Posted on 08/19/2004 9:00:36 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
The US media still largely ignores news regarding the Islamic Republic of Iran. As Tony Snow of the Fox News Network has put it, “this is probably the most under-reported news story of the year.” Most American’s are unaware that the Islamic Republic of Iran is NOT supported by the masses of Iranians today. Modern Iranians are among the most pro-American in the Middle East.
There is a popular revolt against the Iranian regime brewing in Iran today. I began these daily threads June 10th 2003. On that date Iranians once again began taking to the streets to express their desire for a regime change. Today in Iran, most want to replace the regime with a secular democracy.
The regime is working hard to keep the news about the protest movement in Iran from being reported. Unfortunately, the regime has successfully prohibited western news reporters from covering the demonstrations. The voices of discontent within Iran are sometime murdered, more often imprisoned. Still the people continue to take to the streets to demonstrate against the regime.
In support of this revolt, Iranians in America have been broadcasting news stories by satellite into Iran. This 21st century news link has greatly encouraged these protests. The regime has been attempting to jam the signals, and locate the satellite dishes. Still the people violate the law and listen to these broadcasts. Iranians also use the Internet and the regime attempts to block their access to news against the regime. In spite of this, many Iranians inside of Iran read these posts daily to keep informed of the events in their own country.
This daily thread contains nearly all of the English news reports on Iran. It is thorough. If you follow this thread you will witness, I believe, the transformation of a nation. This daily thread provides a central place where those interested in the events in Iran can find the best news and commentary. The news stories and commentary will from time to time include material from the regime itself. But if you read the post you will discover for yourself, the real story of what is occurring in Iran and its effects on the war on terror.
I am not of Iranian heritage. I am an American committed to supporting the efforts of those in Iran seeking to replace their government with a secular democracy. I am in contact with leaders of the Iranian community here in the United States and in Iran itself.
If you read the daily posts you will gain a better understanding of the US war on terrorism, the Middle East and why we need to support a change of regime in Iran. Feel free to ask your questions and post news stories you discover in the weeks to come.
If all goes well Iran will be free soon and I am convinced become a major ally in the war on terrorism. The regime will fall. Iran will be free. It is just a matter of time.
DoctorZin
-good times, G.J.P. (Jr.)
I was thinking more along the lines of Adam Carolla.
Good times man, good times.
Iran has some real beauties ~ freedom in Iran ~ now!
Iran Missiles Sharpen Aim with U.S. Technology
August 20, 2004
WorldNetDaily.com
Geostrategy-Direct Intelligence Brief
The Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps last week demonstrated the integration of a system that turns the Shihab-3 intermediate-range ballistic missile from a flying metal tube into a deadly weapon against Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States, reports Geostrategy-Direct, the global intelligence news service.
The Shihab-3's problem has not been its range, but its accuracy. With a range of 1,400 kilometers, it can reach anywhere in Iraq, Israel and Saudi Arabia.
But the missile, based on the North Korean No Dong, was not accurate.
The Iranians appeared to have changed all that. Tehran has procured and integrated a Chinese missile navigation system into the Shihab-3 apparently based on the Global Positioning System, or GPS.
In one test, the Iranians skipped a generation in technology and posed a threat to U.S. interests throughout the Middle East.
As WorldNetDaily reported, in 1995, the Clinton administration approved the sale of GPS technology directly to a company owned by the Chinese Air Force.
"The Iranians wanted to overcome the lack of accuracy in their missiles so they didn't have to target cities," a U.S. intelligence source said.
"Although the Iranians talked tough, targeting cities posed a political problem for them. Now the Iranians can strike Israeli military and U.S. military targets in Iraq if Teheran's nuclear weapons program is struck. Naturally, the Iranians are ecstatic."
The Shihab-3 could incorporate a nuclear weapon and Teheran has been working hard to develop its first indigenous atomic bomb. Iran has been getting plenty of assistance from China, North Korea, Pakistan and Russia.
North Korea has been the greatest of help, and many in the U.S. intelligence community have concluded that Iran and North Korea have informally linked both their long-range missile as well as nuclear weapons programs.
The next step will probably be a launch of the new Shihab-3 missile. This could occur in a few weeks if the Iranian leadership feels it would help deter Israel and the United States. Stay tuned.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=40042
Inside the Battle: why Najaf Matters
August 18, 2004
The Washington Times
Walid Phares
Why is the storming of Muqtada al-Sadr's base in Najaf and other locations in Iraq a major development? Is it a risky move, and why is it taking place? These are important questions to be raised as U.S. and Iraqi forces encircle the militant cleric in the Shi'ites' holiest shrine in Iraq.
The stakes are indeed high, as a number of analysts fear a general collapse of the Allawi government's power if the operation fails, and by ripple effect, the U.S. role in that country. The situation is also complex as observers are focusing on the real attitude of the Shi'ia community in Iraq. Who are they really with? Who are they really against? And what would they actually do if matters in Najaf turn badly?
Some wonder whether Muqtada is a real leader to reckon with or a stooge of greater powers. My understanding is that he may be both: a real leader of a faction heavily linked to a greater power in the region, namely Iran. In short, this young Shi'ite cleric — whose looks and gestures amazingly resemble the current leader of Lebanon's Hezbollah — owes his current career to two other men: his late father, Mohammed al-Sadr, and the latter's Iranian friend, Imam Qazim el-Haeri.
