Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Christians4LessGvt

Pages: 1 ... 729 730 [731] 732 733 ... 743
10951
3DHS / US Forces Seize Iranian Agent In Iraq
« on: September 06, 2007, 12:13:39 AM »



U.S. seizes 'Iran agent' in Iraq
Sept 5, 2007


The head of Iran's Revolutionary Guard Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, attends a news conference, in Tehran.

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S.-led coalition forces say they have captured a "highly sought" individual in Iraq with alleged ties to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force

The raid took place early Wednesday south of Baghdad in the Shiite Muslim holy city of Karbala, a U.S. military statement said.

According to the military, the detainee was suspected of coordinating with high-level Quds force officers, whose goal it was to transport Iraqis into Iran for terrorist training.

Although the coalition is still assessing the individual's connection with the Quds force, Multi-National Force-Iraq spokesman Lt. Col. Christopher Garver described the arrest as an "integral part of dismantling terror networks that seek to kill innocent Iraqis and security forces."

For months U.S. officials have stated Iranian agents from the Quds force have been helping train and equip militants in Iraq and have been supplying insurgents with the high-tech, armor-piercing explosively formed penetrators.

Iran has denied these assertions.

Last month U.S. soldiers arrested -- and later released -- eight members of an Iranian government delegation at a hotel in Baghdad for allegedly carrying weapons without permits.

The Iranian foreign ministry described the detentions as an "interventionist act."

http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/09/05/iraq.iran/


10952
3DHS / Re: Call It War, Mr. President
« on: September 06, 2007, 12:06:04 AM »
Oh. I see.  Kinda like Iraq.

do you not read my posts?
no not anything like iraq
we do not have the same goals in Iran as we do in Iraq

iran would be an on-going aerial destruction of the iranian military, no ground troops like in iraq
difficulty in Iraq is related to ground troops and there would be no ground troops in iran
IED's dont work well against B-1 bombers and cruise missles

iran / iraq
totally different situations, totally different goals
frankly i dont care what happens in iran (civil war/no civil war) as long as they are stopped from exporting islamic terror/funds/guns/ammo/training

our bombing would not be a precursor to set up a gvt in iran like in iraq
it is to change behavior
in iraq the aerial bombing was the beginning of a ground invasion, in iran the aerial bombing like kosovo would be the end goal
if regime change happens and (it probably would) the clerics are thrown out like the Shah, so be it. (what a fitting ending)

iran would have no military and we would have no ground troops there
we would "wait and see" who takes over and what their geo-political goals are
but we would not tolerate an iran acting in the way they have been
if they do, then their military would be again destroyed as needed

With the Iraqi military totally destroyed there wouldn't be any "current Iraqi regime."  

Exactly the opposite
Yes very quickly in relative terms Iraq had an election and produced "a regime"
when you referred to the "regime" you obviously implied the same people would still be in charge in Iran
i very seriously doubt they would
the youth of iran are approaching a boiling point
with no military to impose the clerics iron fisted rule a new regime would ensue

they managed to create a few problems for the World's Only Super-Power, didn't they?

yes because we have ground troops there trying to be police on the ground
there would be no us ground troops in iran
nice analogy that does not apply

we have the power to destroy their military, they do not have the power to destroy ours
just ask milosevic (except he's dead)



10953
3DHS / Re: Call It War, Mr. President
« on: September 05, 2007, 09:25:07 PM »
The current Iranian regime is probably one of the few governments in the world today that could match the U.S.A. atrocity for atrocity.

with the iranian military totally destroyed there wouldn't be any "current iranian regime"
with virtually no military they would be hard pressed to even control their own insurgencies that they currently battle
rather that worry about the us, they would be very very busy fighting for their own survival

10954
3DHS / Re: Call It War, Mr. President
« on: September 05, 2007, 03:18:31 PM »
I agree Rich.
Good post.

Iran is fighting a proxy war against the United States and Israel because
the Iranian Theocrats realize they can not survive an all out war with the US.
I think we should destroy their military from the air as early as yesterday.
The cheap talk about enraging the Muslims, is just that.
Look at the videos below, as if they don't already hate us.
Destroy the Iranian military now instead of later when it would be more difficult.
They would certianly destroy ours if they could.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=XHoVuFlrcjA

http://youtube.com/watch?v=1OIUieD2KN4


10956
3DHS / Re: "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military"
« on: September 05, 2007, 09:26:09 AM »
It's no secret what Iran has been doing in Iraq.

and many other places
huge shipmements of arms to American/Israel enemies
in reality we are at war with Iran
why "hold back"?
i think the sooner the bombing starts the better

