Update: Iran says NIE Report is a Declaration of Surrender
So the Left thinks we should conduct a more “sensitive” war against Islamic-extremism?
From Reuters:
TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran’s president said on Sunday the publication of a U.S. intelligence report saying Iran had halted a nuclear weapons program in 2003 amounted to a “declaration of surrender” by Washington in its row with Tehran.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also dismissed in an interview with state television the prospect of new U.N. sanctions against Iran over its refusal to halt sensitive atomic work.
“It is too far-fetched,” he said when asked whether he expected the U.N. Security Council to impose fresh sanctions on Iran following two such resolutions since last December.
Ahmadinejad, who often rails against the West, told a rally earlier this month that the December 3 publication of the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate was a “victory” for Iran.
He said on Sunday: “It was in fact a declaration of surrender … It was a positive action by the U.S. administration to change their attitude and it was a correct move.”
So, just how does a defeated nation handle the negotiations now that Iran is emboldened? We’ll see where “sensitive” gets us.
A portion of the “CYA” National Intelligence Estimate (“NIE”) report made public recently has apparently thrown gasoline on the proverbial fire in regard to the Iranian nuclear standoff.
The report, “liberally” written, gave Tehran a un-deserved geopolitical victory while attempting to discredit the Bush administration. The attempt IMHO didn’t completely succeed.
However, NIE reports are supposed to be designed to bring clarity to an issue. It seems as though this report did the exact opposite. Which can lead to dangerous and unforeseen consequences.
From the AP via Yahoo! News:
JERUSALEM - Israel’s public security minister warned Saturday that a U.S. intelligence report that said Iran is no longer developing nuclear arms could lead to a regional war that would threaten the Jewish state.
In his remarks — Israel’s harshest criticism yet of the U.S. report — Avi Dichter said the assessment also cast doubt on American intelligence in general, including information about Palestinian security forces’ crackdown on militant groups. The Palestinian action is required as part of a U.S.-backed renewal of peace talks with Israel this month.
Dichter cautioned that a refusal to recognize Iran’s intentions to build weapons of mass destruction could lead to armed conflict in the Middle East.
Read more: Israel, US report on Iran may spark war.
Posted on:
December 15, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Iran Watch, Israel - Palestine, Middle East . •
No Comments • .
National Intelligence Estimate Says Iran Stopped Pursuing Nuclear Weapons in 2003
The President’s critics and the Left are spinning this report as evidence the Bush administration is a neo-con war machine. Yes, the President will likely have to soften his position on Iran or at least use this as an opportunity to gain some “breathing room.” But IMHO, the NIE report reflects positively on the President.
Here’s why:
Instead of keeping the NIE under wraps the President released the report.
In 2003, the President commenced with the invasion of Iraq. It is no coincidence that Iran stopped pursuing WMD at that time. This bolsters the idea that striking in the heart of the middle east was the strategically correct move to make after liberating Afghanistan.
The NIE’s revelations kind of make Hillary Clinton look stupid after telling the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) in February 2007:
“U.S. policy must be clear and unequivocal: We cannot, we should not, we must not permit Iran to build or acquire nuclear weapons,” the Democrat told a crowd of Israel supporters. “In dealing with this threat … no option can be taken off the table.”
And calling Iran…
“a danger to the United States and one of Israel's greatest threats, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said "no option can be taken off the table" when dealing with that nation.”
The NIE shows just how incompetent our intelligence community can be. And therefore puts a damper on the Left’s accusation that the President lied in order to garner support for OIF. Instead he was forced to rely on faulty intelligence supplied by the very same agencies that author the NIE’s.
At the very least it shows the extent to which the intelligence community is willing to go to cover-their-own-butts (“CYA”).
Posted on:
December 4, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Homeland Security, Intelligence, International, Iran Watch . •
1 Comment • .
Ed Koch, Democrat and former mayor of New York City has it about right in his take on recent mid east geopolitics.
From World Tribune:
The Israel-Palestine peace meeting in Annapolis, Maryland was a success in at least one respect. It brought together every Arab state involved, including Saudi Arabia and Syria.
According to many Middle East experts, the coming together of Arab nations at the request of President Bush indicates that Arabs are in such fear of Iran and its efforts to dominate the region that they are willing to cooperate with the United States more than ever before.
And this…
In a New York Times op-ed article, author Michael B. Oren writes: “…participants in the conference were above all motivated by their fear of a radical and relentlessly aggressive Iran.” He went on to point to “the success of the Iranian proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, as well as the expansion of Iranian influence westward into the Iraqi vacuum.”
