet and Petpars confirm they import dogs by paying traveling Iranians to act as illicit couriers and claim the puppies are their own. While importing dogs for sale is illegal, passengers are allowed to bring personal pets in on commercial flights.

The flight from Ukraine to Tehran has been nicknamed "the puppy flight" because many of its passengers, mostly university students, are carrying puppies for sale, according to several pet website owners who import from Ukraine.

When airport authorities caught on last year, they increased the tax on importing pets from $50 to $800, according to sellers. Some dog vendors diverted their operation so dogs are transported from Ukraine to Armenia and Turkey and from there smuggled in the cargo section of tour buses and trucks returning to Iran, vendors say.

"We have a large and very capable network expanding from Iran to Europe and beyond to help unite Iranians with dogs," says the 30-year-old owner of Petpars, who asked that his name not be published.

Sanaz, an art student in Tehran, bought a St. Bernard puppy from a student coming from Moscow. Now the dog is the size of a small pony and she doesn't know what to do with it in her small apartment given the restrictions on walking dogs in public.

On the entrance to many of Tehran's parks and neighborhood gardens, a municipality sign reads: "Pets (dogs…) are absolutely prohibited from entering the park."

"I used to take him out for walks but the police have stopped me several times and threatened to confiscate him, so I just take him to the roof of our apartment building now and pray he doesn't bark," says Sanaz, who, like many owners, declined to use her surname for fear of having her pooch confiscated.

Milad, a 24-year-old owner of a white terrier, had a harrowing run-in with the morality police. He was driving home in Tehran with the dog in the front seat from a friend's house when a police car spotted him and signaled for him to pull over. He refused and, he says, the police chased him to the door of his house. He opened the car door to let the dog escape but an officer jumped out and pulled a gun on the dog, he says.

"I threw myself on my dog and said, 'You have to shoot me before you kill him,'" Milad says. A group of neighbors came out to defend him and, he says, eventually the police backed off from killing or confiscating the dog. But they suspended Milad's driver's license for six months and took his car for three months.

Write to Farnaz Fassihi at farnaz.fassihi@wsj.com

Saturday, July 2, 2011

" And the hits just keep on coming...." - Iran Funnels New Weapons to Iraq and Afghanistan

Our President, the feckless "Empty Suit", has called for troop reductions in Afghanistan against the advice of his military advisers. His desire is to claim victory and reduce the troop levels in a purely political move to curry favor in the face of his re-election efforts.

Meanwhile, our enemies in the regions, specifically IRAN have continued to supply the Taliban and others with newer sophisticated weapons. Their goal is to assist in the infliction of as many US Military casualties as possible as they know that will drive public sentiment against continued support for Afghanistan.


Based on what we are seeing, President Doofus has made the Iranians and the Taliban very happy by doing exactly what they wanted him to do. The sooner we fold up shop here, the sooner they can go back to running things like they do, terrorizing the population of Afghanistan and providing a base for their brand of terrorism.

For once, I wish the American public would get over the idea of instant results and understand that the people who place themselves as our enemies are not as hung up on polls and what others think. They have one desire and that is the defeat of the West. By acting the way he has, our President emboldens them.

Jack Kennedy's words from 1961 somehow seem very appropriate - " Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger.....If you are awaiting a finding of "clear and present danger," then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear and its presence has never been more imminent. " - President John F. Kennedy, Address to the American Newspaper Publishers, 27 April 1961

I wonder if anyone will understand before it is too late. If we fail at this effort, our position in the defense of the western world will be imperilled seriously and irrevocably.

Iran Funnels New Weapons to Iraq and Afghanistan
By JAY SOLOMON - Wall Street Journal

TEHRAN—Iran's elite military unit, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, has transferred lethal new munitions to its allies in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent months, according to senior U.S. officials, in a bid to accelerate the U.S. withdrawals from these countries.

The Revolutionary Guard has smuggled rocket-assisted exploding projectiles to its militia allies in Iraq, weapons that have already resulted in the deaths of American troops, defense officials said. They said Iranians have also given long-range rockets to the Taliban in Afghanistan, increasing the insurgents' ability to hit U.S. and other coalition positions from a safer distance.

