Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Target Iran?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Target Iran?

    The author of this, Arnaud de Borchgrave, is editor at large of The Washington Times and of United Press International.

    If anyone has any doubt about the kind of nuclear work Iran has been doing for the past 18 years, it must be a case of naivete compounded by gullibility.


    Target Iran

    If anyone has any doubt about the kind of nuclear work Iran has been doing for the past 18 years, it must be a case of naivete compounded by gullibility.

    Nor should there be any uncertainty about what Iran's mullahocracy would do with a nuclear weapon. All of Iran's leaders since the Ayatollah Rohollah Khomeini replaced the shah in February 1979 have made it clear the objective is Israel's destruction.

    In Iran's last presidential race, Western governments and media favored Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. He was a "known" quantity and a "moderate." Michael Rubin, editor of the Middle East Quarterly and a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, burst that soap bubble.

    Four years ago, when he took the podium at Tehran University to deliver the Friday sermon, Mr. Rafsanjani predicted the Islamic world one day would be equipped with nuclear weapons only Israel possesses in the Middle East. At that point, he explained, "the strategy of the imperialists will reach a standstill because the use of even one nuclear bomb inside Israel will destroy everything." And, added the "moderate" former president of Iran, "It is not irrational to contemplate such an eventuality."

    Another prominent "moderate," courted by Europe's democracies, was former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami. "In the Koran," he declared in a homily Oct. 24, 2000, "God commanded to kill the wicked and those who do not see the rights of the oppressed."

    The Bush administration argues a small minority of terrorists that have perverted the meaning of Islam has hijacked the religion. But didn't Ayatollah Khatami speak for Shi'ite Islam when he said, "If we abide by the Koran, all of us should mobilize to kill." This is not Osama bin Laden or sidekick Ayman al-Zawahiri or Abu Musab Zarqawi speaking for militant Islam, but a man, who when he invoked the Koran to kill infidels, was regarded in the West as the "moderate" president of Iran.

    Having a nuclear weapon is fundamental to Islamist belief. No odes to world peace if they do this, or dirges to world catastrophe if they do that, will deflect the mullahs' core belief as dictated by Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

    Fundamental to Israeli defense doctrine is that no weapon of mass destruction can be tolerated in any Middle Eastern arsenal. Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew, the geopolitical sage of the Orient, said in a UPI interview three months before September 11, 2001, the biggest threat on horizon 2010 is "an Islamist bomb and mark my words, it will travel."

    Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, now controlled by pro-Western President Pervez Musharraf, was developed by the same man who began assisting Iran's nuclear efforts 18 years ago. A.Q. Khan, also known as Dr. No for the nuclear black market he created to benefit U.S. enemies, began imparting his nuclear know-how to Iran in 1988. Israel believes if Iran resumes weapons-grade uranium enrichment, March 2006 becomes a critical month for acquisition of Iran's first nuclear weapon.

    All is not well in Pakistan either. Radical clerics won a major victory against Mr. Musharraf by refusing to expel foreign students in madrassas, the Koranic schools where hatred of America and Israel is still taught.

    Tehran started the new year by announcing it doesn't like a Russian compromise proposal and soon will resume nuclear fuel research. Iranian agents have also scoured Europe for missile parts, says a 55-page intelligence assessment dated July 1, 2005. Leaked to the Guardian in Britain, it draws upon material gathered by British, French, German and Belgian agencies.

    Iran, says this report, has developed an extensive web of front companies, official bodies, academic institutes and middlemen dedicated to obtaining in Western Europe and former Soviet republics, the expertise, training and equipment for nuclear programs, missile development, and biological and chemical weapons arsenals.

    The document, says the Guardian, lists scores of Iranian companies and institutions involved in the arms race. It also details Tehran's determination to perfect a ballistic missile that can deliver warheads far beyond its borders. Iran is trying to extend the range of its Shahab-3 missile, now almost 1,000 miles and capable of reaching Israel.

    Taking their cue from President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who declared Israel "should be wiped off the map" and the World War II Holocaust was a figment of Zionist propaganda, Iranian commentators push the envelope to nauseous absurdity.

