Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
gollum

Covert missions in Iran

356 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Athenian
Iran is going to be fun...

why, when are you posted to go, or are you going to be just visiting?

Hell, If the USA invades Iran... I think I will enlist in the Iranian army just for some laughs and a good story. original.giftongue.gif

His point, I believe, is that they will be a very formidable force. not the weak sad excuse for an army Iraq had.

Bang on the dot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum
I don't want to have an 'all-out' war with Iran. I made this clear before, because of the innocent people there. Also, I don't want us to spread our troops thin.  ph34r.gif

I'm hoping this will be resolved peacefully or with minimum military involvement.

480188[/snapback]

Said like a true armchair General. I'm sure Bush is proud of you and your symPATHETIC approach to the issues that have and may still arise with Iran. Good for you Babs. Now if you give me your address I'll send you a quarter and you can phone some poor git that gives a **** what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum

British dossier argues against a military strike on Iran

1/23/2005 12:00:00 PM GMT

Jack Straw, argues against a military strike on Iran in a 200 page report to the British government.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has drawn up a report stating Britain's case against a military strike on Iran.

According to media reports, in his 200 page dossier Straw argues against an attack on Iran amidst rising fears that President Bush may seek support for this new conflict.

In his report, Straw argues for a "negotiated solution" rather than a military one to halt Iran's suspected ambitions to produce nuclear weapons. Straw believes that "a peaceful solution led by Britain, France and Germany is in the best interests of Iran and the international community," at the same stating the European countries intentions in "safeguarding Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology."

Reportedly, the dossier entitled Iran's Nuclear Programme, was quietly issued in the House of Commons on the eve of Bush's inauguration last week for fear of provoking a public rift with Washington.

Furthermore, it appears that relations between the two allies are not as rosy as previously perceived, with tensions running high between them.

The Iran report marks a sharp shift in strategy by the Labour government which in the run-up to the war in Iraq had produced two dossiers trumpeting the case to join the U.S. led invasion.

As further proof of their lack of desire in joining another war in the Middle East, British Prime Minister Tony Blair will reinforce his governments views to Bush when the two leaders meet up in Brussels, Belgium next month and at an Anglo-American summit to be held in Washington some time after the May general election.

It's believed that Straw will also push forward Britain's case to U.S. Secretary of State nominee Condoleezza Rice, a very close Bush confidante, when the pair meet up in London next month.

The growing suspicions that the United States is dead set on embarking on a military confrontation with Iran, grew after the publication of Seymour Hersh's report on American commandos operating inside Iran since mid-2004.

Even though the Pentagon attacked the report saying it was "riddled with errors of fundamental fact", no explicit denial of the covert operations were ever made.

American Vice-President Dick Cheney also waded into the Iranian issue by attempting to deflect attention away from the White House's plans of possibly attacking Iran. He warned that Israel could be the country that launches a pre-emptive strike on its own in an attempt to shut down Iran's nuclear program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Babs

Bang on the dot! My point, the US can handle Iran _flat out!

At the moment we have a lot on our plate because a goodly amount of countries haven't helped us. cool.gif

So, I got to go, our 'beloved' president is talking on the tube. ....I say that because I know it will get all you guys going. laugh.gif Are you guys stupid or what? w00t.gif

....*smacks herself on head*...."Babs, that was a dumb question!"

Edited by Babs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum

Analysts: Another war on Iran not good for the U.S.

1/22/2005 9:10:00 AM GMT

Iran affirms that its nuclear programme is solely used for peaceful purposes

Political analysts say that with a bulk of the U.S. forces engaged in its “illegal” war on Iraq, Washington has enough good reasons to avoid military action against Iran even while intensifying its pressure on the Islamic Republic to halt its nuclear program.

"There are no good military options," James Carafano, a military expert with the conservative Heritage Foundation, said.

He added that the United States might conduct pinpoint strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities from U.S. warships or from the air, but short of an imminent threat from nuclear armed Iranian missiles, any gain would likely be outweighed by the trouble Iran could inflict in the U.S. forces in its neighbours; Iraq and Afghanistan, he said.