10957
3DHS / Re: "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military"
« on: September 04, 2007, 05:58:32 PM »
mr perceptive, looks like this may actually happen
iran without a military would be such a nice reality



BERN, Switzerland.
Sept. 3, 2007

After a brief interruption of his New Hampshire vacation to meet President Bush in the family compound at Kenebunkport, Maine, French President Nicolas Sarkozy came away convinced his U.S. counterpart is serious about bombing Iran's secret nuclear facilities. That's the reading as it filtered back to Europe's foreign ministries:

Addressing the annual meeting of France's ambassadors to 188 countries, Mr. Sarkozy said either Iran lives up to its international obligations and relinquishes its nuclear ambitions ? or it will be bombed into compliance. Mr. Sarkozy also made it clear he did not agree with the Iranian-bomb-or-bombing-of-Iran position, which reflects the pledge of Mr. Bush to his loyalists, endorsed by Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut Independent. But Mr. Sarkozy recognized unless Iran's theocrats stop enriching uranium to weapons-grade levels under inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), we will all be "faced with an alternative that I call catastrophic."

A ranking Swiss official privately said, "Anyone with a modicum of experience in the Middle East knows that any bombing of Iran would touch off at the very least regional instability and what could be an unmitigated disaster for Western interests."

Leaks about the administration's plan to brand Iran's 125,000-strong Revolutionary Guards a global terrorist organization is widely interpreted as a major step on the escalator to military action. Belatedly, Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer, has signed a contract with Lockheed Martin for the training of 35,000 elite guards to be assigned to protect the kingdom's widely scattered oil installations. With 25 percent of the world's oil reserves, Riyadh has earmarked $5 billion to train and field as soon as possible a high-tech force. Eighteen months ago, the desert kingdom was jolted by an al Qaeda terrorist squad that managed to penetrate the first two layers of defenses at Abqaiq, the nerve center of the entire oil infrastructure.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has now stated publicly his country holds the key to the conditions of a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Iraq, much criticized by the United States for his lack of leadership, and who has been deserted by half his Cabinet, is much praised in Tehran, where he has gone twice in 11 months to confer with Iranian leaders. Mr. Ahmadinejad also says Iran is ready to fill the power vacuum in Iraq following a U.S. withdrawal. "The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly," he said, "and soon we will see a huge power vacuum in the region."

The United States is not alone in trying to prove Mr. Ahmadinejad's geopolitical weather forecast wrong. Saudi Arabia and its five Gulf Cooperation Council allies in the Gulf, Egypt and Jordan, are terrified at the idea of Iraq falling under Iranian domination.

Hoping to head off a U.S.-Iran military confrontation, European countries are still pinning their hopes on major Iranian concessions at the International Atomic Energy Commission in Vienna. Iran is back to cooperating with IAEA ? but only one comma or semicolon at a time. The three European Union countries acting as U.S. surrogates on nuclear matters with Iran, and IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, detect progress where the U.S. sees only stalling. Iran is still resisting short-notice inspections of sites that are not officially declared nuclear facilities, and where secret nuclear work is believed to be taking place.

Tehran's only objective at the IAEA and the U.N. Security Council is to head off further economic sanctions from its major EU trading partners. Thus the mantra that its only interest in nuclear matters is as an alternative source of energy in a country already awash in oil taxes credulity.

Both the Bush administration and Israel are painstakingly fashioning a casus belli with Iran. For Israel, the training and weapons support Iran furnishes Hezbollah in Lebanon (now with more rockets of all kinds than it had before the 2006 war when it fired 4,000 into Israel) and Hamas in Gaza (now equipped with Katyusha rockets and a range of 10.6 miles), coupled with Mr. Ahmadinejad's existential threats against the Jewish state, are sufficient evidence to justify air attacks against Iran's nuclear facilities. And for the White House, there is daily evidence of Iran's Revolutionary Guards meddling in Iraq, from improved explosive devices made in Iran to behind-the-scenes dominance in the affairs of the oil-rich south.

Arnaud de Borchgrave is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press

http://



10958
3DHS / Re: "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military"
« on: September 03, 2007, 10:32:08 PM »
mr perceptive, i  think we should do it tomorrow morning if possible
i think president bush will attack (aerial) the islamic theocrats before his term ends
the sooner the better

10959
3DHS / Re: "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military"
« on: September 02, 2007, 10:48:09 PM »
re: "It would take about ninety days, minimum, to build it up"

it would take 90 days to build up supply?
thats not really all that much when you consider the upsides of destroying the Islamic Republic's military




10960
3DHS / "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military"
« on: September 02, 2007, 06:57:12 PM »



Pentagon "three-day blitz" plan for Iran

Sunday TimesSeptember 2, 2007
Sarah Baxter, Washington


THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians? military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.

Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for pinprick strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities. They're about taking out the entire Iranian military, he said.

Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same. It was, he added, a very legitimate strategic calculus.

President George Bush intensified the rhetoric against Iran last week, accusing Tehran of putting the Middle East under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust. He warned that the US and its allies would confront Iran before it is too late.

One Washington source said the temperature was rising inside the administration. Bush was sending a message to a number of audiences, he said to the Iranians and to members of the United Nations security council who are trying to weaken a tough third resolution on sanctions against Iran for flouting a UN ban on uranium enrichment.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last week reported significant cooperation with Iran over its nuclear programme and said that uranium enrichment had slowed. Tehran has promised to answer most questions from the agency by November, but Washington fears it is stalling to prevent further sanctions. Iran continues to maintain it is merely developing civilian nuclear power.

Bush is committed for now to the diplomatic route but thinks Iran is moving towards acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to one well placed source, Washington believes it would be prudent to use rapid, overwhelming force, should military action become necessary.

Israel, which has warned it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons,has made its own preparations for airstrikes and is said to be ready to attack if the Americans back down.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, a spokesman for the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which uncovered the existence of Iran's uranium enrichment plant at Natanz, said the IAEA was being strung along. A number of nuclear sites have not even been visited by the IAEA, he said. They're giving a clean bill of health to a regime that is known to have practised deception.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, irritated the Bush administration last week by vowing to fill a "power vacuum" in Iraq. But Washington believes Iran is already fighting a proxy war with the Americans in Iraq.

The Institute for the Study of War last week released a report by Kimberly Kagan that explicitly uses the term "proxy war" and claims that with the Sunni insurgency and Al-Qaeda in Iraq increasingly under control, Iranian intervention is the next major problem the coalition must tackle.

Bush noted that the number of attacks on US bases and troops by Iranian-supplied munitions had increased in recent months despite pledges by Iran to help stabilise the security situation in Iraq.

It explains, in part, his lack of faith in diplomacy with the Iranians. But Debat believes the Pentagon's plans for military action involve the use of so much force that they are unlikely to be used and would seriously stretch resources in Afghanistan and Iraq.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2369001.ece

10961
3DHS / Re: Hillary Fundraiser Arrested Again
« on: September 01, 2007, 01:20:35 PM »
This brings up bad memories during the Clinton years of fundraisers at Buddhist Temples and renting out the Lincoln bedroom to all those foreigners. Please, we don't want to return to that. Foreigners in the Lincoln bedroom while our married President is cheating on his wife in the next room.

10962
3DHS / Hillary Fundraiser Arrested Again
« on: September 01, 2007, 10:41:01 AM »


Donor surrenders as Clinton camp ponders


How could the senator's campaign have missed the red flags over Hsu?
By Dan Morain, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

September 1, 2007



REDWOOD CITY, CALIF. -- As Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu confronted an old criminal case and faced a new FBI investigation Friday, a fundamental question persisted: How did Democratic presidential front-runner Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign fail to see the red flags in Hsu's contributions?

Until this week, Clinton counted Hsu as one of her most prolific money bundlers. He gave her campaign $22,300, regularly appeared as a co-host for major fundraising lunches and dinners, and raised more than $100,000 from his friends for her presidential run.
   
"Obviously, we were all surprised by this news, and we have a procedure that we follow and upon verifying it, we returned his money," Clinton said this week.

When a campaign has attracted more than 500,000 donors, as Clinton's has, there is no way a candidate's staff can check out each contributor. Clinton and her aides said there was little they could have done to protect themselves, but fundraising experts from both parties pointed to warning signs that should have given aides pause.

"If I were raising money for the prohibitive front-runner for president of the United States, I would be very, very careful about who these donors are and do some level of research," said Marty Wilson, a Republican strategist and fundraiser for Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and others.

The most obvious red flag: A check of a commonly used database produces a 1990 San Francisco Chronicle news story detailing how Norman Hsu had been kidnapped by gang members in the San Mateo County suburb of Foster City. A second widely used database discloses that Norman Yuan Yuen Hsu of Foster City had a bankruptcy in 1990.

Having established that he lived in San Mateo County, a check of the San Mateo County Superior Court's website reveals that Norman Yuan Yuen Hsu had a criminal case.

In the early 1990s, Hsu, 56, pleaded no contest to grand theft in a scheme that cost investors $1 million, and then disappeared. On Friday, Hsu turned himself in to San Mateo County authorities.

