Iran, al-Qa'eda and the nuclear bomb
Posted by: 7V on 30 July 2004
The 9/11 Commission has concluded that it was not Iraq that had connections with Islamic terrorists but Iran. The report claims that Iran made "concerted efforts to strengthen relations" with al-Qa'eda and that Iranian border guards were instructed to "facilitate the travel of al-Qa'eda members".
Clearly the Commissions findings have added to fears about Iran's pursuance of a nuclear programme. In fact, the US Congress recently authorised the use of "all appropriate means" to halt it. According to Senator Sam Brownback: "It's better to take forceful action now to end a terror threat and save lives, then to wait for a nuclear 9/11 to take place and then ask why".
Meanwhile, Israel has expressed extreme concern (hardly surprising given Iran's commitment to destroy the Jewish state). Aljazeera.net has reported Public relations head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Commander Seyed Masood Jazayeri, as saying that in retaliation to any attack Iran has proved itself to be "harsh, assertive, hard-hitting and destructive".
"The United States is showing off by threatening to use its wild dog, Israel," he said.
"They will not hesitate to strike Iran if they are capable of it. However, their threats to attack Iran's nuclear facilities cannot be realised. They are aware Tehran's reaction will be so harsh that Israel will be wiped off the face of the earth." he warned.
Meanwhile (according to Aljazeera), US-appointed interim Iraqi Defence Minister Hazim Shaalan warned of invading Iran if it did not stop interfering in his country's internal politics.
"I've seen clear interference in Iraqi issues by Iran," the minister said in an interview with The Washington Post in Baghdad on Monday.
"Iran interferes in order to kill democracy."
So ....
My question for debate is what would you learned gentlemen like to see happen here?
a) Ignore Iran's bomb making ambitions. They will go away.
b) Allied pre-emptive action. The US are in so much shit anyway that what difference will another foreign escapade make?
c) Let Israel deal with it. That way we can all make a lot of loud, critical noises while being secretly relieved. If Iran attacks Israel afterwards they can deal with it.
d) Wow, Iraq attacking Iran. Well there's something I hadn't thought of. Great idea.
e) None of the above.
I'm asking you guys because I strongly suspect that action will be taken soon and I'd like to hear your responses in advance, this time.
Steve Margolis
defy convention - make music
Clearly the Commissions findings have added to fears about Iran's pursuance of a nuclear programme. In fact, the US Congress recently authorised the use of "all appropriate means" to halt it. According to Senator Sam Brownback: "It's better to take forceful action now to end a terror threat and save lives, then to wait for a nuclear 9/11 to take place and then ask why".
Meanwhile, Israel has expressed extreme concern (hardly surprising given Iran's commitment to destroy the Jewish state). Aljazeera.net has reported Public relations head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, Commander Seyed Masood Jazayeri, as saying that in retaliation to any attack Iran has proved itself to be "harsh, assertive, hard-hitting and destructive".
"The United States is showing off by threatening to use its wild dog, Israel," he said.
"They will not hesitate to strike Iran if they are capable of it. However, their threats to attack Iran's nuclear facilities cannot be realised. They are aware Tehran's reaction will be so harsh that Israel will be wiped off the face of the earth." he warned.
Meanwhile (according to Aljazeera), US-appointed interim Iraqi Defence Minister Hazim Shaalan warned of invading Iran if it did not stop interfering in his country's internal politics.
"I've seen clear interference in Iraqi issues by Iran," the minister said in an interview with The Washington Post in Baghdad on Monday.
"Iran interferes in order to kill democracy."
So ....
My question for debate is what would you learned gentlemen like to see happen here?
a) Ignore Iran's bomb making ambitions. They will go away.
b) Allied pre-emptive action. The US are in so much shit anyway that what difference will another foreign escapade make?
c) Let Israel deal with it. That way we can all make a lot of loud, critical noises while being secretly relieved. If Iran attacks Israel afterwards they can deal with it.
d) Wow, Iraq attacking Iran. Well there's something I hadn't thought of. Great idea.
e) None of the above.
I'm asking you guys because I strongly suspect that action will be taken soon and I'd like to hear your responses in advance, this time.
