Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Grad, Feb 6, 2007.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Iran is holding the US responsible
More fuel for the fire then.........
Hmmmm can anyone else hear the sound of the war machine in the White House reving up?
One more step closer to Op Persian Freedom.
What goes around comes around, to incite violence and civil unrest in Iraq then to be kidnapped in the lawless country you helped to create.
haha hoho hehe hoho haha hehe.
Kidnapped by who?
Are there any reports yet?
Reuters has this, updated at 15:53 GMT.
The brass necked hypocrisy of this made me laugh out loud. Doesn't someone read Blair's stuff before he says it?
I'm sorry eyeuk, I don't rember Iran attacking and occupying Iraq in 2003 inciting violence and civil unrest as a consequence?
Of course I could be wrong.
The whole thing has the smell of a big pot of something being gleefully stirred. I am just trying to figure out who is doing the stirring! Is this a US led thing to further incite Iran, or an Iranian ploy to get the US to back off, or is it just pure dumb co-incidence that an Iranian diplomat got kidnapped by Shia or Sunni extremists?
As I understand it (if I can trust the media who are undoubtably fed stories by the US and UK Govts) Iran has been training militias and even sending their forces into Iraq in an effort to destabilise the country and to support the Iraqis who oppose the troops in the south.
While it can be said that the invasion by the allies initally created the situation the Iranians have added to it and could be blamed for some of the mess it has become.
I'm sorry if my earlier statement was unclear.
Thats a very funny line.
Or more like the Presidential Palace's one in Tehran. All we know so far are that a bunch of Iraqi's - and you can't exactly tell a Sunni from a Shia just by looking at them - dressed as police grabbed the guy. If you want an alternative theory to the usual The US Is To Blame one then I could see Ahmadinejad trying something like this to keep things unsettled and maybe drum up a little support back home.
Whilst the public still massively supports him on the nuclear enrichment/power situation, some of his more barking statements on things like Israel or his aggressive stance of almost picking a fight with the world over the nuclear affair have made him much less popular. Even some of the conservative government elements have been looking at him a bit askance lately as an embarrassment. Wasn't it a week or so ago that he got snubbed by the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei when he wanted a meeting over nuclear matters? He's reportedly a bit more moderate on the issue than Ahmadinejad. Well, that's my contribution to the conspiracy pot.
Interesting stratfor.com bulletin this morning (....I really must learn how to post links!). Reasoned analysis setting out the options:
1. US op
2. 'plausible denaibility' US op
3. Sunni op trying to stir up the US-Iranian rift which AQ mouthpieces have gone on record saying helps them.
Abductors in 36th Commando Battalion uniforms, apparently closely linked with US. Seems a bit obvious for (1) or (2) but you never know.... Perhaps the fact that, whatever, the Iranians think it was the US the key point. The bulletin cites a recent precedent when 5 US soldiers were abducted and killed in Karbala on January 20 after 5 Iranians were killed in Arbil with no clear culprit.
Iran is a danger, more so than Iraq ever was. Iran needs to be turned into molten glass and it doesn't matter what the trigger is as long as it's done.
Separate names with a comma.