Report: U.S. 'preparing the battlefield' in IranStory

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
well, i guess it isn't a secret anymore...


New Yorker article says Congress authorized up to $400 million for covert ops in Iran

Journalist Seymour Hersh says program is being staged from Afghanistan

U.S. officials decline comment, deny the U.S. is launching raids from Iraq

Iranian general says troops are building graves for invaders in the event of war

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration has launched a "significant escalation" of covert operations in Iran, sending U.S. commandos to spy on the country's nuclear facilities and undermine the Islamic republic's government, journalist Seymour Hersh said Sunday.


An Iranian flag flies outside the building containing the reactor of Bushehr nuclear power plant, south of Tehran.

White House, CIA and State Department officials declined comment on Hersh's report, which appears in this week's issue of The New Yorker.

Hersh told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer" that Congress has authorized up to $400 million to fund the secret campaign, which involves U.S. special operations troops and Iranian dissidents.

President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have rejected findings from U.S. intelligence agencies that Iran has halted a clandestine effort to build a nuclear bomb and "do not want to leave Iran in place with a nuclear program," Hersh said.

"They believe that their mission is to make sure that before they get out of office next year, either Iran is attacked or it stops its weapons program," Hersh said.

The new article, "Preparing the Battlefield," is the latest in a series of articles accusing the Bush administration of preparing for war with Iran. He based the report on accounts from current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources.

"As usual with his quarterly pieces, we'll decline to comment," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe told CNN.

"The CIA, as a rule, does not comment on allegations regarding covert operations," CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano said.

Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador in Baghdad, denied U.S. raids were being launched from Iraq, where American commanders believe Iran is stoking sectarian warfare and fomenting attacks on U.S. troops.

"I can tell you flatly that U.S. forces are not operating across the Iraqi border into Iran, in the south or anywhere else," Crocker said.

Hersh said U.S. efforts were staged from Afghanistan, which also shares a border with Iran.

He said the program resulted in "a dramatic increase in kinetic events and chaos" inside Iran, including attacks by Kurdish separatists in the country's north and a May attack on a mosque in Shiraz that killed 13 people.

The United States has said it is trying to isolate Iran diplomatically in order to get it to come clean about its nuclear ambitions. But Bush has said "all options" are open in dealing with the issue.

Iran insists its nuclear program is aimed at providing civilian electric power, and refuses to comply with U.N. Security Council demands that it halt uranium enrichment work.

U.N. nuclear inspectors say Tehran held back critical information that could determine whether it is trying to make nuclear weapons.

Israel, which is believed to have its own nuclear arsenal, conducted a military exercise in the eastern Mediterranean in early June involving dozens of warplanes and aerial tankers.

The distance involved in the exercise was roughly the same as would be involved in a possible strike on the Iranian nuclear fuel plant at Natanz, Iran, a U.S. military official said.

In 1981, Israeli warplanes destroyed an Iraqi nuclear reactor.

Iran's parliament speaker, Ali Larijani, warned other countries against moves that would "cost them heavily." In comments that appeared in the semi-official Mehr news agency Sunday, an Iranian general said his troops were digging more than 320,000 graves to bury troops from any invading force with "the respect they deserve."

"Under the law of war and armed conflict, necessary preparations must be made for the burial of soldiers of aggressor nations," said Maj. Gen. Mirfaisal Baqerzadeh, an Iranian officer in charge of identifying soldiers missing in action.
 

rusty

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 24, 2006
4,627
11
0
Under a mask.
Wouldnt surprise me.
Could be the end game of all end games.
Dont wanna get too deep here.
But some say Iran is the major player toward the end.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Iran's parliament speaker, Ali Larijani, warned other countries against moves that would "cost them heavily." In comments that appeared in the semi-official Mehr news agency Sunday, an Iranian general said his troops were digging more than 320,000 graves to bury troops from any invading force with "the respect they deserve."

"Under the law of war and armed conflict, necessary preparations must be made for the burial of soldiers of aggressor nations," said Maj. Gen. Mirfaisal Baqerzadeh, an Iranian officer in charge of identifying soldiers missing in action.
.........................................................

Thats putting the cart before the horse.

Considering a land invasion is highly unlikely.

They may should consider using the graves for when a nuke is dropped on their asses.

Iran always seems to approach these situations with illogical comments.
 

kosar

Centrist
Forum Member
Nov 27, 1999
11,112
55
0
ft myers, fl
.........................................................

Thats putting the cart before the horse.

Considering a land invasion is highly unlikely.

They may should consider using the graves for when a nuke is dropped on their asses.

Iran always seems to approach these situations with illogical comments.

Yep,

Illogical comments should always be met with a mushroom cloud.
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Yep,

Illogical comments should always be met with a mushroom cloud.

..........................................................