That analysis reinforces my belief that the United States could get these same Arab states to recognize that they must help us in Iraq or suffer the consequences of an ultimate Iranian victory when we leave. “Helping us” means sending troops, spending money and apprehending and deterring terrorists in their countries who are seeking jihad – holy war – against the U.S. in Iraq and elsewhere. The U.S. has refused to make the threat of leaving Iraq dependent on the offers of help from these Arab countries in the region who have more to lose than we do by our withdrawal of military forces from Iraq. This is the moment for President Bush to deliver such an ultimatum to our Arab regional allies.
I agree with this idea so long as a threat to withdraw troops is predicated on the basis of achieving victory in Iraq, not defeat. Which is what the Democrats and their handlers on the Left advocate.
Read the rest: Guess who’s afraid of Iran?
Posted on:
December 4, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch, Iraqi Freedom, Middle East . •
No Comments • .
Arash Kamangir apologizes on behalf of ordinary Iranian citizens because of protesters celebrating the 28th anniversary of the takeover of U.S. Embassy in Tehran. (Story on Fox News.)
Apology accepted.
To hell with Ahmadinejad and his fascist regime.
Posted on:
November 5, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch . •
1 Comment • .
I wonder what liberals, who idolize Iranian president Ahmadinejad, think of this story?
Come to think of it… purging a political party is something the netroots tried right here in America prior to the 2006 Congressional election. Remember?
From AFP:
Ahmadinejad orders purge of local officials
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejed has ordered the sacking of local officials who are deemed to be "indifferent" to the problems of people, the press reported on Tuesday.
Ahmadinejad has made provincial issues a central plank of his presidency, visiting all of Iran's 30 provinces and giving speeches promising drastic improvements in local infrastructure.
"We will soon send a secret letter to provincial governors with the names of officials who should be encouraged," Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by the hardline Kayhan newspaper.
"But also there will be the names of officials who are indifferent. As soon as the governors receive this letter they must sack these officials," said Ahmadinejad.
He added that other officials would be rebuked for showing "weakness" in their work.
Many economists in Iran have accused Ahmadinejad of stoking its inflation problems by ploughing windfall revenues from high oil prices into local infrastructure projects.
But the government insists that it is merely fulfilling Ahmadinejad's election promises of making people feel the benefits of oil wealth and has inflation under control.
The revelation of the order comes after Ahmadinejad's advisors said on Monday that the president would soon embark on another round of provincial trips to chase up on the fulfillment of the promised projects.
Read the rest: Ahmadinejad orders purge of local officials
Posted on:
October 30, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch, Leftwing Watch . •
No Comments • .
Here we go again. CNN reporting enemy propaganda as news: U.S. forces battle militants in Sadr City. My BS alarm goes off whenever I see reports like this. Especially, when it involves a U.S.-led operation in Sadr City, Baghdad. Why?
Every report seems to focus on how many innocent civilians are either killed or wounded during the operation. Who supplied the news for that particular story?
It is well-known that the Iranian's are conducting operations against coalition interests in the Sadr City. Such operations would include military training and support for militias, psychological-warfare and propaganda aimed at Western media.
Isn't this what the Iranians did through their support of Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Palestine? CNN's report sounds eerily familiar to news stories that have come out of Gaza in years past. You know the story, an aggressive "occupation" force steam-rolls through a neighborhood leaving dead and wounded civilians in its wake. With no apparent reason for being there in the first place. Then pictures of grieving, suffering civilians are shown. Sounds familiar.
Civilians are undoubtedly wounded or killed during military operations in a crowded urban setting and that is tragic. But there is no proof that U.S. forces engage in operations with the intent to cause civilian casualties. My question for CNN is: was a reporter on the ground in Sadr City during the fighting? If so, was he or she a "stringer" or Western journalist? And where is the context for this report?
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) — Iraqi officials expressed outrage early Sunday at what they say are civilian deaths in the wake of a massive military operation in Baghdad's Sadr City neighborhood.
The U.S. military said its ground forces are "unaware" of civilian deaths in the early morning raid that it said left 49 "criminals" dead.
An Iraqi Interior Ministry source told CNN that 15 civilians were killed — all men — and 52 other civilians were wounded, including women and children.
Sadr City's mayor, Hassan Adhab, told Iraqi state TV there were 10 "martyrs" — including a mother and her three children — and 42 others were wounded.
Coalition forces were targeting a man they said was a leader in an Iranian-funded kidnapping operation. U.S. military spokeswoman Sgt. Nicole Dykstra told CNN the target was "neither apprehended nor killed today."
Adhab described a bloody scene, saying dozens of sheep were killed in the melee, and military aircraft still hovered over the neighborhood hours after the raid.
He blamed American forces for targeting cars carrying people who were heading to work early Sunday.
"We call upon Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to stop such immoral acts in Sadr City," Adhab said.
When asked about the Sadr City raid, the spokesman for the Baghdad Security Plan said Iraqi forces take every measure to avoid civilian casualties.
"If there are innocent civilian casualties in Sadr City or anywhere else then that is unfortunate," Brig. Gen. Qassim Atta said. "We hope both the Multi-National Forces and the Iraqi Security Forces demonstrate military restraint and respect human rights."
He said al-Maliki will be briefed on the details of the Sadr City raid by the Multi-National Forces.
The U.S. military said the joint ground forces were fired upon as they were clearing several buildings in the "target area."
"Supporting aircraft was called in to suppress the enemy fire, killing an estimated six criminals," a military news release stated.
"The operation's objective was an individual reported to be a longtime Special Groups member specializing in kidnapping operations," the military said. "Intelligence indicates he is a well-known cell leader and has previously sought funding from Iran to carry out high profile kidnappings."
The military said its forces were hit by a roadside bomb as they left the area, but the blast did not cause any casualties among coalition forces.
The Iraqi Interior Ministry spokesman said many cars and many homes were damaged in the battle.
The ministry spokesman said the firefight took place between 1:30 a.m. (6:30 p.m. ET) and 6 a.m. (11 p.m. ET) in Sadr City, a densely populated Shiite slum where there is much grass-roots support for Iran and anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
"Special Groups are Shia extremist militant groups trained, funded and supplied primarily by Iran through the Islamic Revolutionary Guards — Quds Force," said U.S. Army Lt. Justin Cole.
"Special Groups have evolved over the past three years into insurgent elements using a cellular structure and operating independently."
"Special Groups operate throughout Iraq," Cole said. "They plan and execute bombings, kidnappings, sectarian murders and more against Iraqi citizens, Iraqi forces and coalition personnel."
Posted on:
October 21, 2007 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch, Iraqi Freedom, Media Bias . •
2 Comments • .
From CNSNEWS.com:
Strategic Outpost
Iran is OPEC's second-largest oil producer. Sudan also has significant oil reserves and, with the end of a two decade-long north-south civil war is becoming an increasingly important source.
Bashir seized control in a 1989 military coup and under him Sudan followed Iran's 1979 example by declaring itself an Islamic regime.
Bashir's Sunni Muslim regime soon established good relations with Iran's Shi'ite government. Researchers say the link-up in late 1991 resulted in members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard training fundamentalist militias set up by Khartoum.
"In early 1992 Sudan emerged as a strategic outpost and key part of the infrastructure for Iran's export of the Islamic Revolution throughout the Near East and Africa," according to counter-terrorism expert and author Yossef Bodansky.
Relations between the two later cooled, in part because of theological differences.
Under President Mohammed Khatami (1997-2005), Iran pursued less openly extremist policies, while Sudan in the second half of the 1990s sought to ease tensions with the West, for instance negotiating the departure of al-Qaeda terrorist leader Osama bin Laden, who was based in Sudan from 1991 to 1996.
Now, with both governments under fire in the international community, they appear to be moving closer together again.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki during a meeting with Bashir this week praised what he called positive trends in bilateral relations.
He said the two countries could also contribute to ensuring greater effectiveness of the two blocs to which both belong - the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Non-Aligned Movement.
Read the whole story: Under Fire From the West, Iran and Sudan Cozy Up.
Posted on:
September 21, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
Global Jihad, International, Iran Watch, North Africa . •
No Comments • .
This is another follow up post to "Today is the Era of Thoughts, Dialogue, and Cultural Exchanges".
Via Bloomberg:
Iranian military forces handed back control of an oil rig seized yesterday in the Persian Gulf to its Romanian owners, a company official said.
"We have contact with the rig and the Iranians have now gone," said Radu Petrescu, spokesman for Grup Servicii Petroliere (GSP), the Romanian owners of the platform, named Orizont, in a phone interview from Bucharest today.
The Romanian company was in the process of removing the rig from Iranian waters because of a contractual dispute with its client Oriental Oil Kish when it was fired on and boarded yesterday, the spokesman said.
Complete article: Iran Hands Gulf Rig Back to Driller Amid Contract Dispute
Posted on:
August 24, 2006 , by
newyank • Trackback
Filed in:
International, Iran Watch . •
1 Comment • .
