Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EXCLUSIVE: Iranian Weapons Arm Iraqi Militia
ABC News ^ | November 30 2006 | JONATHAN KARL AND MARTIN CLANCY

Posted on 11/30/2006 8:19:10 AM PST by jmc1969

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-208 next last
To: dinoparty
We don't have the resources to fight occupation opposed insurgencies...but we have the resources to destroy all the military infrastructure that supports these insurgencies.

Iran and Syria are footing the bill, supplying the weapons and training. If we destroy, completely, these military forces and means of production...and eliminate those regimes...the insurgencies and the Jihad dies with them.

101 posted on 11/30/2006 9:22:20 AM PST by Mariner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: All
Yet we blow up tons of weapons caches in Iraq instead of finding a way for them to wind up in the hands of Iran's many ticked off youngins. We lose because we always forfeit.
102 posted on 11/30/2006 9:25:45 AM PST by The Toll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Muzzle_em
Anyone care to theorize what would be happening in Iraq and/or U.S. right now if the U.S. had never gone into Iraq and Saddam was still in power?

Iraq would be the home of Al Quata, funded freely by Saddam. Saddam would be financially supporting anything they wanted. His goal would be a total destruction of the US before he died of old age. If he didn't do this, the terrorists would have taken over Iraq eventually anyway.

103 posted on 11/30/2006 9:27:45 AM PST by concerned about politics ("Get thee behind me, Liberal.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: edcoil
Any law that says Iran cannot make stuff or sell or give them to anyone?

Uh, yeah. Not that they can be expected to enforce it or anything, but the U.N.'s Charter prohibits aiding an armed insurgency against a recognized government. This would doubtless also be illegal with respect to any number of bilateral or regional accords and agreements.

104 posted on 11/30/2006 9:27:54 AM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

"big question is what will the US do about it, publicly or otherwise?"

Nothing!


105 posted on 11/30/2006 9:29:30 AM PST by MPJackal ("If you are not with us, you are against us.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Bombing iran will NEVER happen.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1538092/posts?page=1


106 posted on 11/30/2006 9:33:06 AM PST by US_MilitaryRules (Time to eradicated islambs and mooselimbs! GO PTSC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

Any analogy breaks down. The Stern gang didn't worry about civilian casualties when they blew up the King David Hotel. We didn't worry about killing innocent women and children with the fire bombing of Tokyo and Hamburg and Dresden or using the A bomb against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. War is about winning any way you can. The winners apply the rules after the war is over.


107 posted on 11/30/2006 9:33:13 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Fighting Irish

We are outdoing our reputation as a paper tiger when it comes to fighting this war.When did America become so predictable? It's like we are following a script that was written by our enemies.The politicians in Washington are being manipulated like puppets and the terrorist are holding the strings.We can't win a war when we are dancing to the beat of the enemy.


108 posted on 11/30/2006 9:34:29 AM PST by peeps36 (Rebuild Iraq's Army And Send It Over To Kick Iran In The Teeth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
It's been done. Check it out here.
109 posted on 11/30/2006 9:35:10 AM PST by Pirate21 (The liberal media are as sheep clearing the path along which they will be led to the slaughter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

Certainly a possibility, especially if we would consider operating across those borders if needed. Bush has lost his perspective if he just views this as a question of Iraq.


110 posted on 11/30/2006 9:48:34 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"Our troops are in a war zone being killed, and we know the neighboring hostile country is providing weapons to the killers. The only sensible course is to threaten Iran and prepare to follow through if they do not pull back."

Like we did to the Chinese who were supplying the North Koreans? Or the Russians who were supplying the VC?
We don't have a good track record in this regard and I don't see that changing...

Kit.

111 posted on 11/30/2006 9:51:17 AM PST by KitJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

ABC is just now figuring out that Iran is no saint? Welcome to hte real world ABC- we were waiting for you to catch up- now move to hte back of the line and keep your yap shut please. http://sacredscoop.com


112 posted on 11/30/2006 9:53:22 AM PST by CottShop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

I'm shocked.