Such arms shipments would escalate the shadow competition for influence playing out between Tehran and Washington across the Middle East and North Africa, fueled by U.S. preparations to draw down forces from two wars and the political rebellions that are sweeping the region.

The U.S. is wrestling with the aftermath of uprisings against longtime Arab allies from Tunisia to Bahrain, and trying to leave behind stable, friendly governments in Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran appears to be trying to gain political ground amid the turmoil and to make the U.S. withdrawals as quick and painful as possible.

"I think we are likely to see these Iranian-backed groups continue to maintain high attack levels" as the exit date nears, Maj. Gen. James Buchanan, the U.S. military's top spokesman in Iraq, said in an interview. "But they are not going to deter us from doing everything we can to help the Iraqi security forces."

In June, 15 U.S. servicemen died in Iraq, the highest monthly casualty figure there in more than two years. The U.S. has attributed all the attacks to Shiite militias it says are are trained by the Revolutionary Guards, rather than al Qaeda or other Sunni groups that were the most lethal forces inside Iraq a few years ago.

In Afghanistan, the Pentagon has in recent months traced to Iran the Taliban's acquisition of rockets that give its fighters roughly double the range to attack North Atlantic Treaty Organization and U.S. targets. U.S. officials said the rockets' markings, and the location of their discovery, give them a "high degree" of confidence that they came from the Revolutionary Guard's overseas unit, the Qods Force.

U.S. defense officials are also increasingly concerned that Iran's stepped-up military activities in the Persian Gulf could inadvertently trigger a clash. A number of near misses involving Iranian and allied ships and planes in those waters in recent months have caused Navy officials to call for improved communication in the Gulf.

Iran's assertive foreign policy comes amid a growing power struggle between President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Many of the president's closest aides have been detained on alleged corruption charges in recent weeks, raising questions as to whether Mr. Ahmadinejad will serve out his term.U.S. and European officials also say Iran has grown increasingly aggressive in trying to influence the political rebellions across the Middle East and North Africa. Tehran is alleged to have dispatched military advisers to Syria to help President Bashar al-Assad put down a popular uprising.

In recent months, according to U.S. officials, Iran has also increased its intelligence and propaganda activities in Egypt, Bahrain and Yemen, countries where pro-U.S. leaders have either fallen or come under intense pressure.

Iranian officials denied in interviews and briefings this week that the Revolutionary Guard played any role in arming militants in Iraq and Afghanistan. They charged the U.S. with concocting these stories to justify maintaining an American military presence in the region.

"This is the propaganda of the Americans. They are worried because they have to leave Iraq very soon, according to the plan," said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast. "They are better off going home and sorting out their own domestic problems."

Iranians officials have also accused the U.S. and Israel of interfering in Iranian affairs, including assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists and supporting opposition groups. The U.S. and Israel have denied this.

In recent weeks, Iran's leadership invited the presidents of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq to Tehran to discuss regional affairs. Senior Iranian officials made it clear during those meetings that they wanted an accelerated exit of American forces from the region.

"Americans want to have permanent bases in Afghanistan, and this is dangerous because the real security will not be established as long as the American military forces are present," Ayatollah Khamenei told Afghan President Hamid Karzai last week, according to Iranian state media.

Iraq has in recent years been a proxy battlefield for the U.S. and Iran. U.S. officials in Iraq said the Qods Force is training and arming three primary militias that have in recent months attacked U.S. and Iraqi forces. Kata'ib Hezbollah, or Brigades of the Party of God, is viewed as the one most directly taking orders from Revolutionary Guard commanders in Iran. Two others, the Promise Day Brigade and Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq, are offshoots of the Mahdi Army headed by the anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, who currently lives in Iran.

Over the past six months, Kata'ib Hezbollah has escalated attacks on U.S. forces employing weapons called IRAMs, or improvised rocket-assisted munitions. The weapons are often propane tanks packed with hundreds of pounds of explosives and powered by rockets. Militiamen launch the weapons from the backs of flatbed trucks.