    Tehran TV political analyst Hosein Rouyvaran said Nazi concentration camps were "detention centers" where no more than 250,000 Jews died and where "for hygienic reasons, they used to burn the bodies of those who died of typhus or contagious diseases [in crematoria]."

    Gas chambers, this moron explained, were "for disinfecting the clothes and the possessions of the prisoners."
    Anyone else think it's just a matter of time before this comes to a head-on collision with the West?

    Dr. Mordrid
    Last edited by Dr Mordrid; 9 January 2006, 07:34.
    Dr. Mordrid
    ----------------------------
    An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

    I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

  • #2
    Iran will not cause a head-on collision with the West. There is a much more likely case for the West, or certain countries in the West, causing a head-on collision with Iran, and that is not the same thing. I am surprised, knowing your feelings towards the French, that you take a French author's sabre-rattling meanderings so seriously.
    Brian (the devil incarnate)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Brian Ellis
      Iran will not cause a head-on collision with the West.
      I disagree. Iran is already financing Hezbolla who are active in South America as well as south lebanon. They're also funding Hamas and many other terrorist organisation, wouldn't be surprised if they fund some branches of Al-Qaeda as well. If that's not going head-on against the west, what is?
      "For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism."

      Comment


      • #4
        Saber rattling or no, it pretty much sums up what a lot of us have been thinking for a long time - Islam, at least in its modern incarnation, is by its very nature hostile.
        The Internet - where men are men, women are men, and teenage girls are FBI agents!

        I'm the least you could do
        If only life were as easy as you
        I'm the least you could do, oh yeah
        If only life were as easy as you
        I would still get screwed

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Brian Ellis
          I am surprised, knowing your feelings towards the French, that you take a French author's sabre-rattling meanderings so seriously.
          Wrong, he's Belgian;

          Born in Belgium in 1926, de Borchgrave was educated in Belgium, Britain and the United States. He served the British Royal Navy from 1942-46, volunteering at the age of 15. Shortly after his 21st birthday, he was appointed Brussels bureau chief for United Press International, and three years later he was the Newsweek bureau chief in Paris, then chief correspondent and at the age of 27 became a senior editor for the magazine.
          Also; this article is typical of those I've read not only in both liberal and conservative US press but in European and Asian media. Most everyone is on edge over what's going on in Iran, and IMO with very good reason.

          Dr. Mordrid
          Dr. Mordrid
          ----------------------------
          An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

          I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Gurm
            Islam, at least in its modern incarnation, is by its very nature hostile.
            Sorry, but any religion in any incarnation is hostile. Just look at the IRA from a few years ago for example.
            /meow
            Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600
            Asus Striker ][
            8GB Corsair XMS2 DDR2 800 (4x2GB)
            Asus EN8800GT 512MB x2(SLI)

            I am C4tX0r, hear me mew!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by lowlifecat
              Sorry, but any religion in any incarnation is hostile. Just look at the IRA from a few years ago for example.
              As I said, we've discussed this before. There is a HUGE difference between the IRA - the actions of which were decried loudly by virtually all other Christians - and the government of Iran, which seems to speak for the majority of Islam.
              The Internet - where men are men, women are men, and teenage girls are FBI agents!

              I'm the least you could do
              If only life were as easy as you
              I'm the least you could do, oh yeah
              If only life were as easy as you
              I would still get screwed

              Comment


              • #8
                The point is, if there are any moderate muslims, they obviously aren't in power in Iran.

                All I will say is, if Germany had been invaded in 1936, WW2 would have been a very minor thing.

                Comment


                • #9
                  There are moderate Muslims. The problem is that for the most part they are silent either out of fear or some misguided feeling that criticizing the Islamists would be wrong.

                  Dr. Mordrid
                  Dr. Mordrid
                  ----------------------------
                  An elephant is a mouse built to government specifications.

