BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.

Subject: BS: Five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 01:31 PM

This was mentioned on another thread but since this story is buried so deep, I thought I'd give it a thread all its own. As I've said before, there are two sides to every story but so far the media is saying very little. I'd sure like to know more about what this is about. It seems odd that the Iraqi govt. has to petition the U.S. govt. for the release of Iranians when they were meeting with Iraqi officials in Iraqi territory.

"Iranian officials have said that the men are diplomats. Hoshyar Zebari, the Iraqi foreign minister and a Kurd, said in a telephone interview on Tuesday that although the men being held were not officially diplomats, they had nevertheless been acting as liaisons between Iraq and Iran.

"It was not a clandestine operation," he said. "They were known by us. They were under surveillance by regional security. They operated with the approval of the regional government and with the knowledge of the Iraqi government. We were in the process of formalizing that liaison office into a consulate. Then they would have diplomatic immunity."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/world/middleeast/05iraq.html

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 01:39 PM

The US is of the opinion that Iran is working with some Shi'ites to destabilize Iraq. Hence the raid. Initially they took six captives but let one go. The five remaining are either innocent, agents or hostages. I can find very little on that story which started a few months back.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 02:57 PM

From the Wall Street Journal:

"One benefit of this episode is that it provoked the press to start reporting on the Revolutionary Guards and elite al Quds force. These highly trained and well-financed fighters are the regime's instruments of violence from Lebanon and the Palestinian territories--where they arm Hezbollah and Hamas--to Iraq, where Iranian-supplied weapons are killing American and British soldiers.

For that reason, it's important to separate Iran's hostage-taking from the entirely lawful arrest by the U.S. of five Iranians in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil in January. Some hyperbolic British reporting has linked the two, but the Iranians were part of a Revolutionary Guard network that was supplying money and weapons to killers in Iraq. It would be a bad sign, and only encourage more hostage-taking, if the five Iranians were now released quickly in what Iran might claim is a quid pro quo."

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 03:34 PM

Interesting that the NY Times and the Wall Street Journal have entirely different perspectives. It doesn't sound as if the Wall Street Journal bothered to ask Iraq about the situation.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 03:36 PM

And the NY Times didn't bother to ask the US...

But I thought you wanted to have the viewpoint of BOTH sides?

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:07 PM

I do want to hear both sides.

The article from the NY Times was dated Apr 05. If you bothered to read it, you would see that it did give the U.S. side of the story.

Im not sure when the article you quoted from the Wall Street Journal was dated. I couldn't find it when I googled. Maybe you could provide a link. It sounds like the Wall Street Journal has already found the Iranian captives quilty and have ignored the Iraqi government.

Something stinks.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:11 PM

From the Wall Street Journal:

Mahmoud's 'Gift'
The right way to exploit any fissures in the Tehran regime.

Thursday, April 5, 2007 12:01 a.m. EDT

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:16 PM

Let's concentrate on getting more information before sniping at one another (ducking for cover)

This is an important story that his slipped into deep background.

As I recall the Kurds, who are generally pleased with our current support, were dismayed that they were not briefed on this operation in their terriotry before it happened.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:21 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/25/world/middleeast/25iraq.html?ei=5090&en=d7bbb4578e61b6da&ex=1324702800&partner=rssuserland&emc


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/12/25/iraq/main2295239.shtml

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=2534


http://news.webindia123.com/news/articles/World/20061226/546655.html

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:24 PM

The Kurds surrounded the Yanks who either performed the arrest or did the snatch. (Long time since I heard the expression.)

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:42 PM

So let's see if I have this right:

The US is convinced that Iran is helping to destabilize Iraq. Now, let's see...did Iran invade Iraq illegally on phony charges? No. Well, I guess we can see now who it was that destabilized Iraq.

And how would Iran accomplish that? By arming the Sunni insurgency? No. The Iranians are Shiites and they hate the Sunnis. So they must be arming the Shiites against us.

Hmmm, but didn't eh Sunnis hold the power prior to the invasion? Yes, I believe so. And wasn't it Bush who put the Shiites in power after the invasion? Yes...yes, I believe it was.

Wasn't that a highly dangerous, stupid thing to do when you have a nation of Shiites next door that we've been arguing with since the days of Carter as well as the fact that Israel's biggest rival is Hezbollah which is also Shiite and highly regarded by Iraqi Shiites?? Why, yes, yes, I would think so, yes.

