tell me about it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pre.../06/bush.shtml

Consider this statement from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert: "The time is approaching when Israel and the world community will have to decide whether to take military action against Iran." Or Israeli Brigadier General Oded Tira who said that because "President Bush lacks the political power to attack Iran," Israel and its supporters "must lobby the Democratic Party and U.S. newspaper editors" to demand such an attack. If the Americans do not take military action against Iran, General Tira promised, "we'll do it ourselves."

Now ask yourself this question: Are your views on Iran influenced by all this "lobbying"?

Iran’s leaders are not stupid at all, they are very smart. They know what they are doing, they know how to use the media to their advantage. They know Americans are peaceful people and as shown in this thread do not want to be brought into a war with Iran. Now if Iran attacked Americans on American soil it would be over for them but it seems Americans are not to worried about the fact they are directly involved in the killing of American soldiers in Iraq. Some would rather blame their own leaders. A good part of the country would rather ignore what goes on over seas, again this is what America did before Pearl Harbor and what America did with bin Laden and the Taliban before 9/11. To an Extremist like President Tom when you come to the table to talk, it is a sign of weakness, oh they will listen to you, shake your hand and agree with erery thing you are saying. Once you leave they are making plans to kill you.

No one wants a War with Iran, and the situation is very volatile. What can or should be done? If Israel or the USA or both attack Iran it may set off a firestorm, not just in the Middle East, remember the riots in Paris and the UK? Times that by ten. Hopefully cooler heads prevail, like the Cuban missile crisis did. America can not Cut & Run from Iraq, that is the key, if America does you can move that doomsday clock to 30 seconds to midnight.

Threre is no evidence to support that claim other than Bush, Cheney, Condi, et el. saying it is so, and we all know how honest that group is.[/sarchasm]

Maybe you call it a "fact" due to those wily Iranians' clever use of the western media to their advantage propagandawise?

Of course the Iranian diplomats who were illegally arrested in Iraq are most likey right now being tortured into "confessing" to whatever the hell their witch hunters want them to.

It is the exact same game plan they used in the run up to the Iraq disaster except this time they think they can pull off another Gulf of Tonkin event and ramrod Congress into voting for war with Iran.

And by they I mean Israel.

Like I said, Iran has a problem with Israel and Israel has a problem with Iran and as far as I can tell, there is nothing between them but air and opportunity.
And again, not my or my country's problem.

I wonder how most americans would feel if Iran had a well financed lobbying group constantly pestering our elected politicians in DC to attack Israel and saturating the media with evil Israel stories?

You must live in a very isolated country then. Where at, Antartica? The moon?

Do you really think a nuclear war that will spread to involve eastern Europe, southern Asia, northern Africa, and half of the world's population will not have any effect on the United States? When Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iran, and Israel decide to glass the entire middle east and send a billion souls to the afterlife, you're just going to sit in your living room and watch it on TV with a bowl of popcorn? Wow. I never knew such apathy could exist.

Nope.
I'll be sitting on the beach knocking back shooters of Maker's Mark.

By the way the fear isn't working any more.

The world is NOT going to end if we DON'T attack Iran.

Just like America was not going to be sprouting mushroom clouds if we did not invade Iraq.

Same bold faced lies; different country.

War with Iran?
No thanks.
One clusterfuck was enough.

If you and the neocons want war with Iran so badly; move to Israel.
I hear that they will be starting one with them very soon and seeing as how they have a population of less than 7 million people, I'm quite certain they would welcome you with open "arms".

what beach? save me a shot :tu:

totally agree with all of this and am puzzled by one thing: why would anyone believe anything they are being told by the Bush administration? even being charitable and not calling them outright liars, the administration neocons and the hawks have been wrong about absolutely everything.

this administration has only fear to sell - it amazes me how many suckers are buying.

It's not really a beach in the sense that you think of beaches.
It's a very isolated piece of property on the river that my brother owns and we cut a trail down the mountain through the woods to it.
4 wheeler access only or walk.
Or a 4 x 4 that you don't care about scuffing up.
There is a big sandbar there so we started calling it the beach.
I'll save you some Maker's Mark if you bring me a quart of untaxed whiskey from Wilkes county.

Nice to hear you're not afraid. But keep two things in mind: a) this is my analysis, not the administration's, and b) I'm not advocating war, I'm warning of it's coming. Since your kind will most likely keep the US out of Iran's affairs for as long as possible I'm pretty sure we'll be totally unable to stop whatever is going to happen. I only hope you won't have to eat your words in a few years. If you're the one to say I told you so and not me, I'll be more than happy.

Seeing TG's post on the news that China can now knock out satellites makes me ask...

what about China.?.they don't invade parts of the middle east or meddle in their affairs anywhere as much as UK/US they don't have the media in all their cities controlled by parties only interested in making it a one sided issue, no. they do not really
need to worry about being hated by Muslims.

I find it interesting that the west a few hundred years ago got much of the technologies from the near and far east that helped form the technologies we use today, once apon a time the travelers from the east brought back more and more ideas philosophies and culture to the emerging western world. many things like the fact we use zero come from there, it's in the history books but it's not being taught.

so should China worry if nukes start flying over there ? they have enough interest in the area to
want to at least to not want to see things completely destroyed, but the west somehow must have the injustices it has perpetrated against the region undone. Maybe even learn one of the biggest lessons of its existence.

Reexamine the last two or three hundred years of the involvement of the west in that area, and the emigration of certain ethnic races from the region to our cities and why when the immigration to our cities reached a certain threshold about 10 or so years ago ,where it had become much more even in numbers we find our selves suddenly in a war where one of the parties becomes an unrelenting dishonest enemy who's goal is to only destroy the west by any means possible

Right - this may surprise you knife but there is a world outside of America and in this World outside of America many counties are saying the same thing. Also in the World outside of America there is this organization, a rather useless one but all the same, they call themselves the United Nations, they just put sanctions against Iran because of their growing threat to peace. So let us take Bush out of the equation. Unless you are talking about the drone Iran supposedly shot down, American sources in Iraq deny it. If you would rather believe a Extremist who hates America over your know government that is your right.

So Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, (Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf) - Egypt, Israel, Britain, and The UN to name a few, are all conspiring with the Bush Administration? I find this hard to believe but I will leave a quote below which may help it make a little more sense. Your hated toward your government is blinding you, only a fool can believe an Extremist like President Tom should have nuclear weapons. I hope the world is wrong and nothing happens, do want another Cold War scenario? I am all for a peaceful resolution, nothing could be better, but doing nothing is not the answer, I am not saying war is the answer, but you can not just stand on the sidelines, cross your fingers and hope everything will just be ok. We all need to realize that these problems aren’t about politics or party lines, at the end of the day, you are not Democrats or Republicans, you are Americans, and this problem applies equally to us all. It is the religious leaders, the Ayatollahs who call the shots and one thing history has taught us about Iran, They don't make threats - they make promises.

“If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence.” — Bertrand Russell, Roads to Freedom

a cold war type nuclear stand off is enevitable
if not already happening..
didn't the US threaten to send Pakistan back to the stone age a little while ago ?

I have a gut feeling that the US and China made a clandestine deal where the US promised to keep Iran's nuclear program under control if China promised to keep North Korea's nuclear program under control. China has been curiously cooperative up until now, maybe they really are afraid that a nuclear Iran would disrupt their burgeoning industries. That's why I think any nuclear war or cold war involving Iran would invariably involve China too. They're not as dependent on the Middle East's oil as we are but they know they will be soon. Maybe the US is letting Iran get away with making nukes as a way of backhanding China for letting North Korea make nukes.

yeh..interesting take
can't say i disagree too much with any of that..
i must be missing something
:D

Once N.Korea gets threatening enough, Japan will grow balls again and become a serious military power in the region. That's China's main incentive to rein in N.Korea.

News at 11: NKorea says nuke talks with US reached 'agreement'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070119...weaponsustalks

U.S. plans envision broad attack on Iran: analyst

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. contingency planning for military action against
Iran's nuclear program goes beyond limited strikes and would effectively unleash a war against the country, a former U.S. intelligence analyst said on Friday.


