B a h r a m e r a d: President Bush

Showing posts with label President Bush. Show all posts

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Iranians and Americans Fooled For 30 Years :By Jalil Bahar -May 9, 2008

We have sucked up endless hot air from America’s politicians about the imminent danger from Iran and the need for sanctions…even the possibility of war! Iran after all was labeled part of the Axis of Evil. And like everybody else you’ve believed them and handed over your hard earned cash…
Yes, you’re a sucker. You’ve been fooled.
The Mullah’s in Iran and successive administrations in the United States have been working hand in glove for over 30 years; under a general operating principle: “Private Amity, Public Enmity”! Yes. Absolutely Yes! They publicly rebuke each other, pretend they have no relations, but secretly coordinate all their actions to achieve their mutual strategic objectives. It’s shrewd and absolutely true.

Don’t feel bad you’re not the only one. Sometimes, false enemies can do you big favors. It’s a game that has been going on for over 30 years. We’ve all been sucked up in it! When Iranian leaders visit North Korea and ask for assistance with their Nuclear program, guess what? They end up learning what North Korea’s got; and all that information makes it back to the United States. They’ve fooled North Korea’s shrewdest leaders! When Iranian leaders visit Russia or China and ask to purchase anything, and the Russians or Chinese capitulate, guess what? All that information makes it back to the United States. Russia, China and North Korea fooled! The single largest source of detailed intelligence on Russian, Chinese and North Korean military and technological capability comes from no-lesser ally than Iran. When Bush placed Iran within the ‘Axis of Evil’, he managed to both excite Iran’s expatriate community into handing even more money to the Republican Party, reinforce Jewish lobby support and at the same time keep his promise to publicly denounce the Iranian regime (which is what his friend [the Iranian Mullahs] wanted). And the Democrats (Clinton and company) are no Saints either. If you want real clues on what they have been (really) doing, consider the following:

1) Who is the largest donor to America’s Afghanistan rebuilding effort? Iran of course! $570 Million (committed right after the US invasion) and then another $100 Million recently when money ran short. This is by far the largest sum from any nation.
2) Who provided Military assistance to the US during the Invasion of Afghanistan? Iran’s puppet Afghan army: the Northern Alliance. Without doubt, Iran is the principal backer of the Northern Alliance. Iran not only rendered huge amounts of material and military assistance to the Northern Alliance groups. But Iranian special envoys such as Alae'ddin Broujerdi (chairman of Iran Majlis' - Parliament's - foreign affairs and security commission) was a frequent visitor to the Amu Darya region and Panjshir Valley, cajoling and motivating the anti-Taliban resistance. Without Broujerdi's persuasive skill, Northern Alliance groups, ridden with petty jealousies and personality conflicts and turf problems, would have unraveled. And without the Northern Alliance, US forces would not have had the ‘ground’ support, logistics support, linguistic support to invade and then hold down Afghanistan…in a matter of a few days.
3) Who is the number one exporter to Iraq? Iran of course! Iran exported $1.7 billion dollars worth of non-oil goods to Iraq last year. Not Saudi Arabia, Not Jordan, Not Turkey, No…No major US ally…its Iran. Speaking at the inaugural ceremony of Tamarchin border crossing point, Mohammad-Hossein Bagh-Enayat said that the commodities that had been exported to Iraq through 13 border points including Tamarchin in West Azarbaijan included basic supplies needed to maintain stability in Iran. Bagh-Enayat said that Kermanshah province in western Iran, ranks first in terms of exporting goods to Iraq. He added that Iran's non-oil exports increased by 15.14 percent last year compared to the preceding year. Currently, 300 tons of kerosene is exported to Iraq every day through the Mehran crossing and this amount is scheduled to be increased to 2000 tons a day. Iran supplies 470 MW of power (electricity) to Basra, 120 MW of power (electricity) to the Kurds in the north, the Iraqi markets are filled with Iranian air conditioners, refrigerators, cars, trucks, tires, ….you name it …Iran supplies it. This is during a period of supposedly ‘increased economic sanctions against Iran’ with restrictions on trade with Iran and increased US military surveillance on the border between Iran and Iraq.
4) Who established the first functioning embassy in Iraq (and for that matter Afghanistan)? Iran of course. Iran recognized the new ‘American Installed’ provisional governments immediately. NO ARAB country has an operating embassy in Baghdad yet!! Many have promised, none have delivered.
5) Who has given up almost all of its legitimate territorial claims in the Caspian Sea to allow US and British Oil companies to steal (Iranian) oil and Gas through Azarbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmanestan? Iran, of course. Iran is on the verge of signing a treaty to reduce its territorial claims in the Caspian to 11% of the Sea; down from 50% established in previous treaties. And who benefits? BP in Azarbaijan, Conoco in Kazakhstan, Unocal in Uzbekistan… The Mullahs have given away access to probably the largest reserves of Hydrocarbons on the face of the planet. Literally trillions of dollars…all for US and British benefit!
6) Who is in charge now in Afghanistan and Iraq? Iran’s Shiite allies of course. They completely dominate both governments. Most of them have spent years living in exile in Iran…under Iranian protection. Iran’s enemies (Sadam Hussein and the Taliban) have been defeated at minimal cost to Iran …all at US expense, and now both Afghanistan and Iraq have essentially been handed to Iran’s puppets. Now that my friend is what friends are for!
And what about Iran’s Nuclear program and road side bombs and weapons in Iraq? What about Iranian aid to Hamas and Hezbollah? Doesn’t the United States have real ‘issues’ with Iran’s regime?
As for road-side bombs in Iraq, remember a basic fact: over 70% of all the road side bombings occur in Sunni regions of Iraq with projectiles produced NOT in Iran. Secondly, if you want to sell a bogus Air Attack to Iran in time to shift US public opinion in favor of John McCain (prior to a Presidential Election), you can easily arrange for ‘some’ of these bombs to look and smell Iranian. Thirdly, we know from the anti-Soviet war in Afghanistan that Russian weapons were given to the Mujahedeen (by Egypt and Israel). The very presence of Iranian bombs does not ‘by itself’ mean that the bombs originated in Iran. You can not believe the garbage being fed to congress by Petreus or his cohorts. Countless Iranian diplomats have been captured and interrogated to determine whether in fact Iran is in fact double dealing! Yet, as Petreus pointed out, no smoking gun has been identified. After seeing “Charlie Wilson’s War” this weekend, I finally realized that this whole issue of where weapons come from could be a giant red herring. It could for example be Israeli intelligence trying to cause havoc in Iraq to somehow push the United States into war with Iran. Or a ploy to simply retain US troops in Iraq, or a ploy to undertake a bogus attack on Iran. The bottom line is the information can not be trusted, and the Mullahs will remain in power. Nothing has changed or will change inside Iran. The United States is behind the Mullahs. As for Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran has kindly stepped in with $80 Million dollars in aid to Hamas when Israel decided to unilaterally stop any payments to them after Mahmoud Abbas’s gang took over the west bank. Iran’s mullahs were told to do so by the US.
In a twisted turn of events for Iran’s Mullahs, the United States has decided to use Iran as Israel’s bogey man to persuade it to make peace. On the one hand, the President can sound very pro-Israel, very anti-Iranian, yet simultaneously scare the pants off the Israelis with the potential threat of Iran’s ‘nuclear missiles’ landing in Tel-Aviv. Suddenly, Israel has a viable and legitimate enemy – large enough to support Hamas and Hezbollah; and a formidable military rival. Bush can pretend to hate the Mullahs, be very pro-Israeli (maintain Jewish Lobby support) …and at the same time scare Israel into making a deal. It’s brilliant. The Jewish lobby in the United States has become a power onto itself. No American politician can challenge Israel directly on anything…and get elected. It’s both sickening and frightening to America’s political elite. One of Jimmy Carter’s biggest mistakes was the ‘neutralization’ of Egypt as a political foe to Israel. Israel, no longer fears any of its neighbors. And with the political influence it has in the United States, Israel can unilaterally dictate any settlement – without fear. We all know, anyway, that Christian fundamentalists in the United States hate the Jews (and Bush is their puppy). The whole Nuclear issue with Iran is absolutely bogus. Everyone knows it. Iran has substantial domestic Uranium reserves. Also, Uranium enrichment is a fairly well known and relatively well established. Every western nation has in the past tried to sell Nuclear plants to Iran and participated in educating and training Iran’s (fluent English speaking) Nuclear Engineers. Nothing will change…its all a bogus spat. Sanctions against Iran are essentially symbolic and meaningless in terms of their real impact. For the past 30 years, virtually every product available in the West through Dubai. Dubai has a huge roll on- roll off port, where all products are brought in duty free, and then re-exported to Iran with amazing efficiency. Traders can legitimately claim that the destination for all their goods is Dubai, and then legally re-export items to Iran with impunity. Iran has been able to execute all its banking transactions through friendly banks. The only goal sanctions achieve is to reduce the ‘direct’ market share of European exporters with Iran …forcing them to trade through Dubai too…and thus level the playing field between all players in terms of export costs to Iran. A bogus invasion of Iran may be a by-proxy attack by Israelis. Who knows? What ever they do, it will be symbolic (like sanctions); and the Mullahs will remain in place. Nothing of substance will change. Make no mistake about it a bogus attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities will reinforce the Mullahs and the Theocratic regime NOT destabilize it. An attack will play into the Mullah’s hands by reinforcing their domestic support and their bogus anti-American rhetoric. Using Iran as a bogey man has had other benefits too. Do you recall the recent, multi-billion dollar deal to sell arms to the Saudi’s and United Arab Emirates in case they get into a war with Iran. Brilliant! Absolutely Brilliant! Iran, the bogey man, is being used to sell ‘American Protection’ for Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait … all the Arab literal states of the Persian Gulf. And then there was this whole story Bush fed to Putin about how US had to install missiles pointing at Russia, stationed in Poland and Romania incase the Iranians decided to fire missiles into Europe!?? Absolutely Brilliant Bullshit! There is nothing new in this. After all Iran’s Mullahs were uniquely able to eradicate Russia’s agents in Iran. They killed over 300,000 communists in the first 10 years of power in Iran. And it is now old news about behind the scenes Republican deals with Iran’s Mullahs to hold US embassy hostages in Tehran to humiliate Jimmy Carter and win the presidency for Reagan. It was after all, George Bush (senior), who flew to Paris to finalize the deal with the Mullahs… in exchange for security assurances to them. A secret treaty with the Mullahs was ratified and signed in 1981 guaranteeing security with Iran (Algiers Treaty).The Bush clan has long-standing relations with the Mullahs. And the Democrats are not any cleaner. The Mullahs have served the United States in ways the Shah of Iran never could! It has been 30 years of non-stop back room deals. Nothing has changed, nothing will change. So next time you hear an American politician ‘verbally’ attack Iran (like Hillary Clinton recently did) remember you’re being fooled. All they want is your money, Jewish lobby support, and they will deliver absolutely nothing. American politicians are unscrupulous. Do not be fooled. And do not count on America to change the regime in Iran . We, Iranians, have to do it on our own.