So who is responsible for this unfortunate situation? Once again, I'd have to say George W. Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 04:48 PM

You are talking with yourself, and the scary thing is it's a dialogue.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 05:26 PM

There's nothing scary about that. People do it all the time. It only scares them when they catch someone else doing it. Those who don't do it audibly are still doing it silently inside their heads anyway.

"If my thought-dreams could be seen, they're probably put my head in a guillotine." - Bob Dylan

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 05:37 PM

These things don't HAVE to make sense. Remember, Reagan was secretly selling weapons to those same enemies of the US, the Iranians ... to fund some friends of the US, the contras ... or was it the other way around ...

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Charley Noble
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 09:29 PM

This whole situation might be cleared up if the Kurds would only make way...ah, what's the use of trying to make a point in this madhouse?

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 09:59 PM

BB--

You have performed the improbably feat of slandering the Wall St Journal. I would say it's not libel, since on Mudcat we basically talk.

Your latest cut-and-paste, although for some reason you choose not to admit it, is an editorial--and makes no pretense to objectivity ("or scholarship sublime"). And as such, it's only representative of one side of the Journal------the more-Bushite-than-thou side. Perhaps it's the side you identify with.

There is another side to the WSJ--the reporting side. Which somehow seems not to your liking--since it seems you never quote it.

Perhaps for good reason--since it points out the many flaws in the editorials' logic. The Wall St Journal is the only newspaper I know of--in the world--in which the reporting often directly contradicts the editorials.

The editorial says the Revolutionary Guards objective "was clearly to create some negotiating leverage" (in the nuclear controversy) and humiliate Blair.

No, in fact it's not clear. There are other possibilities--explored in the reporting.


The editorial states the lesson is to "increase diplomatic and sanctions pressure."

No, in fact elsewhere in the same issue, the reporting points out the another theory is that there are moderates in Iran whose attempt to approach the Western position was the target of this incident.   It is not at all clear that these moderates should not be encouraged. More pressure will undercut them. (And other media theorize that the incident was just an attempt to distract from the disastrous economy--and provide a handy--and well-known-- villain, while attaining the upper hand over that villain).



The editorial mentions the "entirely lawful" arrest of the 5 Iranians in Irbil. If it's "entirely lawful", what were the specific charges against these men? Perhaps you can enlighten us.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Apr 07 - 10:00 PM

"improbable"

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 07:16 AM

Basra Police: EFP bomb killed Britons By KIM GAMEL, Associated Press Writer
22 minutes ago



BAGHDAD - The Basra police commander on Friday said the roadside bomb used in an attack that killed four British soldiers had not been used in southern       Iraq before, and his description of the deadly weapon indicated it was a feared Iranian-designed explosively formed projectile.

Separately, a suicide car bomber hit a police checkpoint Friday in western Ramadi, killing at least 20 people — two of them policemen — and wounding as many as 30, police in the Anbar provincial capital.

Police opened fire as the suicide bomber sped toward a checkpoint, three miles west of Ramadi, according to police Col. Tariq al-Dulaimi.

Anbar province has been a stronghold of the Sunni insurgency but many tribes in the region recently switched allegiance, with large numbers of military-age men joining the police force and Iraqi army in a bid to expel al-Qaida in Iraq fighters.

The U.S. military has claimed       Iran is supplying Shiite militia fighters in Iraq with explosively formed projectiles, known as an EFP. They hurl a molten, fist-sized copper slug capable of piercing armored vehicles.

The four British soldiers — including two women — were killed Thursday as the American military announced the deaths of eight more U.S. soldiers since Tuesday.

The Basra region police commander, Maj. Gen. Mohammed al-Moussawi, said two similar bombs had been discovered Friday morning; one was discovered on the road leading to Basra Palace, the compound that houses a British base and the British and U.S. consulates. A second was uncovered in the western Hayaniyah district where Thursday's attack occurred. The area is known as a stronghold of the Mahdi Army, a militia loyal to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.

The reported deaths of the American forces and the bomb attack on the British unit marked the start of the eighth week of the joint U.S.-Iraqi security crackdown in Baghdad and surrounding territory.

Also Thursday, the U.S. military confirmed an American helicopter carrying nine people had been downed south of Baghdad and that four were injured.

An Iraqi army official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of security concerns, said the helicopter went down after it came under fire from anti-aircraft guns near the Sunni insurgent stronghold of Latifiyah, 20 miles south of Baghdad. The U.S. military did not confirm that account.

It was the ninth U.S. helicopter to go down in Iraq this year. The U.S. military has studied new evasive techniques, fearing insurgents have acquired more sophisticated weapons or have figured out how to use their arms in new and effective ways.

Prime Minister       Tony Blair called the Basra attack an "act of terrorism" and suggested it may have been the work of militiamen linked to Iran. He stopped short of accusing Tehran, however.

"Now it is far too early to say that the particular terrorist act that killed our forces was an act committed by terrorists that were backed by any elements of the Iranian regime, so I make no allegation in respect of that particular incident," Blair said.

He added, however, "This is maybe the right moment to reflect on our relationship with Iran."

One U.S. soldier died and two were wounded in a roadside bombing Thursday in restive Diyala province north of Baghdad, the military said. Four others died Wednesday in two roadside bomb explosions in southern Baghdad and north of the capital, while a fifth was killed by small-arms fire in the eastern part of the city. Two other soldiers were killed by small-arms fire on Tuesday — one in eastern Baghdad and another on foot patrol in the southern outskirts of the capital.

The deadly attack against the British patrol in southern Iraq was the greatest loss of life for Britain in more than four months and it cast a shadow over celebrations marking the return of 15 British sailors seized by Iran two weeks ago in disputed waters in the Persian Gulf.

"Just as we rejoice at the return of our 15 service personnel so today we are also grieving and mourning for the loss of our soldiers in Basra, who were killed as the result of a terrorist act," Blair said.

The British patrol struck a roadside bomb and was hit by small-arms fire early Thursday in the southern city of Basra, British military spokeswoman Capt. Katie Brown said. The explosion created a 9-foot crater in the road. Hours after the attack, a British soldier's helmet was still laying in the street among dozens of spent bullets.

The latest casualties raised to 140 the number of British forces to die in Iraq since the March 2003 invasion — 109 in combat.

Blair has announced that Britain will withdraw about 1,600 troops from Iraq over the next few months and hopes to make other cuts to its 7,100-strong contingent by late summer.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:36 PM

Sorry that this is a duplicate of a posting on another thread. I've had alot of trouble posting today.

"Now it is far too early to say that the particular terrorist act that killed our forces was an act committed by terrorists that were backed by any elements of the Iranian regime, so I make no allegation in respect of that particular incident,"

"Just as we rejoice at the return of our 15 service personnel so today we are also grieving and mourning for the loss of our soldiers in Basra, who were killed as the result of a terrorist act," Blair said.

This is the same way that the U.S. led the public to believe that Saddam was responsible for 911!

Link Iran to terrorism in Iraq so that you have justification for an invasion of Iran. The five Iranian hostages were not the intended targets. They meant to kidnap men of higher rank but failed because the Kurds tipped them off. Now Iraq wants the Iranian released. How can the U.S. continue to detain these men if the Iraqis think it is wrong? Who has the power?

It is my understanding that while it may be true that Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiites with weapons, it is to protect the civilian population from the Sunni insurgency (something the military seems incapable of doing). They are involved in what is considered protection and reprisal killings. They are not targetting the U.S. or Iraqi military.

The deaths of U.S. and coalition forces are due to the Sunni insurgency and/or al-Qaeda. Al-Sadr wants the U.S. out because the U.S. is using Iraq as an excuse to start a war with Iran. If the U.S. would leave, the Mahdi militia and the Iraqi army would be able to quell the insurgency and allow the Shiite dominated, Iraqi government to control their own destiny.

I may be wrong and if I am, you are free to disagree but it appears that the U.S. has no intention of allowing a Shiite dominated, Iraqi government to succeed and that they are allowing the insurgency to gain momentum to justify their presence in Iraq. The end game is to invade Iran to eliminate Hezbollah and Hamas. All of this so that the U.S./Israel can gain dominance in the Middle East. If its true, the coalition forces are being used as cannon fodder in a war that will destroy more than Iraq and Iran.

Please tell me I'm wrong or bring the coalition forces home immediately!

For some odd reason, this post is not getting through. I'll hit submit again and hope this isn't a multiple post. What is going on? O.K., I've tried four times. Time to take a break and try later. Maybe I'm being censored.