113 posted on 11/30/2006 9:53:53 AM PST by rintense (Liberals stand for nothing and are against everything- unless it benefits them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Sorry folks, but our government isn't going to a damn thing about Iran sending weapons into Iraq. They've been doing it for well over a year and we've known about it for that long. No matter how many US soldiers are killed with Iranian weapons we won't lift a finger to actually stop it. Oh sure, we'll 'beef up border security', but we won't punish the Iranian gov't in any shape, form or fashion. We have neither the will nor the resolve.

Our government will work triple overtime seeking a politically correct, euro-safe solution that will culminate in people waving pieces of paper around... if they seek a solution at all.


114 posted on 11/30/2006 9:55:43 AM PST by navyguy (We don't need more youth. What we need is a fountain of SMART.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KitJ

Exactly, the poor track record should not be repeated. Iran is a strategic target in itself, probably more important than Iraq.


115 posted on 11/30/2006 9:56:53 AM PST by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: kabar
didn't worry about civilian casualties when they blew up the King David Hotel.

Actually they did or they would not have called in a warning before they bombed British Military Headquarters in one wing of the KD Hotel.

If your argument is that even when there is concern for civilians an important war aim must trump that concern regarding civilians you are correct.

In the West today concern for tangential civilians- often terrorist supporters- stops necessary military action in its track.

Our enemy has no such compulsion. They consider us all, civilians and uniformed, as legitimate targets.

Being moral should not mean being suicidal. Losing to barbarism is immoral.

116 posted on 11/30/2006 10:08:25 AM PST by Sabramerican (Says the piano player: America's greatest legacy will be to create a Palestinian State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969
folks, the long view is that we went into Iraq BECAUSE of Iran. That we're now just starting to see fresh weapons popping up on the battleground is not news.

Like Afghanistan before it, we had plenty 100% justifiable reasons to project our power to Iraq. As the world---still to this day---is wringing their hands worrying about the "unwinnable" war in Iraq, the US has been able to realize the ultimate intent of our multitheater strategy--the confrontation of Iranian (and Russian) regional power that has taunted us for almost 30 years.

Despite an colossal barrage of news stating the exact opposite, we are uniquely positioned to counter fascist rhetoric originating from Tehran. A belligerent Iran is proof positive that our pressure is working, not floundering.

The popular (and much derided) notion of the US "reaching out" to our enemies may be an incorrect reading of what's really happening. Instead, we may be setting the agenda Robert Oakley style--(to paraphrase) "America will help you steer events toward a peaceful resolution, but so help us, if you screw up your end, we'll bring this place down."

117 posted on 11/30/2006 10:12:38 AM PST by cyberdasher (Wikistan--Frontline of the information wars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus

Like everything else in life there is a simple solution.

At 12:00 tomorrow, the US declares that unless Iran leaves Iraq immediately, at 17:00est tomorrow, just in time for the evening news cycle, Iran will cease to bee an oil producing nation.

Then we remove all troops from the Baghdad area and put them on the Syrian border. Then Israel mobilizes for war.

Oh, then disconnect John Boltons telephone.


118 posted on 11/30/2006 10:13:45 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (I thank the RNC for freeing me to vote my values rather then political party. It is liberating!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz

Forgot something.

Later in the evening, Quetta in Pakistan is totally leveled by stealth aircraft. Then the US denies having anything to do with the bombing.

Call it the say of settling all debts.


119 posted on 11/30/2006 10:15:08 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (I thank the RNC for freeing me to vote my values rather then political party. It is liberating!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: navyguy
Yes I agree. The will of history - represented in Russia and China's stance, Europe's passivity, and the American left's rebellion - is once again pushing Persia to the forefront of power in that region.