"I've seen some of the planning ... You're not talking about a surgical strike," said Wayne White, who was a top Middle East analyst for the State Department's bureau of intelligence and research until March 2005.

"You're talking about a war against Iran" that likely would destabilize the Middle East for years, White told the Middle East Policy Council, a Washington think tank.

"We're not talking about just surgical strikes against an array of targets inside Iran. We're talking about clearing a path to the targets" by taking out much of the Iranian Air Force, Kilo submarines, anti-ship missiles that could target commerce or U.S. warships in the Gulf, and maybe even Iran's ballistic missile capability, White said.

"I'm much more worried about the consequences of a U.S. or Israeli attack against Iran's nuclear infrastructure," which would prompt vigorous Iranian retaliation, he said, than civil war in
Iraq, which could be confined to that country.

President George W. Bush has stressed he is seeking a diplomatic solution to the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

But he has not taken the military option off the table and his recent rhetoric, plus tougher financial sanctions and actions against Iranian involvement in Iraq, has revived talk in Washington about a possible U.S. attack on Iran.

The Bush administration and many of its Gulf allies have expressed growing concern about Iran's rising influence in the region and the prospect of it acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Middle East expert Kenneth Katzman argued "Iran's ascendancy is not only manageable but reversible" if one understands the Islamic republic's many vulnerabilities.

Tehran's leaders have convinced many experts Iran is a great nation verging on "superpower" status, but the country is "very weak ... (and) meets almost no known criteria to be considered a great nation," said Katzman of the
Library of Congress' Congressional Research Service.

The economy is mismanaged and "quite primitive," exporting almost nothing except oil, he said.

Also, Iran's oil production capacity is fast declining and in terms of conventional military power, "Iran is a virtual non-entity," Katzman added.

The administration, therefore, should not go out of its way to accommodate Iran because the country is in no position to hurt the United States, and at some point "it might be useful to call that bluff," he said.

But Katzman cautioned against early confrontation with Iran and said if there is a "grand bargain" that meets both countries' interests, that should be pursued.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/iran_usa_experts_dc

Some interesting political intrigue surrounding that story, multi. Nice find.

It appears that part of the administration's diplomatic strategy is leaking fake military plans to members of the press who in turn will confirm to Iranian skeptics that Bush's sideways threat of military action is serious. Of course this is a ploy to make Iran more eager to talk to the US when it finally opens diplomatic channels. It's also a manipulation of the American press, but as long as they believe they're actually discrediting the president they're all to eager to help.

it seems the latest I heard out of Iran is the Ayatolla has ordered the president to 'stay out of all matters nuclear'

haven't looked for any source for this yet.. but it sounds like things could be happing there that might become more diplomatic and with some possible outcome like the NK talks on the same subject

it could need a false flag attack of some sort to unleash the dogs of war
because i get the feeling that there are some very interested parties that want very much for a nuclear confontaion to happen with Iran

There are no coincidences, only the illusion of them, or so I've heard. I don't believe that a diplomatic solution to both nuclear threats will come swiftly or easily, but this is a good sign that a diplomatic solution is possible.

Not surprisingly the people who invested millions in R&D in bunker buster missiles want to see their investment mature. I hope to see them disappointed. On this occasion the Democrats may actually make the world safer, for once.

Iran’s strongman loses grip as ayatollah offers nuclear deal
Marie Colvin and Leila Asgharzadeh, Tehran


IRAN’S supreme leader is considering a change of policy on the country’s nuclear programme in an effort to defuse growing tension with the West, according to senior sources in Tehran.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...557946,00.html

well, let's see, there's Bush, Cheney, a handful of neocons, Sinner, and maybe a couple of others who are interested in a confrontation with Iran....but since it's gonna be about 10 years before Iran is even able to make all the ingredients, they have a long wait before the confrontation is gonna be nuclear.

perhaps we'll be able to put some grown-ups in the White House in the interim.

after that ,who knows..
maybe it will just happen all over again at the start of next Republican term of office :)

it tends to be approximately 10 year cycles

nah.. that would be too pat

Why the sudden change in the rhetoric and propaganda?