Superior Court Judge H. James Ellis ordered him held on $2 million bail. Hsu, dressed in a sharply tailored black suit, was led from the court in handcuffs. After posting bail, the depth of his woes became more apparent. A Justice Department source disclosed that the FBI has opened an investigation into Hsu's campaign donations.

Aides to Clinton and others say Hsu never asked for favors. But, like many donors, he would have his photo snapped with prominent people. A vanity wall lined with pictures of senators and governors can impress potential business partners, particularly those not be savvy enough to know that politicians regularly pose for such pictures.

"I recall him as a regular face at Democratic candidate fundraising events," said John Emerson, one of Clinton's major Southern California backers. "He strikes me as one of those guys who likes to be in the room, likes to be the guy who is there and has taken a picture with a candidate."

Although Hsu was particularly active on Clinton's behalf, she was hardly the only candidate who received Hsu's contributions. After making his first federal campaign donation in September 2003, Hsu generated more than $1 million for Democratic politicians.

Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson said Friday that Clinton, like all candidates, relied on publicly available information to vet major donors. The system did not detect details about Hsu's past. "There is a series of steps to examining donations when they come in, and obviously, in the case of Mr. Hsu, these did not uncover this decade-plus-old warrant," Wolfson said.

Because Hsu had been giving to other candidates, Democratic recipients assumed he was a reputable source of money.

In most instances, a donor's background is well-known. But if the person is not known to the campaign, that person will be vetted.

All major campaigns employ researchers who investigate their opponents, and pick over their candidates' donors, particularly those who are raising six-figure sums. Some campaigns retain consulting firms specifically to vet donors.

One consultant said some campaigns ask donors for permission to run background checks because political opponents almost certainly will investigate the sources of their foes' campaign money.

Another problem was the pattern of donations made by Hsu and his friends, particularly those from a family that lives in a modest home in Daly City, a working-class town south of San Francisco.

Members of the family have given more than $200,000 to politicians in recent years, often on or about the same days that Hsu gave money. Federal law prohibits donors from reimbursing others who give at their behest.

Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) each received money from the Daly City clan. After the proximity of the donations became the focus of news accounts, Obama and Clinton sent letters to the family seeking assurance that the donations came from their own bank accounts.

"There is a concern, though nothing is proven, that there is some potential reimbursement of campaign contributions," said Richard L. Hasen, a Loyola Law School professor and election law expert. "Anytime you have an entire family or group of employees of apparently modest means making large contributions . . . it raises a red flag."

At an appearance in New York this week, Clinton vowed that her campaign would "continue to analyze all contributions and take action if that's warranted."

dan.morain@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-na-hsu1sep01,1,4862233.story?coll=la-headlines-business&ctrack=1&cset=true

10963
3DHS / Re: this guy is guilty as hell
« on: August 31, 2007, 09:37:07 PM »
pleading guilty to a speeding ticket because you don't want to hassle with it and pleading guilty to charges relating to outrageous homosexual activity in a men's airport restroom seems like a bit of a stretch of a comparison but i understand what you are saying
however with the history and the guilty plea combined i think he is most likely a sick sick individual
he needs to resign and get help quick


10964
3DHS / New UPI Poll: More think a GOP Pres better for Iraq War
« on: August 31, 2007, 07:47:26 PM »
UPI Poll: GOP President Better For Iraq Warr

Aug. 31, 2007

WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 (UPI) -- A narrow plurality of participants in a UPI-Zogby International poll
said a Republican U.S. president is more likely to see the Iraq war to a successful end.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/08/31/upi_poll_gop_pres_better_for_iraq_war/5618/

10965


Top Taliban Commander Killed In Southern Afghanistan

KABUL, August 30, 2007 (RFE/RL) --

A senior Taliban commander has been killed in a recent air strike
by U.S.-led coalition forces in southern Afghanistan, RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan reported today.

The air strike was in Sarwan Qala -- between the districts of Sangin and Musa Qala in Helmand Province.

The commander, known as Mullah Berader, was a top military commander for the Taliban government until its removal from power in late 2001. Berader also was a member of the Taliban leadership council, which is headed by the Taliban's fugitive spiritual leader Mullah Mohammad Omar.

Berader is considered to be the second major commander of the Taliban after Mullah Dadullah, who was killed during NATO operations in May.

In other news, the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan announced that a British soldier and his Afghan interpreter were killed today while on a routine patrol near Kandahar in southern Afghanistan. The ISAF gave no more details.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2007/08/4e6d6c60-0375-4ca0-83dc-7c310550b487.html

Pages: 1 ... 729 730 [731] 732 733 ... 743