We've generally known about this for a while, but this is the strongest accusation I've seen:
A senior US military official said there is "clear evidence" that Iran is funding, training and arming Shiite extremists to destabilize Iraq.
"I think it is irrefutable that Iran is responsible for training, funding and equipping some of these Shia extremist groups, and also providing advanced IED technology," said Brigadier General Michael Barbero, using the acronym for "improvised explosive devices."
"And there is clear evidence of that," he added at a Pentagon press conference.
Iran has provided many over acts which justify a full declaration of war by the United States - the only question now: what do we do about it?
President Bush has said time and again that he will not permit Iran to obtain nuclear weaons. By all accounts, Iran is not going to stop its nuclear development, so it isn't really so much a matter of "if" but "when". As for what we are waiting for: The campaign in Baghdad is starting to show serious success - so we may be waiting for that to be calmed down a bit more; we have been developing the sort of ordnance we need to penetrate Iran's hardened nuclear sites - could be that we don't have enough of them ready to do the job; the war has become the issue of 2006 - it could be that President Bush wants a clear mandate, in the form of a continued GOP majority, before committing America to another long campaign in the War on Terrorism...other reasons can easily be thought of by anyone who wishes to take the time.
But the time is coming when we won't be able to wait anymore - and I think that time is coming soon.
UPDATE: Jerusalem Post says Israel may "got it alone":
Israel is carefully watching the world's reaction to Iran's continued refusal to suspend uranium enrichment, with some high-level officials arguing it is now clear that when it comes to stopping Iran, Israel "may have to go it alone," The Jerusalem Post has learned.
One senior source said on Tuesday that Iran "flipped the world the bird" by not responding positively to the Western incentive plan to stop uranium enrichment. He expressed frustration that the Russians and Chinese were already saying that Iran's offer of a "new formula" and willingness to enter "serious negotiations" was an opening to keep on talking.
If I were Israeli, I would be in favor of taking action - but as I'm American, I'd have to say that any Israeli action at this point against Iran would be a disaster for American policy in the middle east...Israel can't do it, so we must do it.
Posted by Mark Noonan at August 24, 2006 03:34 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.blogsforbush.com/mt/crawford.cgi/7745
Comments
If President Bush is waiting for a clear mandate that a Republican win in November would give him, expect the bombing to start within days of the election being over. I believe most Americans realize that Iran as the puppet master needs to be taken down. The targets should include the ruling Mullahs, not just the military or nuclear facilities.
If it is because of not enough ordinance, then the bombing could start anytime the military tells the President they have enough. Once it has begun, we may have to move ground troops. This helps explain the activation of more Ready Reserves - we will need the experience they have to fight effectively.
The one thing I am sure of, it will not be because he wants "the world" to agree with his actions. President Bush knows that most Europeans will never agree to going against Iran, out of fear of angering the Muslim population in their own countries.
Posted by: kjstrouble at August 24, 2006 11:15 AM
All this "talking tough" about the USA taking down Iran is insane. The USA cannot even control Iraq and you, kjstrouble, want to send in the troops to Iran as well?
The UN must give Iran an ultimatum, then a united action involving the USA and some key European countries to destroy the facilities should be made. Don't go it alone. The USA should insist on a common front and shared responsibility.
Even with this mode of operation, there obviously will be hell to pay
Posted by: Canuckguy at August 24, 2006 03:09 PM
Whether by accident or by design, President Bush has succeeded in almost completely encircling Iran, a brilliant move that will be appreciated long after he leaves office.
Take a moment to study a map of the Persian Gulf, Middle East and Central Asia. President Bush has assembled an array of allies that should keep Ahmadinejad in his box. To Iran's west lies US and coalition forces in Iraq, across the Persian Gulf are Saudi Arabia and other US friendly Gulf States, to the east are Pakistan and US/NATO forces in Afghanistan. Other than the less reliable northern border area of Central Asia, Iran's madman is contained.
Just as important as the bordering states is the fairly new key strategic ally of India. In July of 2005, India and the US made a joint statement, that among other things said that they would "combat terrorism relentlessly and everywhere". As we all know, the US gave India a pass at that time with regard to its nuclear programs as well. This couldn't have happened without the quiet cooperation from Pakistan.
Why is Pakistan turning a blind eye to its traditional foe upgrading its nuclear capabilities? Because the Pakistanis know very well that the real threat emanates from Iran and its terrorist puppets, and India acting as a long range deterrent against Iran is very useful. Being a predominantly Muslim nation, Pakistan cannot be publicly seen taking a lead in confronting Iran in the event of a nuclear confrontation.