Kata'ib Hezbollah claimed credit for a June 6 IRAM attack that killed six American troops at Camp Victory, near Baghdad International Airport. This week, three more Americans were killed when an IRAM struck a desert base just a few miles from the Iranian border in Iraq's Wasit Province, according to U.S. officials.

"We believe the militias see themselves as in competition with each other," said Gen. Buchanan. "They want to claim credit for making us leave Iraq."

The U.S. believes Iranian involvement in Afghanistan is significantly lower than in Iraq. But U.S. officials said they have seen clear evidence that the Revolutionary Guard has transferred longer-range rockets to elements of the Taliban that significantly enhance their ability to target U.S. and other NATO forces.

In February, British forces intercepted a shipment of four dozen 122-millimeter rockets moving through Afghanistan's desolate Nimruz Province near the Iranian and Pakistan borders. The rockets have an estimated range of about 13 miles, more than double the distance of the majority of the Taliban's other rockets.

"It was the first time we've seen that weapon," said a senior U.S. defense official in Afghanistan. "We saw that as upping the ante a bit from the kind of support we've seen in the past."

U.S. officials stressed that most of Iran's influence in Afghanistan is channeled through "soft power"—business, aid and diplomacy. But these officials said the deployment of more U.S. and NATO forces along the Afghan-Iranian border as part of the Obama administration's Afghanistan "surge" appears to have raised Iran's sense of insecurity.

These officials said Iran's support for the Taliban appears to wax and wane in relation to how successful Washington and NATO appear to be in stabilizing Afghanistan. Shiite-majority Iran has traditionally viewed the Taliban, a Sunni group, with trepidation. The two sides nearly fought a war in 1998 after the Taliban executed Iranian diplomats based in the central Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif.

"They're supporting the Taliban because they want us out of here," said the U.S. official in Afghanistan. "If we're making gains, I can see them upping their support. If they're making gains, they'll probably stay quiet."

In large part because of the growing wariness over Iran's backing of Shiite militias in Iraq, the U.S. is considering altering its withdrawal plans from the country, say administration and defense officials.

All U.S. forces are due to depart at the end of the year, but senior American officials have hinted loudly that they would like Baghdad to ask the U.S. to keep a viable force in the country beyond that date. Some administration and military officials have talked about retaining 10,000 troops in Iraq.

Military officials and defense analysts cite Iran as a prime justification for extending the U.S. presence. They say Iran is trying to use its military, which is much more powerful than Iraq's, and Shiite proxy militias inside Iraq to pressure Baghdad to maintain close ties with Tehran.

Adm. William McRaven, the administration's nominee to lead Special Operations Command, told a Senate panel this week that he favors keeping a commando force in Iraq that would be available to counter threats.

—Julian E. Barnes contributed to this article.
Write to Jay Solomon at jay.solomon@wsj.com

Sunday, September 5, 2010

Taliban paid bounties for kills by Iranian sources - The Sunday Times of London


The knowledge detailed in this news report from The Sunday London Times that Iran is funding the Taliban in such an open and obvious manner is unsettling. Either our present Leadership (Military & White House) are planning an over arching strike on Afghanistan based Iranian Spy networks, hopefully also hastening the downfall of the present Iranian government, thereby ending this funding of the Taliban OR they are so hapless they have not a G-D clue as to what to do, which means we have placed our defense in the hands of a White House that couldn't fight it's way out of a bar-fight, let alone a serious global conflict. If the latter is the issue, it amounts to dereliction of duty by those who are charged with our defense. If the former is being planned, then let it begin sooner rather than later and end the lives of these soulless bastards killing innocents & our soldiers.

The inference here is not regarding our military fighting men & women, who are both valiant & excellent at their chosen profession, but rather the Leadership at the top in the 5-sided Wind Tunnel across the Potomac and the Doofus Empty Suit-in-Charge who is on perpetual campaign-mode or vacation.....I can't remember which.

I am all for taking the fight to the enemy, to hit them where they stand and make them regret the day they decided to take up arms against us. Once again, I must defer to Sir Winston Churchill, who had more knowledge of what to do in these situations in his weakest moments than the whole of all the idiots in WASH DC have combined. His words are important as the Bastards we are fighting mean us no less harm than Hitler & Tojo did in the 40's...They wish to see us & the rest of the free world subjugated to their will.....