Steve Margolis
defy convention - make music
White North American's & European's are last people around qualified in preaching to Persia about Civilisation, as well as some of the 21 Countries surrounding it in the region.
Fritz von Changeyourmindset
Fritz von Changeyourmindset
As one afterthought of which there are unsuprisingly many, I recall that as UK put the Shar & His Missus up after he got booted out by the bearded one Brutain still remained closely tied diplomatically, even after the London Siege, as it was very much to out financial advantage.
Not wishing to ponder on one aspect too long, but a well documented account of female chid abuse comes to mind also regarding Iran. A so-called arranged marriage between an old geezer and a 12/13 year old girl, where sexual relations were definately on the cards, yet that Countries laws expresslly forbade such matrimony. Countries are I suppose more important than individuals, but this one in question just happened to be good old England, where they were living at the time, how easy it is to forget if you read the wrong papers, innit..
Fritz Von Bloodonthetracks
The Hypocracy aspect is my point, how can trust possibly be built on such flimsey past history between us ?
Where's my beer ?
Not wishing to ponder on one aspect too long, but a well documented account of female chid abuse comes to mind also regarding Iran. A so-called arranged marriage between an old geezer and a 12/13 year old girl, where sexual relations were definately on the cards, yet that Countries laws expresslly forbade such matrimony. Countries are I suppose more important than individuals, but this one in question just happened to be good old England, where they were living at the time, how easy it is to forget if you read the wrong papers, innit..
Fritz Von Bloodonthetracks
The Hypocracy aspect is my point, how can trust possibly be built on such flimsey past history between us ?
Where's my beer ?
The League like the UN had failures and successes but the failures were not necessarily of the League itself but of the attitudes of the nations involved who were ultimately unwilling to surrender their ideas of sovereignty to another organisation. As I’ve said the UK constitutional monarchy and the US federal republic have had some very dark hours, but it doesn’t mean that they are terminally flawed models.
As you well know, that isn’t what I said. The undermining of the UN can be laid largely at the door of the US, not the majority of members whom it has bullied and bought.
In every conflict there is a gap between truth and perception and whilst there were significant crimes committed by the IDF at Jenin, the media leapt prematurely to the conclusion that there was a massacre there. The story of the massacre thrived for 2 main reasons; firstly the Israelis consistently refused to allow any independent observers or medical aid into the camp to verify the stories and help the wounded which compounded the notion (rightly or wrongly) that they were hiding something and secondly, based on how Israel has actually acted in the past, readerships and audiences didn’t view the notion of the IDF carrying out this massacre as particularly extraordinary, unbelievable or unexpected. FWIW the UK has carried out some shameful acts in NI from ignoring civil rights abuses, heavy handed sectarian policing through internment to collusion between the Army units and Loyalists paramilitaries. However in their defence they’ve realised that they weren’t going to stem the mounting death toll by adding to it and that the only way to get out of the hole was to ensure equal rights, treatment, opportunities, cross community policing and negotiation on the aspirations of all parties to the conflict. Much to the irritation of some people, who it transpired knew precious little about the history of either conflict, I’ve suggested many times in the past that the Israel/Palestine conflict could benefit greatly from some of the conflict resolution lessons learnt in NI.
If you’re referring to Osirak, no I hadn’t forgotten about it, it’s just that it was a nuclear reactor and not a nuclear deterrent and so not pertinent to my point. It’s attacks such as this, Operation Sphinx and Operation Damocles before it, that reinforce the trepidation that people feel in respect of Israel’s behaviour and it’s complete disregard as to the antipathy it creates. As to my nuclear deterrent point, why do you think the West and their immediate neighbours prefer “jaw jaw to war war” in their approach to North Korea. Do you think it’s because they see them as fundamentally good eggs who’ll see sense after a good chit chat?
I couldn’t give two shits about Saddam and he can rot in hell, but isn’t this the kind of idle, baseless I don’t know anything but what-if, speculation that’s just got 10-15,000 innocent Iraqis and 1000+ US/UK troops killed and 3500 wounded. Blair is still 100% sure that he had WMDs so who’s to say it would have been any different?