The nuclear fearmongering wasn't working. That's why.

Now we have "Iranians killing Americans" as the new and improved mantra for more war with absolutely 0 evidence or proof; just the Bush admin saying it is so and trying like hell to make it so.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16710690/from/RS.4/

The Bush admin: Lie Lie Lie Deny Deny Deny; then when enough time has passed say that's old news....

It's all about accountability.

We voted for a new Congress that WILL do it's job.
They had better start yesterday.

My previous replies stand. You're misinterpreting a change in style as a change in rhetoric. Honest mistake.

U.S.-Iran tensions could trigger accidental war, military and analysts say

DOHA, Qatar: Tensions between the United States and Iran have risen to the point where a war could be kicked off by mistake, an outcome that neither Tehran nor Washington wants, U.S. military officials and private analysts say.

A U.S. military official here likened the current U.S.-Iran standoff to the buildup in hostility in Europe before World War I, when a duke's assassination triggered a tragic war that engulfed a continent.

"A mistake could be made and you could end up in something that neither side ever really wanted, and suddenly it's August 1914 all over again," the U.S. officer said on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of the issue. "I really believe neither side wants a fight."

Iraq is already a proxy battleground between Washington and Tehran, and the U.S. military escalation in the region — including the recent deployment of a second carrier battle group to the Gulf region and plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq — makes a full-blown war with Iran more likely, said Vali Nasr, an Iran expert at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School.

"The U.S. escalation could trigger greater conflict, especially since Iraq provides an unstable context in which it can happen," Nasr said Monday.

In Tehran, political analyst Hermidas Bavand said U.S. force increases were leading many Iranians to believe Washington is looking to pick a fight, perhaps one that would overshadow America's disastrous intervention in Iraq.

"It's an extremely dangerous situation. I don't think Tehran wants war under any circumstances. But there might be an accidental event that could escalate into a large confrontation," Bavand said. "It could be difficult to contain."

The United States and Iran are locked in an escalating series of provocations. Washington accuses Iran of arming and training Shiite Muslim extremists in Iraq. U.S. troops have responded with arresting of Iranian diplomats in Iraq, and the White House has said U.S. President George W. Bush signed an order allowing U.S. troops to kill or capture Iranians inside Iraq.

"If you're in Iraq and trying to kill our troops, then you should consider yourself a target," U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said last week.

The two countries also are in dispute over Tehran's controversial nuclear program. The United States accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons — an allegation Tehran denies. Iran's defiant refusal to suspend uranium enrichment lead the U.N. Security Council to impose limited economic sanctions.

The U.S.-Iran standoff complicates the Qatar-based U.S. Central Command's work overseeing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Centcom commander Gen. John Abizaid, set to retire in March, is required to calibrate Tehran's reactions to the extra U.S. warships and troops making their way to the region. Centcom also must keeps close tabs on Iranian military maneuvers and internal political developments.

Iranian coast guard vessels recently veered into territorial waters on the Arab side of the Persian Gulf, an event that could have been viewed as either a mistake or a provocation, the U.S. officer said. Both sides are on tenterhooks.

"You see little things. A boat crosses a line. Like their coast guard. But what does it mean? You've got to be very careful about overreacting," the officer said in an interview on a U.S. base in Qatar. "It's a problem. It certainly makes Gen. Abizaid's job a lot more complicated."

Iran's military has more than 500,000 troops and an antiquated collection of ships, aircraft, ballistic missiles and other weapons. U.S. military analysts describe the Iranian military as large but ineffective.

Surrounding Iran are more than 200,000 U.S. troops in bases scattered across Iraq, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Turkey, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. The U.S. Navy has a carrier battle group in the region and another on the way, and dozens of U.S. bombers and strike aircraft are arrayed on bases surrounding Iran.

Those U.S. bases — and not Iran's archenemy Israel — provide the likeliest targets for an Iranian strike, the U.S. officer said. Gates said this month that the Pentagon was dispatching an additional Patriot missile defense battery to the Gulf region, ostensibly to protect U.S. bases.