Authors Website: http://www.faceofiran.com/

Authors Bio: Former Iranian Diplomat, now retired real estate investor in Delaware - Back

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jalil_ba_080504_iranians_and_america.htm

comment by Bahramerad : Who is Attacking Iran ?
For the past three years — at every opportunity - Ahmadi Nejad - or Ahmaghi Najess as he is known to the ex pat Iranians - has been telling the Idiot crowds in Iran that through his "vast Engineering knowledge" gained while he was working with the Qods brigade and shooting the last bullets into the heads of at the "300,00" commies of one sort or another - THAT AMERICA WILL NOT ATTACK IRAN - HE KNOWS THAT BECAUSE HE WAS TOLD THIS BY THE MEHDI IN HIS DREAMS AND THEN HE CALCULATED THAT YES - THEY WILL NEVER ATTACK IRAN AND HE CAN DO PRETTY WELL WHAT HE DAMN PLEASES AND THAT THE QODS BRIGADE, THE BASEJIS AND THE PASDARANS HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT."
Now thanks to Dr, Bahar we know the secret of this knowledge - THE MEHDI LIVES IN THE WHITE HOUSE!
by Bahramerad (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 14 comments) on Sunday, May 11, 2008 at 3:54:42 AM

Keeping Secrets From the CIA
Why was Langley cut out of clandestine meetings with Iranian informants?
Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball : Newsweek Web Exclusive : May 8, 2008

The Senate Intelligence Committee is about to release a report that sheds new light on "inappropriate" back-channel contacts between Pentagon officials and a group of Iranian informants—including a key figure from the Iran-contra affair. In December 2001, two Pentagon Mideast experts—Larry Franklin and Harold Rhode—secretly traveled to Rome. They met with a group of Iranians who supposedly had information about plans by Iranian-backed terrorists to attack Americans—including U.S. troops who were then closing in on Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. The meetings were approved by high-level officials at the White House and the Pentagon. The CIA, however, was kept in the dark. When the CIA and the State Department found out about the meetings a few weeks later, they strenuously protested to the White House and demanded that the contacts be terminated immediately. At least officially, the White House complied. Now, years later, the Senate Intelligence Committee is finally producing a report on its investigation of those meetings.

The document is part of the panel's "phase two" investigation into the misuse of pre-Iraq War intelligence. The report is not likely to satisfy either the White House or the administration's most vocal critics. While Intelligence Committee officials are keeping details of the report under wraps, several sources familiar with its contents—who asked for anonymity discussing an unpublished report—said that congressional investigators found nothing illegal about the secret contacts. The meetings were brokered by two Iran-contra figures: Michael Ledeen, a Washington academic and prominent neoconservative activist who was close to a number of senior Bush administration officials at the time, and Manucher Ghorbanifar, a Paris-based Iranian businessman who served as a middleman for arms deals in the 1980s and was long ago branded a "fabricator" by the CIA. U.S. intelligence agencies said at the time that Ghorbanifar had a history of offering information that proved unreliable. But in the report, the panel does conclude that senior Bush administration officials (including then deputy Defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz and deputy national-security adviser Stephen Hadley) approved the meetings without informing the CIA or its director at the time, George Tenet, thereby allowing intelligence gathering outside of normal channels. The sources say the report also suggests that Ledeen misled the National Security Council about the meetings--a charge that Ledeen strongly denied this week in an e-mail exchange with NEWSWEEK. The Rome meetings provoked controversy when they were first disclosed in the summer of 2003. They seemed typical of the rocky relations between the Pentagon and CIA during the early years of the Bush administration. According to Ledeen, there was a reason the CIA was excluded from the secret discussions: the Iranians, he said, wanted nothing to do with the agency. That would not be surprising, given the CIA's deep antipathy toward Ghorbanifar. Three intelligence sources familiar with the investigation told NEWSWEEK that the Senate report questions whether Ledeen, who first approached administration officials about meeting with the Iranian informants, made up the claim that the Iranians refused to deal with the CIA. The report, the sources said, notes that the two Pentagon officials involved in the discussions said the issue never came up. In an e-mail to NEWSWEEK, however, Ledeen said he is sure he told senior officials who authorized the contacts—including Hadley and Zalmay Khalilzad (now U.S. ambassador to the United Nations)—that the Iranians "did not want to talk to CIA people."
According to several accounts of the Rome meetings—including one published by former CIA director Tenet in his memoir "At the Center of the Storm"—Ledeen persuaded Wolfowitz and Hadley, now White House national-security adviser, to allow him to set up the secret sessions. Only later did it emerge that the Iranian informants were in fact contacts of Ghorbanifar. (In his book, Tenet himself labeled Ghorbanifar a "con man and fabricator.") "Steve, this whole operation smells," Tenet wrote that he told Hadley after he learned about the contacts. In 2003, administration officials close to Hadley told NEWSWEEK that Hadley had become concerned that Ledeen and Ghorbanifar might be dragging the Bush administration into a repeat performance of the Iran-contra affair, and ordered that the contacts be cut off. In an interview with NEWSWEEK in Paris in November 2003, Ghorbanifar said that despite the official cease-and-desist order, he still kept in contact with both Rhode and Franklin for months. Ghorbanifar said he told the Americans he could help them recover hundreds of millions of dollars worth of cash that, he claimed, Saddam Hussein had buried. He envisioned splitting the money with the U.S. government: the United States could use part of it to overthrow Saddam; he would use the rest to finance an effort to overthrow the clerical regime in Tehran. The scheme came to nothing. In e-mails to NEWSWEEK, Ledeen said that the Rome meetings were productive and useful. "We obtained information on Iranian support for terror operations in Afghanistan; that information saved American lives. But the CIA and State then threw a joint tantrum and cut off all contact with proven sources of information. Go figure."Despite the unorthodox way in which the meetings were arranged and the problematic histories of the people who arranged them, sources familiar with the congressional inquiry said investigators could not declare that the Rome contacts broke the law. The reason: even if the CIA was cut out of the meetings, it was not illegal for National Security Council officials to authorize the contacts. If the committee's criticism of the administration's performance is as mild as advance reports suggest, critics who felt the Rome meetings could unravel deeper Bush scandals about the selling of the Iraq War are likely to be disappointed. URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/136084