Can I take it that this is information over and beyond the cut and paste from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Threats_to_Israel/Iran.html
Can you direct me to this? And I assume you’ll also have the specific threat that they are to be used against Israel or any other country
Your own views make pretty poor reading. It’s like the kind of self-deluding, head in the sand nonsense that Arye peddles. For myself, friends, colleagues, I can’t say that I’m aware that we’re immersed in a sea of Arabs eager to force their opinions on us. I would say that my contact with Jews would be considerately greater. I fail to see how the oil relationship which you crudely describe would lead to the public perception of Israel as a threat. The US is hugely dependent on the Middle East oil so what’s your take on that? I’m sure that the media is a factor here but I take the main weekly broadsheets, watch the BBC and Sky News and scan the US news sites and I simply can’t see that that any one element of the British media is wildly pro-Arab or anti-Israeli. Maybe you’re suggesting that the entire British media is in on the conspiracy in which case you are beyond help. I have read extensively on this subject through the years and don’t need to rely on the vagaries of the world’s media to let me know when a situation is as desperate, rotten to the core and in need of radical, external intervention as this. There is undoubtedly anti-Semitism as there are those who despise everything Arab, but in the arena of what passes as rational debate, the old fallback of anti-Semitism is pathetic and not really worthy of comment.
I’ve honestly never heard anyone hold this position; it is patently ludicrous and I am at a loss as to what “trendy” circles these would be.
Does it answer my question? Well, I was already more than aware of the views of the Jewish virtual library, I just thought that you might have evidence of some specific and recent direct threat or unambiguous act of aggression that made such an attack imperative. Cheers again for the paste.
What will happen will happen with Iran and there will be no shortage of people who will support the US and its agents irrespective of moral, ethics and human rights. The thing is, everyone knows that there are bad men with bad intentions doing bad things in Iran and Israel and I concede that measures have to be taken, but if the powers that be aren’t going to be even-handed and intelligent about it, then if anything, it’s going to inflame the problem. As we should have learnt from 9/11, Al- Queda don’t need the “nukes” that hysterical ninnies like Toy are bleating on about, just ingenuity, luck and a chink in the enemy’s defences, next month, next year, 10 years from now and they’ve got us. What a shit way for us to have to live our lives.
Nice one. That’s the kind of visionary thought that’ll keep the body baggers busy on both sides for the foreseeable future, and throughout the Middle East if Roy’s link plays out.
quote:.
Of course the fact that the UN is driven primarily by the self-interest of its members also undermines its legitimacy and, ultimately, its effectiveness.
As you well know, that isn’t what I said. The undermining of the UN can be laid largely at the door of the US, not the majority of members whom it has bullied and bought.
quote:
There is a difference between the truth and what is "perceived at large".
In every conflict there is a gap between truth and perception and whilst there were significant crimes committed by the IDF at Jenin, the media leapt prematurely to the conclusion that there was a massacre there. The story of the massacre thrived for 2 main reasons; firstly the Israelis consistently refused to allow any independent observers or medical aid into the camp to verify the stories and help the wounded which compounded the notion (rightly or wrongly) that they were hiding something and secondly, based on how Israel has actually acted in the past, readerships and audiences didn’t view the notion of the IDF carrying out this massacre as particularly extraordinary, unbelievable or unexpected. FWIW the UK has carried out some shameful acts in NI from ignoring civil rights abuses, heavy handed sectarian policing through internment to collusion between the Army units and Loyalists paramilitaries. However in their defence they’ve realised that they weren’t going to stem the mounting death toll by adding to it and that the only way to get out of the hole was to ensure equal rights, treatment, opportunities, cross community policing and negotiation on the aspirations of all parties to the conflict. Much to the irritation of some people, who it transpired knew precious little about the history of either conflict, I’ve suggested many times in the past that the Israel/Palestine conflict could benefit greatly from some of the conflict resolution lessons learnt in NI.