And according to Anthony Cordesman, an expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Tehran "would see any pre-emptive attack as encirclement."

"It would probably react hard to whatever happened, and that would make it more destabilizing than stabilizing," Cordesman said in an interview, adding that "there would be many people who argue just the opposite".

Reports suggesting that the United States is preparing to directly confront Iran have been circulating ever since The New Yorker magazine published an article, prepared by reporter Seymour Hersh, who first uncovered the abuse scandal in Abu Ghraib jail near Baghdad, saying that the U.S. commandos have been conducting secret operations inside Iran since mid 2004, preparing for possible air strikes.

But the U.S. defense Department strongly rejected the magazine’s report as "riddled with errors of fundamental fact", however, it didn’t clearly deny conducting covert reconnaissance missions.

Also this week, and in a radio talk show, Vice President Dick Cheney, noted that Iran was "right at the top of the list" of Bush’s administration’s global problems, warning that Israel might attack Iran first without being asked to, in an attempt to halt Iran's nuclear programme.

"Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards," the Vice President said.

"We don't want a war in the Middle East if we can avoid it," Cheney said, "and certainly, in the case of the Iranian situation, I think everybody would best suited by, and or best treated or dealt with, if we could deal with it diplomatically."

The United States claims it is seeking a peaceful solution with Iran over its nuclear programme, but Iran accuses Washington of trying to disrupt its nuclear negotiations with the EU.

However, the most pessimistic comment of all this week came from Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden.

"There may be nothing we can do to persuade Iran not to develop weapons of mass destruction," Biden said during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing for Secretary of State-designate Condoleezza Rice.

But according to Carafano, another ground war in Iran would be unsustainable.

"We couldn't do another large scale ground operation without a major mobilization that would require mobilizing basically all of the national guard," he said.

"Even if we wanted to do that, it would be pretty obvious because it would take us months if not years to get the national guard up and ready to go."

Analysts add that, even with a limited U.S. attack on Iran, which shares a 1,450-kilometer border with the war-torn Iraq, would encourage Tehran to use its influence among Iraq's Shiites and thus, end the U.S. domination in southern Iraq. Same theory applies in Afghanistan, with which Iran has a 900-kilometer border.

"When you're trying to stabilize Iraq and you've got this long border between Iran and Iraq, and you're trying to keep the Iranians from interfering in Iraq so you can get the Iraq government up and running, you shouldn't be picking a war with the Iranians," said Carafano.

"It just doesn't make any sense from a geopolitical standpoint," he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum
Bang on the dot! My point, the US can handle Iran _flat out!

At the moment we have a lot on our plate because a goodly amount of countries haven't helped us. cool.gif 

So, I got to go, our 'beloved' president is talking on the tube. ....I say that because I know it will get all you guys going. laugh.gif Are you guys stupid or what? w00t.gif

....*smacks herself on head*...."Babs, that was a dumb question!"

480204[/snapback]

P*ss off then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum

Still here? Take the hint, GO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mekorig

Extremist in the USA, extremist in Iran. lets them kill each other, and let the rest of the world live pacefully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Athenian
Extremist in the USA, extremist in Iran. lets them kill each other, and let the rest of the world live pacefully.

480235[/snapback]

A great plan. But sadly it is not the way things work...

Usually when two opposing warriors honorably fight each other, one overcomes the other. One extremist will still be left to pick on the rest of the world living in peace. wink2.gif

Edited by Athenian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mekorig

we just out the survivor in a place where cant bother anymore and live in peace. tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellar
You guys are funny! laugh.gif I get tired of repeating myself and that's why I don't respond to certain posts. It's a waste of time to go over and over again the same material....S.o.r.r.y!

Why dont you answer my and gollums' questions? You've always wrote something similar to that in order to side step similar questions, or ones you dont want to answer!

no one i know likes an arm chair general, if you're so keen for this war with Iran, and that war with Syria, and finishing what you started with Iraq and Afhganistan, then why dont you bloody get out there and help? the US military are crying out for people, im sure they'd even take you. blink.gif you are so keen for these wars to happen, instead of just waving your flag, do something

thumbsup.gif

I hate armchair generals... especially ones like Babs who even at one point said that others who dont agree with her are afraid to fight. Lmfao.

Hell, If the USA invades Iran... I think I will enlist in the Iranian army just for some laughs and a good story.

You'll probably not be able to tell the story though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warden

Hi RACIST here with a few words for the blind being led by the blinded

Unlike one or two of us who have been in the armed forces we are all arm chair generals ,we all have views ,some we like and some we dont,atleast WE have the right to express them ,arent we lucky

We have all had our fair share of attacking each other for expressing our views

I dont believe in most of your views and i know the feeling is mutual,but the last 15 to20 posts i would have expected the mods to have steped in ,atleast for the disgusting language directed at BABS

That is unless the MODS agree it is ok to use sutch disgusting language on this site no.gif

I know from personal experience i have been warned

I will wait and see

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellar
Unlike one or two of us who have been in the armed forces we are all arm chair generals ,we all have views ,some we like and some we dont,atleast WE have the right to express them ,arent we lucky

And we have the right to think people are morons when they're armchair generals... Especially when an armchair general calls someone who has been in the armed forces a coward who doesnt want to fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warden
Unlike one or two of us who have been in the armed forces we are all arm chair generals ,we all have views ,some we like and some we dont,atleast WE have the right to express them ,arent we lucky

And we have the right to think people are morons when they're armchair generals... Especially when an armchair general calls someone who has been in the armed forces a coward who doesnt want to fight.

480649[/snapback]

By looking at many of the posts i would say yes

You have the right to think what you want

Its just a pity certain people get upset and take it to personaly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellar
Unlike one or two of us who have been in the armed forces we are all arm chair generals ,we all have views ,some we like and some we dont,atleast WE have the right to express them ,arent we lucky

And we have the right to think people are morons when they're armchair generals... Especially when an armchair general calls someone who has been in the armed forces a coward who doesnt want to fight.

480649[/snapback]

By looking at many of the posts i would say yes

You have the right to think what you want

Its just a pity certain people get upset and take it to personaly

480661[/snapback]

How are we supposed to take it when someone like Babs tells us were cowards who dont want to fight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warden

You take it like a grown up ,

Aheated debate s what is is a debate,not a falling out seasion

As i said before STICKS AND STONES

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lottie
British dossier argues against a military strike on Iran

1/23/2005 12:00:00 PM GMT 

Jack Straw, argues against a military strike on Iran in a 200 page report to the British government.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has drawn up a report stating Britain's case against a military strike on Iran.......

480202[/snapback]

Thanks for the article Gollum.

In his report, Straw argues for a "negotiated solution" rather than a military one to halt Iran's suspected ambitions to produce nuclear weapons. Straw believes that "a peaceful solution led by Britain, France and Germany is in the best interests of Iran and the international community," at the same stating the European countries intentions in "safeguarding Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology."

Britain is not going into Iran guns blazing, its just not going to happen. The above

from the report is to me the best approach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warden

It is quiet asstonishing how i said the exact same as post 319 ,but mines was on post 107......200 posts later you come up with well done ,good point

Is it because GOLLUM said it ,double standers

Shame on you no.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zephyr
zep...Sounds to me like you don't want to share this information. whistling2.gif

479142[/snapback]

No Babs; I'd love to share everything I know with others, and I have tried to answer honestly any specific questions you or others might have and that I might know the answers to. yes.gif The only problem is that it's very hard to answer to generalised questions, especially the ones based on existing stereotypes, so if you have any specific questions, as usual I'm at your entire service Babs. yes.gif

As for trusting the Iranian people, my point was that I don't really see any other option for the world or the Iranian government at this point. Most people I talk to don't believe in any up coming war against the US or anybody else for that matter and certainly don't believe in any immediate dangers posed by Iran to the world peace, at least the dangers are for sure not more than those posed by any other country in the region and beyond. In fact, whether we are okay with the present Iranian government or not is irrelevant in seeing that all the negative propaganda and singling out of Iran among many countries that are known to have WMD, and are certianly not democratic, is more of a political game Western leaders are playing than any moral issues involved (how can one persuade the Iranian people that they should not have nukes when the military dictators ruling Pakistan have them, especially from a moralistic approach? Why do we not hear of any threats against Saudi Arabia when we know most of the terrorists come from there and that elements within that government have been and continue to be involved in supporting terrorism? Just to give you two simple examples among many that make the general population very skeptical of the moral gestures of the west). In fact it is a big dissapointment for the Iranian people to see these differing and biased measures used by the so called democratic, free countries against Iran and there are strong doubts as to the real intentions of those countries. Many believe that the Iranian government is only a good scapegoat for the West and that even if there was another type of government here, people in the West would still be going after Iran and that it is the country as a whole they are trying to weaken and not just the regim. w00t.gif That's why seen from here, it is very hard to trust the West's policies towards Iran ( this does NOT mean a hatred of the West by the Iranian people, just a mistrust of their policies), and this, I can assure you is independent of their views on the present Iranian regim and government. The policy makers in the West are in dire need of modifying their views and failed policies toward Iran if they truly and sincerely want to see reforms. Empty military threats, nonsense propaganda, unfairly singling Iran out for what everybody else also has and does and siding with Iran's sworn enemies can only add to the mistrust and will delay any reforms that only, and only the people of Iran can bring to their country over a period of time. The West needs to earn the trust of the Iranian people since a lot depends on this trust, not only for the Iranians, but also for the whole world. hmm.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lottie
It is quiet asstonishing how i said the exact same as post 319 ,but mines was on post 107......200 posts later you come up with well done ,good point

Is it because GOLLUM said it ,double standers

Shame on you  no.gif

481095[/snapback]

What are you talking about? It just so happens that ever since this Iran issue came up I have not believed for one moment that Britain would go to war with Iran, as I said it just ain't going to happen.

The article and quote I took from it to my mind is the way forwards in this without it becoming a bloody mess and it would be a bloody mess. Hence why I quoted, nothng more and nothing less, I speak my own mind thanks. Iran is quite capable of giving as good as it gets if a war kicked off and I don't think our goverment see that as something that is going to solve anything thankgod.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Stellar
You take it like a grown up ,

Aheated debate s what is is a debate,not a falling out seasion

As i said before STICKS AND STONES

Taking it like a grown up is not shuting your mouth and not giving your opinion after someone else has so rudely called a soldier who has faught for his country a "coward who doesnt want to fight" and things to that effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gollum
Hi RACIST here with a few words for the blind being led by the blinded

Unlike one or two of us who have been in the armed forces we are all arm chair generals ,we all have views ,some we like and some we dont,atleast WE have the right to express them ,arent we lucky

We have all had our fair share of attacking each other for expressing our views

I dont believe in most of your views and i know the feeling is mutual,but the last 15 to20 posts i would have expected the mods to have steped in ,atleast for the disgusting language directed at BABS

That is unless the MODS agree it is ok to use sutch disgusting language on this site no.gif

I know from personal experience i have been warned

I will wait and see

480613[/snapback]

I'll just assume on the most part that it was directed at me.

warden, you have no idea if I have been given a warning.

Just because you do not see a public dressing down does'nt mean one has not been given. yes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
zephyr
The article and quote I took from it to my mind is the way forwards in this without it becoming a bloody mess and it would be a bloody mess. Hence why I quoted, nothng more and nothing less, I speak my own mind thanks. Iran is quite capable of giving as good as it gets if a war kicked off and I don't think our goverment see that as something that is going to solve anything thankgod

And thankgod there are reasonable minds such as yours around Lottie, otherwise we would all be sweeping some suspicious looking dust off of our door steps. w00t.gif You've got my support for whatever it is that you're running for! yes.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
warden
You take it like a grown up ,

Aheated debate s what is is a debate,not a falling out seasion

As i said before STICKS AND STONES

Taking it like a grown up is not shuting your mouth and not giving your opinion after someone else has so rudely called a soldier who has faught for his country a "coward who doesnt want to fight" and things to that effect.

481312[/snapback]

STELLAR ,i read yhat post ,but i think it is about time to take it on the chin,or as they say with a pinch of salt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.