Saturday, April 12, 2008

9/11 Zionist Job ?

www.jewsagainstzionism.com

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

News Central

Iran, Not al-Sadr, Leading Shi'a Attacks In Iraq
March 26, 2008 Threat Watch threatswatch.org
As Shi’a militias and armed groups strike out at US and Iraqi targets from Baghdad to Basra, it is curious to note how many news reports attribute the attacks to Muqtada al-Sadr, either directly or indirectly. Rocket attacks on the U.S.-protected Green Zone may carry a message with implications across Iraq: rising anger within the Mahdi Army militia.The Shiite fighters led by anti-American cleric Muqtada al-Sadr are reorganizing their ranks, taking delivery of new weapons from Iran and ramping up complaints about crackdowns by U.S. and Iraqi forces that could unravel the Mahdi Army’s self-declared cease-fire, according to militia commanders.But Muqtada al-Sadr was sidelined from any command by Iran weeks ago. There are no attributions of direct quotes, commands or comment from Muqtada since the Shi’a militia uprising began in earnest. And there is a very simple explanation for this: The puppet has had his strings cut. Iran is calling the shots. The fact that his note exists is far more important than its specific wording.
“So far I did not succeed either to liberate Iraq or make it an Islamic society — whether because of my own inability or the inability of society, only God knows,” Sadr wrote.“The continued presence of the occupiers, on the one hand, and the disobedience of many on the other, pushed me to isolate myself in protest. I gave society a big proportion of my life. Even my body became weaker, I got more sicknesses.”In reality, the continued presence of his Iranian masters pushed him to isolate himself. Iran has changed other leadership positions and oriented other terrorist groups toward field operational leadership and away from political leadership. The IRGC commander was changed. Hizballah’s military command was stripped from Nasrallah and handed to sheikh Naim Qasim in the Bekaa Valley. And Hamas is effectively run by al-Qassam Brigades military commander Ahmed Jabari in Gaza, not Khalid Meshaal in Damascus nor Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza City.As such, the militarily incompetent Muqtada al-Sadr has been yanked from control of the Mahdi Army. We are seeing the natural and intended progression of this change in Iraq today.The shelling of the ‘Green Zone’ (or International Zone) in Baghdad in coordination with attacks throughout southern Iraq from Basra to Baghdad are not a reaction to an al-Sadr decision any more than they are the effects of his military leadership and command. They are the fruits of Iranian labor.The rockets used in the Green Zone attacks “were Iranian-provided, Iranian-made rockets,” General Petraeus said. Can we dismiss this from the most successful US commander in Iraq since the conflict began? Further, is it wise to also dismiss the trend of Iranian command changes across the board to operational ground commanders? And, is it wise to forget that Muqtada al-Sadr announced his seclusion and withdrawal from command (at the behest of his Iranian masters)?In order to minimize or dismiss Iran’s guiding hand in the fighting in Iraq, one must do all of these things. And this is completely illogical. Completely.Yet, so desperate some seem to avoid any conflict with Iran, they ignore that fact that Iran has already chosen the conflict, whether we like it or not.It is an ‘Inconvenient Truth.’

Petraeus: Iran 'behind Green Zone Attack'

The most senior US general in Iraq has said he has evidence that Iran was behind Sunday's bombardment of Baghdad's heavily fortified Green Zone. Gen David Petraeus told the BBC he thought Tehran had trained, equipped and funded insurgents who fired the barrage of mortars and rockets.

Iran 'behind Green Zone attack' BBC

Hezbollah Improves Rocket Arsenal ABCNEWS.com

Was polonium-210 being smuggled for a dirty bomb? Online Journal

Cheney Disputes Iran's Nuclear Goals
BEIRUT -- Vice President Dick Cheney charged in an interview released Tuesday that Iran is trying to develop weapons-grade uranium, though international inspectors and U.S. intelligence services have not found evidence of such an effort

Senator Hails U.S. Ban on UK Firm that Sold to Iran
WASHINGTON -- The head of the Senate Banking Committee on Monday hailed a Commerce Department decision to suspend the export privileges of a British company that had illegally shipped three U.S.-made aircraft to Iran and was preparing to send it three more.

US 'deploys Nuclear Sub To Persian Gulf'

An American nuclear submarine has crossed the Suez Canal to join the US fleet stationed in the Persian Gulf, Egyptian sources say.

Chris Floyd: Still Not Worried? Petraeus Blames Iran For Green Zone Attack

Let's be clear. This is an administration that claims the right to go to war on the merest suspicion that some evil foreign entity might attack Americans at some time in some way. This is an administration that has already acted on this deranged--but oh-so-war-profitable--"national defense strategy." An administration that specifically named Iran as a dire threat in the most recent version of this official strategy.

Petraeus & Crocker Plan To Bush: Troop Levels In Iraq To Remain High Through 2008.

Today, Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker presented plans to President Bush recommending that troop levels in Iraq "remain nearly the same through 2008 as at any time during five years of war." The New York Times reports that it "now appears likely that any decision on major reductions in American troops from Iraq will be left to the next president."

The Woman Who Nearly Stopped The Iraq War

Of all the stories told on the 5th anniversary of the Iraq War, there is one important episode that took place during the build-up to the conflict that has gone largely unreported. On Friday 31 January 2003 a request from the US government for an intelligence "surge" at the UN. The aim, according to the email, was to give the US "the edge" in negotiations for a crucial resolution to give authorisation for an illegal Iraq war

Watch Online PBS: Bush's War: A 4-Hour Special Pre-9/11 Til Now

The gangs all here: Rummy, Wolfy, Rice, Powell, Armitage, Clarke, Cheney, Bush, Rove, and the other Iraq Neocon Chickhawk Criminals of War. Watch online here.

Pentagon Report: No Evidence Of Saddam Attempt To Assassinate Bush

Newsweek reports that the same Pentagon report that has essentially disproved an Iraq-al Qaeda link also calls into question the 1993 plot (to assassinate former president George H. W. Bush while in Kuwait) which spurred former President Bill Clinton to launch a Tomahawk cruise-missle strike against Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service, may be another tenuous allegation made against Saddam by current President George W. Bush.

