Iran: A Bridge too Far?

[multi]

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..

[RDixon]

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

[albed]

Originally Posted by RDixon

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?

Look, I admit, I don't know much about bomb-making. And I don't know much about how factories label bombs.

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

[RDixon]

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.

[Mazer]

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.

[RDixon]

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...

[Sinner]

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

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

Bush admin says it came from Iran.

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.

[multi]

Originally Posted by RDixon

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

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

this is the full powerpoint presentaion that pic came from

[Drakonix]

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.

[multi]

One ambassador in Washington said he was taken aback when John Hannah, Vice President Cheney’s national security adviser, said during a recent meeting that the administration considers 2007 “the year of Iran” and indicated that a U.S. attack was a real possibility.

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/12/hannah-iran/

[RDixon]

Originally Posted by Drakonix

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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021100479.html

[Drakonix]

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:

During a long-awaited presentation, held in Baghdad's fortified Green Zone, the officials displayed mortar shells, rocket-propelled grenades and a powerful cylindrical bomb, capable of blasting through an armored Humvee, that they said were manufactured in Iran and supplied to Shiite militias in Iraq for attacks on U.S. and Iraqi troops.

U.S. military officials in Iraq had previously described the use of "explosively shaped charges" to target vehicles, but Sunday's briefing was the first time they displayed pieces of what they called an "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 officials released a PowerPoint presentation including photographs of the weaponry, but did not allow media representatives to record, photograph or videotape the briefing or the materials on display.

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.

[RDixon]

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