I know, I'll remove the part about the Z*&^%$# conspiracy and see what happens. I do believe I'm being blocked.

Hmmm - Still no luck.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:39 PM

There seems to be a technical problem. It has been being addressed by people in the Help section (see top right of page just under Go)

A glitch - submit posting not working sometim

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 01:58 PM

dianavan,

I disagree with your assessment.

Reading the articles from when they were captured ( December) there WERE others captured, who were released because THEY had diplomatic credentials. Not because "They meant to kidnap men of higher rank but failed because the Kurds tipped them off. "

In addition, you have stated that the Kurds warned the Iranians off. Since the Iranians are accused of providing material to attack the US forces, this means that the Kurds were working against the US forces.

Not exactly "It is my understanding that while it may be true that Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiites with weapons, it is to protect the civilian population from the Sunni insurgency (something the military seems incapable of doing). They are involved in what is considered protection and reprisal killings. They are not targetting the U.S. or Iraqi military. "

ERP are NOT useful in protecting civilian populations: They ARE useful in attacking hardened vehicles, ( ie, armoured).

" may be wrong and if I am, you are free to disagree but it appears that the U.S. has no intention of allowing a Shiite dominated, Iraqi government to succeed and that they are allowing the insurgency to gain momentum to justify their presence in Iraq."

You are correct: I would choose to disagree with your analysis. Rather, it appears to me that Iran is acting to incite violence and kill Iraqis and coalition forces for their own internal political gain.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 02:02 PM

Sorry, EFP.

"The U.S. military has claimed       Iran is supplying Shiite militia fighters in Iraq with explosively formed projectiles, known as an EFP. They hurl a molten, fist-sized copper slug capable of piercing armored vehicles."

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 03:58 PM

Have EFP's, supplied by Iran, actually pierced the armour of coalition vehicles? If so, please support this claim.

As you know, the U.S. can claim just about anything. I no longer believe the claims and want to see the proof before I support any U.S. military action. Like I said, we've been sucked in before by U.S. "claims".

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: beardedbruce
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 04:00 PM

"BAGHDAD - The Basra police commander on Friday said the roadside bomb used in an attack that killed four British soldiers had not been used in southern       Iraq before, and his description of the deadly weapon indicated it was a feared Iranian-designed explosively formed projectile. "

And it was an Iraqi who said so....

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 04:01 PM

We didn't get sucked in. Canada is not in Iraq.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 10:33 PM

BB--

Gee, it must have slipped your mind. I'm sure you didn't intend to not answer the specific question of exactly what the Iranians seized in Irbil (Iraq) have been charged with--especially since it is extremely germane to the topic of the thread.

Since you are evidently convinced, like the calm thinkers who write the Wall St Journal editorials, that the seizure was "completely legal", you must have knowledge of the exact charges against the Iranians. Sorry, general speculation on weapons imported into Iraq by Iranians won't cut it. We are talking about these specific individuals and what crime they are alleged to have committed.

Since I'm sure you know the answer, would you mind sharing it with us? Otherwise we may be forced to the conclusion that you don't know any more about it than we do---and therefore the assertion that the arrests were "completely legal" has no support.

But when has that ever stopped a Bushite from making wild charges?

Awaiting your enlightenment.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 11:14 PM

"The U.N. Security Council resolution that officially marked the end of the U.S. occupation and transferred sovereignty to the Iraqi government retains the U.S. military's right to implement "security detentions". However, any such detentions should be subject to Iraqi law, according to Scott Horton, who teaches international law at Columbia University School of Law.

"The Iranians who are being held as 'security detainees' are not being charged with anything, and so are being held unlawfully," he told IPS."

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/03/30/192/

A very good article, btw. It describes how the U.S. is undermining relations between Iraq and Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 06 Apr 07 - 11:47 PM

"Tehran has said the five were diplomats working in a consulate office in Arbil -- comments that Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari seemed to support in an interview with the New York Times Thursday.

He said that the men were operating with the knowledge of the Iraqi government and were not involved in any sort of "clandestine operation."

"They were known by us. They were under surveillance by regional security. They operated with the approval of the regional government and with the knowledge of the Iraqi government.

"We were in the process of formalizing that liaison office into a consulate. Then they would have diplomatic immunity," he said.

http://www.turkishpress.com/news.asp?id=170013

Why isn't the media all over this?