Sunday, March 16, 2008

The Man Between War and Peace

As the White House talked up conflict with Iran, the head of U.S. Central Command, William "Fox" Fallon, talked it down. Now he has resigned. ( he was sacked- booted out-chucked out-pushed-fired- he was luky he was not dispatched!).
If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it'll all come down to one man. If we do not go to war with Iran, it'll come down to the same man. He is that rarest of creatures in the Bush universe: the good cop on Iran, and a man of strategic brilliance. His name is William Fallon, although all of his friends call him "Fox," which was his fighter-pilot call sign decades ago. Forty years into a military career that has seen this admiral rule over America's two most important combatant commands, Pacific Command and now United States Central Command, it's impossible to make this guy -- as he likes to say -- "nervous in the service." Past American governments have used saber rattling as a useful tactic to get some bad actor on the world stage to fall in line. This government hasn't mastered that kind of subtlety. When Dick Cheney has rattled his saber, it has generally meant that he intends to use it. And in spite of recent war spasms aimed at Iran from this sclerotic administration, Fallon is in no hurry to pick up any campaign medals for Iran. And therein lies the rub for the hard-liners led by Cheney. Army General David Petraeus, commanding America's forces in Iraq, may say, "You cannot win in Iraq solely in Iraq," but Fox Fallon is Petraeus's boss, and he is the commander of United States Central Command, and Fallon doesn't extend Petraeus's logic to mean war against Iran.
So while Admiral Fallon's boss, President George W. Bush, regularly trash-talks his way to World War III and his administration casually casts Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as this century's Hitler (a crown it has awarded once before, to deadly effect), it's left to Fallon -- and apparently Fallon alone -- to argue that, as he told Al Jazeera last fall: "This constant drumbeat of conflict...is not helpful and not useful. I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for. We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions."
What America needs, Fallon says, is a "combination of strength and willingness to engage."

Find this article at: http://www.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon

Thursday, March 13, 2008

Mideast Commander Retires After Irking Bosses

Sign In to E-Mail or Save This - Print - Reprints - Share - Digg - Facebook - Mixx - Yahoo! Buzz - Permalink - By THOM SHANKER - Published: March 12, 2008

WASHINGTON — Adm. William J. Fallon, the commander of American forces in the Middle East whose outspoken public statements on Iran and other issues had seemed to put him at odds with the Bush administration, is retiring early, the Pentagon announced Tuesday. Multimedia : Backstory With Thom Shanker (mp3) - The Reach of War - Go to Complete Coverage » The Lede: Storm of Blog Criticism Follows Fallon Resignation
Admiral Fallon had rankled senior officials of the Bush administration in recent months with comments that emphasized diplomacy over conflict in dealing with Iran, that endorsed further troop withdrawals from Iraq beyond those already under way and that suggested the United States had taken its eye off the military mission in Afghanistan. A senior administration official said that, taken together, the comments “left the perception he had a different foreign policy than the president.” Admiral Fallon, 63, took over the Central Command only a year ago, becoming the first admiral to become the top officer there. In a statement issued by his headquarters, he acknowledged that “recent press reports suggesting a disconnect between my views and the president’s policy objectives have become a distraction at a critical time and hamper efforts” across his region. His premature retirement was announced by his civilian boss, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who said he accepted the admiral’s request to retire “with reluctance and regret.” The White House issued a statement from President Bush that, while complimentary, was pale by comparison to other messages of farewell for senior officials with whom Mr. Bush has worked more closely. The statement said Admiral Fallon had served his country with “honor, determination and commitment” and deserved “considerable credit” for the progress in Afghanistan and Iraq. In his statement, Admiral Fallon said, “I don’t believe there have been any differences about the objectives of our policy” in the Middle East. Indeed, many of his public statements have fallen within the range of views expressed by Mr. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But there was no question that the admiral’s premature departure stemmed from what were perceived to be policy differences with the administration on Iran and Iraq, where his views competed with those of Gen. David H. Petraeus, the American commander in Iraq, who is a favorite of the White House. During a news briefing to announce the retirement of Admiral Fallon, a man hailed by the defense secretary as one of the most brilliant strategic minds in the military, Mr. Gates was asked whether the unexpected departure could be seen as a prelude to preparation for a war with Iran. “It’s just ridiculous,” Mr. Gates responded. Across the officer corps, a large number of senior military leaders share Admiral Fallon’s broad assessment that a war with Iran would bring unexpected and, perhaps, unmanageable, risks elsewhere in the Muslim world and around the globe.But many said they agreed that once it became clear he had lost the confidence of his civilian bosses, it was the responsibility of the four-star admiral to retire. That was especially so, they said, as it became obvious that no great effort was being made by civilian leaders to persuade him to remain in command. At the same time, some younger officers who have been critical of senior commanders for not speaking up about the risks of invading Iraq now see a senior officer who did speak his mind publicly being prompted to choose early retirement. A number of officials said the last straw came in an article in Esquire magazine by Thomas P. M. Barnett, a respected military analyst, that profiled Admiral Fallon under the headline “The Man Between War and Peace.” The article highlighted comments Admiral Fallon made to the Arab television station Al Jazeera last fall, in which he said that a “constant drumbeat of conflict” from Washington that was directed at Iran was “not helpful and not useful.” “I expect that there will be no war, and that is what we ought to be working for,” Admiral Fallon was quoted as saying. “We ought to try to do our utmost to create different conditions.” Readers of the Esquire article who are among the admiral’s supporters said they did not believe after reading it that the admiral had made comments that could be viewed as insubordinate to the president. But the cast of the lengthy article put him at odds with the White House. “If, in the dying light of the Bush administration, we go to war with Iran, it’ll all come down to one man,” the article begins, referring to Admiral Fallon. “If we do not go to war with Iran, it’ll come down to the same man.” Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen have maintained an unwavering public line that disagreements with Iran should be resolved diplomatically, and that any military option was only the last resort. That view is frequently expressed by Mr. Bush, although some White House officials are said to hold far more hawkish views on dealing with Iran. Mr. Gates said Tuesday that Lt. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the Army officer who is No. 2 at Central Command and has served two tours in Iraq since the invasion of 2003, would temporarily take Admiral Fallon’s place when the admiral retires at the end of this month, and would serve until a permanent replacement was nominated and confirmed by the Senate. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic majority leader, pounced on the retirement announcement, calling it “yet another example that independence and the frank, open airing of experts’ views are not welcome in this administration.” When Admiral Fallon was nominated in January 2007 to be the commander of American military forces across a region where they are engaged in two ground wars, the choice struck many analysts as odd. Admiral Fallon replaced Gen. John P. Abizaid of the Army. At the time, a range of senior Pentagon civilians and military officers said Mr. Gates had recommended that Admiral Fallon move from his post as commander of American forces in the Pacific to bring a new strategic view — as well as maritime experience — to the Middle East. Although known for being tough on his subordinates, he also developed a reputation for nuanced diplomatic negotiations with friendly nations, and with some with whom the United States has more prickly ties.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

The atomic dance

(http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=4369467

Sunday, March 02, 2008

NEWS CENTRAL

THE TERRORIST ARE USING WOMEN TO CARRY OUT BOMBINGS IN IRAQ.
HERE IS A PICTURE OF ONE TAKEN TODAY IN BAGHDAD.

American forces were detaining a man believed to be in charge of a cell that recruited women to carry out suicide-vest bombings, the military said Saturday in a statement.The cell leader planned to use his wife and another woman to carry out his next attack, the statement said. Maj. Daniel J. Meyers, a spokesman for American forces in northern Iraq, said they captured the man after receiving a “high level of intelligence.”Women are being used more frequently as bombers by Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a homegrown Sunni Arab extremist group that American intelligence agencies have concluded is foreign led.Women have carried out six attacks or attempted attacks so far this year, according to the United States military. The bombers of the Baghdad pet markets were two women with a history of psychiatric treatment

Ahmadinejad Heads to Iraq as Chairman of U.S. Joint Chiefs Visits
Baghdad -- Army and police checkpoints dotted the Iraqi capital on Saturday in preparation for a visit by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, which will coincide with a visit by the chairman of the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Bush: Iraq Should Tell Iran to Stop War Supplies

CRAWFORD, Texas -- U.S. President George W. Bush said on Saturday the Iraqi government should use a visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to tell Tehran to stop arming Iraqi militias and to insist on "breathing space" to let democracy develop.

U.S. Zeal for Iran's Non-Muslims Faulted

TEHRAN -- For decades the United States has funded an effort intended to help Christians, Zoroastrians and Jews escape persecution in Iran. Now some of their leaders are questioning American motives as sects that have endured here for thousands of years dwindle rapidly as a result of the migration.

Alarm Over Iran Helps BushThe U.S. has plenty of reasons to strike, but the administration pushes diplomacy.