Iran's only strategy to deal with the mess is to find ways to force the US to leave, to destabilize allied regimes in the area and to find friends in Central Asia and Syria/Lebanon. That is why they sponsored Hezbollah's actions in Lebanon, why they are fomenting Shiite resistance in Iraq, why they are funding terrorist organizations around the world and why they are courting Syria and Central Asian states.
Although, Bush must work harder to bring the Russians into the fold as they could be helpful in bringing the Central Asian states more reliably into the West's camp, he really has achieved a master-stroke of brilliant geo-political significance. And for these reasons alone, the US cannot leave Iraq and if anything, should be building its forces in the region. That is the only way to prevent Iran from becoming dangerously adventurous.
http://reubenyakobovich.blogspot.com/
Posted by:
Reuben at August 24, 2006 07:22 PM
Hey canuck, How much time have you put in securing a country(afghanistan or Iraq)? None, i didn't think so. So in other words, your expert opinion lol on the security of Iraq is about as useless as a KOS poll!
By the way what the hell do you think the U.S. is doing with the U.N.(corrupt bastards) anyways, playing pattycake? The same sh.. they went thru before Iraq. Pussyfooting with no intention of follow through. Not happening in this country, we'll leave that for the French & the Libs. LMAO!
Posted by: bearmanUSMC at August 24, 2006 07:25 PM
It's not a specific country issue like Afghanistan or Iraq, it's a regional one. We really should give battle to all of the enemies of America wherever they be. I say let Israel start the action and then we'll follow it up. After all, they live there and have more incentive to take out Iran's nukes.
Waiting for others, like timid Europe, to join in is just an excuse to delay what needs to be done now. And even if we did wait, then we'd get what? 100 French or German "troops"? Just look at the response we're getting from Europe for Lebenon. It's all a game to them. I look for countries like Spain to not only not contribute but also to actually join the enemy, inline with how they tucked tail and dishonorably fled during the Coalition formation.
Posted by: Jim at August 24, 2006 09:37 PM
Bearman:
--Do you not know that Canada is playing a role in Afghanstan. Hardly a week goes by without some soldiers dying.
--As for Iraq, our government was too smart to get involved in a war justified by lies and false intelligence. The USA should have concentrated on Afghanstan instead of withdrawing resources to another sinkhole.
--The Iraq mess has been going on for 3 years and it is getting worse due to the stupidity of your political leaders.
Posted by: Canuckguy at August 24, 2006 09:50 PM
Hmmmmm.......well thank you for wearing your ignorance out on your sleave. Nice dodge by the way! of course i know the canadians are involved in afghanistan! If it was my country I'd be forever indebted, it's not however so I will be polite and say thanks for the support! Of course that would not be directed to you canuck, you obviously would prefer politics over freedom, mercy, compassion, and defending the ones you love. By the way, hardly a week goes by without the death of a soldier in afghanistan......????? Are you out of your mind????? I know for a fact that even in Iraq, soldier deaths have been cut drastically due to our adaptations and.....yes......here it come.......SUCCESSES!!!! Which would explain why the terrorrist(or freedom fighters as your ilk calls them) have been targeting more & more civilians! Even those reports have drastically reduced! Find some new talking point canuck, and don't talk to me about securing a nation unless you've been on the ground there! I haven't either, but my brother(101st) did three tours, 2 Iraq, 1 Afghanistan, and he tears folks like you up in debate.....why? Because he was there, you weren't & aren't!
Posted by: bearmanUSMC at August 25, 2006 12:44 AM
Please report any inappropriate comments to abuse (at) blogsforbush (dot) com. Be sure to include the title of the blog entry, the name of the commenter, and the text of the offending comment.
Post a comment
If President Bush is waiting for a clear mandate that a Republican win in November would give him, expect the bombing to start within days of the election being over. I believe most Americans realize that Iran as the puppet master needs to be taken down. The targets should include the ruling Mullahs, not just the military or nuclear facilities.
If it is because of not enough ordinance, then the bombing could start anytime the military tells the President they have enough. Once it has begun, we may have to move ground troops. This helps explain the activation of more Ready Reserves - we will need the experience they have to fight effectively.
The one thing I am sure of, it will not be because he wants "the world" to agree with his actions. President Bush knows that most Europeans will never agree to going against Iran, out of fear of angering the Muslim population in their own countries.
All this "talking tough" about the USA taking down Iran is insane. The USA cannot even control Iraq and you, kjstrouble, want to send in the troops to Iran as well?
The UN must give Iran an ultimatum, then a united action involving the USA and some key European countries to destroy the facilities should be made. Don't go it alone. The USA should insist on a common front and shared responsibility.
Even with this mode of operation, there obviously will be hell to pay
Whether by accident or by design, President Bush has succeeded in almost completely encircling Iran, a brilliant move that will be appreciated long after he leaves office.
Take a moment to study a map of the Persian Gulf, Middle East and Central Asia. President Bush has assembled an array of allies that should keep Ahmadinejad in his box. To Iran's west lies US and coalition forces in Iraq, across the Persian Gulf are Saudi Arabia and other US friendly Gulf States, to the east are Pakistan and US/NATO forces in Afghanistan. Other than the less reliable northern border area of Central Asia, Iran's madman is contained.
Just as important as the bordering states is the fairly new key strategic ally of India. In July of 2005, India and the US made a joint statement, that among other things said that they would "combat terrorism relentlessly and everywhere". As we all know, the US gave India a pass at that time with regard to its nuclear programs as well. This couldn't have happened without the quiet cooperation from Pakistan.
Why is Pakistan turning a blind eye to its traditional foe upgrading its nuclear capabilities? Because the Pakistanis know very well that the real threat emanates from Iran and its terrorist puppets, and India acting as a long range deterrent against Iran is very useful. Being a predominantly Muslim nation, Pakistan cannot be publicly seen taking a lead in confronting Iran in the event of a nuclear confrontation.
Iran's only strategy to deal with the mess is to find ways to force the US to leave, to destabilize allied regimes in the area and to find friends in Central Asia and Syria/Lebanon. That is why they sponsored Hezbollah's actions in Lebanon, why they are fomenting Shiite resistance in Iraq, why they are funding terrorist organizations around the world and why they are courting Syria and Central Asian states.
Although, Bush must work harder to bring the Russians into the fold as they could be helpful in bringing the Central Asian states more reliably into the West's camp, he really has achieved a master-stroke of brilliant geo-political significance. And for these reasons alone, the US cannot leave Iraq and if anything, should be building its forces in the region. That is the only way to prevent Iran from becoming dangerously adventurous.
http://reubenyakobovich.blogspot.com/
Hey canuck, How much time have you put in securing a country(afghanistan or Iraq)? None, i didn't think so. So in other words, your expert opinion lol on the security of Iraq is about as useless as a KOS poll!
By the way what the hell do you think the U.S. is doing with the U.N.(corrupt bastards) anyways, playing pattycake? The same sh.. they went thru before Iraq. Pussyfooting with no intention of follow through. Not happening in this country, we'll leave that for the French & the Libs. LMAO!
It's not a specific country issue like Afghanistan or Iraq, it's a regional one. We really should give battle to all of the enemies of America wherever they be. I say let Israel start the action and then we'll follow it up. After all, they live there and have more incentive to take out Iran's nukes.
Waiting for others, like timid Europe, to join in is just an excuse to delay what needs to be done now. And even if we did wait, then we'd get what? 100 French or German "troops"? Just look at the response we're getting from Europe for Lebenon. It's all a game to them. I look for countries like Spain to not only not contribute but also to actually join the enemy, inline with how they tucked tail and dishonorably fled during the Coalition formation.
Bearman:
--Do you not know that Canada is playing a role in Afghanstan. Hardly a week goes by without some soldiers dying.
--As for Iraq, our government was too smart to get involved in a war justified by lies and false intelligence. The USA should have concentrated on Afghanstan instead of withdrawing resources to another sinkhole.
--The Iraq mess has been going on for 3 years and it is getting worse due to the stupidity of your political leaders.
Hmmmmm.......well thank you for wearing your ignorance out on your sleave. Nice dodge by the way! of course i know the canadians are involved in afghanistan! If it was my country I'd be forever indebted, it's not however so I will be polite and say thanks for the support! Of course that would not be directed to you canuck, you obviously would prefer politics over freedom, mercy, compassion, and defending the ones you love. By the way, hardly a week goes by without the death of a soldier in afghanistan......????? Are you out of your mind????? I know for a fact that even in Iraq, soldier deaths have been cut drastically due to our adaptations and.....yes......here it come.......SUCCESSES!!!! Which would explain why the terrorrist(or freedom fighters as your ilk calls them) have been targeting more & more civilians! Even those reports have drastically reduced! Find some new talking point canuck, and don't talk to me about securing a nation unless you've been on the ground there! I haven't either, but my brother(101st) did three tours, 2 Iraq, 1 Afghanistan, and he tears folks like you up in debate.....why? Because he was there, you weren't & aren't!