"We're a little closer than the Israelis. We're a better target for him," the officer said, speaking of Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Any war "would be a very short and very violent fight," he said.

Nasr, the Iran expert at the U.S. Naval school, and the U.S. officer cautioned that Washington's ongoing focus on Ahmadinejad's anti-Western rhetoric may strengthen the hard-line's president's position even among his critics back home.

Continued..

Since when do the Iranians use English or is this proof that the Bush admin is secretly arming Iran?

The ineptitude of the Bush admin continues to boggle the minds of sane people everywhere.

http://cernigsnewshog.blogspot.com/2...ieve-this.html

I'd take your word that there's english on that mortar round but unfortunately you're just to stupid to trust. So where's the english?

No doubt this seems like a well informed source to you. But that's just because you're so incredibly clueless.

albed: adjective:
a: slow of mind: obtuse b: given to unintelligent decisions or acts: acting in an unintelligent or careless manner: c: lacking intelligence or reason.

You shall henceforth be known as torpid.

The perfect Bush follower.

English is the international language of business, and the metric system is ubiquitous. Believe it or not, Iranians are capable of learning English. 'HE' is the international symbol for high explosive, and people everywhere know how to use common era notation for the date. If these shells were meant to be used by people who don't speak Persian then it's only natural that they'd be labeled this way.

Since when do Iranians use English? Since long before the 1979 revolution.

Maybe if I file the point a bit...
Make it sharper...

Does that look like a shell produced in Russia?
China?

Bush admin says it came from Iran.

If you believe that then...

Here, take this shell and this hammer...

I don’t know but give me some paint and I can make it look like it is. I can make it say anything you want quite easily

Oh well then it has to be false, and it will not matter what evidence comes out because you will take the word of a American Hating dictator over your own government. Your hated is blinding you. I don’t know where it came from but if this is your proof it is from the USA, (Pretty Weak)-- I have to ask aswell – is the USA the only English speaking country in the world? I swore there where others, Yeah, wait a minuite I live in one and I am from another. Maybe they are Irish bombs? Na, that wouldn’t fit into the conspiracy so for this argument we will say the USA is the only English speaking country in the world, makes it more believable in this situation.

The Iranians do not hate America.
They don't much care for the government here though and I can't really fault them for that considering what my government has done to them over the past 60 years.

Sinner, if you are so gung ho for war why don't you come down here and apply for citizenship?
Hell the military here right now would induct you even without you being a citizen.
They would be more than happy to facilitate your desires to fight "evil dictators"; or are you like so many others; just a keyboard warrior?

I don't have much respect for a man who talks the talk but refuses to walk the walk.
That's why I have 0 respect for Bush and the rest of his "war for fun and profit" pals.

You're on a roll today, Dix. :dis:

You are right, most Iranians don’t hate anyone, including America. The Religious Leaders do and they control the country including the government and the army. The whole Great Satan thing.

I tried RD, I tried to get a green card but could not get one. I worked in the USA for a year and a half. I was in sales with a Canadian company selling to American companies, according to the Fee Trade agreement it was legal as long as the products were shipped into the country and not brought in by myself. I tried to join the Armed Forces but because of a respiratory problem I failed the medical. I wanted to fly helicopters in combat situations. I have said before I am an Irish Republican, born in Armagh but moved to Canada when I was 2. I was raised in a military family brought up knowing everything is a fight and nothing is given to you, but things are easily taken away if you allow it to happen. So maybe I am a keyboard warrior, because I cannot go to the battlefield. I am perfectly safe in my home with my son and girlfriend.

I do believe Iran is a threat and cannot be allowed to continue down the path they are on. I believe America must stay in Iraq until there is some stability and then hand over the keys, I am know occupation does not work, I was taught that through 800 years of Irish history.

I don’t have respect for your current government because of the lies and deceit that want on in Texas with the conviction of those to border guards, but that is neither here nor there.

OK. I can respect that.
Maybe I was a bit too harsh.
I didn't get much sleep last night.

