| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iran dares US to attack |
| 2006-04-14 |
| IRAN has said it could defeat any American military action over its controversial nuclear drive, in one of the Islamic regime's boldest challenges yet to the United States. "You can start a war but it won't be you who finishes it," said General Yahya Rahim Safavi, the head of the Revolutionary Guards and among the regime's most powerful figures. "The Americans know better than anyone that their troops in the region and in Iraq are vulnerable. I would advise them not to commit such a strategic error," he told reporters on the sidelines of a pro-Palestinian conference in Tehran. The United States accuses Iran of using an atomic energy drive as a mask for weapons development. Last weekend US news reports said President George W. Bush's administration was refining plans for preventive strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. "I would advise them to first get out of their quagmire in Iraq before getting into an even bigger one," General Safavi said with a grin. "We have American forces in the region under total surveillance. For the past two years, we have been ready for any scenario, whether sanctions or an attack." Iran announced this week it had successfully enriched uranium to make nuclear fuel, despite a UN Security Council demand for the sensitive work to be halted by April 28. The Islamic regime says it only wants to generate atomic energy, but enrichment can be extended to make the fissile core of a nuclear warhead -- something the United States is convinced that "axis of evil" member Iran wants to acquire. At a Friday prayer sermon in Tehran, senior cleric Ayatollah Ahmad Janati simply branded the US as a "decaying power" lacking the "stamina" to block Iran's ambitions. And hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that a US push for tough United Nations sanctions was of "no importance". "She is free to say whatever she wants," the president replied when asked to respond to comments by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice highlighting part of the UN charter that provides for sanctions backed up by the threat of military action. "We give no importance to her comments," he said with a broad smile. On Thursday, Ms Rice said that faced with Iran's intransigence, the United States "will look at the full range of options available to the United Nations". "There is no doubt that Iran continues to defy the will of the international community," Rice said, after Iran also dismissed a personal appeal from the UN atomic watchdog chief Mohamed ElBaradei. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief must give a report at the end of April on Iranian compliance with the Security Council demand. In Tehran he said that after three years of investigations Iran's activities were "still hazy and not very clear". Although the United States has been prodding the council to take a tough stand against the Islamic republic, including possible sanctions, it has run into opposition from veto-wielding members Russia and China. Representatives of the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany are to meet in Moscow Tuesday to discuss the crisis. In seeking to deter international action, Iran has been playing up its oil wealth, its military might in strategic Gulf waters and its influence across the region -- such as in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #23 I'm not sure he's wrong, as mad as his comments make me. Ultimately I'm not sure we have the will for an all out bloody war. What I see is that we have a bunch of fools in this country that don't understand what a military and political achievement it's been for our troops to take control of an entire nation, begin retraining of that nation's military and rebuilding of the country, while being attacked by outside terrorists and rebels from Sadam's regime. We've only had 2367 deaths in that time period and the amount of Iraqi civilian deaths although much higher pales in comparison with past wars. History is going to look back at those figures in awe. What concerns me is that I don't think we would see the same thing in Iran. We can't just take out the nuke sites. At the very least there would be retaliation and large increase of US casualties in Iraq which would lead to more of our cowardly politicians voting to turn tail and run. I think it could overwhelm Bush at this point in time. It's also possible it would lead to the overthrow of more or less friendly Arab leaders, an attack on Israel and a much wider war then just Iran. Even in the best case scenerio, where our only concern is Iran, it will not be an easy nut to crack. I have no doubt we could obliterate the mullahs and their military, but with the differences in terrain, the amount of money that Iran is pouring into their military, and Iran having been able to observe our military in action and get some idea of how we operate, our casualties would be a lot higher. If people in this country can't handle under 2400 deaths in 3 years how are they going to handle 10 times that amount in a much shorter period of time? All of this doesn't even take into consideration the international response which would not be particularly in our favor. I do think it's going to have to be done, but I think it's going to take some sort of open action by Iran against Israel, or our forces, or another attack on this country by terrorists before we'll see it and by the time it actually comes to pass it'll be whole lot bloodier then it might have been. |
| Posted by: BillH 2006-04-14 22:58 |