After we leave Iraq, there will be a short war after 2008 engulfing the entire middle east, with Iran/Iraq obtaining the allegiance of neighboring countries (except Israel of course)

120 posted on 11/30/2006 10:15:29 AM PST by rjp2005 (Lord have mercy on us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican
Actually they did or they would not have called in a warning before they bombed British Military Headquarters in one wing of the KD Hotel.

There are differing opinions as to when and how the calls were placed. Innocent people died.

Being moral should not mean being suicidal. Losing to barbarism is immoral

On that we agree, and that was my point. War is about winning.

121 posted on 11/30/2006 10:17:16 AM PST by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: demsux

"The Iranians/Persians are the most cowardly warriors that "I have ever heard of.
Instead of fighting honorably, they hide behind terrorists, women, children, etc."

This is war. They know it and act like it, we don't. They use the most effective means available to them, regardless of what others think, we don't. That's why groups of pathetically armed madmen have the greatest military power in the world tied down without sight of victory.


122 posted on 11/30/2006 10:17:23 AM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: melancholy
"We've got to go on a media blits before the Air Force blitz..."

INDEED!!!

And this time, immediately following the media blitz, I hope to see some serious "SHOCK & AWE"!!

Nancee

123 posted on 11/30/2006 10:19:00 AM PST by Nancee ((Nancee Lynn Cheney))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: cyberdasher
...the US has been able to realize the ultimate intent of our multitheater strategy--the confrontation of Iranian (and Russian) regional power that has taunted us for almost 30 years...

That's classic Rumsfeld. But without him, can we see it through? Does anyone left in our government grasp the situation?

124 posted on 11/30/2006 10:20:08 AM PST by LikeLight (Pelosi, YMB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Bah, bah, baaah, bomb, bomb Iran...


125 posted on 11/30/2006 10:20:17 AM PST by Antoninus (When your party's platform is "Vote for US because THEY will be worse," prepare to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton
There is a book (now available in paperback ):

***********************

Unholy Alliance: Radical Islam and the American Left
(Hardcover)
by David Horowitz

********************************************************

And reviews:

****************************************

Editorial Reviews

Rich Lowry, Editor National Review

David Horowitz is synonymous with pyrotechnics. A historian and polemicist of the first order, he is paid the ultimate compliment --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

Davis Hanson, Author, Ripples of Battle

An original look at those who want us to fail in the Middle East, both at home and abroad. The --This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

***********************************************************

See all Editorial Reviews

Fascinating Analysis of Leftist Goals, August 13, 2006

Reviewer: N. Sincerity - See all my reviews

A former 1960s radical, Horowitz is well-acquainted with the Leftist mindset. In this book, he strives to explain the modern alliance between left wing progressivists and radical Islamofascists. He argues that this alliance is based on a common desire to destroy Western capitalism. Leftist sympathy with Islamofascist ideas makes no sense from an intellectual point of view, given that countries ruled by radical Islamists are among the most racist, sexist, theocratic states in the world today. However, Leftists have recognized that they can benefit politically from destructive terrorist attacks on the Western world. A West under attack can be made to turn on its leaders in fear and desperation (as they did in Spain after the Madrid train bombings). Only once people reject current government structures can the Left execute its anti-capitalist revolution and build a new reality that mirrors the Leftist view of utopia. The complete and utter idealogical hypocrisy of the Islamofascist-Leftist alliance is distressing, but as Horowitz reminds us, Leftists radicals truly believe the ends justify the means.

***************************************

126 posted on 11/30/2006 10:30:37 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Kerretarded

So, all who've been killed by Iranian weapons to date were freebies?


127 posted on 11/30/2006 10:31:18 AM PST by Liberty Tree Surgeon (Mow your own lawn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: concerned about politics

I too believe that Al Q would have rid Iraq of Saddam if the U.S. had not. Interesting how those freaking "sheet heads" constantly change alliances. I'm SURE he was considered an infidel by AQ. He was their useful idiot in helping them and supplying them. They would have gladly beheaded him when they were finished with him. Are AQ Sunni or Shite?
Who gives a "shite?" They are all freaking nuts.


