Iran’s President and the Terrorist

#1
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link. If Iran continues on its present course Bush will be forced into strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. If there are terrorist attacks on the US in reprisal then Iran can expect another round of strikes, not to mention special ops attacks against terror targets in Lebanon and possibly Syria as well. This summer may well be long and hot.
 
#2
Now in his mid-forties, Mugniyeh is reported to have travelled with Ahmadinejad in January this year from Tehran to Damascus, where the Iranian president met leaders of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas
Was this one of the weekly 'Team Terrorist' meetings? - as I am pretty sure that Debka has been printing the same story every week for the past couple of years - just glad to see that some one has finally noticed :twisted:
 
#4
Perhaps this guy's being lined up as the new OBL? Nobody seems to care about OBL now, a new enemy is needed. I remember reading the real story of 'Carlos the Jackal' - his terorist career was not nearly as 'impressive' as we were led to beleive. More worrying is that the Iranians are sending 'advisors' to southern Lebanon.
 
#5
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link. If Iran continues on its present course Bush will be forced into strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. If there are terrorist attacks on the US in reprisal then Iran can expect another round of strikes, not to mention special ops attacks against terror targets in Lebanon and possibly Syria as well. This summer may well be long and hot.
Tell me, T6, have you ever thought of entering the competition for "The Most Gullible Cnut in the World"?

Just a thought!! :D :D :D

MsG
 
#6
Let's look at the article

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Sarah Baxter, Washington and Uzi Mahnaimi, Tel Aviv
...
US officials and Israel intelligence sources believe Imad Mugniyeh, the Lebanese commander...
Sahar & Uzi from Mossad. Very reliable source.

...Mugniyeh is reported to have travelled with Ahmadinejad in January this year from Tehran to Damascus, where the Iranian president...
Reported by whom? How reliable is this 'report'? Has Israel sufficient cause to portray Iran in the negative light?

Michael Ledeen, a Middle East expert and former Pentagon and National Security Council official who wrote that Mugniyeh had “probably” been there, said last week senior American officials had confirmed it.
So unnamed 'American official' said somthing to HowHisName? 'expert' and it is being presented as a proven fact. The cost of this article is equal to zero.

An Israeli defence source claimed Mugniyeh was in regular touch with the new Iranian intelligence minister, Gholamhossein Mohseni Ezhei. The minister is a long-time confidant of Ahmadinejad and was appointed by him.
Equally I can 'claim' that mr.Blair is a KGB agent and what? (btw, many would believe me).

Hezbollah. Can anybody there to name even one terror act performed by Hezbollah in recent 10 years?

No? You don't know about even one terror act? It is a strange terror organisation then...
 
#7
Aliases:
Islamic Jihad,
Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine,
Organization of the Oppressed on Earth,
Party of God,
Revolutionary Justice Organization,
The Islamic Resistance


Wheather it be Hezbollah or one of its aliases, matters not. Deciding to use another name doesnt stop your participation in terrorism.
 
#8
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link. If Iran continues on its present course Bush will be forced into strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. If there are terrorist attacks on the US in reprisal then Iran can expect another round of strikes, not to mention special ops attacks against terror targets in Lebanon and possibly Syria as well. This summer may well be long and hot.
I really don't know where to begin. How about:

1. Divorcing the two entirely seperate issues of terrorism and a suspected nuclear weapons program. Nobody in Iran is going to be stupid enough to give nuclear weapons to a terrorist group because its use would be be a death sentence for Iran. Nuclear forensics can determine the exact reprocessing or enrichment facility that the material came from. The loose nukes thing isn't going to be an issue because Iran isn't ever going to have the number of devices lying around like the Russians have. If something does missing there, they'll notice.

2. Try and get some idea into your head some concept of the limited power Ahmedinejad actually has. Learn, for pity's sake the difference between capabilities, intentions and simple rhetoric.

3. As I have pointed out before and as Zbignew Brzeninski (not exactly a peacenik) mentioned in Sunday's LA Times, this irresponsible, amateurish and quite fantastic sabre-rattling is preventing any hope of finding a diplomatic solution to the Iran problem. Of course, this is precisely what some fcukwits in the US administration want.

4. Even if Iran does get the bomb, why is everybody so concerned about the failure of deterrence that has prevented major war between the US and USSR, the USSR and China and India and Pakistan? What's different in this case?

5. There is also the "small" issue of the US position solidifying a hardline position as Iranian nationalists join up with the religious nutcases. This is exacerbated further by any ham-fisted attempt to turn "ethnic" groups into political agitators. What these muppets in Washington are actually foregetting is that Iran, unlike Iraq which was cobbled together by us Brits in the 1920s, actually has a history of political identification with Iran/Persia that goes back over 2,500 years. The exile ethnic groups, such as Iranian Jews and Armenian Christians have two major cob-ons with the current crowd running the show- religion (obviously) and the fact that most of them were doing very nicely, thank-you very much, under the Shah. You only have to see the cars their kids drive to school in to see that. (Saw one hairy little cnut, about 19-20 yrs old, park up a Bentley Continental last week. 8O )

6. Oil at $75 and rising. And a war with Iran will make Iraq look like a San Francisco bar fight.

7. Just think about the size of the tasking order required to get rid of nuclear facilities, IRBM and SSM batteries, naval facilities, airfields, terrorist training camps and air defences. Use of B-2s alone, and unafraid? Bag o'sh1te. Do you have any idea how many aircraft support a B-2 mission? You're not going to send a $2bn+ a/c into harms way without a sh1tload of CAP, EW and SEAD to keep everybody's head down.

8. You're facing the possibility of an attack from the US, you'd better start lining your ducks up in a row- starting with talking to your friends about retaliation. in the wake of US statements, is it any wonder that Ahmedinejad is talking to these people?

9. The Bush administration being flat wrong about every single major policy initiative of the last 5 1/2 years. Let me just head you off at the pass T6- while I agree that the Taleban had to be taken out of the game, Afghanistan isn't free- largely because of a failure to secure the country after their overthrow because CENTCOM was told to get cracking on "you know what". Their elected government controls maybe 3 square blocks in Kabul and enough ink has been spilt about the clusterfcuk that is Iraq that I need not elaborate further here. Any international goodwill that the US had after 9/11 has been well and truly p1ssed up the wall. (Including in Iran where there were spontaneous rallies of support for the US in the days after 9/11- and neither the government or the clerics are friends of bin Laden and al Qaeda either.)

10. The American public finally becoming wise to the fact that the Administration is a bunch of deceitful, inept cnuts and there's an election in November. Even if John Negroponte (who incidentally, according to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the HPSCI, has been identified as being unable to keep Rummy in check) trots out the most credible evidence possible that the Iranians intend to use a nuclear weapon again the US or its allies- who the fcuk is going to believe him now? By painting the USIC as the bad guys for the Iraq debacle, the Administration has undermined ANY credibility it had with the American people.

Now please, think things through once in a while before you spout your usual nonsense.
 
#9
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link. If Iran continues on its present course Bush will be forced into strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. If there are terrorist attacks on the US in reprisal then Iran can expect another round of strikes, not to mention special ops attacks against terror targets in Lebanon and possibly Syria as well. This summer may well be long and hot.
Who really gives a flying fcuk apart from Geroge W Bush and his team of financial...no goverment advisors Send in a Delta farce team and nick him if it bothers you that much.
 
#10
Wha_Dar said:
Aliases:
Islamic Jihad,
Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine,
Organization of the Oppressed on Earth,
Party of God,
Revolutionary Justice Organization,
The Islamic Resistance


Wheather it be Hezbollah or one of its aliases, matters not. Deciding to use another name doesnt stop your participation in terrorism.
Wha_Dar!

Terrorist organisation is terrorist because it performs terror acts. Hezbollah is a Lebanese political party that has own militia. I'm unaware about even one terror act by Hezbollah at least last 10 years.

So branding Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation is no more than PR.
 
#11
crabtastic said:
tomahawk6 said:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link. If Iran continues on its present course Bush will be forced into strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. If there are terrorist attacks on the US in reprisal then Iran can expect another round of strikes, not to mention special ops attacks against terror targets in Lebanon and possibly Syria as well. This summer may well be long and hot.
I really don't know where to begin. How about:

1. Divorcing the two entirely seperate issues of terrorism and a suspected nuclear weapons program. Nobody in Iran is going to be stupid enough to give nuclear weapons to a terrorist group because its use would be be a death sentence for Iran. Nuclear forensics can determine the exact reprocessing or enrichment facility that the material came from. The loose nukes thing isn't going to be an issue because Iran isn't ever going to have the number of devices lying around like the Russians have. If something does missing there, they'll notice.

