Iran: A Bridge too Far?

[multi]

THE PEOPLE CUT THE HEART OUT OF THE LIEBERMAN-KYL AMENDMENT








US trains Gulf air forces for war with Iran

The American air force is working with military leaders from the Gulf to train and prepare Arab air forces for a possible war with Iran, The Sunday Telegraph can reveal.

An air warfare conference in Washington last week was told how American air chiefs have helped to co-ordinate intelligence-sharing with Gulf Arab nations and organise combined exercises designed to make it easier to fight together.

Gen Michael Mosley, the US Air Force chief of staff, used the conference to seek closer links with allies whose support America might need if President George W Bush chooses to bomb Iran.

Pentagon air chiefs have helped set up an air warfare centre in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) where Gulf nations are training their fighter pilots and America has big bases. It is modelled on the US Air Force warfare centre at Nellis air force base in Nevada.

Jordan and the UAE have both taken part in combined exercises designed to make sure their air forces can fly, and fight, together and with American jets.

The conference was long-planned to discuss developments in air warfare technology, but the question of possible hostilities involving Iran was discussed.

Bruce Lemkin, the American air force deputy under-secretary for international affairs, said: "We need friends and partners with the capabilities to take care of their own security and stability in their regions and, through the relationship, the inter-operability and the will to join us in coalitions when appropriate…

"On its most basic level, it's about flying together, operating together and training together so, if we have to, we can fight together."
more..

[multi]

Originally Posted by multi

THE PEOPLE CUT THE HEART OUT OF THE LIEBERMAN-KYL AMENDMENT

small victory it seems.. This whole thing shines some very bad light on the Democrats...

Yesterday, Democratic Senators Hillary Clinton (NY), Chuck Schumer (NY), Bob Menendez (NJ), Barbara Mikulski (MD), and Ben Cardin (MD) all voted in favor of the "Kyl-Lieberman Iran Amendment." This piece of legislation actually encourages the practitioner of cowboy diplomacy, George W. Bush, to be even more belligerent in his foreign policy. The Kyl-Lieberman Amendment passed by a vote of 76 to 22. Chris Dodd and Joe Biden voted against it, and Barack Obama missed the vote.

The amendment states: "The United State should designate Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization . . . and place the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps on the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists."

Kyl-Lieberman is the first step in providing Congressional legitimacy for military action against Iran. The 76 to 22 vote, which also had the support of Majority Leader Harry Reid, codifies U.S. Iran policy and comes very close to sounding like a declaration of war. Designating a four decades old military branch of a sovereign state a "foreign terrorist organization" is an extreme step that is only necessary or useful if there are plans "on the table" to do something about it.

The U.S. troops in Iraq are not considered "foreign." The U.S. calls those Iraqis who are resisting occupation "terrorists." Now a segment of the Iranian armed forces is being labeled a terrorist organization. Such a step is tantamount to a foreign government designating the U.S. Marines a "foreign terrorist organization."

The Democratic Senate is playing right into the hands of those neo-cons and crazies who think a military strike against Iran will improve the situation in the Middle East. On the contrary, it will magnify the current disaster in Iraq tenfold.

If the Senate and the Neo-Cons convince Bush to strike Iran they will be sparking a real war with a nation that can fight back. With its 70 million people, high literacy rate, key geographic location, level of economic development, and its control of a significant share of the world's oil production, Iran is a nation that could cause quite a stir if Bush is dim-witted enough to go down that terrible road.

I can envision a scenario where the United States launches a sustained set of air raids against most of the infrastructure of Iran, specifically targeting the "nuclear facilities" that are widely dispersed throughout the country. The Democrats in Congress will be jumping through hoops like well-trained circus dogs as they vote for resolutions and give speeches validating the aggression. And then we're off to the races in another illegal war against a nation that has not attacked us.


...More

[vernarial]

They don't really know what they're getting themselves into.

I disagree with this last statement of the article. I think they know full well what they are doing. And they will make even more money, and consolidate even more power. They aren't stupid people. They just have a different opinion on how the world should work. An opinion that all but ignores the suffering of millions of people, but an opinion none the less. I call them ass holes. Some people call them heroic leaders.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by vernarial

I call them ass holes. Some people call them heroic leaders.

The rest of us just call them politicians.

[albed]

Brits find Iranian bombs crossing into Afghanistan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...wafghan104.xml

Iran is supplying the Taliban in Afghanistan with the same bomb-making equipment it provides to insurgents in Iraq, according to British military intelligence officers.

the discovery of more than 50 roadside bombs and timers in lorries crossing the border from Iran last month proves that Iran's Quds Revolutionary Guards are actively supporting the Taliban.

A spokesman for the British embassy in Kabul said yesterday: "This confirms our view that elements within Iran are supporting the Taliban.

And it confirms my view that British politicians are too cowardly to retaliate; letting their own soldiers needlessly die so they can keep the support of propaganda indoctrinated idiot voters and cling to their jobs like pathetic power junkies, no better than degenerate drug addicts, while sacrificing every bit of principle and honor in their descent into the political muck.

[malvachat]

A right wing UK newspaper.
Good source of balanced news.
Credible?
Albed seems to think so.
For example.
Gordon Brown does not need to call an election till 2010.
But the right wing press have been telling the story for weeks that he's ahead in the polls and would win easy.
So he is deciding if to call an election.
No doubt at all that he would win.
That's of course till the Tory conference and baby David pulls the lead back.But it makes no difference,Gordon Brown and the labour party would still win.The key is the margin.
If it's a small margin 20,30 seats the press will say his authority as leader is in question.A bigger win gives him that power.Of course now Gordon is indecisive.
But at no time has he said he's even thinking about it's all just press speculation.
It's all part of a continuing attack on Gordon Brown this credible source is running.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...4/npoll104.xml

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../05/dl0501.xml

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../05/do0501.xml

Getting the idea now.

Now to your story,please find another source with this story.Because I have trouble believing anything in a well known Tory rag.

In fact a list of you credible sources would be nice.
You seem to be dodging doing that for some reason.

[malvachat]

I thinks I must be physic.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNew...50140120071008

http://uk.reuters.com/article/topNew...64885720071008

"reuters"
Credible source??
Not sure?still waiting for the list.

From the same source.

"War on terror seen fuelling al Qaeda"

"the "war on terror" is failing and instead fuelling an increase in support for extremist Islamist movements,"

"Going to war with Iran", he said, "will make matters far worse, playing directly into the hands of extreme elements and adding greatly to the violence across the region. Whatever the problems with Iran, war should be avoided at all costs."

"Oxford Research Group"
Credible??


http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldN...37906320071008