Bush: Iraq Should Tell Iran to Stop War Supplies
CRAWFORD, Texas -- U.S. President George W. Bush said on Saturday the Iraqi government should use a visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to tell Tehran to stop arming Iraqi militias and to insist on "breathing space" to let democracy develop.

Bush Rules Out Talks with Iran
February 29, 2008 The Jerusalem Post Hilary Leila

US President George W. Bush on Thursday ruled out direct talks with Teheran during his remaining months in office, calling such engagement a mistake that would confuse regional allies and discourage reformists in Iran. "What's lost by embracing a tyrant who puts his people in prison because of their political beliefs? What's lost is it will send the wrong message," Bush said at a press conference in response to a question on his willingness to speak with political leaders in places such as Iran and Cuba.Bush said he had no intention of changing his policy and engaging with leaders of rogue countries, though he has received much criticism in Democratic circles for taking that position, particularly from those running for president."I just remind people that the decisions of the US president to have discussions with certain international figures can be extremely counterproductive," Bush added, in a veiled warning to those opponents. "It can send chilling signals and messages to our allies; it can send confusion about our foreign policy; it discourages reformers inside their own country. And in my judgment, it would be a mistake."As the debate on engagement with enemy states has raged in the presidential primaries, the question to Bush on such overtures - the only query in the press conference to deal directly with Iran - highlighted the dramatic shift in US policy options toward Iran in recent months.Bush's last press conference, in December following the release of the US National Intelligence Estimate that found Iran had halted its nuclear weapons program, was dominated by questions on US policy toward the country.Questions also came up at the previous press conference in October, when Bush warned about the potential for "World War III" because of Iran and was asked about possible military action against the Islamic Republic."Nobody's talking about military action anymore. I haven't seen anybody [discuss it]," said John Calabrese, a Washington-based Middle East Institute scholar who edits the Middle East Journal, speaking of both media and government representatives here.Earlier in the week, US Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns, who has held the Iran portfolio at the State Department, spoke before his imminent departure from the government.Asked about Iran, Burns said, "I don't think that conflict with Iran is inevitable. I think there's plenty of space for diplomacy."He also said, "I think that this is going to be a drama that plays out well into 2009 and beyond."A report in Mother Jones noted that his earlier statements on the subject were "darker, and more deliberately calibrated to convey an underlying threat. Burns used language then about there not being endless amounts of time for diplomacy and to see Teheran's behavior change."Now, the piece said, "the message seemed to suggest a longer horizon."Iran expert Ilan Berman of the American Foreign Policy Council said Burns's comments were in keeping with "the growing perception that the administration is just kicking the can down the road" for the next administration to deal with.Burns did stress the importance of a third UN Security Council resolution sanctioning Iran, which the US hopes to see pass in the coming days.But analysts such as Berman said whatever did pass would be lacking "teeth," in part because the National Intelligence Estimate reduced the pressure on reluctant countries to take hard steps against Iran."Now that there's no military option, there's no credible reason for those countries to build up that effort," Berman said.Calabrese attributed the removal of the military option to the trouble the Bush administration would have justifying an attack that was sure to be unpopular domestically and internationally."The apparent lack of evidence indicating that the nuclear weapons threat is immediate deprives the Bush administration of the cloak of legitimacy that it needs to conduct a military strike any time soon," he said.Berman said that while he had long considered a US strike "unlikely," it was "the threat and the possibility that we have to resort to that which was crucial."Now, he said, the perception of that threat has changed.One area of American action on Teheran that has continued full steam ahead is the US Treasury effort to hurt Iran's economy by acting against its banks and officials involved in proliferation and terrorism, as well as scaring off investors because of the risk of doing business there.Speaking to the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, US Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Patrick O'Brien detailed on Wednesday the American approach, which he described as having "an impact" by also encouraging allies to avoid involvement with rogue states and following the United States's lead."There hasn't been a drop-off in private sector pressure on Iran since the NIE," said Michael Jacobson, an expert in finance and terrorism with the Washington Institute.He said private companies had the same concerns about the risk of dealing with Iran and finding themselves complicit in terrorism and proliferation that they did before the intelligence estimate was released.Jacobson also said financial measures had been the most effective tool against Iran to date, and that they could ultimately be successful because there were many options for financial pressure yet to be applied.However, he added that those options could be limited by the climate created by the National Intelligence Estimate."There's still more that could be done by governments, which would make financial pressure heavier," he said.Even a weak UN sanctions resolution could offer progress on that front, Jacobson argued. "Whatever the resolution says, if there is a unanimous resolution, and particularly if Europe follows with really strong [independent sanctions], it would be a sign that even if Iran thought this would go away with the NIE, it's not, and that could help in reviving the financial pressure at the government level."

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Artificial Intelligence : Using TAGHIEH against the mullahs

US Intel Links Iran With Nuke Bomb Bid
February 14, 2008 The Associated Press George Jahn

VIENNA, Austria -- The U.S. has recently shared new intelligence with the International Atomic Energy Agency on key aspects of Iran's nuclear program that Washington says shows Tehran was directly engaged in trying to make a bomb, diplomats said Thursday.One of the diplomats said Washington also gave the IAEA permission to confront Iran with at least some of the evidence in an attempt to pry details out of the Islamic republic, as part of the U.N. nuclear watchdog's attempts to investigate Iran's suspicious nuclear past.The diplomats suggested that such moves by the U.S. administration would be a reflection of Washington's' drive to pressure Iran into acknowledging that it had focused part of its nuclear efforts toward developing a weapons program.The U.S. is leading the push for a third set of U.N. sanctions against Iran. Tehran insists its program is intended only to produce energy and has refused U.N. demands that it suspend its uranium enrichment program - technology that can produce both fuel for nuclear reactors and the fissile material for a bomb.A recent U.S. intelligence assessment that Iran had a clandestine weapons program but stopped working on it four years ago has hurt Washington's attempts to have the U.N. Security Council impose a third set of sanctions.While the Americans have previously declassified and then forwarded intelligence to the IAEA to help its investigations, they do so on a selective basis.Following Israel's bombing of a Syrian site late last year, and media reports citing unidentified U.S. officials as saying the target was a nuclear installation, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei turned in vain to the U.S. in asking for details on what was struck, said a diplomat who - like others - spoke on condition of anonymity in exchange for divulging confidential information.Over the past two years, the U.S. already has shared material on a laptop computer reportedly smuggled out of Iran. In 2005, U.S. intelligence assessed that information as indicating that Tehran had been working on details of nuclear weapons, including missile trajectories and ideal altitudes for exploding warheads.After declassification, U.S. intelligence also was forwarded on two other issues: the "Green Salt Project" - a plan the U.S. alleges links diverse components of a nuclear weapons program, including uranium enrichment, high explosives testing and a missile re-entry vehicle - and material in Iran's possession showing how to mold uranium metal into warhead form.Two of the diplomats said the material forwarded to the IAEA over the past two weeks expanded on the previous information from the Americans, but had no additional details.Iran is already under two sets of U.N. Security Council sanctions for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment, which it started developing during nearly two decades of covert nuclear activity built on illicit purchases and revealed only five years ago.Since then, IAEA experts have uncovered activities, experiments, and blueprints and materials that point to possible efforts by Iran to create nuclear weapons, even though Tehran insists its nuclear project is peaceful and aimed only at creating a large-scale enrichment facility to make reactor fuel.Its leaders consistently dismiss allegations that they are interested in enrichment for its other use - creating fissile material suitable for arming warheads.Instead of heeding Security Council demands to freeze enrichment, Iran has expanded its program. On Wednesday, diplomats told the AP that Iran's new generation of advanced centrifuges have begun processing small quantities of the gas that can be used to make the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