2. Try and get some idea into your head some concept of the limited power Ahmedinejad actually has. Learn, for pity's sake the difference between capabilities, intentions and simple rhetoric.

3. As I have pointed out before and as Zbignew Brzeninski (not exactly a peacenik) mentioned in Sunday's LA Times, this irresponsible, amateurish and quite fantastic sabre-rattling is preventing any hope of finding a diplomatic solution to the Iran problem. Of course, this is precisely what some fcukwits in the US administration want.

4. Even if Iran does get the bomb, why is everybody so concerned about the failure of deterrence that has prevented major war between the US and USSR, the USSR and China and India and Pakistan? What's different in this case?

5. There is also the "small" issue of the US position solidifying a hardline position as Iranian nationalists join up with the religious nutcases. This is exacerbated further by any ham-fisted attempt to turn "ethnic" groups into political agitators. What these muppets in Washington are actually foregetting is that Iran, unlike Iraq which was cobbled together by us Brits in the 1920s, actually has a history of political identification with Iran/Persia that goes back over 2,500 years. The exile ethnic groups, such as Iranian Jews and Armenian Christians have two major cob-ons with the current crowd running the show- religion (obviously) and the fact that most of them were doing very nicely, thank-you very much, under the Shah. You only have to see the cars their kids drive to school in to see that. (Saw one hairy little cnut, about 19-20 yrs old, park up a Bentley Continental last week. 8O )

6. Oil at $75 and rising. And a war with Iran will make Iraq look like a San Francisco bar fight.

7. Just think about the size of the tasking order required to get rid of nuclear facilities, IRBM and SSM batteries, naval facilities, airfields, terrorist training camps and air defences. Use of B-2s alone, and unafraid? Bag o'sh1te. Do you have any idea how many aircraft support a B-2 mission? You're not going to send a $2bn+ a/c into harms way without a sh1tload of CAP, EW and SEAD to keep everybody's head down.

8. You're facing the possibility of an attack from the US, you'd better start lining your ducks up in a row- starting with talking to your friends about retaliation. in the wake of US statements, is it any wonder that Ahmedinejad is talking to these people?

9. The Bush administration being flat wrong about every single major policy initiative of the last 5 1/2 years. Let me just head you off at the pass T6- while I agree that the Taleban had to be taken out of the game, Afghanistan isn't free- largely because of a failure to secure the country after their overthrow because CENTCOM was told to get cracking on "you know what". Their elected government controls maybe 3 square blocks in Kabul and enough ink has been spilt about the clusterfcuk that is Iraq that I need not elaborate further here. Any international goodwill that the US had after 9/11 has been well and truly p1ssed up the wall. (Including in Iran where there were spontaneous rallies of support for the US in the days after 9/11- and neither the government or the clerics are friends of bin Laden and al Qaeda either.)

10. The American public finally becoming wise to the fact that the Administration is a bunch of deceitful, inept cnuts and there's an election in November. Even if John Negroponte (who incidentally, according to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the HPSCI, has been identified as being unable to keep Rummy in check) trots out the most credible evidence possible that the Iranians intend to use a nuclear weapon again the US or its allies- who the fcuk is going to believe him now? By painting the USIC as the bad guys for the Iraq debacle, the Administration has undermined ANY credibility it had with the American people.

Now please, think things through once in a while before you spout your usual nonsense.
You missed out the point that attacking Iran would be economic suicide. Without Iran's oil production, the world's supply is 2billion barrels a day BELOW world requirements and it would drive the price per barrel into the stratosphere, collapsing the international trading markets.

On top of that, attacking Iran would, at some stage, require hits on her oil facilities, including the sparkling new terminal on the Gulf of Oman coast that has been built with Chinese money and skills, effectively destroying a vital part of China's national interest (not smart with a country that controls 3/4 IIRC of America's national debt). And that isn't even thinking about the 2/5 of the global oil supply that passes through the Straits of Hormuz!
 
#12
Disregarding the sensationalist spin, theres probably a grain of truth in this article.

Iran is perhaps sending a message of its own to the spams...mess with us and we have the capability to hit US soil.
 