| #22 WIll say again the RINO, agenda-less, Lefties/Commies-for-Fascism-for-Communism Dems have nuthin' and no one for 2008, and the anti-Bush-GOP MSM and Hollyweird isn't cutting it despite all the PC anti-Bush/America rants and Left-centric Reality- and Alternatism-themed shows. WILL SAY AGAIN THAT ITS HIGHLY DOUBTFUL HILLARY WILL RUN FOR POTUS OR WILL WANT TO BE POTUS AS LONG AS THE VARIOUS ROGUE CRISES REMAIN UNRESOLVED, i.e. aren't over. wid 2-3/4 years left in Dubya's term, IRAN andor NORTH KOREA, to include TAIWAN, will prob be the last Rogues Dubya and his boyz get to effectively deal with - Africa, etal. world states will be left to Dubya's REPUBLICAN successor. NEW 9-11's AND EAST-WEST GEOPOL CONFRONTATION IS ALL THE WEAK-AND GETTIN-WEAKER DEMOLEFT HAVE RIGHT NOW, WID OR WIDOUT THE CLINTONS, and whatever the Dems desire or need to do to forcibly usurp GOP pre-eminence HAS TO OCCUR NOW, NOW LATER, espec iff they expect Hillary to win the Presidency. WITHOUT NEW 9-11's OR EAST-WEST CONFRONTATION OVER IRAN-NORTH KOREA-TAIWAN, ITS DOUBTFUL THAT EVEN GORE, KERRY, OR DEAN, wid Hillary as VEEP?, WILL WIN IN 2008. NOt just new 9-11/s/Amer Hiroshimas, but new 9-11's/Amer Hiroshimas which destroy the credibility, iff not existence, of the GOP and its major candidates as a potent organized force and Party. The DemoLefties for 2008 need catasrophic events which are violent, NPE-minimum casualty-heavy, PC/PDeniable, AND ABOVE ALL SHORT LEAD TIMES TO CAMPAIGN FOR ELEX. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-04-14 20:27 |
| #21 Granwyth Hulatberi? You work for the Yes Men? |
| Posted by: Steve White 2006-04-14 19:32 |
| #20 What's the catch? |
| Posted by: Iblis 2006-04-14 18:54 |
| #19 Exactly what you would expect someone named Granwyth Hulatberi to say. My parents were mean and had an evil sense of humor. |
| Posted by: Granwyth Hulatberi 2006-04-14 18:46 |
| #18 The quoted general seems to assume the US would send in troops rather than simply bomb the snot out of everything we vet as a proper target. I think any kind of actual invasion is very unlikely. In fact I think, the first strike might be against the Mullahs. We just need assets in country to tell us when, and planes nearby enough to hit when the call comes in. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2006-04-14 18:37 |
| #17 Exactly what you would expect someone named Granwyth Hulatberi to say. |
| Posted by: Snins Jans1496 2006-04-14 18:36 |
| #16 you also post under a generated name There. I used my real name. Happy? |
| Posted by: Granwyth Hulatberi 2006-04-14 18:31 |
| #15 and you also post under a generated name, how courageous! Showtime's ineveitable. Hopefully the Persian/Kurds/etc. people will take the chance to take back the then smouldering hole they call a country |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-14 18:12 |
| #14 I think Show Time is coming up real soon... And I think the US will blow its wad early and nothing will come of it. Cheers. |
| Posted by: Chavirt Thrinelet3532 2006-04-14 18:03 |
| #13 he's already GPS - equipped - they scan for empty frontal lobes |
| Posted by: Frank G 2006-04-14 17:57 |
| #12 General Yahya Rahim Safavi, what's your cross-street? |
| Posted by: HammerHead 2006-04-14 17:48 |
| #11 Goes down after November mid-term elections. Open wide AhMad, bend over and spread em. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-04-14 17:18 |
| #10 My biggest worry: that we'll stomp all over their nuclear toys and set back their plans by a couple of years-- but without taking out the Mad Mullahs. That would be a horrible mistake. |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-04-14 17:14 |
| #9 Hoo-kay. Thanks for the invite. Don't mind if we pick the time, doya'? :-D |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2006-04-14 17:11 |
| #8 Not till after the summer. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-04-14 16:57 |
| #7 I have a real hinky feeling about this. I think Show Time is coming up real soon... |
| Posted by: Dave D. 2006-04-14 16:56 |
| #6 My biggest fear is he is right. Our military can demolish them. But thier people are just canon fodder to them. They would extend it out, and with our press constantely pounding on the reasons for attaching we would back off. It was my biggest fear in the Iraq war, and I'm not convinced we will finnish there. |
| Posted by: plainslow 2006-04-14 16:48 |
| #5 Bush is playing his cards close to his chest. Condi is spouting out the required State pablum. The military is not saying much, and neither is Rummy. Everything is just MSM wild speculation or Iranian bluster. I would imagine, and it is my fervent hope that most everything is prepositioned and ready to go. The sites will have to be taken out AND the MM regime decapitated. The stakes are too high for Israel (they would lose everything), for us, and like it or not, for the rest of the ME oil consuming nations, INCLUDING the Chicoms. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2006-04-14 16:31 |
| #4 You know, the funny part about this is that many of the dumbshits actually believe what they are saying. It's like nobody among their leaders ever read Jane's ships or armies of the world. "Ha ha! We are not frightened of your aircraft carrier!" (What do you mean, they have more than one?) |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-04-14 16:24 |
| #3 This being true, why do they need the weapon? Build villages so 44,000 people don't die when you have an earthquake. |
| Posted by: plainslow 2006-04-14 16:14 |
| #2 Mohamed ElBaradei...The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief must give a report at the end of April on Iranian compliance with the Security Council demand. In Tehran he said that after three years of investigations Iran's activities were "still hazy and not very clear". If Mo see's his shadow, does that mean six more weeks of winter? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2006-04-14 16:13 |
| #1 "Daylight come and we drop the bomb" |
| Posted by: Oztralian 2006-04-14 16:08 |