pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Like the one today..don't have it in front of me due to crazy busy day of work..but Iran Top Scientist killed...car bomb I think ( car was bombed...not the other type)
-
Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum
Iran warnes US to not return carrier to Persian Gulf
- Thread starter dogtowner
- Start date
Like the one today..don't have it in front of me due to crazy busy day of work..but Iran Top Scientist killed...car bomb I think ( car was bombed...not the other type)
Werbung:
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Iranian nuclear scientist assassinated on same date Iranian professor killed in 2010
By Elizabeth Flock
An Iranian scientist working at a key nuclear facility was assassinated by a magnetic bomb Wednesday, The Post’s Thomas Erdbrink reports.
A policeman checks the remains of a bombed car belonging to Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan Wednesday. (HANDOUT - REUTERS) The killing of Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan suggests a covert effort to push back on Iran’s controversial nuclear program, — “certain to amplify authorities’ claims of clandestine operations by Western powers and their allies to halt Iran’s nuclear advances” the Associated Press reports.
However, in 2010, Erdbrink reported that Iran's opposition movement blamed the government for past attacks in order to spread fear in the country, and retain control.
Over the past several years, two Iranian nuclear scientists have been assassinated in similar circumstances. An Iranian physics professor, Massoud Ali Mohammadi, was killed by a motorcycle bomb on this date in 2010.
Iranian authorities blamed the prior killings on the United States and its allies Wednesday, with some members of parliament shouting, “Death to America!” Erdbrink reports.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...n-2010/2012/01/11/gIQAWRXwqP_blog.html?wprss=
By Elizabeth Flock
An Iranian scientist working at a key nuclear facility was assassinated by a magnetic bomb Wednesday, The Post’s Thomas Erdbrink reports.
A policeman checks the remains of a bombed car belonging to Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan Wednesday. (HANDOUT - REUTERS) The killing of Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan suggests a covert effort to push back on Iran’s controversial nuclear program, — “certain to amplify authorities’ claims of clandestine operations by Western powers and their allies to halt Iran’s nuclear advances” the Associated Press reports.
However, in 2010, Erdbrink reported that Iran's opposition movement blamed the government for past attacks in order to spread fear in the country, and retain control.
Over the past several years, two Iranian nuclear scientists have been assassinated in similar circumstances. An Iranian physics professor, Massoud Ali Mohammadi, was killed by a motorcycle bomb on this date in 2010.
Iranian authorities blamed the prior killings on the United States and its allies Wednesday, with some members of parliament shouting, “Death to America!” Erdbrink reports.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...n-2010/2012/01/11/gIQAWRXwqP_blog.html?wprss=
RoccoR
Well-Known Member
pocketfullofshells, et al,
You're correct. Initial reports indicate that a motorcyclist drove by and attached a "sticky bomb" to the car. It is something we've seen before in the Middle East. REF: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/11/sticky-bombs-hi/
(COMMENT)
Of course it would appear that most people will assume that it is either the US or Israel that is behind these activities.
But, in addition to localized internal factions (government resistance) within Iran, that wish to avoid a confrontation over nuclear proliferation, there are a number of Middle East/Persian Gulf states that also have objections to Iran developing a nuclear program.
Then, of course, there is the internal workings of governing bodies that have a vested interest in "preserving the Islamic Revolution, territorial integrity, and national sovereignty." And surprisingly, these adjunct bodies might be conducting an operation that intentionally sets-back the critical nuclear weapons design program and the associated development in a strategic delivery system.
The Iranians are not as stupid as we often portray them to be. They understand that having a nuclear launch capacity is a political, military and economic liability. And they are looking for a way to save face, but at the same time, disrupt the advancement of these two programs. They know that if a confrontation were to erupt, no matter the ultimate outcome, Iran will be severely damaged politically, militarily, and socio-economically. The Supreme National Security Council wants to preserve the Islamic Revolution from decay and the integrity of the Supreme Leadership. The Military Commanders do not want to see the bulk of their forces destroyed in a meaningless confrontation and wish to guard the independence and territorial integrity of the nation.