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 04:05 AM

"Iranian officials have said that the men are diplomats"
"the men being held were not officially diplomats"

You are all over it Dianavan and doing a splendid job. What do we need the media for?

It is OK for the Hezbollah forces from Iran to enter Israel and take soldiers as hostages though.

Have they been returned as required by the cease fire deal?

Here is a video for Dianavan

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 01:19 PM

OK Dickey--since BB is obviously -- fruitlessly--scouring the net for some indication of the exact charges against the Iranians taken in Irbil, perhaps you can tell us the answer. And if you can't, tell us why their seizure is "totally legal". It is after all the subject of the thread--much as you would like to drag the subject elsewhere.

Oh, I forgot, it's against your principles to do any research--or anything but bumper-sticker debate.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 05:27 PM

Dickey - We are not talking about Hezbollah. Start another thread.

I realize, however, that the effort to justify a war with Iran is not coming from the U.S. alone. It is obviously fueled by Zionist fear as well.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 05:37 PM

Zionists have such an irrational fear of their neighbours. And of the country whose leader said "Israel should be wiped off the map." Those silly people.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 06:45 PM

As you said yourself in a previous thread, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad does not make policy.

Besides that, his term ends sometime this year.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 07:00 PM

His term apparently ends in August of this year. He is allowed to run for another term. That why he wanted to show the Iranians that he was a 'generous', 'compassionate' and 'forgiving' man. He's on the campaign trail. Not so different than any other politician.

btw - Not only does he not make policy, he is also not in charge of the military.

I agree, its very silly to be afraid of Ahmadinejad.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 11:44 PM

Hezbollah is a military force of Iran which invaded another country and kidnapped hostages with armed conflict.

Have they lived up to the bargain anout releasing the hostages? Are they following the Geneva conventions that you demand the US must follow? Has the Red Cross or Amnesty International visited them? Do they have lawyers? Have they been charged with anything?

You beleive it is hands off for Iranians in Iraq but perfectly alright for them to have an armed invasion into another country and takes hostages.

"Whatever success the U.N. Security Council would presume to claim, it cannot be said that Resolution 1701 has effectively addressed the direct cause of the fighting--the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser, 31, and Eldad Regev, 26, by Hezbollah, and the earlier abduction of Gilad Shalit, 19, by Hamas. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's call for the unconditional release of these soldiers has been ignored. Moreover, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law, the terrorists have not only seized the soldiers as hostages for political blackmail, they have not allowed the Red Cross to visit them. Their families do not know their physical condition; they have no proof they are even alive."
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110008856

This thread is not about Zionists either so why bring them into it?

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 07 Apr 07 - 11:51 PM

The Red Crescent not Cross.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 12:35 AM

"Hezbollah is a military force of Iran..."

No they are not. They are a locally-raised independently led militia of Shiites that has come directly from the local Shiite population in Lebanon. They are a Lebanese militia. They receive material and moral support from Iran...naturally! ...and from other Shiites in many places...but they are not a military force of Iran, they are a separate military force all of their own. They are an ally of Iran. Like various similar allies of the USA, such as the Mujahedin who later became the Taliban, for instance, and killed Russians with arms supplied by the USA, or like the Afghani Northern Alliance, they get help from their international friends, whoever those friends are. So what? The Mujahedin were not the army of the USA, neither were the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, and Hezbollah are not the army of Iran.

"which invaded another country and kidnapped hostages with armed conflict"

Israel and the USA also have invaded other countries (and HOW!) and taken hostages, many of them....your media just doesn't call people hostages when they are taken prisoner by Israel or the USA. Israel has captured and held far more people in its border fighting than Hezbollah has, and those people are also still being held. The Muslims view those people held in Israeli prisons or in American military prisons as hostages too, and they also want them returned. There are thousands of those people, not just a handful of them.

You're the one who believes it's "hands off", Dickey...for the USA and Israel. In your moral system they are free to invade whom they please when they please and take hostages when they please, because they can "do no wrong".

Why be so surprised that the Muslims in the world don't agree with that point of view?









which invaded another country and kidnapped hostages with armed conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 01:01 AM

Disregard the last line. Unintentional paste job while cutting and pasting.