Yeh I think its the barbarian side of my centrist
views.

When I think back on the Iran hostage situation and how they dragged that out , I have alot of inner hostility towards them

What will be will be.
 

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
..........................................................

Yeh I think its the barbarian side of my centrist
views.

When I think back on the Iran hostage situation and how they dragged that out , I have alot of inner hostility towards them

What will be will be.

They dragged it out because that snake Reagan had a deal with them not to release them until he got in office. Nice patriot that Reagan was
 

UGA12

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 7, 2003
7,774
108
63
Between The Hedges
They dragged it out because that snake Reagan had a deal with them not to release them until he got in office. Nice patriot that Reagan was

:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:

They had been hostages for a year before Reagan even won the election.

Whats that word, oh yeah......Pathetic
 

Spytheweb

Registered User
Forum Member
Sep 27, 2005
1,171
14
0
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:

They had been hostages for a year before Reagan even won the election.

Whats that word, oh yeah......Pathetic


In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an "October Surprise"* by the Reagan camp ? something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages' release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration's defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released. Under Reagan, the Iran-Contra Affair completes this story.
 

UGA12

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 7, 2003
7,774
108
63
Between The Hedges
In the late stages of the presidential race with Ronald Reagan, Carter, given those new parameters, might have been able to bargain with the Iranians, which might have clinched the election for him. The 11th-hour heroics were dubbed an "October Surprise"* by the Reagan camp ? something they did not want to see happen.

Allegations surfaced that William Casey, director of the Reagan campaign, and some CIA operatives, secretly met with Iranian officials in Europe to arrange for the hostages' release, but not until after the election. If true, some observers aver, dealing with a hostile foreign government to achieve a domestic administration's defeat would have been grounds for charges of treason.

Reagan won the election, partly because of the failure of the Carter administration to bring the hostages home. Within minutes of Reagan's inauguration, the hostages were released. Under Reagan, the Iran-Contra Affair completes this story.

Damn, please accept my deepest apologies as I had no idea that there were allegations out there.:142smilie :142smilie :142smilie

Shouldnt you be building a shoe bomb rather than in this thread spy:shrug:
 

Tapir Caper

Registered
Forum Member
Apr 14, 2008
583
0
0
Rogue Nation

by Charley Reese

One gets the impression that there are some people in Washington who believe that Israel or the U.S. can bomb Iran's nuclear reactors, fly home, and it will be mission complete.

It makes you wonder if perhaps there is a virus going around that is gradually making people stupid. If we or Israel attack Iran, we will have a new war on our hands. The Iranians are not going to shrug off an attack and say, "You naughty boys, you."

Consider how much trouble Iraq has given us. Some 4,000 dead and 29,000 wounded, a half a trillion dollars in cost and still climbing, and five years later, we cannot say that the country is pacified.

Iraq is a small country compared with Iran. Iran has about 70 million people. Its western mountains border the Persian Gulf. In other words, its missiles and guns look down on the U.S. ships below it. And it has lots of missiles, from short-range to intermediate-range (around 2,200 kilometers).

More to the point, it has been equipped by Russia with the fastest anti-ship missile on the planet. The SS-N-22 Sunburn can travel at Mach 3 at high altitude and at Mach 2.2 at low altitude. That is faster than anything in our arsenal.

Iran's conventional forces include an army of 540,000 men and 300,000 reserves, including 120,000 Iranian Guards especially trained in unconventional warfare. It has more than 1,600 main battle tanks and 21,000 other armored combat vehicles. It has 3,200 artillery pieces, three submarines, 59 surface warships and 10 amphibious ships.

It's been receiving help in arming itself from China, North Korea and Russia. Unlike Iraq, Iran's forces have not been worn down with bombing, wars and sanctions. It also has a new anti-aircraft defense system from Russia that I've heard is pretty snazzy.

So, if you think we or Israel can attack Iran and not expect retaliation, I'd have to say with regret that you are a moron. If you think we could easily handle Iran in an all-out war, I'd have to promote you to idiot.

Attacking Iran would be folly, but we seem to be living in the Age of Folly. Morons and idiots took us into an unjustified war against Iraq before we had finished the job in Afghanistan. Now we have troops tied down in both countries.

China has a tremendous investment and interest in Iran and would likely see an attack as a threat to its national interests. China could strike a large blow against the U.S. just by dumping the financial paper we have foolishly allowed the Chinese to pile up, thanks to the trade deficit.

For some years now, I've worried that we seem to be more and more like Colonial England ? arrogant, racist, overestimating our own capacity and underestimating that of our enemies. As the fate of the British Empire demonstrates, that is a fatal flaw.

The British never dreamed that the "little yellow people" could come ashore by land and take Singapore from the rear or that they would sink the pride of the British fleet, but they did both.