The Sadrs are one of the most revered clans in Shi'ite Iraq. Imam Mohammed al-Sadr led a fierce opposition to Saddam Hussein's regime for almost two decades. But his struggle against the Ba'athist dictator was mostly inspired by the jihadist ideology in neighboring Iran. A classmate of the Ayatollah Khomeini, Muqtada's father aimed at replacing Saddam's Pan-Arabism with an Islamist Republic. In 1999, Muqtada's father was executed by Saddam's regime, leaving his followers, including his son Muqtada, on the run.
Thanks to the U.S.-led invasion and the toppling of the Ba'athist regime, the Sadrists made it back to Iraq from Iran. Muqtada was suddenly projected as the "new leader" of the al-Sadr clan. According to sources in Iran, Imam Haeri "lobbied" for the young cleric to become the man to be supported by the Khamanei power in Tehran, so that he would become the potential Hassan Nasrallah of Iraq. (Sheikh Nasrallah is the Iranian-backed head of Lebanon's Hezbollah.) Iran's plans for post-Saddam Iraq — plans coordinated with Damascus — is to develop the local power of Sadr within the Shiite community and project the young cleric as the real strong man in the country.
The rise of Muqtada to prominence was rather bloody. Immediately after the removal of Saddam, a competitive clerical exile (who was just returning from Britain), Abdul Majid al Khoei, was assassinated by al Sadr followers in Najaf. In August of 2003, another important leader, Imam Baqer al-Hakim, was killed by a car bomb as he stepped out of his mosque. Other Shi'ite figures were assassinated too. All were Muqtada's political competitors. He was able to move up the ladder by the elimination of all potential spiritual leaders, with the exception of Grand Ayatollah al-Sistani.
On the ground, Muqtada and his advisers, from the Pasdarans (Iran's Revolutionary Guards) and Hezbollah, formed a militia, the Jaish al-mahdi. The "Mehdi army" was essentially a tool of terror against fellow Shi'ites. To counter the mainstream popular force of the Shi'ites, the al Badr Brigades, the militiamen of Muqtada, deployed in the holy shrines, stated that they are "protecting them" and imposed embryonic "militia-rule" in the areas under control.
Hence, the collision between the pro-Iranian force inside Iraq and the coalition were doomed to happen. Tehran wants a vassal power in Iraq from Sadr City to Basra, and Muqtada al Sadr is her man. The main battles seem to be between Iraqi Shi'ites and American Marines. In fact, deep down, the war is between two forms of Shi'ism. The Khomeinists on the one hand and the moderates on the other. The United States is obviously on the side of the latter.
Walid Phares is a professor of Mideast Studies and an Iraq/Terrorism analyst for MSNBC and Fox News.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20040818-092342-8460r.htm
Iran's Brinkmanship . . .
August 20, 2004
The Globe and Mail
Comment
Is Iran headed for war with the United States and Israel? Judging by recent news reports, one could be forgiven for thinking so.
In the past several days, sabre-rattling, primarily from the Iranian side, has grown deafening. Iran "will not sit with arms folded to wait for what others will do to us," Iranian Defence Minister Ali Shamkhani said on Al-Jazeera television Wednesday. In a direct reference to U.S. President George W. Bush's doctrine of pre-emption, Rear Admiral Shamkhani threatened an Iranian first strike in the event that Iranian commanders believe a U.S. or Israeli assault on Iran's nuclear facilities is imminent. "America is not the only one present in the region," he said. "We are also present, from Khost to Kandahar in Afghanistan; we are present in the Gulf and we can be present in Iraq."
Earlier, a senior Iranian military officer said that if Israel bombed its emerging nuclear facility at Bushehr, in a repeat of Israel's pre-emptive strike on Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility in 1981, Iran would attack Israel's nuclear reactor at Dimona. (Though Israel neither confirms nor denies its nuclear status, the Dimona plant is thought to provide weapons-grade plutonium for an estimated 200 Israeli nuclear warheads.) Amid growing international concern over Iran's burgeoning nuclear program, there has been much speculation that Israel contemplates just such a pre-emptive strike. The result, if the threats and counterthreats are to be believed, would be the catastrophic wider Middle Eastern war that the more pessimistic analysts have feared for the past three years.
The public war of words must be taken with a grain of salt. Many analysts believe an Osirak-style strike on Iran is a practical impossibility, both because the country's nuclear facilities are widely dispersed and because the United States, which already has its hands full in Iraq, would oppose it. The last thing President Bush wants in an election year is a broader Mideast war. The U.S. stance so far has been one of pointedly diplomatic bellicosity. John R. Bolton, the U.S. undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, is pressing for the matter to be brought before the United Nations Security Council in hopes of isolating Iran economically, not of launching an invasion.
That said, there is cause for concern. Last June, Iran reneged on a commitment to suspend its uranium enrichment program. Last month, according to the United States, Iranian officials said the country could produce enough weapons-grade uranium to build a nuclear bomb within a year. (Most international estimates suggest an Iranian nuclear bomb is between three and five years away.) A week ago, Iran tested the Shahab-3 missile, which has a range of 1,300 kilometres.
Clearly Iran is engaging in brinkmanship, almost certainly predicated on the assumption that the looming presidential election and the war in Iraq have tied the United States' hands. The fact that the mullahs are probably bluffing -- Iran would stand no chance in a military showdown with Israel, let alone the United States -- does not make their posturing any less dangerous. For the U.S. election will be over in November, and Iraq is moving, albeit haltingly, toward greater democracy and stability. Saddam Hussein bluffed, allowing the world to believe he posed an imminent threat. He's now locked in a cell.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20040820/EIRAN20/TPComment/Editorials
Bump!
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.