US Confirms Upcoming Talks with Iran on Iraq
WASHINGTON -- The United States confirmed Monday reports that it is planning a new round of talks with Iran on the future of war-ravaged Iraq, but that the two sides have yet to agree on a date. By AFP
Many Iranians Says Revolutionary Ideals Still Unmet
In Tehran Monday, tens of thousands celebrated the 29th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in 1979. By The Christian Science Monitor
A Campaign to Stop Stoning
Iranian judges apparently didn't get the memo about the moratorium on stoning issued in 2002 by Ayatollah Shahroudi, head of the judiciary. According to Amnesty International, nine women and two men are currently in prison awaiting this cruel and barbaric punishment, which is usually meted out for sexual transgressions. By The Nation
Many in Iran Bear the U.S. No Ill Will
TEHRAN -- When the shah ruled Iran, the Westernized elite would enjoy Hollywood movies at a small theater in the center of the city. Today, that theater is an Islamic cultural center and a meeting place for fundamentalists. By The International Herald Tribune
Iran Parades Captured British Naval Boat
The Iranian president today attempted to humiliate Britain by parading a captured naval boat in a huge rally marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic revolution. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also used the occasion to tell huge crowds in Tehran that Iran will not back down "one iota" in its nuclear dispute with Western powers. By Daily Mail
A Hard Winter in Iran
If the upcoming parliamentary elections in Iran were open and democratic, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the ruling mullahs would have a lot to worry about. How would you like your allies to face an electorate when, in one of the coldest winters in recent memory, the government has left thousands of people for days or even weeks with no natural gas for heat? When even those in Tehran have suffered rolling blackouts every night for a month, robbing people of electricity and heat for hours at a time? And all this while the country's major export -- oil -- is at nearly 100 dollars a barrel? By Chicago Tribune
Iran Sets Up Banks to Sidestep US Curbs
Iran's first investment banks will start operating next month, part of Tehran's strategy of opening new banking channels but also part of its effort to circumvent US restrictions on its financial sector. more By The Financial Times
Polish Gas Monopoly Signs Preliminary Gas Deal with Iran
WARSAW -- Polish gas monopoly PGNiG signed a preliminary deal with an Iranian state-owned oil company to cooperate on managing already-discovered gas reserves, it said on Monday. more By Reuters
US Captures Militia Leader With Iran Ties
U.S. soldiers captured a suspected Shiite militia commander and one other suspect Monday, the latest of several days of raids in Shiite holy cities south of Baghdad. more By The Associated Press
Iran Sees Less Threat in Exiled MKO Militants
TEHRAN, Iran -– Gholam Reza Sadeghi felt certain of his fate if he ever returned to Iran: torture and execution, given his years as a member of the antiregime Mujahideen-e Khalq, or "People's Holy Warriors." more By The Christian Science Monitor
Iran's Old Guard Pushed Aside
TEHRAN -- After Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's followers toppled a U.S.-backed autocracy in Iran, he brought to power a coterie of politically engaged clerics who sought to create the world's first Islamic republic. Nearly 30 years later, a new generation of politicians is sweeping aside those clerics, many of whom had become proponents of better relations with the West and gradual steps toward greater democracy. By The Washington Post
Thousands Rally to Mark Revolution, Defy Nuclear Pressure
TEHRAN -- Tens of thousands of Iranians rallied on Monday to mark the 29th anniversary of the Islamic revolution, in a show of defiance of Western pressure on Iran to suspend its disputed nuclear program. By Reuters
Does Iranian Government Fear Educated Women?
Who’s afraid of girls? The Iranian government, it seems. Recent years have seen a dramatic rise in the number of Iranian girls enrolling in universities and other institutions of higher education. While many governments would see this as a blessing worth boasting about, that's not the case in Iran. By Radio Free Europe/RadioLiberty

Artificial Intelligence : Using TAGHIEH against the mullahs

February 11, 2008 The Washington Institute for Near East Policy Patrick Clawson
Though the White House press release read "President Bush to travel to Middle East to follow up on progress made at Annapolis," his January trip actually centered on Iran, a country he did not visit. America's friends -- the Persian Gulf monarchs as well as Israel -- fear that the publication of the recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) means the United States is weakening in its resolve to confront the rising threat from Iran. President Bush made his Middle East jaunt, in part, to assure them that that assessment was premature.Since its appearance in December, the NIE has given pause to Israeli policy makers and provided succor for State Department analysts who believe the Bush administration is overestimating the case for Tehran's nuclear intentions. That is because the report implies that the threat from Iran has diminished. But in fact, a careful and close reading of the NIE does not warrant this interpretation. In the end, the report will only make it harder to address a growing threat to world peace.Indeed, Americans might believe we no longer have to worry about Iran's nuclear program. In fact, the problem is worse because diplomacy may be more complicated, though not necessarily impossible. The most troubling prospect is that the United States and Israel are headed in opposite directions, which could lead to a severe strain in their relationship.The NIE begins: "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program." That's nice, but it does not matter very much. As the NIE states, "We assess with high confidence that Iran has the scientific, technical, and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so." The key word in that sentence is "eventually" because the most vital question is when Iran will be able to produce its first nuclear weapon. The NIE says nothing about how the reported halt of Iran's nuclear weapons program affects that date.Despite the impression given by the wording in the NIE, Iran has by no means stopped its nuclear activities. In fact, Iran proudly shows off the progress it is making with its huge uranium-enrichment facilities. The Nobel Peace Prize-winning director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Mohamed ElBaradei, has said that when those facilities are completed, Iran would need only "a few months" more to build a nuclear weapon. That estimate suggests that the hard part is enriching the uranium -- not making a bomb. In other words, the wording of the NIE is deceptive: building a bomb is relatively easy. Producing nuclear material is not.That is why the 40-year effort to verify and enforce the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) has been based on controlling the production of fissile material -- that is, enriched uranium or plutonium. NPT enforcement is based on safeguarding nuclear material, not only looking to see if a country is building a weapon. Iran does not need to have a weapons program -- that is, a bomb-design program -- until it is close to producing fissile material. After all, Iran does not need a sophisticated warhead such as the ones that go atop missiles. It could put a bulky, heavy nuclear device into a ship container or a truck -- similar to the truck Iran's proxies used to bomb the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983.So what does the NIE say about when Iran will be able to make sufficient fissile material for a bomb? The old estimate, made in 2005, stated this was "unlikely before early-to-mid next decade." The new NIE says, "Iran probably would be technically capable of producing enough HEU [highly enriched uranium] for a weapon sometime during the 2010-2015 time frame." The only caveat is from the State Department's intelligence arm, which "judges that Iran is unlikely to achieve this capability before 2013." How nice -- we may even have as long as five years. That is better than nothing, but it is not very good.International Pressure, U.S. Engagement or Military Force?The NIE argues that Iran can be persuaded through sticks and carrots: "We judge with high confidence that the halt [in Iran's nuclear weapons program] was directed primarily in response to increasing international scrutiny and pressure resulting from exposure of Iran's previously undeclared nuclear work."Iran's decision to suspend its nuclear weapons program, in fact, came in the fall of 2003, after the British, French and German leaders bluntly told Iran: suspend your nuclear program or suffer the consequences. Their stand was unprecedented in its forcefulness for the usually mild Europeans. And, of course, they acted in the wake of what then looked like a successful U.S. invasion of Iraq. The lesson the NIE draws is that when Iran sees a united international community, it backs down."Our assessment that the [nuclear weapons] program probably was halted primarily in response to international pressure suggests Iran may be more vulnerable to influence on the issue than we judged previously," the NIE reads.I think that is correct; a longtime theme of my work has been Iran's vulnerability to influence on the nuclear issue, so it would be comforting to think that the NIE is accurate in this regard. But honesty as an analyst compels me to report that the NIE provides little reason to come to this conclusion.The alternative, more cynical interpretation from many of my Israeli friends is that Iran understood that suspending its nuclear weapons program would have no effect on its progress toward nuclear weapons, yet would reduce the risk that IAEA inspectors would discover Iran's true intentions. In other words, the NIE displays undue confidence that the U.S. intelligence community knows not just what happened but the reasons why.That over-confidence fits a pattern. The sad reality is that the U.S. intelligence community's track record on Iran suggests that its knowledge has been not much better than it was about Iraq or North Korea. As the new NIE points out, the 2005 estimate assessed "with high confidence that Iran currently is determined to develop nuclear weapons," whereas the new estimate is that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in fall 2003 -- well before the 2005 estimate came out.Since the intelligence community has now decided it was wrong in 2005, one might think that U.S. intelligence agencies would be more cautious about what they now purport to know. It is possible that the new information is the last word on the subject, but it is vital to remember that deciding whether or not Iran is "determined" is a matter of interpretation, not just information.According to the NIE, Iran did in fact have a covert nuclear weapons program up until 2003. If that information is correct, then Iran has been in complete violation of its obligations under the NPT, both by having a program until 2003 and then not reporting it up through the present day. Only full disclosure can provide confidence that Iran will not restart the program.What if Iran gets to the brink of a bomb?If Iran gets to the brink of a bomb, then there will be a vigorous debate about what to do. The two obvious alternatives are: stop Iran's nuclear program by force or live with it by deterring it. Military force is always a terrible choice, so we need to carefully consider whether there is a better alternative. Deterrence sounds attractive; after all, it worked during the Cold War.But deterrence is not a simple policy. Even during the Cold War, it meant accepting great risks, as evident from the Cuban missile crisis. And deterring a nuclear Iran is likely to prove much more difficult than deterrence was during the Cold War for a host of reasons: The Cold War required committing hundreds of thousands of troops and hundreds of billions of dollars a year for decades. The international community may not have the political will to assemble a broad coalition of states ready to commit forces to deter a nuclear Iran or the staying power to maintain such a military coalition over a period of decades. The Cold War saw mid-size powers like Germany and Italy reluctantly accept protection from the superpowers rather than build their own nuclear weapons. It will be no small challenge to deter the dozens of other potential proliferators who may conclude from Iran's experience that there is little price to be paid for violating the NPT or withdrawing from it. Since Iran's clandestine nuclear activities were brought to light, nine Middle East countries have announced they are rethinking their nuclear options. The Middle East security environment is much more complicated than the straightforward East-West Cold War. The Iran-Iraq war killed a half million people, at least 10 times more than have died in all Israeli-Arab fighting. Introduce nuclear weapons into this messy situation, and many more may die. The Soviet Union more or less lived up to agreements it made. The Islamic Republic of Iran has a long history of dissimulation. Iran may be tempted to try covert, deniable nuclear weapons delivery -- for instance, by terrorist groups -- which the United States would have difficulty attributing to it.For all its faults, the Soviet Union was a tightly run ship. Iran's regime is dotted with factions that seem to pay little attention to any central authority. What's worse, the Revolutionary Guards, the same radical elements that provide support to terrorists, control aspects of the nuclear program. To say that there are potential command-and-control problems is an understatement. The Soviet communist system wanted to rule the world. In Islamic Iran, some radical elements appear to be willing to destroy the world. They are so highly confident God is on their side that they are ready to risk bringing on the apocalypse.What Will Israel Do?If the United States decides to live with a nuclear-armed Iran, Israel may not accede. For the United States, Iranian nuclear capability is a big problem but by no means an existential threat. By contrast, Israel has to worry that Iran will supplement the hundreds of millions of dollars it spends each year to arm those fighting to wipe Israel off the map (Hamas and Hezbollah) with nuclear threats aimed at the same purpose.If Israel decides to use force on its own, that would have many disadvantages for U.S. interests. An Israeli strike would convert a global issue about Iran's failure to comply with its obligations under international treaties into an Iranian-Israeli dispute, where many around the world would automatically take sides against Israel.An Israeli strike could engender such international criticism that Iran would be confident it can rebuild without fearing international disapproval, much less a second round of strikes. Many around the world would assume that Washington gave Israel permission, if not assistance, so the United States would face much the same reaction as if it had carried out a raid itself. That could mean vicious Iranian responses against U.S. interests.If Israel acts against the wishes of the United States, the worst of all situations would be created if it does the job poorly. In such a case, the threat from Iran's nuclear program would be magnified, and the U.S.-Israel alliance would be damaged. Unfortunately, this case is distinctly possible. This makes it all the more urgent that we reinforce diplomacy with tough sanctions and close international coordination at the highest levels to maximize the chances, admittedly fading, that Iran agrees to a compromise.Patrick Clawson, the deputy director for research of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, is the author of several books on Iran.

