Posted on 11/20/2003 3:24:55 PM PST by Dog
LOL! I almost posted that on the live thread of the President's speech yesterday, but I have learned to refrain myself. I always did enjoy those discussions here on FR. Sigh....
Iran is a much larger and FAR more populous country than Iraq. And worse and more defensible terrain.
You're living in a drug-addled fantasy world if anyone thinks we're invading Syria or Iran anytime in the remotely foreseable future.
As long as North Korea exists, we basically don't have the force to do so as well as occupy Iraq, except in the exceptionally dubious possibilty that the Iranian regular army ACTIVELY allied itself with invading US forces against the Pasdaran.
Good thinking.
Little doubt Al Qaeda doesn't have stocks of the stuff. Somebody gave it to them as a test/warning. Iran has been in bed with these guys all along. So, it could be them. Or it could have been the Iraqis. Either way, Al Qaeda would probably love to get their hands on the stuff, but the sponsor state was just too nervous to let them get any quantity.
Ijaz's credibility is just shy of debka.com's, imho. Every time I see him on FNC he's spewing about the latest overblown AQ story du-jour. Never seems to pan out. Remember the AQ has suitcase nukes claims, AQ has chem/bio weapon claims, UBL will be caught in two weeks claim, etc., etc.???
Wasn't that said about Afghanistan, that the terrain and the winter weather would decimate our forces?
Agreed. There is another factor though in this equation: Israel.
Israel is becoming very nervous and is getting an itchy trigger-finger when it comes to Iran's nuclear production-missiles-factory-et.al.
Who knows if they might just decide to go in and preemptively strike Iran?
We can tell Israel what to do and what not to do...only to a point, then they take their security matters into their own hands.
So all that weight he gained went right to his butt?
You mean Bill Clinton has been in Iran?
| Laden hands over mantle of terror to son: Report ^ |
||||||
| Posted by Brian S On 10/19/2003 3:57 PM CDT with 27 comments Times of India ^ | 10-19-03 PTI[ SUNDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2003 08:06:03 PM ] LONDON: Terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden has appointed his eldest son 26-year-old Saad Bin Laden as his successor and ordered him to attack British and US targets, a report quoting his latest audio tape said on Sunday. The tape purportedly from the al-Qaeda leader on Saturday promised more suicide attacks inside and outside United States and other countries that supported the Iraq war and demanded the Americans to quit Iraq. The news that Osama bin Laden had named son Saad as his successor forced British Intelligence Agency Mi5 Chief Eliza Manningham-Buller to... |
||||||
| Bin Laden's son stepping up to the plate ^ |
||||||
| Posted by JohnHuang2 On 10/15/2003 6:41 AM CDT with 15 comments WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, October, 15, 2003 Like father, like son, assert U.S., European and Arab intelligence agencies who believe one of Osama bin Laden's youngest children is beginning to call the shots at the Iranian branch of al-Qaida. Saad bin Laden is one of an estimated 400 operatives of the terror network recruited and protected by Tehran's hard-line clerics, according to the Washington Post. Tehran's elected government, headed by the reformist President Mohammed Khatami, does not appear to have control over this group, called the Jerusalem Force. The Post reports the 24-year-old bin Laden is computer savvy and fluent in English. His father groomed him for... |
||||||
| Bin Laden Son Assumes Key Role in Al Qaeda- Report ^ |
||||||
| Posted by sarcasm On 10/14/2003 4:08 AM CDT with 2 comments Reuters ^ | October 14, 2003 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One of Osama bin Laden's oldest sons has emerged as a key player in the al Qaeda network and is part of a small group of leaders running the group from Iran, The Washington Post reported on Tuesday.Citing U.S. and European intelligence sources, the newspaper reported that Saad bin Laden and other senior al Qaeda operatives in Iran were in contact with an al Qaeda cell in Saudi Arabia just prior to the May 12 suicide bombing in the Saudi capital that killed 35 people.The sources gave no details of the communications but said the contacts led... |
||||||
| Bin Laden Son Plays Key Role in Al Qaeda ^ |
||||||
| Posted by Pan_Yans Wife On 10/13/2003 10:27 PM CDT with 8 comments The Washington Post ^ | October 13, 2003 | Douglas Farah and Dana Priest Saad bin Laden, one of Osama bin Laden's oldest sons, has emerged in recent months as part of the upper echelon of the al Qaeda network, a small group of leaders that is managing the terrorist organization from Iran, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. Saad bin Laden and other senior al Qaeda operatives were in contact with an al Qaeda cell in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, in the days immediately prior to the May 12 suicide bombing there that left 35 people dead, including eight Americans, European and U.S. intelligence sources say. The sources would not divulge the nature |
||||||
Like other Al Qaeda leaders in Iran, the younger bin Laden, who is believed to be 24 years old, is protected by an elite, radical Iranian security force loyal to the nation's clerics and beyond the control of the central government, according to U.S. and European intelligence officials.The secretive unit, known as the Jerusalem Force, has restricted the Al Qaeda group's movements to its bases, mostly along the border with Afghanistan.
Also under the Jerusalem Force's protection is Saif al-Adel, Al Qaeda 's chief of military operations; Abdullah Ahmed Abdullah, the organization's chief financial officer, and perhaps two dozen other top Al Qaeda leaders, the officials said. Al-Adel and Abdullah are considered the top operational deputies to Osama bin Laden and his second-in-command, Ayman Zawahiri, who communicate with underlings almost exclusively through couriers.
U.S. officials have sent stern warnings to the government of President Mohammad Khatami that Iran's harbouring of senior Al Qaeda operatives would have repercussions for a nation the Bush administration has labelled part of the "axis of evil.''
Intelligence officials believe that although the U.S. State Department is eager to renew talks with Iran on a variety of issues, primarily its nuclear program, it is not clear whether that nation's civilian government could deliver its end of any bargain, especially if it entailed turning over Al Qaeda leaders.
"Iran will continue to pursue an asymmetric strategy in which they court Western acceptance, while maintaining their surrogate leadership roles within the Islamic extremist community," a U.S. intelligence analysis says.
Similarly, Saudi Arabia, which in recent years has tried to thaw relations with its larger and more powerful neighbour across the Persian Gulf, is trying, unsuccessfully, to persuade Iran to extradite Saad bin Laden and others suspected in the Riyadh bombing. Saudi officials estimate there are up to 400 Al Qaeda members there.
"Those people are in Iran and somebody must be helping them. The question is who?" Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador, told the San Francisco Chronicle last month. "This is the problem with Iran. The people who we can deal with can't deliver, they can't lead eight ducks across the street. And the guys who can deliver, they're not interested.''
Invading Iran just isn't going to happen, for the reasons you mentioned. But a war fought exclusively from the air - taking out their nuke facilities, ground forces, and the ayatollahs themselves) is a disinct possibility, and quite doable. The Iranian revolutionaries would then take care of the rest.
Syria is another story -- much smaller, easy terrain, and a pathetic armed forces. In addition, they very well could be in possession of Saddam's WMD (that every sane and informed person knows he had). I wouldn't discount our taking them out in a manner not too dissimilar to what we did in Iraq. If we find those WMD the Dems will be deprived of their #1 (and longstanding) beef against the administration, and their chances in '04 will be all but eliminated.
I don't think it will work for them, as we have a lot more at stake, but this is their strategy, and we need to respond accordingly. The West, especially the USA, armed and help the Mujahadeen fight the Soviets. Perhaps Iran wants to be/thinks they can be their "helper" now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.