Venezuela Hosts Iranian Terrorists

Strategy Page ^ | 06.22.2008 | Strategy Page

[Coffee200am]

June 22, 2008: A new battlefield for the war on terror has developed in Venezuela. There, leftist president Hugo Chavez has not only established close diplomatic relations with Iran (and Cuba, North Korea and radical groups throughout the region), but has allowed Iran to set up operations in South America. Regular commercial flights from Iran to Venezuela (via Syria, to accommodate Hizbollah) carry people, cash and whatever else Iran wants to move. No questions asked, no visas required. Several U.S. counter-terrorism operations have gone to work, trying to find out what Iran is up to, and how to block any terrorist activity. For example, the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control is looking to block attempts by Iran and Hizbollah to get around banking restrictions placed on their terrorist activities, by opening bank branches in Venezuela. Hizbollah is using its new base in Venezuela to support its fund raising, and purely criminal activities, in South America. Iran is looking to support attacks against South American Jews, plus any other mischief it can pull off.

[Paul Ross]

Bump!

And unfortunately, didn't McCain also make noises close to pledging to have nuclear disarmament...

[ETL]

At first they appear strange bedfellows (Iran together with Venezuela, Russia and China). But when you read Ahmadinejad's own words (below), he sounds exactly like these communists. I wonder if the student uprising/revolution he helped lead during the Carter years was backed by the Russians? My guess is he's a Moscow puppet. It would explain an awful lot of what we are hearing and reading today. The guy really does sound a lot more like a radical leftist 'intellectual' than an Islamic extremist. Check out his choice of words, assuming of course the translation is accurate.

From WorldThreats.com:
"Chavez pledged that his country would 'stay by Iran at any time and under any condition,' state television reported. Ahmadinejad said he saw in Chavez a kindred spirit." "'We do not have any limitation in cooperation,' Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying. 'Iran and Venezuela are next to each other and supporters of each other. Chavez is a source of a progressive and revolutionary current in South America and his stance in restricting imperialism is tangible.'":
http://www.worldthreats.com/latin_america/Iran-Chavez%20Alliance.htm

[Natchez Hawk]

“Iran is looking to carry out attacks against South American Jews, plus any other mischief...”

This is based on something other than a single incident a dozen years ago?

[DoughtyOne]

McCain has made a number of troubling comments regarding our nuclear arsenal.  The problem with them is that his plans hinge on agreements and inspections that have proven over time to be unreliable.  And when it comes to nuclear weapons, being wrong is fatal.  Nobody likes it, but MADD is the proper course.  When other nations posess nuclear weapons, there is no other policy.  Any other policy is simply suicidal.  It encourages tyranical states to think they just may be able to win a nuclear war, and that's something we should leave absolutely no doubt about.  We need thousands of nuclear warheads ready to go, so that no nation thinks it can pull off a surprise attack and weather the paultry response.  The response must be unthinkable for any nation to contemplate.

One of the few things I disagreed with Ronald Reagan on, was our nuclear stockpile.  Yes it would be wonderful if there were no nuclear weapons on this planet.  It would also be nice if every human was a multi-millionaire and there were no poor.  There are a lot of things I would like to be the case, but they aren't.  And disarming the United States without making the world a vastly more dangerous place, is one of them.

John states that inspections will allow us to disarm.  Yep, the same inspections that couldn't determine that Hussein didn't have WMDs, is now his great idea for making sure others don't have nukes so we can destroy most of our own.

This article touches on John's dreams for our future.  They cause me to think those dreams are a nightmare.  He wants to reduce our nuclear arsenal to the lowest possible number.  He wants to withdraw our battlefield tactical nuclear weapons from Europe.

In short, John is the 2008 version of George McGovern.  Well, okay, he's not quite as bad, but he might actually get a chance to do what he wants to, and that makes him a dangerous threat to our nation IMO.  Put this man in office and you'll see people across this forum backing some of the worst policy decisions in the History of the United States.  Yep, that's the eventuality I'm hoping to realize.  NOT!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2022096/posts

[Paul Ross]

One of the few things I disagreed with Ronald Reagan on, was our nuclear stockpile.

I didn't. I approved of everything he did and tried to do. The INF treaty was the only reduction he authorized, while everything else was modernized.

The INF treaty defanged the nuclear freezers. Reagan was proved to have been right. That if you are to negotiate with tyrants, you have to negotiate from strength.

We never would have had the B1B or the B2 or the MX missiles, not to mention SDI, but for Reagan. Carter and the rats would have traded them away.

The main cuts have occurred subsequent to Reagan, with GHWB eliminating our tactical inventory...unilaterally. Xlinton and W slashing our Minutemen in more than half. And W all on his lonesome UNILATERALLY decomissioning our brand-new MX missiles...all while Russia deploys the Topol-M super missile...and keeps its full inventory of SS-18s. China and Russia remained armed to the teeth in regard to tacticals as well.

Reagan's motto, "Trust, but Verify" was, in his hands, a tool which would have ultimately resulted in fairly serious action upon detection of falsehood by the Russkies. Unfortunately, in Xlinton's hands, the verification went out the window...even when it was discovered that the Russians had clearly knowingly tried to cheat and hide S-22s in tunnels and such in Eastern Europe...only to be ratted out after the Soviet Union's collapse. Since the "new" Russia never admitted to these deceptions, despite Yeltsin's pledges, we should have actively kept the Eastern Bloc states from surrendering any of the nukes back to Russia. Should have kept the arsenal splintered.

And then bought it off their hands.

[DoughtyOne]

Paul, I’m not going to disagree with the agreements Reagan made. I merely address the desire on his part to destroy all nuclear weapons by some point in time.

I don’t care how well we try to avoid it, if we disarm at any point, we’ll be destroyed. It’s the one infalible fact of human history, nations that disarm are soon relegated to the ash heap of history.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Paul Ross]

I don’t care how well we try to avoid it, if we disarm at any point, we’ll be destroyed. It’s the one infalible fact of human history, nations that disarm are soon relegated to the ash heap of history.

I wouldn't argue against that. Reagan was merely forcing the sentimentalists to confront reality, He himself wasn't ever going to disarm unilaterally. Unfortunately, his RINO heirs did.

[DoughtyOne]

Thanks for the additional comments Paul. You may be right about Reagan’s long term hopes. I didn’t care to see him advocate for zero nukes at any point in time, but your take on it is fine with me.

You’ll get no arguement out of me that those who followed him, were far less than stellar.

[Cindy]

A LOOK AT IRAN
http://www.truthusa.com/IRAN.html