(EXTERNAL CLANDESTINE ACTIVITY)
The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) is nearly a direct action arm of the Supreme Leader (not the Presidency). It is bound by the need to protect the Supreme Leaders control (like most Secret Police Organizations); and the Islamic Revolution. MOIS's head is a senior cleric (not a professional intelligence and security officer). It functions under the interpretative limitations of the religious leader.
While the MOIS has a general mission statement to gather, procure, analysis, and classification of necessary information inside and outside the country (like most intelligence agencies world-wide), the security side is responsible for disclosing conspiracies that sabotage the integrity of the Islamic Republic. And that is a key element: the integrity of the Islamic Republic.
Regionally, there are a number of nearby neighbors that have very free and numerous legal travelers in the Iran. The include, but are not limited to:
Each of these nations have a reason to limit the R&D advancement of Iran in the proliferation of CNWDI; and the adjunct supporting programs. Their individual reasons may, in some cases, overlap, while other are purely utilitarian. But at the end of the day, all of these nations have no real interest in seeing Iran becoming the dominant regional power supported by a nuclear capacity. One, or more of these nations may, in fact, be running operations against the programs.
It is relatively easy to place the blame on the US or Israel; in fact, a Presidential Candidate has openly stated that he hope the US is involved in these sabotage efforts. This lends good cover to externals that might be less suspect.
Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
You're correct. Initial reports indicate that a motorcyclist drove by and attached a "sticky bomb" to the car. It is something we've seen before in the Middle East. REF: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2008/11/sticky-bombs-hi/
(COMMENT)
Of course it would appear that most people will assume that it is either the US or Israel that is behind these activities.
- Assassination of five Iranian Scientists.
- The sabotage of construction sites at nuclear facilities.
- The cyber attacks against computer systems and networks at Iranian nuclear facilities and research centers.
But, in addition to localized internal factions (government resistance) within Iran, that wish to avoid a confrontation over nuclear proliferation, there are a number of Middle East/Persian Gulf states that also have objections to Iran developing a nuclear program.
Then, of course, there is the internal workings of governing bodies that have a vested interest in "preserving the Islamic Revolution, territorial integrity, and national sovereignty." And surprisingly, these adjunct bodies might be conducting an operation that intentionally sets-back the critical nuclear weapons design program and the associated development in a strategic delivery system.
The Iranians are not as stupid as we often portray them to be. They understand that having a nuclear launch capacity is a political, military and economic liability. And they are looking for a way to save face, but at the same time, disrupt the advancement of these two programs. They know that if a confrontation were to erupt, no matter the ultimate outcome, Iran will be severely damaged politically, militarily, and socio-economically. The Supreme National Security Council wants to preserve the Islamic Revolution from decay and the integrity of the Supreme Leadership. The Military Commanders do not want to see the bulk of their forces destroyed in a meaningless confrontation and wish to guard the independence and territorial integrity of the nation.
(EXTERNAL CLANDESTINE ACTIVITY)
The Iranian Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) is nearly a direct action arm of the Supreme Leader (not the Presidency). It is bound by the need to protect the Supreme Leaders control (like most Secret Police Organizations); and the Islamic Revolution. MOIS's head is a senior cleric (not a professional intelligence and security officer). It functions under the interpretative limitations of the religious leader.
While the MOIS has a general mission statement to gather, procure, analysis, and classification of necessary information inside and outside the country (like most intelligence agencies world-wide), the security side is responsible for disclosing conspiracies that sabotage the integrity of the Islamic Republic. And that is a key element: the integrity of the Islamic Republic.
Regionally, there are a number of nearby neighbors that have very free and numerous legal travelers in the Iran. The include, but are not limited to:
- Russia
- China
- Kuwait
- Saudi Arabia
Each of these nations have a reason to limit the R&D advancement of Iran in the proliferation of CNWDI; and the adjunct supporting programs. Their individual reasons may, in some cases, overlap, while other are purely utilitarian. But at the end of the day, all of these nations have no real interest in seeing Iran becoming the dominant regional power supported by a nuclear capacity. One, or more of these nations may, in fact, be running operations against the programs.
