Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

LINK-- Sec of Defense Gates says We Can Prove Iran's Iraq Role...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:02 AM
Original message
LINK-- Sec of Defense Gates says We Can Prove Iran's Iraq Role...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/09/AR2007020900680.html

The foundation for an attack on Iran is being built with almost no critical opposition being covered by the reporting news sources.

Gates says they have markings and serial numbers on exploded IEDs that lead to Iran, and that Iranians have been 'swept up' in operations in Iraq. He also says we are moving an additional aircraft carrier into place, but the US has no plans to attack Iran.

We are putting our soldiers in harms way by placing them in such close proximity to Iranian territory, and 'an accident' has the potential to set off an attack from our forces 'that just happen to be in the region' since we have no intention of attacking Iran.

THis possibility is becoming even more likely as Iran has announced it will perform 'war games' in some of the same areas where we presently have ships and troops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
1. and they will shower us with flowers
as we cake walk down main street Tehran...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
varkam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. As I believe Al Franken noted in his book...
you left out the modifier 'exploding'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #2
10. MY OOPS
and they will shower us with EXPLODING flowers...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
3. It's a deja vu trainwreck!
I expect by March or April at the latest, reports of "'LIVE! Breaking News!' Carrier Hit by Iranian Missile" will be airing. Bush has pushed to the edge of the cliff and as soon as the 'surge' is in place, he's going to push us over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. We may have a two step strategy in the lead up to war in Iran....
We sold bunkerbuster bombs to Israel, modifiable with mini-nuke warheads. Step One is Israel launching an attack on Iranian nuclear sites, with US knowledge and technical assistance. Step Two is the US launching a withering attack on Iranian military installations and infrastructure in retaliation for an Iranian response to the Israeli bombing by attacking the 'Green Zone' in Iraq.

Bush will say we had to respond with an attack on Iran because we have to protect our troops in Iraq from further attack by Iran, which struck us first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radfringe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #3
12. sneak peek for tomorrow's toon.. did this one up before I even saw the article
am I psychic or what???!!!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Excellent!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. How many people heard this on the news?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x107654

Iran war after terrorist attack blamed on Iran by Carter Official
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. Just like the Al-Qaeda - Iraq link? Is the OSP back up and running?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Yes, it is now called the "Iranian Directorate" --same folks who brought us OSP n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:12 AM
Response to Original message
6. Well mr. gates would know how to PROVE a scenario, now wouldn't he?
After all, didn't he state in his autobiography that the US provoked a war between Russian and Afghanistan? CIA was sent in to train Osama and his buddies 6 months before the *official* war began?

Yep -- Bob Gates has a history of slinking around a *prospective* action, and setting all the ducks in a row.

QUACK :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
9. Are we going to attack Saudi Arabia if we find out they are ..
supplying Sunni insurgents? Perhaps we need to have hearings on who is supporting who and who's responsible for the bulk of the violence before we decide who to attack first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beelzebud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
11. Why would Iran put serial numbers on IMPROVISED explosive devices?
They take us for complete IDIOTS.

IED meand IMPROVISED. Why the fuck would Iran need to make IMPROVISED explosive devices, and if they're IMPROVISED, why the fuck would they have serial numbers on them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HowHasItComeToThis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. BINGO Beelzebud
WATCH FIX NEWS RUN WITH THIS.

:yourock: :yourock: :yourock: :yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
15. It's an all-out propaganda blitz in progress.
Gates: U.S. Can Prove Iran's Iraq Role



Photo Credit: AP Photo

By LOLITA C. BALDOR
The Associated Press
Friday, February 9, 2007; 9:03 AM


SEVILLE, Spain -- Serial numbers and markings on explosives used in Iraq provide "pretty good" evidence that Iran is providing either weapons or technology for militants there, Defense Secretary Robert Gates asserted Friday.

Offering some of the first public details of evidence the military has collected, Gates said, "I think there's some serial numbers, there may be some markings on some of the projectile fragments that we found," that point to Iran.




From the http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?section=root&name=ViewWeb&articleId=12433">The American Prospect

By Gareth Porter
Web Exclusive: 02.02.07

The Blame Game


.....

Indeed, the new campaign hyping Iranian meddling, like the 2002-2003 propaganda campaign leading up to the invasion of Iraq, emphasizes a single, highly emotional theme. Instead of the “mushroom cloud” invoked by Condoleezza Rice in September 2002, the administration now conjures up the image of Iranian agents lurking in Iraq for the purpose of killing Americans. And although the White House has decided against the release of any documentation of these allegations for now, the campaign proceeds apace.
As it did in 2002 and 2003 regarding the Iraqi threat, the Bush administration claims to have “intelligence” to support its central theme of Iranian agents fomenting Shiite violence. But a careful investigation of some specific statements that have been made on the alleged Iranian role in sending weapons to Iraqi Shiite militias reveals a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

.....


Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno, the second-ranking U.S. commander in Iraq, made the most spectacular claim of Iranian culpability in arming the militias so far when he declared in an interview with USA Today on Wednesday, “We have weapons that we know through serial numbers…that trace back to Iran.” He referred specifically to RPG-29s -- armor-piercing rocket-propelled grenades -- and truck-mounted Katyusha rockets captured in Iraq.
That statement represents a serious leap in logic, because the place in which a weapon was manufactured does not tell us who actually supplied them to Iraqi Shiites. (The United States, for example, has been supplying Iraqi forces with Russian-made RPG-7s.) But in making the claim, Odierno made a major stumble: Iran has never been known to manufacture the RPG-29, so the military could not have captured one with an Iranian serial number. The RPG-29 has always been a Russian-made weapon. The Iranian arms industry has focused on its own version of the Russian-made RPG-7 -- an older and much simpler anti-armor weapon than the RPG-29 -- and it has sought overseas markets for it. But there has never been any evidence of Iran designing and manufacturing any version of the RPG-29 -- probably because it would be too difficult of Iranian arms factories to match the quality of the Russian export.



The Russians sold large quantities of the RPG-29 to Syria in 1999-2000, and last summer Hezbollah used that weapon with surprising effectiveness against Israeli tanks. Israelis captured Iranian-made copies of other Russian anti-tank missile systems in the hands of the Hezbollah. But both the Israeli newspaper Haaretz and the Beirut-based Arabic defense monthly Defense 21 confirmed that the RPG-29s used by Hezbollah were Russian-made weapons obtained via Syria.
Odierno’s statement didn’t mark the first time that the U.S. military has tried to peddle the story of the Iranian origins of the RPG-29s in Iraq. Last September, General John Abizaid admitted that only a single RPG-29 had actually been found in the country, and he said it was “unclear” how it got into the country, according to Agence France-Presse. Abizaid didn’t claim any Iranian serial number, but instead suggested that the mere fact that the weapons had been used by Hezbollah “indicates … an Iranian connection.” In the Bush administration’s world, Hezbollah is a “proxy” of Iran and therefore cannot have any policies independent of Iran. In the real world, however, Hezbollah has long been understood by specialists to have its own priorities and policies that may or may not jibe with those of Tehran.

.....


The question of Katyusha rockets in Iraq is more complicated. Both Russian-made Katyushas and Iranian versions of it, with other names, have been used by Palestinian militants and by Hezbollah since the 1980s. Hezbollah has had as many as 13,000 rockets, most of which could be called “Katyushas,” since 2004.
The fact that at least a few hundred Shiite militants loyal to Moqtada al-Sadr have gone to Lebanon at Hezbollah’s invitation indicates a strong organizational link between Hezbollah and anti-occupation Shiite militias. This provides the most likely explanation for the Katyushas found in Iraq, regardless of where they are made.
Significantly Odierno did not claim that the anti-armor roadside bombs known as explosively formed projectiles (EFPs), which represent the most lethal armor-piercing technology now being used in Iraq, were manufactured in Iran. Instead, he asserted that the technology itself and “some of the elements to make them are coming out of
Iran."


That has been the refrain of the Bush administration and the U.S. command for nearly a year. The Deputy Chief of Staff for intelligence of the Multinational Forces in Iraq, Major General Richard Zahner, gave a press conference last September in which he argued that Iran’s culpability in the appearance of EFP technology is proven by the fact that the C-4 explosive used in EFPs in Iraq has the same Iranian batch number as the C-4 found on the Hezbollah ship carrying arms to Palestinian militants that was intercepted by the Israelis in 2003.
Zahner’s assertion is contradicted, however, by the most in-depth study of the subject so far -- an article by Michael Knights published in Jane’s Intelligence Review late last month. Knights, vice-president and head of analysis for the Olive Group, a private security company based in London, has been following the evolution of EFPs in Iraq for nearly three years.
In the article and in an interview with me, Knights suggested that the evidence does not point to Iran as the primary force behind the use of EFPs in Iraq. “There is no need to see an Iranian policy driving it,” he told me. Knights said it is far more likely that Hezbollah policy drove the phenomenon. He points out that it was Hezbollah, not Iran, that transferred EFP devices and components to Palestinian militants after the second Intifada began in 2000.
The remarkable coincidence of the same batch number of C-4 appearing in the intercepted Hezbollah ship and in southern Iraq indicates that the Shiite militias have been getting supplies not from the Iranians, but from Hezbollah. (If Iran had deliberately shipped the explosive to southern Iraq last year, the batch number would have been different from a batch that was given to Hezbollah years earlier.)

.....


U.S. intelligence has made much of the fact that a Hezbollah manual for making EFPs has been captured in Iraq. Knights notes, however, that the manual was actually found in the hands of Sunni insurgents. Knights says the Sunnis “might also have access to EFP expertise through Palestinian groups.” The Sunnis used EFPs on a number of occasions, but most often have relied on the less powerful “shaped charges” that they appear to make themselves.
Regardless of how the technology was initially picked up by Shiite militants, Knights points out that the trend since early 2005 has been toward the emergence of networks of Shiites who make the EFPs themselves, supply them to Shiite militias, and serve as middlemen in importing both devices and components. The network of middlemen, according to Knights, is not aligned with any particular Shiite group and is typified by the one discovered by British forces in Basra in December 2006. It consisted of members of the Basra Police Intelligence Unit, the Internal Affairs Directorate of the police, and the Major Crimes Unit and was drawn from policemen representing every major Shiite faction in Basra.
Knights’ research on EFPs illustrates that the Bush administration campaign to blame Iran for the Shiite use of modern weapons is based not on intelligence but rather, once again, on its own faith-based worldview. The syllogism underlying the anti-Iran campaign is: Hezbollah has been helping Shiites. Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy. Therefore, Iran is arming the Shiites.

.....



(All emphasis added)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. RPGs are small arms. Frankly, this shows just how little cause for war they can muster.
Who can take these the idiots who are trying to sell this war seriously? RPGs?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MKnights Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-11-07 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Misrepresentation of my views
Dear forum users,

my name is Michael Knights and I am the author of the Jane's Intelligence Review article on EFP. I gave an interview regarding the issue some weeks ago and have been somewhat surprised by the way my comments were interpreted. I was aware during the interview that the article being written for the American Prospect was being constructed to cast doubt on US administration claims about Iranian involvement in Iraq. Though I'm a Brit, I would consider myself of Democratic leanings on most issues, but I objected to the unbalanced way the subject was being approached. I am 100% committed to analytical rigor and don't believe you should begin an invesitgation with an outcome in mind. The comments below are to provide some balance.

I should begin by saying that my research points to the very strong likelihood of Iranian involvement in the provision of EFP technology in Iraq. In other words, I agree with the US administration on that narrow technical issue.

The problem in my conversation the American Prospect is that we appear to have talked past each other. The interviewer asked questions and received answers through the prism of his intended conclusion/angle on the issue. I, on the other hand, left him plenty of room for whatever interpretation he wished to put on the issue by allowing lots of complexity to enter the discussion. For example, it is quite possible for individual data points to suggest that Sunni insurgents NOT supported by Iran have access to EFP technology, yet to simultaneously conclude that the vast majority of EFP technology has entered Iraq via Iran and that a mass of data points suggest that elements of the Iranian government are involved in EFP transfer.

I would really caution against simplifying and politicising complex phenomenon such as the behaviour of states and groups, particularly in Iraq. I was disappointed by the American Prospect's article because it suggested a much more clearcut outcome than exists and it suggested that my views were the OPPOSITE from my actual beliefs.

Regards

Mike Knights
michaelk@outremerconsulting.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-12-07 10:01 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Thank you, Mike
I, for one, respect your opinion and appreciate your clarification here. Unfortunately this is a subject that's bound to be politicized due to the Bush** administration's propensity for lies and fabrication. But it's counter-productive to fight a liar with disingenuous reporting, as you allege American Prospect has done.

The facts are hard to come by these days.

To my mind, it would be a miracle if Iran wasn't meddling in Iraq; they have every strategic reason to want a neighbor who's friendly to them, not the US. At the same time, most of us here are well aware that an unknown portion of the charges this administration makes about Iran's interference are calculated to manipulate public support of military action against Iran, while having no basis in fact.

IOW we're hardened skeptics who tend to believe the exact opposite of what Bush** says. But we welcome the truth whatever it is.

If you wander back here and have the time, it would be great to hear more from you about this...and also what light you can shine, if any, on the Saudi role in funding the Iraqi Sunni groups, e.g. there was a British article not too long ago about their receiving black market arms from Romania...?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC