× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last
Results 1 to 20 of 25 visibility 4571

Iran next on list

  1. #1
    Ummu Amatullah's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis,Minnesota
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    742
    Threads
    66
    Rep Power
    115
    Rep Ratio
    13
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Post Iran next on list

    Report bad ads?

    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.
    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.



    On 16 October 2002, President Bush told the American people that "I have not ordered the use of force. I hope that the use of force will not become necessary."

    We know now that this statement was itself a lie, that the president, by late August 2002, had, in fact, signed off on the 'execute' orders authorising the US military to begin active military operations inside Iraq, and that these orders were being implemented as early as September 2002, when the US Air Force, assisted by the British Royal Air Force, began expanding its bombardment of targets inside and outside the so-called no-fly zone in Iraq.

    These operations were designed to degrade Iraqi air defence and command and control capabilities. They also paved the way for the insertion of US Special Operations units, who were conducting strategic reconnaissance, and later direct action, operations against specific targets inside Iraq, prior to the 19 March 2003 commencement of hostilities.

    President Bush had signed a covert finding in late spring 2002, which authorised the CIA and US Special Operations forces to dispatch clandestine units into Iraq for the purpose of removing Saddam Hussein from power.

    The fact is that the Iraq war had begun by the beginning of summer 2002, if not earlier.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence gathering phase.

    This timeline of events has ramifications that go beyond historical trivia or political investigation into the events of the past.

    It represents a record of precedent on the part of the Bush administration which must be acknowledged when considering the ongoing events regarding US-Iran relations. As was the case with Iraq pre-March 2003, the Bush administration today speaks of "diplomacy" and a desire for a "peaceful" resolution to the Iranian question.

    But the facts speak of another agenda, that of war and the forceful removal of the theocratic regime, currently wielding the reigns of power in Tehran.

    As with Iraq, the president has paved the way for the conditioning of the American public and an all-too-compliant media to accept at face value the merits of a regime change policy regarding Iran, linking the regime of the Mullah's to an "axis of evil" (together with the newly "liberated" Iraq and North Korea), and speaking of the absolute requirement for the spread of "democracy" to the Iranian people.

    "Liberation" and the spread of "democracy" have become none-too-subtle code words within the neo-conservative cabal that formulates and executes American foreign policy today for militarism and war.

    By the intensity of the "liberation/democracy" rhetoric alone, Americans should be put on notice that Iran is well-fixed in the cross-hairs as the next target for the illegal policy of regime change being implemented by the Bush administration.

    But Americans, and indeed much of the rest of the world, continue to be lulled into a false sense of complacency by the fact that overt conventional military operations have not yet commenced between the United States and Iran.

    As such, many hold out the false hope that an extension of the current insanity in Iraq can be postponed or prevented in the case of Iran. But this is a fool's dream.

    The reality is that the US war with Iran has already begun. As we speak, American over flights of Iranian soil are taking place, using pilotless drones and other, more sophisticated, capabilities.

    The violation of a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war in and of itself. But the war with Iran has gone far beyond the intelligence-gathering phase.

    President Bush has taken advantage of the sweeping powers granted to him in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, to wage a global war against terror and to initiate several covert offensive operations inside Iran.

    The most visible of these is the CIA-backed actions recently undertaken by the Mujahadeen el-Khalq, or MEK, an Iranian opposition group, once run by Saddam Hussein's dreaded intelligence services, but now working exclusively for the CIA's Directorate of Operations.

    It is bitter irony that the CIA is using a group still labelled as a terrorist organisation, a group trained in the art of explosive assassination by the same intelligence units of the former regime of Saddam Hussein, who are slaughtering American soldiers in Iraq today, to carry out remote bombings in Iran of the sort that the Bush administration condemns on a daily basis inside Iraq.

    Perhaps the adage of "one man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist" has finally been embraced by the White House, exposing as utter hypocrisy the entire underlying notions governing the ongoing global war on terror.

    But the CIA-backed campaign of MEK terror bombings in Iran are not the only action ongoing against Iran.

    To the north, in neighbouring Azerbaijan, the US military is preparing a base of operations for a massive military presence that will foretell a major land-based campaign designed to capture Tehran.

    Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld's interest in Azerbaijan may have escaped the blinkered Western media, but Russia and the Caucasus nations understand only too well that the die has been cast regarding Azerbaijan's role in the upcoming war with Iran.

    The ethnic links between the Azeri of northern Iran and Azerbaijan were long exploited by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, and this vehicle for internal manipulation has been seized upon by CIA paramilitary operatives and US Special Operations units who are training with Azerbaijan forces to form special units capable of operating inside Iran for the purpose of intelligence gathering, direct action, and mobilising indigenous opposition to the Mullahs in Tehran.

    But this is only one use the US has planned for Azerbaijan. American military aircraft, operating from forward bases in Azerbaijan, will have a much shorter distance to fly when striking targets in and around Tehran.

    In fact, US air power should be able to maintain a nearly 24-hour a day presence over Tehran airspace once military hostilities commence.

    No longer will the United States need to consider employment of Cold War-dated plans which called for moving on Tehran from the Arab Gulf cities of Chah Bahar and Bandar Abbas. US Marine Corps units will be able to secure these towns in order to protect the vital Straits of Hormuz, but the need to advance inland has been eliminated.

    A much shorter route to Tehran now exists - the coastal highway running along the Caspian Sea from Azerbaijan to Tehran.

    US military planners have already begun war games calling for the deployment of multi-divisional forces into Azerbaijan.

    Logistical planning is well advanced concerning the basing of US air and ground power in Azerbaijan.

    Given the fact that the bulk of the logistical support and command and control capability required to wage a war with Iran is already forward deployed in the region thanks to the massive US presence in Iraq, the build-up time for a war with Iran will be significantly reduced compared to even the accelerated time tables witnessed with Iraq in 2002-2003.

    America and the Western nations continue to be fixated on the ongoing tragedy and debacle that is Iraq. Much needed debate on the reasoning behind the war with Iraq and the failed post-war occupation of Iraq is finally starting to spring up in the United States and elsewhere.

    Normally, this would represent a good turn of events. But with everyone's heads rooted in the events of the past, many are missing out on the crime that is about to be repeated by the Bush administration in Iran - an illegal war of aggression, based on false premise, carried out with little regard to either the people of Iran or the United States.

    Most Americans, together with the mainstream American media, are blind to the tell-tale signs of war, waiting, instead, for some formal declaration of hostility, a made-for-TV moment such as was witnessed on 19 March 2003.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.

    We now know that the war had started much earlier. Likewise, history will show that the US-led war with Iran will not have begun once a similar formal statement is offered by the Bush administration, but, rather, had already been under way since June 2005, when the CIA began its programme of MEK-executed terror bombings in Iran.

    Scott Ritter is a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, 1991-1998, and author of Iraq Confidential: The Untold Story of America's Intelligence Conspiracy, to be published by I B Tauris in October 2005.
    chat Quote

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    Halima's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,118
    Threads
    47
    Rep Power
    121
    Rep Ratio
    21
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    It would be stupid of them to just be hopping from one country to the next when they still haven't reconstructed afghanistan and Iraq. It's really bad propganda when they are planning to go into war with Iran when they still have the nuclear weapons, I reckon.
    chat Quote

  4. #3
    solid_snake's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    258
    Threads
    49
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    11
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Iran next on list

    i doubt bush will attact another country before his time runs up. He has to fix Iraq first ... that is if it can be fixed.
    chat Quote

  5. #4
    Halima's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,118
    Threads
    47
    Rep Power
    121
    Rep Ratio
    21
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    He better not! If he does that it would be the 3rd country invaded all within 4 years, which is simply ridiculous. Besides that it will cost more tax money, more terrorist attacks will happen because of the invasion, and everything will just be miserable. So yeah, he has to think twice about invading a country that doesn't play. Inshallah Allah (swt) will guide us all.
    chat Quote

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    aamirsaab's Avatar Jewel of IB
    brightness_1
    On vacation.
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Leicester
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    4,459
    Threads
    50
    Rep Power
    144
    Rep Ratio
    103
    Likes Ratio
    8

    Re: Iran next on list

    lol, you really think bush is gonna fix any of those countries. You have a lot to learn about these leaders.
    Iran next on list

    Book on sharia law Updated!
    Mosque-a-mania!
    Someone said to the Prophet, "Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them." The Prophet replied, "I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse." (Muslim)
    ''Become the change''
    chat Quote

  8. #6
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    The US cannot and will not invade Iran any time soon.