Monday, February 04, 2008

Latest news from the Fascist rulers of Islamic Republic of Idiots

ليست روساي فاميلي دولت احمدي نژاد

سايت رجا نيوز در صفحه اولش مصاحبه ‌اي از احمدي نژاد در مورد جنبش دانشجويي گذاشته و يک سوتيتر هم به عنوان فراز مهم آن در صفحه اول ميبينيم:

آقاي احمدي نژاد: " ... نظام سياسي قبل از انقلاب كه سرتا پايش ظلم بود؛ بعداز انقلاب هم بالاخره در برنامه ريزيها، ارتباطات گروهي، عدم شايسته سالاريها، عزل و نصب ‌ها و توزيع فرصتها، گروههايي بودند كه يا رابطه‌اي و حزبي و فاميلي يا به خاطر منافع شخصي عملكردند و ميكنند. اگر دانشجو جلو اينها نايستد بقيه شعارها ديگر پوچ است... " اينک توجه شما را جلب ميکنم از مبارزه جناب احمدي نژاد با فاميل بازي در دولت نهم:

مهندس زريبافان (دبير هيات دولت):

داوود مددي : رييس سازمان تامين اجتماعي => باجناق زريبافان

سيدمحسن نبوي : عضو هيات مديره شركت سرمايه گذاري خارجي => داماد زريبافان

عليرضا مددي : مديركل وزارتي وزارت تعاون => برادرزاده باجناق زريبافان

ناظمي اردكاني : وزير تعاون => شوهر عمه داماد زريبافان

دانش جعفري : وزير اقتصاد => پسر عمه پدر داماد زريبافان

هاشمي ثمره (مشاور عالي، رييس ستاد انتخابات کشور و همه کاره رييس جمهور):

مهندس مهدي هاشمي ثمره : مديركل وزارتي وزير نيرو => برادر هاشمي ثمره

خانم قند فروش : مشاور خانواده وزير كشور => زن برادر هاشمي ثمره

عبدالحميد هاشمي ثمره : معاون وزير صنايع => برادر هاشمي ثمره

محمود احمدي نژاد (رييس جمهور):

داوود احمدي نژاد : رييس بازرسي رياست جمهوري => برادر احمدي نژاد

حسين شبيري : رييس صندوق مهر رضا => شوهر خواهر احمدي نژاد

پروين احمدي نژاد : معاون مركز امور زنان رياست جمهوري => خواهر احمدي نژاد

علي اکبر محرابيان : وزير صنايع => خواهرزاده احمدي نژاد

مرگ دانشجوی تنها در تهران
خبرگزاری حکومتی ایسکانیوز: با مرگ بی صدای دانشجوی تنها، شمار قربانیان گازگرفتگی در تهران باز هم افزایش یافت. آتش نشانی تهران گفت گاز سمی از یک خانه خیابان کرمان جنوبی متصاعد شده بود و در زیرزمین مسکونی با پیکر «باقر-ف» دانشجوی 23 ساله رو به رو شدیم.ابتدای هفته جاری نیز مرگ بی صدای پسر 17ساله ای به نام «ابراهیم» براثر گازگرفتگی، کمک رسانان آتش نشانی را به «آبعلی» کشید. او کارگر یک رستوران بود و شواهد نشان می دهد وقتی هنگام استحمام، برای گرم کردن خود «پیک نیک» روشن کرد به خاطر نشت گاز و بسته بودن محیط، به شدت مسموم و خفه شد.
آیا این قتل عام نیست ؟
جمهوری اسلامی کمر به نابودی مردم ایران بسته است. گویا انتقام نافرمانی مدنی مردم و عدم تمکین آنها به زعامت خامنه ای، دارد توسط دولت احمدی نژاد کلید می خورد. پاسخ خامنه ای به مردم ایران اعدام های جمعی در ملأ عام، تحقیر و توبیخ جوانان مردم تحت عنوان طرح ارتقآ امنیت خیابانی و مانور کوی و برزن و قلع و قمع اعتراضات معلمان و کارگران، زنان برابری طلب و دانشجویان قهرمان ایران می باشد. اما همه این ها هنوز کافی به نظر نمی رسد. تنبیه عمومی مردم بنا به دستو خامنه ای وارد فاز تازه ای شده است .اعتراض شدید مردم به بی گازی در دو هفته گذشته، باعث شد تا آقای احمدی نژاد دستور عجیبی صادر کنند. ایشان دستور دادند تا برای جبران کاهش فشار گاز در لوله ها، گاز تصقیه نشده که به گاز ترش موسوم است و دارای ترکیبات فراوان سولفور (گوگرد) و ترکیبات خطرناک دیگری می باشد به لوله های گاز شهری تزریق شود. این عمل جنایتکارانه باعث ایجاد انیدرید سولفریک، گاز کشنده منوکسید کربن و غیره است که همه به شدت کشنده هستند. این عمل جنایتکارانه که در زمان هیتلر برای قتل عام یهودیان در اتاق های گاز (با ظاهر حمام مانند) انجام می شد، اکنون در ایران و در زمان ریاست جمهوری احمدی نژاد انجام می شود و تا کنون سبب مرگ صد ها تن از هم میهنان ما در نقاط مختلف ایران شده است .