Dickey, what you don't get is this: you're living in a country that has the utter gall to pre-emptively invade, overrun and occupy small countries that have not even attacked it!!! That is unlawful aggression. It's totally outrageous. It's beyond toleration. If the USA were not so much more heavily armed than any other country in the world it would be very much in danger of being at war with most of the rest of the world by now...just like Hitler was by 1943. You are living in a nation run by out and out war criminals who are as irresponsible and unlawful as Tojo or Mussolini.

The only reason a major war has not broken out yet over this insanity is that the price everyone would pay is simply too great...so the world stands back and holds its nose and makes some disapproving noises, and hopes the USA will cut its losses and go home before something worse happens.

You are living in a rogue nation, Dickey, and your own nation has done worse things than Iran. Much worse. Your own nation has already invaded and occupied 2 small countries and tacitly encouraged the invasion of a third (Lebanon), and is now threatening the invasion of a fourth (Iran). It has killed tens or hundreds of thousands of people in the Middle East and ruined the lives of millions. It has tortured and illegally held prisoners. It has betrayed its own Constitution and its own people. Your government leaders are war criminals on a massive scale. If any small country dared to do the insane military aggression your country does, the whole world would declare it an outlaw nation and would band together and crush it by deadly force. I guarantee that.

The only thing that's saving you from that is the fact that you're so heavily armed that you can get away with your outlaw behaviour. So far. No one can afford a Third World War. It's just unthinkable. As it is, the world just sits back, as I said, holding its collective nose, and hoping you guys will get such a bloody nose yourselves in your criminal adventures abroad that you'll finally sober up and realize you made a very big mistake.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 02:51 AM

Get this straight, Dickie. Iranians are not Arabs and Hezbollah is not an Iranian military force.

Littlehawk - I wonder if Israel can talk some sense into Bush. For the sake of all the people in the Middle East, I hope so. Now that we know Bush is probably arming the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, we can be sure that al Qaeda in Iraq also has his support. What does that tell you? No wonder bin Laden has never been caught!

Our only hope is that when Bush leaves office, he will be tried in an international court for crimes against humanity. I hope both he and Cheney will rot in prison. They deserve to be stoned. I think it would do the American public alot of good if they could each throw one stone at the two of them in a pit. I can honestly say that I have never felt that way about another human being but those two should rot in hell.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 02:59 AM

"U.S. detention camps in Iraq currently hold more than 15,000 prisoners, most of whom, like the Iranians, have been held without charge or access to tribunals for months, even years, in some cases, according to a recent New York Times investigative report."

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 11:48 AM

Please don't be hard on Dickey--he can't help it if he can't understand anything unless it can be fit on a bumper-sticker---after all, he's just a stalwart Bush voter. Requiring research--or especially thinking--is just not reasonable.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 11:52 AM

However, I'm still patiently waiting for any Bushite to tell us exactly what crime the Iranians taken in Irbil (Iraq) have been charged with--since the Bushites assure us their seizure was "totally legal---and that seizure is after all the subject of the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 12:05 PM

Ron. they're still not sure yet but they'll come up with something eventually, maybe in a year or two & tailor fit to meets their needs.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 12:30 PM

If I'd been Ahmadinejad, I would have drawn a much closer link between the British sailors and the Iranians taken in Irbil. Then I would have still released the the British sailors, while pointing out the stark contrast between my treatment of the sailors and Bush's treatment of the Iranians in Irbil.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 12:30 PM

too many "the"s

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 01:44 PM

You're right about Ahmadinejad. He should have linked the Irbil Iranians with the British sailors. I wonder why he didn't? The Iranians should have been released by now. I have this awful feeling that they have been lost in a maze of prisons or that they have been so badly tortured that they can't be seen by the public.

Nobody sides with the U.S. on this (except maybe BB) and the U.S. hasn't charged them. So where are they and why not release them? Iraqi officials say they were in the country legitimately. Can't the Iraqis demand their release?