    I could see a concentrated bombing campaign to force the regime to come to the table and scrap their nuclear ambitions, but the US does not have the force size ot presecute an offensive in Iran given the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The only way the US could do it is if a draft was conducted, but I don't think that would happen unless Iran invaded Iraq or Afghanistan or North Korea invaded the South.
    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  9. #7
    Abubakar's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    81
    Threads
    2
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    19
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Iran next on list



    George Bush may make a lot of noise about more Military Action but he is overstretched in Iraq, both politically and militarily.

    He has used a lot of reserve units, this is a one time only card. most of these units contain part-time soldiers who are under trained and only joined for a macho hobby. Both the US Reserve and the UK Territorial Army now have a recruitment crissis as very few want to join to actually fight and maybe die in an unpopular war.

    Soon he will be looking to be getting out of Iraq, the US are reducing their forces in Afganistan later this year.

    He has started two unwinable wars and will need to get out of them.

    I think we should warn US's 'friends' that if everything does not work out they may well get left on their own or turned on, try Saddam and South Vietnam for a start.

    Peace
    chat Quote

  10. #8
    Ummu Amatullah's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Senior Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis,Minnesota
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    742
    Threads
    66
    Rep Power
    115
    Rep Ratio
    13
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by Halima
    It would be stupid of them to just be hopping from one country to the next when they still haven't reconstructed afghanistan and Iraq. It's really bad propganda when they are planning to go into war with Iran when they still have the nuclear weapons, I reckon.
    asallama alaikum sister Bush's only goal is to destroy the muslim nation he doesn't care how much tax money he spends.On the war on terror he spent about 6.6 billion dollars.Not to mention how much debt America is already in from previous wars especially Persian Golf war and Vietnam war.You should know by now that you should'nt trust a word that comes out of his mouth.First he says that he is going to lower taxes and better health care.Excuse me, but let me remind you tax prices are still the same and America is just going berzerk.Most states governments are shut down because the supreme court can't settle a case and vice versa.
    chat Quote

  11. #9
    Bittersteel's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,549
    Threads
    120
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    8
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    Does Iran have air defences?it is stronglu needed.Israel is a threat too and it got nukes.
    chat Quote

  12. Report bad ads?
  13. #10
    Halima's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,118
    Threads
    47
    Rep Power
    121
    Rep Ratio
    21
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    We should not fear any super-power nation that has nukes. Neither we should fear if they have a good economy. We should only fear Allah (swt)
    chat Quote

  14. #11
    Bittersteel's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,549
    Threads
    120
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    8
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    The US can't invade Iran now.If they do WW3 will start doubtless.
    chat Quote

  15. #12
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by Abdul Aziz
    Does Iran have air defences?it is stronglu needed.Israel is a threat too and it got nukes.


    I don't think Iran needs to really worry about Israel.

    For Israel to attack Iran they would need to fly over either Iraq, Syria or Turkey and I don't think any of those nations would allow such a fly over to attack a powerful neighbor.

    Israel would only use nuclear weapons on Iran as a means of retaliation.

    I dont want to see Iran's ruling regime having access to nuclear weapons since they have consistently said they want to destroy Israel. A nuclear attack on Israel would be a criminal act and would lead to massive deaths across the middle east due to Israels certain retaliation.
    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  16. #13
    Bittersteel's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,549
    Threads
    120
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    8
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    I dont want to see Iran's ruling regime having access to nuclear weapons since they have consistently said they want to destroy Israel.
    how about for self defence?Just like Israel's got?
    chat Quote

  17. #14
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list



    The US doesn't need to invade Iran to push its agenda concerning nclear weapons. I think economic action could help, but a bombin campaign would be the best option for the US.

    That being said, I doubt either will happen unless needed as a, for a lack of better words, final solution to the nuclear issue.

    There is a strong anti-revolution tide in Irans young population and I think that US interference would run counter to the possibility of regime change from the inside.
    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  18. Report bad ads?
  19. #15
    Khattab's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    454
    Threads
    41
    Rep Power
    118
    Rep Ratio
    17
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Iran next on list



    If Iran want nukes then they should have them it is not upto the USA who are and are not allowed them.