                  I carry a gun because I can't throw a rock 1,250 fps

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    if Germany had been invaded in 1936, WW2 would have been a very minor thing.
                    There wasn't enough outrage against Germany in 1936, just as there is not enough outrage against Iran now. We will probably sit and watch and fret about consequences right up until Iran does something sufficiently outrageous for us (meaning all western nations and nervous neighboring nations) to do something decisive.

                    Kevin

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Brian Ellis
                      Iran will not cause a head-on collision with the West. There is a much more likely case for the West, or certain countries in the West, causing a head-on collision with Iran, and that is not the same thing. I am surprised, knowing your feelings towards the French, that you take a French author's sabre-rattling meanderings so seriously.
                      It makes me sad to wish you were right and know that you are wrong.

                      War is surely not a long term solution... but when it comes down to us or them... and make no mistake; that is the choice we are facing. I, quite selfishly, choose us.
                      P.S. You've been Spanked!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lowlifecat
                        Sorry, but any religion in any incarnation is hostile. Just look at the IRA from a few years ago for example.
                        moral relativism alert!
                        P.S. You've been Spanked!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Why a jihad in Thailand?

                          Jihad Watch Board Vice President Hugh Fitzgerald explains the reasons why jihad is being fought in Thailand:
                          The Thailand jihad keeps escalating, with continuing Muslim attacks on Buddhist monks, schoolteachers, farmers, and policemen in the south. The grievances of those Muslims are not about jobs and "poverty"; they are about the Thai being non-Muslims. That is their crime. And for that they must pay. They have no right, as Infidels, to rule over Muslims. It is wrong, it is unnatural, it is an offense against Allah, and his people. It cannot be tolerated. That is the view. Sometimes it is explicitly expressed, sometimes it is expressed in veiled terms, sometimes it is denied. But it is there. It cannot be otherwise.
                          In school one learned, in world history, that "Buddhism disappeared from India, but moved to China." A mysterious statement, that, but no one thought to inquire further. Now we know: Buddhism disappeared from India because of the Muslim invasion; the mass destruction of Buddhist temples and statuary, and the smaller number of Buddhists (as compared to Hindus) account for its disappearance. Had Muslims conquered China, Buddhism would have disappeared there as well.

                          It is important to remember that the Bamiyan statues were only the last of tens of thousands of statues destroyed, over hundreds of years, by Muslims in Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, in what is present-day Pakistan, Kashmir, and India, in Malaysia, Indonesia (600,000 Chinese murdered by Muslims in the 1960s, massacres described as being directed at "Communist fifth-columnists" when in fact it was a Jihad directed at a non-Muslim minority), and now in Thailand with these attacks on Buddhist monks, temples, and believers -- all of this should remind us that Jihad should not be thought of as an attack on the West, but as an attack on all non-Muslims. What unites the Coptic caretaker at the Patmos Center in Egypt, the Episcopalian bond trader, the Assyrian and Armenian Christian women shot dead in Baghdad, the Italian monks killed in Algeria, the Hindu peasants slaughtered in Kashmir and in India, the Buddhist monks killed in Thailand, the Christian Pakistanis killed in hospitals, schools, and churches, the Orthodox held hostage in a Moscow theater, and....you can fill in the list yourself -- is one thing: the ideology of Islam, as it relates to the Unbeliever. There is no "war of ideas" (pace the moronic Tom Friedman); there is simply the ideology of Islamic jihad.


                          But of course you won’t often hear that from those waging this jihad. Instead, they will, as they always do, point to various egregious provocations by non-Muslims. So here, for the jihadist on the run, is a short list of reasons they can invoke for beheading Buddhists in Thailand. In fact, there are 10,000 reasons why Thai Buddhists are being murdered by the local Muslims:
                          1) The American forces have not punished those Rafidite dogs, the Shi'a, for treating Sunni prisoners badly.

                          2) The American forces in Iraq serve pork products to the troops.

                          3) That Danish newspaper. Those cartoons.

                          4) The Israeli refusal to give advice to the "Palestinians" about how to make proper use of the greenhouses (now destroyed).

                          5) The Israelis not preventing the "Palestinians" from destroying those greenhouses -- knowing full well that that was likely to happen.

                          6) The refusal of the Dutch Parliament to remove Ayaan Hirsi Ali from its ranks.

