Iran is funny!

“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070914/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_us_iraq_2

"A day will come that the current U.S. president and officials will be tried in an international supreme court for the catastrophes they caused in Iraq," he said.

"Americans will have to answer for why they don't end occupation of Iraq and why waves of terrorism and insurgency have overwhelmed the country," he added. "It will not be like this forever and some day they will be stopped as happened to Hitler, Saddam and certain other European leaders."


[in related news...]

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL1387483120070913

Iran rocket used in attack on key Iraq base: U.S.

U.S. commanders say that apart from rockets and mortars, sophisticated roadside bombs made from Iranian components have killed scores of U.S. troops.”

“I ran so far away”

“http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/12/nie-report-iran.html

This is called "misdirection".”

“Or an indication that Iran & Washington have come to an agreement.”

“To clarify - the misdirection is on the part of the U.S. Intelligence.”

“Miss Intelligence(36-22-36) is putting candles on the yellow cake again?
last edited: 12/03/07 10:36:43 AM”

“[snip] The notion of a nuclear weapon in Iranian hands appeared so threatening that the United States might well negotiate away other things -- particularly in Iraq -- in exchange for a halt of the program. Or so the Iranians hoped. Therefore, while they halted development on their weapons program, they were not eager to let the Americans relax. They swung back and forth between asserting their right to operate the program and denying they had one. Moreover, they pushed hard for a civilian power program, which theoretically worried the world less. It drove the Americans up a wall -- precisely where the Iranians wanted them.

As we have argued, the central issue for Iran is not nuclear weapons. It is the future of Iraq. The Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988 was the defining moment in modern Iranian history. It not only devastated Iran, but also weakened the revolution internally. Above all, Tehran never wants to face another Iraqi regime that has the means and motivation to wage war against Iran. That means the Iranians cannot tolerate a Sunni-dominated government that is heavily armed and backed by the United States. Nor, for that matter, does Tehran completely trust Iraq's fractured Shiite bloc with Iran's national security. Iran wants to play a critical role in defining the nature, policies and capabilities of the Iraqi regime.

The recent U.S. successes in Iraq, however limited and transitory they might be, may have caused the Iranians to rethink their view on dealing with the Americans on Iraq. The Americans, regardless of progress, cannot easily suppress all of the Shiite militias. The Iranians cannot impose a regime on Iraq, though they can destabilize the process. A successful outcome requires a degree of cooperation -- and recent indications suggest that Iran is prepared to provide that cooperation.

That puts the United States in an incredibly difficult position. On the one hand, it needs Iran for the endgame in Iraq. On the other, negotiating with Iran while it is developing nuclear weapons runs counter to fundamental U.S. policies and the coalition it was trying to construct. As long as Iran was building nuclear weapons, working with Iran on Iraq was impossible.

The NIE solves a geopolitical problem for the United States. Washington cannot impose a unilateral settlement on Iraq, nor can it sustain forever the level of military commitment it has made to Iraq. There are other fires starting to burn around the world. At the same time, Washington cannot work with Tehran while it is building nuclear weapons. Hence, the NIE [report]. [snip] - Friedman”

“And I'm a pacifist......

See the CNN pic's of AA Guns at Nantanz?



what we need for now is for the Iranians to get complacent, so when we let the dogs loose, there are fewer obstacles to overcome....

Misdirection indeed.....”

“Somehow I doubt the Iranians are going to get "complacent".”

“Even the biggest baddest meanest MOFO needs to sleep......and they tend to do that when they feel the safest..."what me? hit ya with my stick?...nah, I don't think you're a threat, why, we could be friends, whadda ya say pal...wanna go get a beer, see a movie...?" (puts down stick...)

hey, let's take MY car okay?....(Trunk packed with knives, guns, a roll of duct tape and a sheet of heavy plastic)......

"Hey, it's MY IDEA...so it's MY TREAT, okay?......”

“LOL!”

“Nah...the citizenry are at the edge of revolution there...you start 'cutting" the basic services you will see people start to revolt.

If the US would sponsor anti government rebels (and I bet you could find some) who would hit power grids, and stuff to just put a pinch on the citizenry....Iran might not be able to really field an army in a few years.”

“Glad I'm tall , many of you are probably having a time breathing?”

“LOL..the National Intelligence Estimate....Iran no threat....


Okay lets look at some other historical successes of the National Intelligence

Examination of information released since the War has revealed there was considerable intelligence information available to US and other nations' officials. It may have been the failure to process and use this information effectively that has led some to invoke conspiracy theories rather than a less interesting mix of mistake and circumstance.

Wanna Guess?

Then there was 9/11....yep totally missed that one...”

“The elected officials have to take the blame for this another Katrina. These people never get off the spin cyclelong enough to see the real world time flying by.
last edited: 12/05/07 7:24:17 AM”

“Interesting Stratfor/Friedman analysis. I wondered the same thing. How could Bush back down on Iran - and possibly avoid taking blame for Iran developing nukes: he could report that they had stopped developing nukes under his watch.

The question that remains (and I'm curious what Mutt, Stratfor - or anyone else has to say about it): when were we getting BS'd? If Bush changed his tune for strategic reasons, when (if ever) were we getting the truth.

I guess a third possibility is that Iran and the US made a deal and that the agreement was that Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, especially, could save face in dropping the nukes by putting out the info that they had stopped for their own reasons years ago - years before Mahmoud Ahmadinejad became president. I guess if I was pro-Bush, I'd love to see that speculation coming out.
last edited: 12/07/07 10:22:31 AM”

“I know-Well, what about when Clinton, After Bush? This is the last time I'll bail you dudes.”

“http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8U16UGG0&show_article=1


LOL..I say run the boats down, chop the sons of the drunken childmolester up in the propellers.”

“This is one of my favorite thread titles ever.”