I suppose no one in Washington can imagine the Iranians sinking one of our carriers in the Persian Gulf. How'd you like to be the president who has to tell the American people that we've lost a carrier for the first time since World War II?

Exactly how the Iranians will respond to an attack, I don't know, but they will respond. In keeping with our present policy, our attack on Iran would be illegal, since under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iran has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes.

Who would have thought that we would become the rogue nation committing acts of aggression around the globe?

June 30, 2008
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,575
226
63
"the bunker"
well,it`s the iraq war,stupid...

it went from being 23% of the news coverage in 2007 to coverage to 3 % in 2008....

not a very good democrat talking point when the surge is doing so well....

sooooo,iraq off the table...enter iran...we got us a new boogeyman...

you guys are such useful idiots...
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,497
260
83
Victory Lane
Richard_reid.jpg

............................................................
During a flight on American Airlines Flight 63 flight, as it was flying over the Atlantic Ocean, Richard Colvin Reid ? an Islamic fundamentalist from the United Kingdom, and alleged/self-proclaimed Al Qaeda operative ? carried shoes that were packed with two types of explosives. He had been refused permission to board this flight the day before.

Passengers on the flight complained of a smoke smell shortly after meal service. One flight attendant, Hermis Moutardier, walked the aisles of the plane to assess the source. She found Reid sitting alone near a window attempting to light a match. Moutardier warned him that smoking was not allowed on the airplane and Reid promised to stop. A few minutes later, Moutardier found Reid leaning over in his seat and unsuccessfully attempted to get his attention. After asking him what he was doing, Reid grabbed at her, revealing one shoe in his lap, a fuse leading into the shoe, and a lit match. She tried grabbing Reid twice, but he pushed her to the floor each time, and she screamed for help. When another flight attendant, Cristina Jones, arrived to try to subdue him, he fought her and bit her thumb. The 6 feet 4 inch (193 centimeters) tall Reid was eventually subdued by other passengers on the aircraft, using plastic handcuffs, seatbelt extensions, and headphone cords. A doctor administered Valium found in the flight kit of the aircraft. [1] Many of the passengers were aware of the situation when the pilot announced that the flight was to be diverted to Logan International Airport in Boston, Massachusetts. Two fighter jets escorted Flight 63 to Logan Airport. The plane was parked in the middle of the runway and Reid was arrested on the ground while the rest of the passengers were bussed to the main terminal. Authorities later found over 100 grams of plastic TATP and PETN hidden in the hollowed soles of his black basketball shoes, enough to blow a substantial hole in the aircraft. He was later convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment
.......................................................
 
Last edited:

The Sponge

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 24, 2006
17,263
97
0
:mj07: :mj07: :mj07:

They had been hostages for a year before Reagan even won the election.

Whats that word, oh yeah......Pathetic

enuf said

October 6, 2003

Study shows Fox News viewers misinformed about war, Iraq, WMD, Iran Contra and anything else they want a simpleton to fall for.


Posted October 6th, 2003 at 11:43 am Share This | Spotlight | Permalink

I have naively believed for years that staying informed about current events by getting some news is better than blissful ignorance derived from getting no news. Then Fox News Channel helped demonstrate just how wrong I was.
The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland conducted a thorough study of public knowledge and attitudes about current events and the war on terrorism. Researchers found that the public?s mistaken impressions of three facets of U.S. foreign policy ? discovery of alleged WMD in Iraq, alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11, and international support for a U.S. invasion of Iraq ? helped fuel support for the war.
While the PIPA study concluded that most Americans (over 60%) held at least one of these mistaken impressions, the researchers also concluded that Americans? opinions were shaped in large part by which news outlet they relied upon to receive their information.
As the researchers explained in their report, ?The extent of Americans? misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.?
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were ?three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.?

Looking at the misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on newspapers as their ?primary news source? incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more ? 17% ? of those who relied on NPR and PBS were wrong. Yet 33% of Fox News viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.
Likewise, when people were asked if the U.S. had ?clear evidence? that Saddam Hussein was ?working closely with al Queda,? similar results were found. Only 16% of NPR and PBS listeners/viewers believed that the U.S. has such evidence, while 67% of Fox News viewers were under that mistaken impression.
Overall, 80 percent of those who relied on Fox News as their primary news source believed at least one of the three misperceptions. Viewers/listeners/readers of other news outlets didn?t even come close to this total.
In other words, Fox News viewers are literally less informed about these basic facts. They have, put simply, been led to believe things that are simply not true. These poor dupes would have done better in this survey, statistically speaking, if they received no news at all and simply guessed whether the claims were accurate.
And, in addition to a fun bash-Fox-athon, I wanted to add that the PIPA study also documented that those who relied on newspapers as their primary news source were better informed than those who watched any of the television news broadcasts. The only folks more informed than newspaper readers
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top