                          7) The refusal of the Dutch Parliament to allow local Muslims to punish Ayaan Hirsi Ali for apostasy, which is in effect preventing one religion, Islam, from dealing as it has every right to deal with those it considers its own members, and over whom Muslim courts should and do have jurisdiction.

                          8) The refusal of the Canadians in Ottawa to allow Muslims to be governed by Shari'a courts.

                          9) The cruel and completely baseless prosecution of the entirely innocent Sami al-Arian in Florida.

                          10) The cruel and completely baseless deportation of the entirely innocent leader of the largest Ohio mosque, Fawaz Damra.

                          11) The cruel and completely baseless attacks on the arrangements, the funding, the people behind or supporting the building of the Boston Mosque.

                          12) The cruel and completely baseless attacks on Islam by apostates from Islam such as Ali Sina and others at www.faithfreedom.org, none of whom have any right to remain free from just punishment as apostates.

                          13) The nasty word -- "racaille" -- uttered by Nicolas Sarkozy, Minister of the Interior, in France.

                          14) The complaint by the Spanish nuns in Granada that the muezzin's electronically-enhanced wail five times a day, from the gigantic mosque that was built on the height overlooking the nunnery, has been made so deliberately loud as to destroy their ability to function.

                          15) The refusal of the Italian state to remove all crosses from all public places everywhere in Italy, as was justly demanded by the head of the Islamic community, Adel Smith.

                          16) The refusal of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera to fire Magdi Allam, an Italo-Egyptian, for his negative remarks about the Muslim Brotherhood.

                          17) The refusal of the University of Geneva to renew the temporary contract of Tariq Ramadan.

                          18) The refusal of the head of the Christian Party in Norway to cease to express sentiments sympathetic to the state, and people, of Israel.

                          19) The insistence of the government of Great Britain of observing a Holocaust Day ceremony, and not including Muslims as victims of that crime which they, the Muslims, regard as greater than any other -- Islamophobia, and the support which it engenders for the criminal founding of the criminal state of criminal Israel.

                          20) The insistence of the German state of Baden-Wurtemberg on adding certain questions for Muslims wishing to obtain citizenship.

                          Numbers 21 through 10,000 -- you make the list yourself. There's plenty of material.
                          P.S. You've been Spanked!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Gurm
                            As I said, we've discussed this before. There is a HUGE difference between the IRA - the actions of which were decried loudly by virtually all other Christians - and the government of Iran, which seems to speak for the majority of Islam.

                            Thats the nail on the head, if the majority oppose Irans government, then they are pretty silent for a religion that preaches uprisings against what is believed to be wrong. 100% with you gurm.
                            is a flower best picked in it's prime or greater withered away by time?
                            Talk about a dream, try to make it real.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Rockets into Israel fuel the jihad

                              In the war of attrition in the Middle East, for some, peace is the enemy, writes Paul Sheehan.
                              THE Qassam rocket is a primitive weapon, a steel tube filled with explosives. It has no guidance system, only limited range and poor accuracy. Primitive it may be, but it is a highly effective propaganda tool, as dozens of these rockets have been fired from Gaza into Israel in the past two months.

                              The rocket attacks were the answer from the Palestinian side to Ariel Sharon's gamble to unilaterally begin a series of strategic withdrawals from the occupied Palestinian territories. The gamble has failed, and the impact of these Qassam rockets may be closer to home than you think.

                              It is time to connect the dots. The political death of Sharon is linked to the death of Yasser Arafat in 2004, which is linked to the liquifying of politics and economic growth in the Palestinian territories which, in turn, is linked to the rocket attacks on Israel from Lebanon, and the religious civil war in Iraq, and the nuclear bellicosity and anti-Semitism of Iran. It's all connected.

                              In southern Lebanon, now dominated by the Shiite militia Hezbollah, which is committed to holy war with Israel, the Iranian Government has been funnelling thousands of Katyusha rockets to Hezbollah. These rockets present a much higher order magnitude of threat than the home-made Qassams. According to the Middle East Defence Bulletin and Defence News, Hezbollah's arsenal has grown to an estimated 12,000 Katyushas, and the more recent models have a range of 75 kilometres, which brings the major port city of Haifa within the zone of potential mayhem.