It is relatively easy to place the blame on the US or Israel; in fact, a Presidential Candidate has openly stated that he hope the US is involved in these sabotage efforts. This lends good cover to externals that might be less suspect.
Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
In my opinion, the long term is simply a combination of short terms. I do not fault anyone for pursuing an action that addresses our needs and furthers our interests even if only for a short time. We have no real long term solutions because our interests routinely shift....so pursuing short term interests (ie a friendly regime for 15 years) is not a bad move in my opinion.
I don't see it that way. You do what must be done at the time to obtain the best outcome in terms of your interests. If that amounts to a short term solution, so be it.
The trick of course is to make them think such an action would result in an unacceptable amount of dead Iranian soldiers, and not ever actually arrive at this point.
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
the Iraq Iran was...the Iraq US war...we know who wins that battle...
Gipper
Well-Known Member
The Iraq Iran War was the Iraq US War....Really? Would you please enlighten us with how you come to this conclusion?
I am not following.
RoccoR
Well-Known Member
BigRob, pocketfullofshells, et al,
I believe that pocketfullofshells was referring to the Iran-Iraq War; wherein Iraq was a surrogate US implement against Iran.
(COMMENT)
There are actually two lines of thought relative to the US in the Iran-Iraq history.
The quasi-Third and Fourth Generational Warfare practices and policies during that period were crazy. Sometime you needed a score card to figure out who was the friend and who was the foe. Our myoptic view of the region in the 1950's - 60's and 70's, while providing short-term gains, --- where a great influence on the path that we followed through the 1980's, 90's and the first decade of the 21st Century. While the short-term gains were initially great, they lead the US into more than a decade of war and created a reputation with the indigenous populations of an untrustworthy Super Power.
Most Respectfully,
R
I believe that pocketfullofshells was referring to the Iran-Iraq War; wherein Iraq was a surrogate US implement against Iran.
(COMMENT)
There are actually two lines of thought relative to the US in the Iran-Iraq history.
- Some believe that Iran (under the Shah) was a US surrogate against Iraq until 1979. There was actually a complaint filed against the US in the International Criminal Court (ICC). (One Source: http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrim2.htm )
- Some believe that Iraq was a US surrogate against Iran; while Israel was providing arms to Iran (the Iran Contra Affair - LtCol North, et al).
The quasi-Third and Fourth Generational Warfare practices and policies during that period were crazy. Sometime you needed a score card to figure out who was the friend and who was the foe. Our myoptic view of the region in the 1950's - 60's and 70's, while providing short-term gains, --- where a great influence on the path that we followed through the 1980's, 90's and the first decade of the 21st Century. While the short-term gains were initially great, they lead the US into more than a decade of war and created a reputation with the indigenous populations of an untrustworthy Super Power.
Most Respectfully,
R
pocketfullofshells
Well-Known Member
Iran has shown its willing to throw hoards of people into enemy lines with out even guns, just bibles...lossing millions of people...Iraq people where having 2nd thoughts when we hit 1000.....
Iran can take the big war...the US would fold and go home.
GenSeneca
Well-Known Member
That is the question you asked me:
"do you believe a full all out war in the middle east will?..." - Pocket
The tone of your question suggested that you did not believe military action could prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. You've now made it clear you believe military action does have the capability of preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. I agree. However, I think you're just barely scratching the surface in regards to the negative impact of war with Iran. For me, it's a question of which is worse... Iran getting, and possibly using, nuclear weapons... or the total economic and strategic collapse of America. Stopping the first will bring about the second, preventing the second will allow the first, which outcome you consider worse is entirely one's own personal opinion.
I would consider any number greater than zero to be too many... The purpose of the US military is to protect the United States and the citizens thereof. Now you answer that question: How many dead American troops are you willing to sacrifice for the security of Israel?
This is a bold claim, and I am not sure what exactly it is based on outside of the notion "spending more money will collapse the United States".
steveox
Well-Known Member
Heard Rumors Navy ships carrying nukes to persian gulf
dude if there are US Navy ships ie a carrier group anywhere, they're packing the hit heat.
Werbung:
steveox
Well-Known Member
You mean like this?
Looks like something from Star Trek.
Looks like something from Star Trek.