If you’re referring to Osirak, no I hadn’t forgotten about it, it’s just that it was a nuclear reactor and not a nuclear deterrent and so not pertinent to my point. It’s attacks such as this, Operation Sphinx and Operation Damocles before it, that reinforce the trepidation that people feel in respect of Israel’s behaviour and it’s complete disregard as to the antipathy it creates. As to my nuclear deterrent point, why do you think the West and their immediate neighbours prefer “jaw jaw to war war” in their approach to North Korea. Do you think it’s because they see them as fundamentally good eggs who’ll see sense after a good chit chat?
quote:
had Iraq had a nuclear capability, the events of the last 10 years would have been very different.
I couldn’t give two shits about Saddam and he can rot in hell, but isn’t this the kind of idle, baseless I don’t know anything but what-if, speculation that’s just got 10-15,000 innocent Iraqis and 1000+ US/UK troops killed and 3500 wounded. Blair is still 100% sure that he had WMDs so who’s to say it would have been any different?
quote:
Iran does not currently have a nuclear capability but the outside world, including Israel, have a pretty good idea of when it will come on-line.
Can I take it that this is information over and beyond the cut and paste from http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Threats_to_Israel/Iran.htmlCan you direct me to this? And I assume you’ll also have the specific threat that they are to be used against Israel or any other country
quote:
I have my own views on why Israel is perceived as such a threat.
Your own views make pretty poor reading. It’s like the kind of self-deluding, head in the sand nonsense that Arye peddles. For myself, friends, colleagues, I can’t say that I’m aware that we’re immersed in a sea of Arabs eager to force their opinions on us. I would say that my contact with Jews would be considerately greater. I fail to see how the oil relationship which you crudely describe would lead to the public perception of Israel as a threat. The US is hugely dependent on the Middle East oil so what’s your take on that? I’m sure that the media is a factor here but I take the main weekly broadsheets, watch the BBC and Sky News and scan the US news sites and I simply can’t see that that any one element of the British media is wildly pro-Arab or anti-Israeli. Maybe you’re suggesting that the entire British media is in on the conspiracy in which case you are beyond help. I have read extensively on this subject through the years and don’t need to rely on the vagaries of the world’s media to let me know when a situation is as desperate, rotten to the core and in need of radical, external intervention as this. There is undoubtedly anti-Semitism as there are those who despise everything Arab, but in the arena of what passes as rational debate, the old fallback of anti-Semitism is pathetic and not really worthy of comment.
quote:
Blaming all terrorism on the actions of the State of Israel is a position, that whilst currently trendy in some circles, is not accurate or helpful.
I’ve honestly never heard anyone hold this position; it is patently ludicrous and I am at a loss as to what “trendy” circles these would be.
Does it answer my question? Well, I was already more than aware of the views of the Jewish virtual library, I just thought that you might have evidence of some specific and recent direct threat or unambiguous act of aggression that made such an attack imperative. Cheers again for the paste.
What will happen will happen with Iran and there will be no shortage of people who will support the US and its agents irrespective of moral, ethics and human rights. The thing is, everyone knows that there are bad men with bad intentions doing bad things in Iran and Israel and I concede that measures have to be taken, but if the powers that be aren’t going to be even-handed and intelligent about it, then if anything, it’s going to inflame the problem. As we should have learnt from 9/11, Al- Queda don’t need the “nukes” that hysterical ninnies like Toy are bleating on about, just ingenuity, luck and a chink in the enemy’s defences, next month, next year, 10 years from now and they’ve got us. What a shit way for us to have to live our lives.
quote:
"why they've engendered so much loathing"
- because they're there.
Nice one. That’s the kind of visionary thought that’ll keep the body baggers busy on both sides for the foreseeable future, and throughout the Middle East if Roy’s link plays out.
quote:
Originally posted by bigmick:
Can you direct me to this? And I assume you’ll also have the specific threat that they are to be used against Israel or any other country.
So you want me to give details of a specific threat that Iran plans to use nuclear weapons against Israel or any other country. As Iran has denied that it's engaged in the development of a nuclear weapon capability, this might be a little difficult to obtain. Were you looking for something along the lines of "I had dinner with the Ayatolla last week and he told me..."?
I have no details of a specific nuclear threat. However, what concerns me in particular are the links between Iran and terrorist organizations including Hezbollah and al-Qa'eda.
quote:
I’m no expert in Iranian matters so can you help me with details of Iranian attacks on Israel or specific threats?
This was your question that I originally attempted to answer. Rather than giving you any more specific pastes from articles on the Web, I suggest that you type the following into Google:
"Iran Buenos Aires terrorist attacks on the Israeli Embassy in 1992" - 2,820 responses
"Iran Hezbollah" - 112,000 responses
"Iran Argentine Jewish communal building 1994" - 2,290 responses
"Iran links al-Qa'eda" - 3,950 responses
If you're expecting me to quote you Iranian sources you're asking more than is reasonable, although you can find some interesting articles on Aljazeera.net (that renowned organ of Zionism) by typing "Iran" into the country code of their advanced search.
Please excuse me for using references from the Internet to make my points. I'm afraid my personal experience with Iran is somewhat limited. Still, by doing a little research in this area, you can undoubtedly increase your own 'expertise in Iranian matters'.
Steve Margolis
defy convention - make music
Obviously like certain other issues this is one that can/will be discussed until
the cows come home. Without being too simplistic though "TRUST" as I've
mentioned before and the building of it are the essence of the whole of
Grandma's Cheesecake as it were, as throughout human history. Thatcher said
"Nuclear Weapon's cannot be dis-invented" the one and only point I can't deny,
coming from her.
There are, and have always been certain diplomatic and other
mechanisms in place to avoid last minute or unwarranted intiation of hostilities
that would be in nobody's interest (Big Scale).
Mindset and psychological
attitudes towards Nations can change overnight from friend to foe and
vice-versa the level of that change of feeling is controlled by these
afore-mentioned mechanisms, which if didn't exist we certainly wouldn't be
sitting here reading my rubbish, but I'm sure a little imagination can go a long
way amongs't long established Civilisations ; can't it ?
Fritz Von Overcomethatfearandwe'reallonawinner
P.S. Transparency and mutual co-operation will eventually be the only option (as always) and usually puts those with a seperate agenda (IE A Q & CO ) well and truly out of business, cos "Money can't buy you love" innit:
the cows come home. Without being too simplistic though "TRUST" as I've
mentioned before and the building of it are the essence of the whole of
Grandma's Cheesecake as it were, as throughout human history. Thatcher said
"Nuclear Weapon's cannot be dis-invented" the one and only point I can't deny,
coming from her.
There are, and have always been certain diplomatic and other
mechanisms in place to avoid last minute or unwarranted intiation of hostilities
that would be in nobody's interest (Big Scale).
Mindset and psychological
attitudes towards Nations can change overnight from friend to foe and
vice-versa the level of that change of feeling is controlled by these
afore-mentioned mechanisms, which if didn't exist we certainly wouldn't be
sitting here reading my rubbish, but I'm sure a little imagination can go a long
way amongs't long established Civilisations ; can't it ?
Fritz Von Overcomethatfearandwe'reallonawinner
P.S. Transparency and mutual co-operation will eventually be the only option (as always) and usually puts those with a seperate agenda (IE A Q & CO ) well and truly out of business, cos "Money can't buy you love" innit:
Isn't Mr Bin Bag's main motive to Screw Saudi Arabia, and build a lovely Worldwide rift between so-called Islamists & Crusaders al 'la
Bush (his words not mine) ?, just thought it worth reminding everybody, innit.
Fritz Von Seemslikesomearedoingthejobforhim ?
Bush (his words not mine) ?, just thought it worth reminding everybody, innit.
Fritz Von Seemslikesomearedoingthejobforhim ?
Sorry, but I don't buy that argument, mercenaries work for hard cash irrespective of where they come from or go to, they are motivated by that and that alone.
Fritz Von Religionhasfuckalltodowithit
Fritz Von Religionhasfuckalltodowithit
Obviously Bin Bag is not personally interested in mega dosh for himself, but I would suggest that as his banking options are limited somewhat, hard cash here & there is most usefull for paying the bar bills, innit.
Fritz Von Haveyouevermetaniranian ?
P.S. Cheers, I didn't know there were 2 Fritz's on this forum ?
Fritz Von Haveyouevermetaniranian ?
P.S. Cheers, I didn't know there were 2 Fritz's on this forum ?