                              On December 28, 10 Katyushas were fired from Lebanon into a residential neighbourhood of the northern Israeli town of Kiryat Shmona. Credit for the attack was claimed by the terrorist group led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, which is leading the carnage in Iraq. If true, it would be the first direct attack on Israel by an arm of al-Qaeda. The attack completed a circle. The object of the rocket attacks from Gaza and southern Lebanon was to kill any peace process, maintain the status quo, thus continuing a long war of attrition against Israel that invigorates the jihadists around the Muslim world.

                              The rockets and bombings and shootings of the past five years show that those who believed in the breakthrough of the Oslo Accords in 1993, and the similar agreement offered at the Camp David summit of 2000, who wanted justice for Palestine and peace for Israeli behind secure borders, now appear naive. History has moved on.

                              Islamic fundamentalism has no interest in such an outcome, and Islamic fundamentalism is growing in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and, especially, the Palestinian territories and southern Lebanon. A recent poll conducted by a Norwegian aid agency found that 80 per cent of Palestinians supported the imposition of sharia, Islamic religious law. The most popular political group in the occupied territories is Hamas, which is committed to holy war and the destruction of Israel. The most popular political figure among Palestinians is Marwan Barghouti, now serving five life sentences in Israel for mass murder. In the area nominally controlled by the Palestinian Authority, murder is promoted and celebrated as martyrdom.

                              This culture of death has entered the system of the entire Muslim world and, commingled with the rise of Saudi-financed fundamentalism and the adventurism of the US President, George Bush, has spread to Muslim communities in Western democracies. Violent, overt hostility by Muslims to the secular host societies is on the rise. And that includes Australia.

                              Among the Palestinians, Islamic fundamentalism is exploiting the conditions created by Arafat. He never wanted peace with Israel. He wanted Jerusalem, and he was engaged in a long-horizon war to get it. David Samuels, author of "In a Ruined Country", the cover story of The Atlantic Monthly in September, interviewed the Norwegian diplomat who was the primary architect of the Oslo Accords, signed by the Palestinian negotiators, who accepted the Green Line 1967 borders of Israel, thus bringing an independent Palestine to the brink of existence. But the key drafter of the accords, Terje Roed-Larsen, said of Arafat: "He lied all the time … He made catastrophic mistakes in both moral and political terms."

                              As for Arafat's governance, Samuels concluded: "The amounts of money stolen from the Palestinian Authority and the Palestinian people through the corrupt practices of Arafat's inner circle are so staggeringly large that they may exceed one half of the total of $US7 billion contributed to the Palestinian Authority. The biggest thief was Arafat himself. The International Monetary Fund has conservatively estimated that from 1995 to 2000 Arafat diverted $US900 million from Palestinian Authority coffers …"

                              Samuels describes "an extreme form of political narcissism" which prevented the development of a Palestinian government structure because Arafat preferred to run the country as a personal fiefdom: "The Oslo Accords created something called the Palestinian Authority, but to this day there is really no such thing … Instead, what exists on the ground is a vast and scattered archipelago of randomly located government ministries, competing security services … The Fatah men who had been Arafat's equals … were assassinated … "

                              Now Arafat's great adversary, Ariel Sharon, has gone, but it should be remembered that Sharon was not the first Israeli warrior-politician to survey the West Bank and Gaza and decide, like a shrewd general, that the position was untenable for long-term occupation.

                              In 2000, prime minister Ehud Barak, the most decorated combat veteran in the history of modern Israel, after coming to the same conclusion, offered more than 90 per cent of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and part of Jerusalem itself, to the Palestinian side. Arafat's counteroffer was nothing. He made no counteroffer. He chose war, and the stillborn nation of Palestine has since liquified into chaos, corruption, and a culture of death, exactly the conditions on which the medievalist perversion of holy war feeds and prospers.
                              P.S. You've been Spanked!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X