" You ask, What is our policy? I will say; “It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy.”


You ask, What is our aim? I can answer with one word: Victoryvictory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival. "

Sir Winston Churchill

----------------------------------------------

Taliban paid bounties for kills
Sunday London Times

IRANIAN companies in Kabul are using their offices to covertly finance Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.

They are paying bounties of $US1000 ($1090) for killing a US soldier and $US6000 for destroying a military vehicle, a treasurer for the insurgents says.

Afghan intelligence and Taliban sources said at least five front companies, set up in the past six months, provide cash for a network of district Taliban treasurers to pay battlefield expenses and bonuses for killing foreign troops and destroying their vehicles.

The Iranian companies win contracts to supply materials and logistics to Afghans involved in reconstruction. The money often comes in the form of aid from foreign donors.

The profits are transferred through poorly regulated Afghan banks - including the Kabul Bank, which is partly owned by President Hamid Karzai's brother, Mahmood - to Tehran and Dubai.

From these countries, the money returns to Afghanistan through the informal Islamic banking system known as hawala to be dispersed to the Taliban fighters.

"This means the companies involved in funding the insurgency can cover their tracks easily. It makes it harder for us to trace the cashflow," a senior Afghan intelligence officer said.

He said the Iranian companies had been formed with the intention of winning contracts funded by foreign aid so the donors' cash could be channelled into the insurgency.

Western officials believe the network may have been set up by the al-Quds force, an elite branch of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guard.

The Iranian embassy in Kabul refused to respond to the claims. But one Taliban treasurer confirmed that Iran was paying bonuses of $US1000 for killing a US soldier and $US6000 for destroying a US military vehicle.

Nobody would have noticed the Taliban treasurer's arrival at an office in Kabul with his assistant in tow: he had dressed in Western clothes and clipped his beard to avoid attracting attention. Directed to a small room furnished with a single table and chair, he was told to wait.

Ten minutes later, he was joined by a smartly suited Iranian businessman carrying a briefcase full of cash.

The treasurer lifted one bundle of notes after another from the case, counting $US18,000 in all. Then he wrapped the money carefully in old clothes and stuffed the bundles into a large sack of flour.

He left the office of the Iranian construction company as unobtrusively as he had come and jumped into a taxi.

After 20 minutes, his assistant emerged into the early August sunshine with the sack, hailing a cab of his own.

The two men met on the outskirts of the capital for their journey home to the neighbouring province of Wardak. There, they handed out the cash to Taliban commanders.

It was the commanders' eagerly awaited reward for killing several Afghan and foreign soldiers when they blew up two local army pick-up trucks and an US armoured vehicle on July 12.

According to the treasurer, he has picked up almost $86,000 in bonuses from the Iranian company in the past six months.

Even larger sums have been collected to pay the wages and expenses of the 200 Taliban fighters in his area: they earn about $245 a month, more than an Afghan police officer or soldier.

The Sunday Times arranged to meet the treasurer through an intermediary with links to the militants. The treasurer, a poor farmer, said he joined the Taliban as a foot soldier four years ago after "seeing the destruction America was bringing to my country". He was taught to read and write last northern winter at a camp near the Iranian city of Isfahan, where he was also trained in basic accountancy.

"It's important for documenting the money," he said. "I have to sign off on all the receipts, and I have to add up how much each fighter deserves after each operation. I also have to communicate in the Iranian language."

The $245 a month paid to each fighter supports their families and covers their living costs and expenses, such as motorcycle fuel and phone cards.

The treasurer moves between his district and Kabul on the orders of the Taliban's provincial governor in Wardak, a shadow of the official post. The shadow governor calls the Iranian company in Kabul and uses code to arrange a time for the money to be picked up.

"I come to Kabul wearing smart clothes. I don't have a beard, I don't wear a turban. I keep a low profile. I have never faced any problems collecting the money," he said.

He parks on the outskirts of the city, takes a taxi to the company offices, where he gives a false name at the gates, and is escorted to the first floor.

"There are lots of computers in the office. It is some kind of construction company. There are about 50 people working at their desks there. Some are Afghans and some are Iranians," he said.

US and British military intelligence have received numerous reports Iran is secretly backing the Taliban fighters. Its support includes supplying components for improvised explosive devices responsible for most of the deaths of NATO soldiers in Afghanistan.

A compendium of military intelligence documents sent to WikiLeaks, the whistleblowers' website, and released in July, contains a good deal of raw intelligence about Iranian support for the insurgents, including claims Taliban delegations have visited Iran to procure weapons, that wounded Taliban fighters are treated at hospitals in Tehran, and that fighters are trained at bases in the eastern Iranian city of Birjand.

In May, The Sunday Times revealed how Taliban militants received military training at camps inside Iran. "Iran's support for the Taliban is incredibly discreet and clandestine," one Western official said last week.

"Their purpose is to bleed America on Afghan soil, to act as a thorn in their side. They are playing a very clever double game."

Iran also supports the Karzai government, funding Islamic schools, television stations and candidates in parliamentary elections due next week.

"Iran is basically hedging its bets to ensure political leverage in Afghanistan once the American forces leave," the official said. "It is supporting both sides while trying to do as much damage to America as possible before NATO leaves."

The relationship is particularly striking because the Sunni-dominated Taliban view Iran's Shia population as heretics.

"We don't care who we get money from," said the Taliban treasurer, who agreed it was a marriage of convenience for both sides. "Iran will never stop funding us, because the Americans are dangerous for them as well. I think the hatred is the same from both us and Iran. The money we get is not dirty. It is for jihad."

The Sunday Times

Sunday, March 21, 2010

Iranians train Taliban to use roadside bombs

WTF ? I think it is high time we find where Mr. Wack-amin-nutjob sleeps at night and send him a few "bon-mots"....

The TV feed from the nose cone of the missile that slams into the goat shack where old beady-eyes sleeps would be justice delivered.
--------------------------------

Iranians train Taliban to use roadside bombs - UK Times


TALIBAN commanders have revealed that hundreds of insurgents have been trained in Iran to kill Nato forces in Afghanistan.


The commanders said they had learnt to mount complex ambushes and lay improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which have been responsible for most of the deaths of British troops in Helmand province.

The accounts of two commanders, in interviews with The Sunday Times, are the first descriptions of training of the Taliban in Iran.

According to the commanders, Iranian officials paid them to attend three-month courses during the winter.

They were smuggled across the border to the city of Zahidan, in southeast Iran, an hour’s drive from training camps in the desert.

Instructors in plain clothes provided daily exercises in live firing. The first month was devoted largely to teaching the Taliban how to attack convoys and how to escape before Nato forces could respond.

During their second month they were shown how to plant IEDs in sequence so that the rescuers of soldiers wounded in one blast would be caught in further explosions.

The third month was spent on storming bases and checkpoints. A hilltop fort was among the locations used for practice by a Taliban platoon.

Local mediators persuaded the commanders to travel to Kabul to tell their stories. They were interviewed on separate occasions on the edge of the city.

Western officials troubled by growing Iranian support for the Taliban describe the accounts as credible. A military crackdown in Pakistan is thought to have encouraged Taliban leaders to look to Iran for more help.

One of the commanders said: “The military is pressuring the Taliban in Pakistan. It is certainly harder to reach places that were once easy to get into. I think more of my fighters will travel to Iran for training this year.”

Karl Eikenberry, the American ambassador to Afghanistan, recently described signs of co-operation between Iran and the Taliban as disturbing.

“Iran or elements within Iran have provided training assistance and some weapons to the Taliban,” he said.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran has publicly backed his Afghan counterpart, Hamid Karzai. But American and British officials have accused Iran of playing a double game by giving covert backing to the Taliban.

Shi’ite Iran had long opposed the Sunni-dominated Taliban. The reason for the change was summarised by one Taliban commander who said of the Iranians: “Our religions and our histories are different but our target is the same. We both want to kill Americans.”