No worries RD, I don’t take this type of stuff personally and what a boring world it would be if everyone got along all the time. We are not going to agree on this and we will fire back and forth at each other. You weren’t harsh at all. You are wrong though….but I will help you see the light… : )

Look at the "evidence" for yourself and decide for yourself.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/doc...?resultpage=1&

Is it Iraq redux or just more BS from the greatest BSing admin in the history of the USA?

The reason american troops are dying in Iraq is simple and it has absolutely nothing at all to do with Iran.
Look towards DC for the answer.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-u...v_b_41022.html

Lol, always squawking that same phrase. You peabrained liberals are the ones who are unhappy - to put it mildly - with the way things are so you should be the ones willing and eager to fight for the changes you want instead of throwing online hissy fits every fucking day.




That ain't gonna happen is it?

Silence property!

What you lack in intelligence you sort of make up for in pissiness. Of course there's no way you can be entirely that pissy.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/doc...?resultpage=1&

this is the full powerpoint presentaion that pic came from

Show me a link to an official U.S. military source site that claims that the picture shown above is an Iranian made mortar shell.

The Iranian made "Explosive Formed Penetrator" or EFP devices they have been talking about are not mortar shells and do not look like that.

They can not be correctly classified as an IED (Improvised Explosive Device) because they are not improvised devices. They are being mass-manufactured in Iran for a specific purpose - to kill and maim Iraqi and coalition soldiers.

The picture above is simply anti-Bush, anti-war propaganda.

See picture below for the Iranian made EFP device.

Try again, if you wish.

The WP article you linked to does not show the picture of an 81mm mortar round and claim it was of Iranian origin.

The article is NOT from an official U.S. military source.

The WP article specifically mentions a special bomb type coming from Iran and specifically mentions "explosively formed penetrator" or EFP:

The EFP devices are "explosively shaped charges" that expel a high velocity armor defeating metallic projectile in a specific direction.

The EFP devices are large and quite powerful. For example, a standard CD or DVD is 120mm in diameter. So, the 81 mm mortar shell is approximately 32% smaller in diameter than a CD. The EFP devices are about 12 inches (approximately 305mm) in diameter, or over two and half times larger than a CD, and about 376% the size of the 81mm mortar shell. Whereas the mortar shell explodes in a circular pattern, the EFP device directs the force of the blast in a narrow aimed direction.

The article says photographs were not allowed during the presentation:

The "precision machining" characteristic of Iranian origin is of the EFP devices, NOT ordinary mortar or rocket propelled grenade munitions. Specifically, the precision machining is of the metallic disk that becomes the projectile when the device detonates. It's shape is special and causes the force of the explosion to be concentrated in a specific direction.

The 81mm mortar round depicted with a claim that the U.S. military stated it is of Iranian origin is apparently a hoax perpetrated by an anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-U.S. source.

The article you linked to confirms the facts that I have posted regarding the Iranian made EFP devices.

Let the back-peddling begin.
Now we see why none of the "military officials" in Baghdad that presented the slideshow that DID include the picture of the mortor round were so keen on not being identified.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...8N8SBQO1.shtml

The slideshow did include pictures of mortar rounds and rocket propelled grenades, as the WP article states. It is true that such munitions have been used to construct IED roadside bombs.

From the descriptions of the presentation, the slideshow did not present a 81mm mortar round as Iranian made. The Iranian made devices in question are not mortar rounds or rocket propelled grenades, they are EFP devices.

IMO the statement does indeed qualify as "back-peddling" when contrasted to much stronger statements recently made. The inference in previous statements is clearly that the Iranian Government is directly involved. However, it is important to note that General Pace has a minority opinion about the involvement of the Iranian Government in the matter.

The 81mm mortar round picture and caption claiming that the mortar round munition is certified by the U.S. military as Iranian is simply a purposeful lie by anti-Bush/anti-war/anti-U.S. source(s).

Again, it is the EFP devices that are Iranian made, or minimally contain Iranian made parts.

"In a news briefing held under strict security, the officials spread out on two small tables an E.F.P. and an array of mortar shells and rocket-propelled grenades with visible serial numbers that the officials said link the weapons directly to Iranian arms factories. The officials also asserted, without providing direct evidence, that Iranian leaders had authorized smuggling those weapons into Iraq for use against the Americans. The officials said such an assertion was an inference based on general intelligence assessments."