Our Politicized Intelligence Services
Today, Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee (and Thursday on the House side) to give the intelligence community's annual global threat analysis. These hearings are always significant, but the stakes are especially high now because of the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.
The mullahs and the death penalty
Saeed Jalili, the Secretary General of the Supreme National Security Council of the Islamic Republic of Iran, visited Brussels last week, to engage in dialogue with European counterparts. Little did he know that Members of the European Parliament would be particularly keen to have a candid exchange of views on the way Iran customarily hangs people from cranes in the public square. Though he did not answer, Jalili must have taken the outrage to heart, because barely a week later, Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahrudi, the head of Iran’s judiciary, has banned all public executions unless he personally authorizes them. He has also banned photographs and films of the executions, though not the executions themselves.
Cross-Border Chases From Iraq O.K., Document Says
WASHINGTON -- American military forces in Iraq were authorized to pursue former members of Saddam Hussein’s government and terrorists across Iraq’s borders into Iran and Syria, according to a classified 2005 document that has been made public by an independent Web site -WIKILEAKS

The 'Manchurian Mullah'
AS the "student" arrives in a bulletproof limousine with heavily armed guards, his teachers, ignoring that he's two hours late, greet him deferentially. The scene takes place at the Shiite seminary in Qom, Iran's holy city. The 35-year-old "student": Muqtada al-Sadr, leader of the Mahdi Army, a militia often deemed one of Iran's chief assets in Iraq.
Ahmadinejad Battles on the Home Front
WASHINGTON -- Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad has garnered headlines around the world for his defiance of Washington, as well as his rhetorical grandstanding on Palestinian issues, Israel and his government's alleged support of Shi'ite militias in Iraq.
Iran Tries to Make Up Lost Ground
The conventional wisdom, particularly in the United States, is that Iran has gained from the US's invasion of Iran's neighbors since the events of September 11, 2001. Yet, a careful reading of the changing security calculus caused by the exponential increase in the US's military presence in Iran's vicinity leads to the opposite conclusion.

Bush: Don't Show Iran US is 'Paper Tiger'
LAS VEGAS, Nevada -- US President George W. Bush on Thursday warned that a hasty pull-out from Iraq would ruin fragile progress there and convince extremists and Iran that the United States is a "paper tiger." "Failure in Iraq would embolden the extremists. Failure in Iraq would say to thugs and killers, the United States is a paper tiger," Bush said in a speech here. "Failure in Iraq would embolden Iran."
Has Iran Won?
Who would have thought that a friendless theocracy with a Holocaust-denying president, which hangs teenagers in public and stones women to death, could run diplomatic circles around America and its European allies? But Iran is doing just that. And it is doing so largely because of an extraordinary own goal by America's spies, the team behind the duff intelligence that brought you the Iraq war.

Radioactive Cargo on Train to Iran Investigated
All Things Considered, January 31, 2008 · Authorities in the Central Asian Republic of Kyrgyzstan are investigating why a train traveling from Kyrgyzstan to Iran was carrying radioactive cargo.
Another Police Attack on Tehran University
While the Sunday police attack on students at Tehran University resulted in injuries to ten ‎of them and the arrest of more than five, University officials either remained silent about ‎the incident or complete denied it.

Food Protest Turns Sour at Tehran Campus
TEHRAN -- Iranian students demanding an improvement of food quality at a university in Tehran started a political protest at the campus. Around 150 Iranian university students held a protest on Sunday chanting political slogans and demanding the resignation of university officials, the ISNA student news agency said on Monday

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

President Bush Delivers State of the Union Address

THE US PRESIDENT SAID :

We're also standing against the forces of extremism embodied by the regime in Tehran. Iran's rulers oppress a good and talented people. And wherever freedom advances in the Middle East, it seems the Iranian regime is there to oppose it. Iran is funding and training militia groups in Iraq, supporting Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon, and backing Hamas' efforts to undermine peace in the Holy Land. Tehran is also developing ballistic missiles of increasing range, and continues to develop its capability to enrich uranium, which could be used to create a nuclear weapon.Our message to the people of Iran is clear: We have no quarrel with you. We respect your traditions and your history. We look forward to the day when you have your freedom. Our message to the leaders of Iran is also clear: Veritably suspend your nuclear enrichment, so negotiations can begin. And to rejoin the community of nations, come clean about your nuclear intentions and past actions, stop your oppression at home, cease your support for terror abroad. But above all, know this: America will confront those who threaten our troops. We will stand by our allies, and we will defend our vital interests in the Persian Gulf. (Applause.)

And Tehran said :

Tehran Confirms Arrest of Members of Bahai Religion
Tehran on Tuesday confirmed Western reports of the arrest of Bahai religious community members in the southern city of Shiraz, ISNA news agency reported. ISNA quoted judiciary spokesman Ali-Reza Jamshidi as saying that some 54 Bahais were arrested due to propaganda against the Islamic system

A 'Duty' for Muslims to Attack the West, Says Editor
Tehran -- Hossein Shariatmadari, managing editor of 'Kayhan' (Universe) one of Iran's most influential newspapers, has issued a strongly worded editorial inviting Muslims to topple moderate Islamic governments and attack US, European and Israeli interests

A Cold War Redux is Seen on the Horizon
WASHINGTON -- Growing friction between the United States and Russia over Iran is only part of an increasingly difficult relationship that many diplomats and experts consider to be in its worst shape since the end of the Cold War, and at risk of further deterioration.
A China Base in Iran?
In the aftermath of President George W Bush's recent tour of the Persian Gulf, coinciding with a similar trip by France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, culminating in a deal with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for a small French base, Iran's security calculus has changed. It has almost reached the point of Tehran considering the option of reciprocating the perceived excess Western intrusion into its vicinity by allowing a military base for China at one of Iran's Persian Gulf ports or on one of its islands.
US Will 'Confront' Iran If Necessary
US President George W. Bush warned Iran that the United States will "confront those who threaten our troops" and defend its allies and interests in the Gulf. Bush, in excerpts of his State of the Union speech provided by the White House, also urged Tehran to suspend its uranium enrichment program, embrace political reforms, and "cease your support for terror abroad.'"
Domestic Issues Trump Foreign Policy in Iran
At each stop on his recent Middle East tour, President Bush centered his foreign policy agenda on the growing threat from Iran. But inside the Islamic Republic, domestic policies -- and not the international issues that Bush highlighted -- are at the center of political debate
Rice: UN Resolution on Iran to 'Open New Directions'
WASHINGTON -- A new UN resolution against Iran should deepen current sanctions and could pave the way for other action over its nuclear program, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday.
Tremors, as Nuke Fuel Arrives in Iran
Well, that was quick. Russia on Monday delivered the last batch of nuclear fuel for Iran’s light-water reactor in the southern city of Bushehr. That’s a little over a month after the first batch arrived.