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Dickey
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 04:04 PM

The establishment of Hezbollah by Iran during the Lebanon War (1982-1986)
The first Lebanon War, which began on June 6, 1982, reduced Syria's influence there, destroyed the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure and led to the collapse of the central Lebanese government. The Iranians correctly identified the opportunity presented by the political upheaval and exploited it to transport the Islamic struggle to the Lebanese arena, in the heart of the Arab world , and from there to wage its battle against Israel and the United States without direct involvement .2 The Iranians were active mostly among the Shi'ites, the largest sect in Lebanon, which has traditionally suffered from political, economic and social deprivation.
Iran's strategy was compatible with the interests of Syria, which at that time struggled against Israel's presence in Lebanon from a position of military and political weakness. The meeting of Iranian and Syrian interests led to Syria's permitting 2,500 Iranian Revolutionary Guards to enter Lebanon and to set up a stronghold within the Shi'ite population in the Beqa'a Valley.
Although the Syrians prevented the Iranian force from participating in the fighting against Israel and large numbers of them returned to Iran, the remaining 1,000-1,500 Iranians entrenched themselves in Baalbek, which was under Syrian military control. They established a military-logistic infrastructure at the Sheikh 'Abdallah camp in Baalbek , which they took over from the Lebanese army, and at the Zabadani camp in Syria , northwest of Damascus. Intelligence and operational Revolutionary Guards elements were later installed in Beirut, Zahle and Mashgharah in the southern Beqa'a Valley. The military infrastructure set up in the summer of 1982 played an important part in establishing Hezbollah and using it to carry out terrorist missions.
The Revolutionary Guards' most conspicuous achievement was successfully uniting the various radical Shi'ite groups which objected to the Israeli presence and Western influence in Lebanon. The Revolution Guards established Hezbollah from among those groups and supported them by training their members, transmitting technical know-how, and providing weapons (through Damascus), ideological guidance and extremely generous funding.
The key role in establishing Hezbollah in Lebanon and dispatching its members on terrorist missions against Israel and the West was filled by Hujjat al-Islam 'Ali Akbar Mokhtashemipour , who was then the Iranian ambassador to Damascus (and is currently head of the Headquarters for Intifada Support, and important in providing Iranian support for Palestinian terrorism).
Guided by the Iranians, during its first years Hezbollah developed two modes of action which became the trademarks of Iranian-directed Shi'ite terrorism :
Suicide bombing attacks : suicide bombing attacks in Lebanon were carried out by Shi'ite terrorists sent to sacrifice themselves for the sake of Allah as part of jihad, an important element in Khomeini's ideology (and that of his heirs). 3 The first suicide bombing attacks were directed against Western targets , and later against Israeli targets in Lebanon and Jewish and Israeli targets abroad (Argentina). During the first Lebanon War Hezbollah carried out a series of suicide bombing attacks against American and French targets, killing hundreds. As a result of the attacks, the multinational force was evacuated from Lebanon and the Palestinian terrorist organizations were encouraged to copy the Lebanese model, using the suicide bombing attack as the main weapon in their terrorist campaigns against Israel (in the middle 1990s and during the second intifada).

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/iran_hezbollah_e1b.htm

"If I'd been Ahmadinejad" Ron, You would make a very good Ahmadinejad with your bullying skills.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: dianavan
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 07:31 PM

Iranians supporting Hezbollah is no different than the U.S. supporting Saddam or the U.S. supporting Arab Sunnis. The difference is Hezbollah is not likely to turn on Iran whereas Saddam did turn on the U.S. So did Bin Laden. So will the Arab Sunnis. It does not mean, however, that Hezbollah is an Iranian army any more than Arab Sunni/ al Qaeda are an American army.

What does Hezbollah have to do with the abduction of the five Iranians by the U.S.?

Absolutely nothing.

As Ron already said, 'I'm still patiently waiting for any Bushite to tell us exactly what crime the Iranians taken in Irbil (Iraq) have been charged with--since the Bushites assure us their seizure was "totally legal"---and that seizure is after all the subject of the thread.'

Quit trying to change the subject. Start your own thread instead of trying to hijack this one.

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Peace
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 07:36 PM

"What does Hezbollah have to do with the abduction of the five Iranians by the U.S.?"

What do Zionists have to do with this thread?

Subject: RE: BS: five Iranians captured by U.S.
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Apr 07 - 08:17 PM

Thanks for the compliment, Dickey. Read any good bumper stickers lately?--since this appears to be the source of your wisdom.

Fascinating that neither you nor any other Bushite have managed to locate any actual facts about the crimes the Iranians taken in Irbil are alleged to have committed. Yet supposedly the seizure of the Iranians is "completely legal".

So far, your silence on this issue--after all, the subject of the thread--is deafening.