128 posted on 11/30/2006 10:32:27 AM PST by Muzzle_em (taglines are for sissies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: LikeLight

dunno, unfortunately. But wouldn't matter because, according to various influential nitwits, our strategies are determined and executed by powerful corporate interest and backroom power brokers. /haha

I trust the generals and the armed forces who, for all intents and purposes, are the only ones standing against radicalized Islamism in the streets.


129 posted on 11/30/2006 10:37:11 AM PST by cyberdasher (Wikistan--Frontline of the information wars)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Liberty Tree Surgeon
So, all who've been killed by Iranian weapons to date were freebies?

Nice try at mixing up the meaning of my words.
130 posted on 11/30/2006 10:41:39 AM PST by Eagle of Liberty (Sorry soldiers.....your country let you down on November 7.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: cyberdasher
"I trust the generals and the armed forces who, for all intents and purposes, are the only ones standing against radicalized Islamism in the streets."

Don't you think that if the military leaders were told to clean up Iraq, or Iran for that matter, they couldn't do it? The only reason it hasn't happened is that's not what they've been told to do. There can be arguments about why the have not been unleashed to win this war, but there can be no doubt that they are being restrained.
131 posted on 11/30/2006 10:42:32 AM PST by Prokopton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 129 | View Replies]

To: Prokopton

I am so dumbfounded by our reactions (or lack of) to this war. This is just like all the history books describe the fall of all great historical empires. The little barbarians poke and poke and poke at the big bully, who shows great restraint, until he is finally no longer able to cope and tumbles over. We can still stop this travesty from occurring, but I doubt we have the stomach to do what needs to be done and thus we are going to end up on the trash heap of history. President Bush needs to act NOW.


132 posted on 11/30/2006 10:42:47 AM PST by Azzurri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

133 posted on 11/30/2006 10:48:34 AM PST by Gritty (If you want to have good relations with the Iranian people you should bow and surrender-A'd'jad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kerretarded
Didn't mix up a thing. My intent is to convey the notion that the line in the sand you describe was crossed over a year ago - any retaliation should have occurred already. And if retaliation is forthcoming, there remains no conditional impediment, so the Administration should proceed immediately.
134 posted on 11/30/2006 11:14:18 AM PST by Liberty Tree Surgeon (Mow your own lawn!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Wow! That's a shocker! Wait a minute! Haven't we all been saying this for the past two years????? Doh!


135 posted on 11/30/2006 11:15:28 AM PST by Virginia Ridgerunner ("Si vis pacem para bellum")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cyberdasher
You are absolutely right. After 9/11 Bush didn't have the political/diplomatic justification for going into Iran that we did for Iraq (e.g. UN resolutions etc.), but I do believe that he and his advisers understood that central contribution of Iran to the Middle East equation. What they didn't predict was how short the pledged bipartisanship would last, and how short peoples memories were for 9/11. Those factors have prevented a more aggressive approach toward Iran to date.

Incidentally, when the left started complaining about the Bush administration using the memory of 9/11 for political purposes, he should have hammered them with the facts. We should have been seeing images from that attack incessantly since then. That we haven't is the result of bending to the left, and now they control congress. Not a smart move.
136 posted on 11/30/2006 11:18:12 AM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Muzzle_em

Al Qaeda are mainly Sunni, just like the Baathists.
And Al AQaeda and Saddam were not enemies. As far back as 1998, bin Laden and al Zawihiri were saying that U.S. attacks on Iraq were part of the reason they declared jihad on us. Also, see Khobar Towers attack. Khobar housed the pilots doing the bombing raids over Iraq. Don't believe the lefty/MSM myth that Saddam and bin Laden hated each other.
Read the Looming Tower by Lawrence Wright (no neo-con is he0, you'l get all the history about al Qaeda you need.