    Iran next on list

    "Lo! the Hour is surely coming, there is no doubt thereof; yet most of mankind believe not." (Al-Ghafir:59)
    chat Quote

  20. #16
    sena's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Turkey,İstanbul-France
    Gender
    Female
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    96
    Threads
    4
    Rep Power
    115
    Rep Ratio
    6
    Likes Ratio
    0

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by imaad_udeen


    The US doesn't need to invade Iran to push its agenda concerning nclear weapons. I think economic action could help, but a bombin campaign would be the best option for the US.

    That being said, I doubt either will happen unless needed as a, for a lack of better words, final solution to the nuclear issue.

    There is a strong anti-revolution tide in Irans young population and I think that US interference would run counter to the possibility of regime change from the inside.
    I agree with this. also usa can make a cooperation with different ethnic origin people from Iran as they did in Iraq. because kurds had supported usa in Iraq war. Iran population is about 75 million. but only 20-25 million of this population are persian. the rest of this are azeri, uzbek and turkmen origin people. especially azeri people call as ''southern azerbejian'' where they lives region (northern part of iran), as not iran. also They are under pressure of iran regime. because of this , They can rebel and usa can make a cooperation from inside without occupying.
    Iran next on list

    He was Muhammad salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam,
    Muhammad, mercy upon Mankind,
    He was Muhammad salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam,
    Muhammad, mercy upon Mankind,
    Teacher of all Mankind.
    :rose:

    whirl 4 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  21. #17
    Bittersteel's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    IB Oldtimer
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    1,549
    Threads
    120
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    8
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    yes .
    chat Quote

  22. #18
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by Khattab


    If Iran want nukes then they should have them it is not upto the USA who are and are not allowed them.



    Hi Brother. No, it is not up to the USA, but it is not just the USA who is worried about nuclear proliferation.

    France, UK, Germany, Israel, Iraq, Turkey and many other nations don't want to see nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran's Shi'a Theocracy.

    I don't like the idea of nuclear weapons being in the possession of any nations without a government which is responsible to its people.

    The UN is firmly against Iran in this issue and if they were to develope nuclear weapons it would be considered as a grave threat to the United States and Israel. And their creation alone could justify war. But I doubt it would happen and I certainly hope the Iranians are just playing hard ball to get concessions out of the West.

    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  23. #19
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by Abdul Aziz
    how about for self defence?Just like Israel's got?

    No democracy = no nukes.

    That is my opinion.

    I thought that the world wanted to limit the amount of nuclear weapons, not increase them.
    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote

  24. Report bad ads?
  25. #20
    imaad_udeen's Avatar Full Member
    brightness_1
    Full Member
    star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate star_rate
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA
    Religion
    Unspecified
    Posts
    497
    Threads
    22
    Rep Power
    116
    Rep Ratio
    10
    Likes Ratio
    1

    Re: Iran next on list

    format_quote Originally Posted by Hashim


    No democracy=no nukes
    is this what you belive?

    Who made this 'law' may i ask? Democracy itself, in the form you are thinking is a haraam conceopt in itself. Any leader who rules by other than shariah law, this is haraam.If you read suraah yusuf, it destroys your belief, it states that legislation belongs only to Allaah. Iran has shariah law, islamic law, but no the way you think, no democracy no nuke. You are thinking they should not have nukes buke they rule by islamic law, astagfirullaah.

    In actuality, the correct forumla is this.

    Does not meet the poltical criteria of the west=no nukes
    Does not meet the demands of america and co=no nukes
    does not lick america's boots=no nukes.



    what part of 'that's my opinion' did you not understand?

    Iran next on list

    -Imaad Udeen Abdul al-Majeed

    had3 1 - Iran next on list
    chat Quote


  26. Hide
Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last
Hey there! Iran next on list Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Iran next on list
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. LI Wish List
    By truemuslim in forum Feedback & Suggestions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-30-2008, 04:23 PM
  2. To Do List..
    By Umar001 in forum General
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-24-2008, 10:05 AM
  3. The annoyance list
    By Halima in forum General
    Replies: 133
    Last Post: 01-19-2008, 09:12 PM
  4. Israel, iran & USA top 'negative list'
    By Isma'el in forum World Affairs
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-10-2007, 01:41 AM
  5. Rep list
    By lyesh in forum Feedback & Suggestions
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 02-13-2007, 08:13 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create