All under strict anonymity too because they knew it was all crap and did not want their names connected with it.
The purpose was to plant the seeds, by way of the willing press, that Iran is killing americans in Iraq in the kool-aid drinker's feeble minds and they greedily suck it up and beg for more.

Now say you're sorry for doubting me

Iraqi insurgents using Austrian rifles from Iran

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...3/wiran313.xml

Google will supply more news sources if you search.


--More than 100 of the.50 calibre weapons, capable of penetrating body armour, have been discovered by American troops during raids.

Within 45 days of the first HS50 Steyr Mannlicher rifles arriving in Iran, an American officer in an armoured vehicle was shot dead by an Iraqi insurgent using the weapon.

They said 170 American and British soldiers had been killed by such weapons.

so, using the same logic with which we are threatening Iran and Syria, we should also be thinking about bombing Austria.

Sure why not? I would be thinking about it if it were my brothers, sisters, husbands, wives, children being killed. Damn right, let us think about it, we will weigh all the pros and cons and see where we end up. My guess is it would not make sense to bomb Austria as lets say Iran. And I am not saying we should bomb Iran but this is where that logic thing comes into play. Who is the larger threat to stability in the region? Who wants to destroy another country, and not even hide the fact that is what they want to do? Who is directly supplying arms to insurgents who are killing Americans? Who is trying to make nuclear weapons and again not try to hide that fact?

Any other countries you would like to consider bombing?

They would have identified themselves if the press conference had been held in the safety of Washington, D.C. instead of Baghdad. It isn't your withering ridicule they're afraid of. The insurgents read the news and if these men had identified themselves they would now have bounties on their heads.

Anyway, the press loves reporting information garnered from anonymous insiders. What's the big deal?

Shouldn't you be watching your president on tv right now, lying through his teeth again?

edit: to answer your edit. The big deal, I suppose would be it was a Press Conference; not a clandestine meeting.

The democrats have apparently decided that having Iranian al-Quds killing U.S. military personnel in Iraq gives them more leverage in pressuring Bush to cut and run so they oppose any retaliation that would save American lives.


Not suprising at all.

http://media-newswire.com/release_1043680.html

You're grasping at straws, especially when you suggest that a public press conference is somehow more suspicious than a secret meeting.

Nobody is suggesting that we bomb Iran over this. The goal is to keep Iran from meddling in Iraq's domestic problems, to keep Iranians from crossing the border. It doesn't really matter whether Iran's government is directly involved or not, it bears all the responsibility for al-Quds's actions. We certainly won't go to war with Iran over this issue, but we do have to press our case on them or these deadly weapons will continue to slip over the border, even after our troops leave Iraq.

I'm not suggesting; I'm saying.

The press conference was twice delayed and then moved from DC to Baghdad where the reporters were not allowed to have cameras or tape recorders.
Then the mysterious "military officials" made very serious allegations against the Iranian government and in keeping with the total ineptitude of everything else the Bush admin has done or tried to do, presented easily debunked "evidence" which did NOT even begin to support their claims.

Do I call that suspicious?

Yes, yes I do.

A spade is still a spade no matter how much quacking a lame duck does.

There is no rational argument against irrational doubt such as yours. If Bush said that the ocean is wet, you'd say it was dry.

The Ayatollahs may not have ordered those weapons to be given to insurgents in Iraq, but those weapons were none the less given to insurgents in Iraq; it's Iran's fault for letting it happen. If calling a spade a spade means indicting Iran for it's involvement in Iraq's violent state, then so be it.

Again, to reiterate, nobody is advocating war with Iran.

Awe hell, there's no point in arguing with you.

Ah hell.
If Bush said that; I would pass out in shock and maybe even awe that he for once told the truth.

You call me irrational for doubting Bush's word?

You do understand how ludicrious that is, don't you?

And you will continue to argue with me because you like it.

I think if I said the ocean was wet you would disagree and make a long post about how wet is really dry....

Believe whatever you want. You have my permission.