#13
The Times said:
US officials and Israel intelligence sources believe Imad Mugniyeh, the Lebanese commander of Hezbollah’s overseas operations, has taken charge of plotting Iran’s retaliation against western targets should President George W Bush order a strike on Iranian nuclear sites.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2147683,00.html

Are these the same "US officials and Israel intelligence sources" that told us about WMD in Iraq?

tomahawk6 said:
Not that we need more evidence that Iran is an enabler of terrorism, but the recent meeting of Ahmadinejad and wanted terrorist Imad Mugniyeh does provide another direct link.
You seem to have a problem discerning 'evidence' from 'supposition' and 'direct link' from 'belief'. If you disconnect from the collective for a few moments, you may understand the difference.
 
#14
KGB_resident said:
Terrorist organisation is terrorist because it performs terror acts. Hezbollah is a Lebanese political party that has own militia. I'm unaware about even one terror act by Hezbollah at least last 10 years.

So branding Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation is no more than PR.
How about as an example: December 27, 2005, a number of 107 mm Katyusha rockets were fired at northern Israeli towns.

The attack came from two sites in south Lebanon , one in the central sector and the other in the west: A number of rockets were fired at Kiriyat Shemonah from the central sector causing property damage. Other rockets were fired from the western sector and fell in the vicinity of the town of Shlomi and other towns along the border.

Do Hezbollah operators require suicide belts and one way missions in order to be classified as terrorists, or are there not other forms of carrying out terror (in the last 10 years)??
 
#16
Arik said:
Do Hezbollah operators require suicide belts and one way missions in order to be classified as terrorists, or are there not other forms of carrying out terror (in the last 10 years)??
No. If they can persuade the Spams to give them F16s and Apaches for free, LGBs and Hellfires work quite well too I am told- but you and yours might know more about the details than I do. Even the odd bulldozer might come in handy from time to time. :wink:
 
#17
crabtastic said:
Arik said:
Do Hezbollah operators require suicide belts and one way missions in order to be classified as terrorists, or are there not other forms of carrying out terror (in the last 10 years)??
No. If they can persuade the Spams to give them F16s and Apaches for free, LGBs and Hellfires work quite well too I am told- but you and yours might know more about the details than I do. Even the odd bulldozer might come in handy from time to time. :wink:
Just a quick note relating to armoured D9 bulldozers. This may have been covered in previous posts, but the Church of England now abides by an ethical investment policy, meaning they no longer invest in Caterpillar, the mercenary swine that sell these things to the US. So now, whether they're building walls or flattening occupied (in the more literal sense of the word) houses, the hand of 'God' is not involved - except, that is, vicariously through the shaved chimp.
 
#18
Arik said:
How about as an example: December 27, 2005, a number of 107 mm Katyusha rockets were fired at northern Israeli towns.

The attack came from two sites in south Lebanon , one in the central sector and the other in the west: A number of rockets were fired at Kiriyat Shemonah from the central sector causing property damage. Other rockets were fired from the western sector and fell in the vicinity of the town of Shlomi and other towns along the border.
Pretty sure that Sharon blamed the PFLP-GC for that one, he also bombed them in Beirut the very next day. Maybe it was a 'team terrorist' joint enterprise and Sharon didn't get the memo. :twisted:

Do Hezbollah operators require suicide belts and one way missions in order to be classified as terrorists, or are there not other forms of carrying out terror (in the last 10 years)??
No, that is so 1908s. Hezbollah is so passed that, its government they are interested in and doesn't Jumblatt know it!

Hezbollah of course would see themselves as a resistance movement - as Nasrallah has said that Hezbollah will not disarm until the Israelis stop threatening southern Lebanon and cede back the Shebba farms, even though they are technically syrian 8O
 
#19
Arik said:
KGB_resident said:
Terrorist organisation is terrorist because it performs terror acts. Hezbollah is a Lebanese political party that has own militia. I'm unaware about even one terror act by Hezbollah at least last 10 years.

So branding Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation is no more than PR.
How about as an example: December 27, 2005, a number of 107 mm Katyusha rockets were fired at northern Israeli towns.
Arik!

First of all, was it Hezbollah?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4563216.stm

A Hezbollah spokesman told the agency he knew nothing of the attacks while a Palestinian Fatah movement official in Lebanon, Sultan Abu Aynaeyn, strongly denied any involvement by Palestinians.

Last month Israeli fighter jets attacked a Hezbollah command post in response to an attack on an Israeli border community.
Anyway it was a military operation. Israel uses to perform the same actions.

Arik said:
Do Hezbollah operators require suicide belts and one way missions in order to be classified as terrorists, or are there not other forms of carrying out terror (in the last 10 years)??
Place Israel instead of Hezbollah in this sentence and say me would it be true in this case?
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top