137 posted on 11/30/2006 11:27:45 AM PST by threeleftsmakearight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: TexasCajun


You mean the Jimmy Carter who can't see things very clearly????


138 posted on 11/30/2006 11:28:50 AM PST by Stayfree (Check out our Flush Hillary Calendar at FLUSH HILLARY CALENDAR.COM!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Wait! Aren't we supposed to be talking to that Ringo Starr lookalike? /s


139 posted on 11/30/2006 11:34:07 AM PST by toddlintown (Six bullets and Lennon goes down. Yet not one hit Yoko. Discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears
I'm gonna re-write the Beach Boys' "Barbara Ann."

They already did.
Just click on the pic in my post above!

140 posted on 11/30/2006 11:47:55 AM PST by XR7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969; FormerLib; A. Pole; kronos77; Bokababe; DTA
This is no surprise!

I said it before, and I'll say it again: Iran is the most dangerous country in the world, and has been our greatest enemy since the islamic revolution of 1979 (even though the old USSR was in existence back then)!!!!

141 posted on 11/30/2006 12:03:44 PM PST by Honorary Serb (Kosovo is Serbia! Free Srpska! Abolish ICTY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Time for ACTION. NOW. No more talk. Talking is done.


142 posted on 11/30/2006 12:24:12 PM PST by Danae (Anail nathrach, orth' bhais's bethad, do chel denmha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Danae

1st,
Bomb Al-Sadr, and then even if only some of his buddies get whacked, they will have a huge funeral procession/rally.

Napalm it. Al-Sadr problem solved, and our other enemies will be very afraid.

2nd, act on the "if you are not with us, you're against us" doctrine.

Sadly, Bushes b*lls seem to be no where to be found.


143 posted on 11/30/2006 12:30:10 PM PST by Idaho Whacko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: xzins; jmc1969; George W. Bush; SandRat
ince we're fighting Iran, we might as well fight Iran. Come on, Pres. Bush, do the right thing. If Iran is killing us, they have blood-guilt.

At the very least we need to take out their arms manufacturing capabilities. I'm sure we know exactly where those weapons were manufactured. A few well placed MOABs should take care of that problem rather easily.

144 posted on 11/30/2006 12:32:38 PM PST by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: kabar
The Stern gang didn't worry about civilian casualties when they blew up the King David Hotel.

I agree with your premise, but just one point of information on the Stern gang. They did not blow up the King David Hotel, it was the Irgun. On the day of the bombing multiple calls to the hotel were made warning the occupants to get out. The British ignored the warnings.

Yes, in war, innocents suffer.

145 posted on 11/30/2006 12:54:11 PM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
Interview with Netanyahu about Iran

http://planetquo.com/Who-Are-The-Terrorists-

146 posted on 11/30/2006 12:58:25 PM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: jmc1969

Why can't the generals greenlight taking out that smelly dirtbag Sadr. Why can't we bomb the crap out of the Iranian Iraqi border and shut down this traffic?


147 posted on 11/30/2006 1:10:40 PM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rhombus
Leaving Iraq via Iran might not be a bad idea.

Leaving Iraq via Iran and Syria might not be a bad idea.

148 posted on 11/30/2006 1:13:54 PM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dinoparty
Do we currently have the resources to engage Iraqi terrorists, the Taliban in Afghanistan AND Iran at once, while still having enough in reserve for the "unexpected" need to fight (1) another terrorist sponsor, (2) North Korea or (God forbid) (3) China or Russia, if need be?

Our strategic bombers seem to be unused at the moment.

149 posted on 11/30/2006 1:16:22 PM PST by finnman69 (cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestu s globus, inflammare animos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Idaho Whacko
You got it I think. Knock off a few then take out the funeral. BIG extermination is the only answer to this. They will NEVER just talk and compromise. Its us or them and they seem to be the only ones who know it.
150 posted on 11/30/2006 1:36:28 PM PST by Danae (Anail nathrach, orth' bhais's bethad, do chel denmha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-208 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson