« David Duke Gets Behind Cindy Sheehan | Main | Single Issue vs. a Coalition »

Iran Backing Network Of Terrorists In Iraq

I'm not surprised.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An Iranian-backed network of insurgents in Iraq is responsible for a new type of lethal roadside bomb, part of plans by Tehran to influence its neighbor that began even before the U.S. invasion, Time magazine reported on Sunday.

Citing a U.S. military intelligence document, the magazine said that over the past eight months, a network of insurgents led by a man named Abu Mustafa al-Sheibani had introduced bombs based on a design from the Iranian-backed Lebanese militia Hizbollah that can easily pierce battle tank armor.

The document estimated that al-Sheibani's team comprised 280 members divided into 17 bomb-making teams and death squads, Time said.

This appeared to be part of an Iranian plan for gaining influence in Iraq that began before the United States invaded in March 2003, Time said. Its investigation was based on documents smuggled from Iran and interviews with U.S., British and Iraqi intelligence officials, as well as an Iranian agent, armed dissidents and Iraqi militia and political allies.

Time cited an unnamed senior U.S. military official in Baghdad as saying one of the new bombs killed three British soldiers in Amarah last month.

"One suspects this would have to have a higher degree of approval (in Tehran)," it quoted the official as saying.

Meanwhile morally bankrupt leaders in Europe and the UN continue to call for "taking war off the table" with regard to Iran in favor strongly-worded resolutions and political sanctions.

And by "political sanctions" they mean the same sort of measures that put billions of dollars in illegal kickbacks in the pockets of international bureaucrats around the world with the Oil for Food Program while simultaneously allowing Saddam Hussein to bribe his way toward the resumption of his WMD programs.

By Rob Port of Say Anything.


Comments (8)

We need to take Iran off th... (Below threshold)

We need to take Iran off the table, then Syria and North Korea. That's not a war plan, that's a peace plan.

..part of plans by Tehra... (Below threshold)
snowballs:

..part of plans by Tehran to influence its neighbor..

Who's been influenced now?

Huh...Reuters article...quo... (Below threshold)
The Hague:

Huh...Reuters article...quoting Time.

Nothing wrong with this reporting, this time...since it agrees with your world view.

Lovely parsing you do...so CONSISTENT.

Of course, Chalabi was NOT working with the Iranians...that's why the CIA did not go ballastic when Scooter rammed him down their throats...

...what's it like on your world?

I second Bullwinkle's sugge... (Below threshold)
Robert:

I second Bullwinkle's suggestion!!!! Now that is a peace plan I can support 100%

Iran supports Terrorists. S... (Below threshold)
Darby:

Iran supports Terrorists. Syria supports Terrorists. Kim Jong Il wants to rule the world.

Err, lets try that again...

Iran wants Nukes, Syria wants Nukes, North Korea might have them, and probably wants to use them.

That's better but...

Iran supports Terrorists... Iran wants Nukes... Terrorists want Nukes... Much better.

Syria supports Terrorists... Syria wants Nukes... Terrorists want Nukes... Imagine that.

North Korea probably has Nukes... North Korea wants to use Nukes... Terrorists around the world rejoice... Pretty scary huh?

Take war off the table? Sorry, but I don't think so. You take that option off the table and all of a sudden you get the same kind of reaction from the terrorists you'd get by assigning a date for the withdrawl of American and Coalition forces from Iraq.

"We have hope, we just need to wait this out; then we will be free to work again!"

The only way to put a stop to Terrorism is to demolish all hope they have of winning. If you take war with Iran off the table then that gives the terrorists a place to hide, where they know they can be safe from retribution. Ditto for Syria and North Korea. Though the North Korean scenario is much more scary than the other two.

The absolute last thing we, those who value political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and all those other god given rights, want is for there to be a place in this world, where those that do not have the same values as us, for them to hide.

Don't get me wrong here, War is the most horrible thing that mankind can do to itself. It should only be used as a last resort.

One of my favorite quotes from history:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Better yet:

"THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but "to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER" and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God."
-- Thomas Paine, from the "The Crisis" collection, written during the American Revolution.

Is it not so great a leap to change but a few words and it apply todays model of the war against terror?

Do the terrorists not want to destroy our way of life? Do they not want all to conform to THEIR ways. What pray many I ask, is the difference between the terrorists of today, and the British Kingdom of history's past?

Is the liberty and freedoms that we are so accustomed too simply not good enough for the rest of the world? Should we truely not interfere with moral and ethical wrong doing?

How can one be proud of our(I'm speaking of Americans here, all others can ponder my thoughts as they will.) heritage, of our freedoms, and not want the same for all of humanity? I can not fathom the world we would live in if the righteous men of our past choose to blindly submit to the tyranny of our past. What a world we would live in today.

Have the lessons of our past not taught us of what Tyranny can do to a people? Did we not fight a war, did innocents not die, to break free of our once Britain overseers? Did we not fight a War, a civil war no less, to bring equality to those that were deemed a lesser race? Did our actions during the civil war not bring the end of slavery to the majority of the civilized world? We saw the error of our ways, and though it did take a very long time, black men and women are free. They do have the same rights as those that once thought themselves to be superior, and proven wrong.

How is it that fighting that same type of oppression and immorality is now a wrong doing?

The innocent are dying this war is not just because of that. That is true innocent people are dying, but I ask you this; how many innocents have died in the past wars to stop tyranny? This war is causing needless suffering on the innocent. Needless suffering you say? Which is greater; The long term suffering, extermination even, of an entire race, while those that are capable of righting immoral actions turn their heads away and do nothing? Or the short term suffering of a few, so that the many in the long term will no longer have to suffer like those that came before.

Taking "War off the table" is not an option. To take it away is to admit defeat. We might as well sit back and just wait for the bright bursts of blinding light. You best have SPF 500,000,000 ready, your gonna nead it.

But we didn't do everything we could in Iraq(before the war), you may say. I disagree. I don't recall how many resolutions were in place against Saddam. But he didn't comply with them. It reminds me of a parent with a young child. The child does something naughty. The parent scolds the child. The child listens to the scolding, and takes it to heart, but the selfish nature of a child is more powerful. So the child does said naughty thing again. Once again, the parent scolds the child. Knowing what is to come, the child no longer cares, and continues the naughty behavior. Now the parent mush properly punish the child. Well, Saddam got punished, it's that simple.

Now the Terrorists are being fought, they're being punished. We will no longer allow those who do wrong to escape the apropriate punishment. You take that punishment away, and return to scoldings, all you will get are children who will continue to do naughty things... Like fly planes into buildings. Ram motorboats laden with explosives into war ships. Set off poison bombs in subways, set off bombs in nightclubs, set off bombs to kill, and maim people in restaurants.

Err... Sorry about the leng... (Below threshold)
Darby:

Err... Sorry about the length... Didn't realize how long it was going to be... Oops.

USA to weak to take on Iran... (Below threshold)
NtvAmrcn:

USA to weak to take on Iran?

Iran says they can kick our ass?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45768

Could this be the reason?
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/14/231441.shtml

This is why I am not a liberal.

Wasn't there a cartoon some... (Below threshold)

Wasn't there a cartoon somewhere with Iran looking over at Iraq and the Oil for food scandal and offering to make the same deal with the US?

Sounds like a cox and forkum thing- I'll have to look for it.

Dang, Darby! That was a blog post all on it's own! Tell me how you *really* feel...




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy