The White House has ended weeks of hesitation over how to respond to the Afghan election by accepting President Karzai as the winner despite evidence that up to 20 per cent of ballots cast may have been fraudulent.
Abandoning its previous policy of not prejudging investigations of vote rigging, the Obama Administration has conceded that Mr Karzai will be President for another five years on the basis that even if he were forced into a second round of voting he would almost certainly win it.
The decision will increase pressure on President Obama to justify further US troop deployments to Afghanistan to prop up a regime now regarded as systemically corrupt.
The acceptance was conveyed by Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, in a meeting with her Afghan counterpart hours before Mr Obama received a formal request from General Stanley McChrystal, the commander of Nato forces in Afghanistan, for up to 40,000 more troops.
#1
i dont see that the Times has sourced what, if i read it correctly, was a private message to the afghan govt.
I will wait to see an official announcement. It could have been the Times got this from an Afghan govt source - such sources are known to exaggerate things sometimes.
#3
okay, wapo seems to confirm this, but spins it differently.
One, its not a US decision, but a consensus among the western powers. Two, they are still pushing for a runoff - but they think Karzai will win a run off anyway, and so they are moving ahead with plans to work with him.
The simmering dispute over whether to deploy more British troops to Afghanistan boiled over today as the Tories and a former head of the army demanded urgent and more decisive action.
The Tories have picked their side. It's going to be an interesting election.
Military commanders have been pressing ministers for months to agree to send between 1,000 and 2,000 extra British troops to Helmand province to join the 9,000 already there.
General Stanley McChrystal, the US and Nato commander in Afghanistan, is asking the alliance for up to 40,000 extra troops to add to more than 100,000 already committed. But Britain only has scope for a "relatively small" troop increase in Afghanistan, the defence secretary, Bob Ainsworth, said today.
However, the former head of the army, General Sir Mike Jackson, said Britain should act with greater urgency at what was a critical time for the campaign. "When so much blood has already been expended, if this is a decisive year we should act decisively," he said. "The secretary of state talked of the difficulties of sustaining such numbers ... but if this is a critical year, I think we can do more."
Jackson added: "The decision is not one of military capacity. It is a matter of the politics of the situation." Britain has the capacity to increase troop levels over a short period, he said.
Nato chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen has said Americans should set aside any doubts about the commitment of other Nato members to the war in Afghanistan. In his first speech in the US as secretary-general, Mr Rasmussen said the campaign in Afghanistan was one of necessity, not choice.
Yes, but our president seems a little confused on the matter. Perhaps if you persuaded him that yours is the clever international position, Mr. Secretary-General...
The speech comes after the top US and Nato commander in Afghanistan warned of likely failure without more troops. But rising casualty figures have hit public support for the operation.
Mr Rasmussen pointed out 40% of the Nato troops involved in the operation were from non-US countries and that soldiers from more than 20 countries had been killed.
Shoring up the coalition is what this visit is all about, says the BBC's Paul Adams in Washington, and with that end in mind, Mr Rasmussen carefully avoided taking sides in the American troop debate.
"I'm a little concerned about the doubts I hear these days in the United States about Nato," Mr Rasmussen said in an address to the Atlantic Council think-tank. "Talking down the European and Canadian contributions - as some here in the US do, on occasion - can become a self-fulfilling prophesy."
He said he was aware of frustrations among US officials caused by "the restrictions some Nato nations put on their forces; by the time it takes Nato to take decisions; by the reluctance of some countries to send more forces to the mission, even for training.
"Let me be very clear. I understand those frustrations. I am already working hard to address those very real problems," he went on.
"While body count is no measure of solidarity, it is, unfortunately, a symbol of commitment. Over 20 countries have had their soldiers killed, some in large numbers," he says. "I will not accept from anyone the argument that Europeans and Canadians are not paying the price for success in Afghanistan. They are."
Canada and the UK, yes. The others? not so very much.
He added: "If we are to succeed in Afghanistan, it will only be if we do it together."
Mr Rasmussen also says the training programme for Afghan forces needs to be stepped up. "If Afghan security forces are to take the lead, they will need to be better trained, better equipped and likely more numerous, which means we are all going to have to invest more in training and equipping them."
Let's see ... who is it who has that task? I could have sworn it was the Europeans ....
Ruritanians ...
There are currently some 100,000 foreign soldiers in Afghanistan from more than 40 countries - more than 60,000 of them American.
Correspondents say that European countries are not expected to offer any significant increase in troops unless Washington takes the lead. The Netherlands and Canada have already set 2010 and 2011 as deadlines for withdrawal and Italy has announced plans for a "strong reduction" in its forces.
#1
This crap is getting out of hand. Israel should respond forcefully to the UK diplomatically, either setting up barriers to UK tourism (that is, not let the hostile left tourists into the country), or go the nation-nation route and expel a few attaches from the British embassy.
Make it clear to the UK that this nonsense had better stop.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il apparently explained the deletion of the word "communism" from the country's constitution, which was revised in April. "It is difficult to comprehend communism. I will try to get socialism right," Kim was reported as saying by a spokesman for the state-run Minju Chosun newspaper.
The spokesman was talking to South Korean reporters on the sidelines of inter-Korean family reunions in Mt. Kumgang. "This is the reason behind the deletion of 'communism' from the constitution," he said. "Communism is meant to be a one-class society where there is no distinction between exploiter and exploited, but that system cannot exist while American imperialism lasts."
Whereas 'juche' is meant to be a one-class society where everyone works for the Dear Leader.
The term "communism" has been removed from clauses 29, 40 and 43 of the revised constitution, disclosed for the first time on Monday by South Korean officials who obtained a copy.
"It appears that North Korea has decided it is better to be flexible stance and reform the system from a socialist perspective rather than continue droning on about something as anachronistic as communism," said Kim Yong-hyun, a North Korean studies professor at Dongkuk University. "Through these changes, North Korea appears to be sending out a message that Kim Jong-il is firmly in control and leading the country."
Meanwhile, Clause 100 of the revised constitution stipulates, "The chairman of the National Defense Committee is the supreme leader," officially recognizing Kim Jong-il's absolute power. Clause 101 stipulates that Kim's term will last as long as the committee exists, and Clause 102 states he serves as the commander in chief of the military. Those clauses did not exist before.
The North Korean leader also formally assumes "special pardoning rights," previously the domain of the Presidium of the Supreme People's Assembly, as well as the right to ratify and scrap important treaties, declare states of emergency or war and mobilize the military. Clause 8 stipulates that it is the state's responsibility to protect the human rights of citizens. The old constitution held the state responsible only for the people's safety and welfare.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Angling for a fistful of Euros?
Posted by: ed ||
09/29/2009 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
IIRC PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM > JAPAN ABANDONS THE USA/AMERICA.
North Korea wants a "goodwill" response from South Korea now that reunions of separated families are resuming, it said Saturday. Yoo Chong-ha, the president of the South Korean Red Cross, on Sunday quoted his North Korean counterpart Jang Jae-on as saying, "The North has extended a special goodwill gesture in resuming family reunions. How about the South doing the same in return?"
The two Red Cross chiefs met at the Mt. Kumgang resort, where the first round of reunions was held over the weekend.
Jang was apparently in a roundabout way asking for rice and fertilizer aid, suspended since the Lee Myung-bak administration's inauguration, since the Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun administrations had tacitly given such aid as a kind of payment for the family reunions.
Yoo was talking to the press at the Mt. Kumgang Hotel. "The North did not specifically mention rice or fertilizer," he said. "I said that we will do whatever the Red Cross can, such as medical aid for the elderly and children. But I also said that matters like rice and fertilizer aid have to be decided by the government since they require spending taxpayers' money" he added.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
With the international community tightening economic sanctions on North Korean entities for their alleged involvement in nuclear and weapons activities, Pyongyang is ever more eager to earn hard currency. One of the few options for the regime to get foreign dollars is to rely on its own labor exports. VOA's Korean Service reporter Young Ran-jeon recently visited Vladivostok, Russia and filed this report voiced by Kate Woodsome. Pseudonyms were used to protect the workers interviewed for this story.
In Russia's largest port city on the Pacific Ocean, Vladivostok, several small-framed Asian men are bustling around a half-built apartment building, trying to move large metal beams. They are North Koreans sent out by their government to earn much-needed foreign currency for the country.
Kim Dong-gil came from North Korea's second largest city of Hamhung. He brags that North Korean workers have the best skills in the Russian construction market, which is also filled with laborers from Central Asia and Vietnam. The estimated 5,000 North Koreans in Vladivostok come from various backgrounds and even include doctors.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
In his first speech since taking the job, he said all 28 members of the transatlantic alliance were spending their "blood and treasure" on a mission of critical importance.
At the same time, the former Danish prime minister urged European nations to "be more flexible" and loosen the caveats that often prevent them getting involved in hostile action.
He said Europe must also provide more manpower and more funds for training the police and army in order to begin a credible transition to Afghan-dominated leadership of security.
"I am concerned about the doubts I hear in the United States these days about Nato," said Mr Rasmussen in his first speech in Washington since taking office two months ago.
Acknowledging years of American frustration, he added: "Some look at the operation in Afghanistan and wonder if Europeans have the will to fight, some wonder if the Europeans have the capability to fight, others think the days of strong transatlantic bonds are a relic of the past.
"Many Americans are losing sight of what Nato is and how much it does in the interests of American security and international security. I am not sure it gets a much visibility in the US as it deserves."
Pointing to the 9,000 additional non-US troops who have joined the Afghan effort in the past 18 months, he said: "Talking down the European and Canadian contributions as some in the United States do on occasion can become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The allies are not running from the fight as much as the conventional wisdom says."
Mr Rasmussen also delivered his dual message that Nato must do more but Americans need to show Europeans more appreciation to President Barack Obama at the White House.
Their discussion came at a critical juncture, with the US administration deep in debate about what course to follow in Afghanistan after receiving a grim progress report and a demand for 40,000 more troops from Gen Stanley McChrystal, the senior commander in the field.
Mr Rasmussen is thought to support a ramping up of the mission and was expected to tell the president that Nato was committed to the fight in Afghanistan and that unity within the alliance was essential.
The Dane pleased his high-powered audience of White House aides, senators and diplomats at the Atlantic Council with a firm commitment that Nato would stay in Afghanistan "for as long as it takes to succeed".
"That's not something you hear from a lot of European leaders," said Kurt Volker, a former US ambassador to Nato.
Mr Rasmussen said he supported Gen McChrystal's analysis that a "more comprehensive approach" was required, based more on protecting the Afghan population and less on military victories.
Though he was not prepared to comment on the commander's request for extra forces, he added: "We are all going to have to invest more in training and equipping [the Afghan army], because they are not ready now. It is a very simple calculation: we have to do more now, if we want to be able to do less later."
However, back in Sweden, an informal meeting of European defence ministers expressed reluctance to send a significant number of reinforcements.
"If you look at Europe, I don't hear any voices saying we have an additional five or ten thousand soldiers to send to Afghanistan," said Soren Gade, the Danish defence minister and a former colleague of Mr Rasmussen.
#2
authorities continue to try to deport him to Morocco, which has issued an international warrant for his arrest. But for now, he is a free man in Canada.
So how does that work? No extradition treaty with Morocco?
TRAVELLERS on the metro in the US capital risk coming facing to face with al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, smiling and wearing an "I Love Guantanamo" T-shirt.
The irreverent billboard image of America's No.1 enemy, just a short distance from the White House, is part of an activist campaign aimed at highlighting that al-Qaeda uses the US detention centre as a recruiting tool.
The metro billboard is "to remind policymakers that torture is illegal, unethical and a top recruiting tool for the terrorist leader Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network", creators from the Avaaz activist group said.
Avaaz believes Guantanamo is a potent symbol for the "war on terror" torture excesses of former president George W. Bush and that al-Qaeda plays on this fact to pull in new members.
Another poster presents former vice-president Dick Cheney, who has ardently defended the controversial interrogation techniques of the Bush-era, begging the question: "Could this be al-Qaeda's best recruiter?"
President Barack Obama, who has vowed to shut the camp by January, is shown in a third poster, looking pensive, alongside a slogan from his inauguration speech: "We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals."
The advertisement campaign aimed at shutting the detention centre at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is being run at Farragut North metro station, one of the closest to the White House, and in the Washington Post daily newspaper.
Defence Secretary Robert Gates said on Monday that the complexities of trying to re-house the 223 inmates still at Guantanamo meant it was "going to be tough" to meet Mr Obama's January 22 deadline for the camp's closure.
#1
Well, I used to support the Guantanamo internment for Al Qaeda prisoners. That said, after seeing this sign, I have changed my mind. I will now vote for Demorats from now on. Thank you for the enlightenment!
#2
Not to worry ol Binny, when we capture you your heart will not be beating long enough to make it to Gitmo...
Im with you Maggie. I prefer a dear leader that would rather beg the Olympic committee for the games to come to America than spend the hour to read the strategic plan for Afghanistan thus defending America. (NOT!)
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
09/29/2009 16:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
And the prospects of suffering all eternity in Hell is the best recruiting tool of the devil.
The Navy's new mission of protecting Europe from ballistic-missile attacks has widespread implications for the surface fleet, potentially affecting everything from deployment schedules to crewing arrangements to command-and-control procedures for cruisers and destroyers.
Ballistic-missile defense warships have become the keystone in a new national strategy to shield European allies from potential attacks by Iran. Rather than field sensors and missiles on the ground in Poland and the Czech Republic, the U.S. will first maintain a presence of at least two or three Aegis BMD ships in the waters around Europe, starting in 2011.
That announcement -- which defined a new mission for the surface force: continent defense -- immediately raised many questions that Navy planners must answer over the next two years:
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So an Iranian missile that is capable of hitting Central Europe (about 2000 miles) would have an apogee of about 500 miles. The SM-3 satellite shoot down occurred at an altitude of 150 miles with the ship preplaced at a highly advantageous location. This is going to work.
Posted by: ed ||
09/29/2009 0:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
apogee of about 500 miles = about 500 km.
Good night all.
Posted by: ed ||
09/29/2009 2:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The Cold War OFFENSIVE Strategic Triad is now the DEFENSIVE TRIAD.
Should prove intewesting, as the PLAN is repor considering dev OFFENSIVE ARSENAL/FIRE-SHIPS equipped wid multiple VLS, among other, + as part of their anti-USN, anti- Aircraft Carrier strategy - WILL THE USN ON ITS PART DEV "DEFENSIVE" ARSENAL/FIRE-SHIPS???
#4
> The {US} Navy's new mission of protecting Europe from ballistic-missile attacks has widespread implications for the surface fleet, potentially affecting everything from deployment schedules to crewing arrangements to command-and-control procedures for cruisers and destroyers.
#6
BP, that's a point for the next US president to press because the current one certainly won't. Bambi doesn't even believe in missile defense and the shield isn't really going to be operational before 2012 or so. So the 45th president is going to have to lay the tab for this in front of the EU, or else the ships sail home.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 7:44 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Gee, I've been pointing out that massive military welfare that's been in existence since the early 70s when Western Europe attained a combined population and GDP equal to that of the US. All we got were excuses and kept footing the bill. When the Wall went down there was no reason to keep anyone there. Something about entangling alliances. Now with a financial Mount Pinatubo [which was finally the last card to get us out of the Philippines}, maybe we can pull way back. In the words of the Emperor Honorius to the citizens of Roman Britannia, see to your own defense.
#10
well congrats Para, but I havent seen that concern expressed regarding the land based BDM elsewhere.
I have different POV about the cold war era. Since 1992, the US presence in Germany, it could be argued was as much about having a launching pad for actions in the mideast as anything else. Anyway, with Russia on the rise, Im not sure this is the ideal time to pull out. I do want to see more euro commitment in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere though.
#1
MORE, MORE.
Stab'em, hack'em , cut their throats,
Kill the baddies they fear the most,
Axes, firearms, Through their hearts,
Whack them all, Kill those Farts.
Corny, but it rhymes.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
09/29/2009 14:30 Comments ||
Top||
ISLAMABAD: Nobody should try to instruct Pakistan on how it should conduct the war on terror, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani said on Monday.
Oh of course not! The Paks are the masters of terrorism ...
He told journalists Pakistan was fighting the war on terror in its own interest and was not acting as a proxy. The army, the political leadership and the people are united in the war against the terrorists, the APP news agency reported him as saying.
To questions, the premier said Pakistan had not received any aid through the Kerry-Lugar Bill yet, adding any discussion on the matter of its usage was premature at this point. To questions on drone attacks in Balochistan, Gilani said the US should not conduct drone strikes anywhere in Pakistan. Anyone who has any information in this regard should come forward and share it with us and the government will itself carry out the required action, he added.
Also on Monday, the prime minister told a French Senate delegation at PM House that friendly nations should enhance their support for Pakistan. Friendly countries should help Pakistan combat militancy, particularly in the capacity-building of law enforcement agencies, as they have already exhausted most of their laser-guided ammunition in the military operation in Malakand and FATA, he said. He said urgent replacement of night-vision goggles, helicopters and drone technology was required. Gilani also said he was anticipating President Nicolas Sarkozys visit to Pakistan early next year to sign framework agreements on further defence and economic cooperation.
During the meeting, delegation chief Josselin de Rohan lauded Pakistans role in the war on terror and assured Gilani of Frances complete support. It would not be possible to succeed in this effort without Pakistans efforts, he said. Rohan also said he would convey the Pakistani law enforcement agencies requirements for ammunition and military hardware to his government.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
MURDER charges against a US Marine accused of slaying an unarmed Iraqi prisoner in Fallujah in 2004 were dismissed today, a military spokesman confirmed.
A spokesman at the US Marines Camp Pendleton base outside San Diego said a charge of unpremeditated murder against Jermaine Nelson was dismissed after the 28-year-old sergeant pleaded not guilty. Nelson admitted one count of dereliction of duty. Sentencing is to be decided later, the spokesman said.
Nelson was the last of three Marines to face charges in connection with the case, which related to the death of Iraqi detainees during fierce fighting in Fallujah five years ago.
Another Marine, Ryan Weemer, was cleared at a court martial earlier this year, while a former soldier, Jose Nazario, was tried and acquitted of manslaughter by a civilian court in 2008.
The case came to light in 2006 when Weemer told a US Secret Service agent during a job interview he had been involved in an unlawful killing in Iraq. The admission triggered an investigation that led to charges against Weemer, Nazario and Nelson.
Prosecutors said the Marines had killed four detainees rather than process them as prisoners. During Weemer's court martial his lawyers said he had shot the prisoner during a "life and death struggle" when the detainee lunged for a weapon.
At Nazario's trial, prosecutors alleged the soldier had shot dead two captives himself before ordering two subordinates to kill the others. However the prosecution's case was weakened after Nelson and Weemer refused to testify and were declared in contempt of court.
Listed below are some details about Iran's military capability. The totals include equipment held by the Revolutionary Guards, which operate on land, at sea and in the air:
ARMED FORCES:
Iran has over 523,000 personnel in active service. Major General Ataollah Salehi is the armed forces chief.
MISSILES:
In a 2007 parade to mark the anniversary of 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, Iran showed its Shahab 3 missile, saying it could travel 2,000 km -- enabling it to hit Israel and U.S. bases in the region. Another missile at the parade, the Ghadr 1, can reach targets 1,800 km away. It was believed to be the first time it has been shown publicly. In November 2008, Iran said it test-fired a Sejjil missile with a range of close to 2,000 km.
ARMY:
The army comprises about 350,000 men, including 220,000 conscripts. 350,000 less 220,000 leaves 130,000 professional cadres. The 220,000 can be dismissed as cannon fodder, which is how they were used in the Iran-Iraq War. The Iranian military as at the bottom of the ayatollahs' trust totem. The ayatollahs used the war to burn off a significant part of the shah-era officers' corps. Add in the ethnic (and language) divisions and the structure becomes even more shaky: Turkic-speaking Azeris make up a quarter of the population. There are significant (but not as large) groups of Arabs, Kurds, and Baluchis.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, viewed as the most loyal guardian of the ruling system, has another 125,000 men. IRGC is the ayatollahs' attempt at an "SS," loyal to the regime before the state. To me, they're a seedy-looking lot, given to strutting and posing and making faces. I could be wrong, though.
In 2004 the army was organised in four corps, with four armored divisions and six infantry divisions. I dunno if that's four corps, each with four armored and six infantry divisions, which sounds pretty heavy, or four corps each with an armored division and 1.5 infantry divisions, which'd be more believable. My guess would be the latter.
There are 1,600 tanks including some 100 Zulfiqar locally produced main battle tanks. Zulfiqar's a first-generation effort, if I recall, using bits and pieces of M48, M60 technology for the suspension and the 125mm main gun from the T72. I don't know what kind of armor it has. I doubt if an Abrams would care.
A large number of Iran's tanks are elderly British-made Chieftains and U.S.-made M-60s. These are known among modern armies as "targets"...
Soviet-made T-54 and T-55s, T-59s, T-62s, and T-72s were also part of the inventory, all captured from the Iraqis or acquired from North Korea and China. The T54 was originally introduced in... ummm... 1954. It has an 85mm main gun. The T55 was introduced a year later and has a 100mm main gun, though otherwise pretty much the same tank. The T59 is the Chinese version of the T54A. The T62 was introduced in (wait for it!) 1962. It has a 115mm main gun and the autoejector had the bad habit of missing the slot and sending the shell casing whizzing around the inside of the turret at high speed, occasionally taking off part of the gunner's or loader's head. It was a spectacular flop on Afghan roads. The T72 was the export version of the T64, which the Sovs kept for themselves. It lacked some of the niceties of the T64, particularly the armor, but it was cheaper to build. I think it had the same 125mm main gun.
The Iraqis had lots of Soviet tanks in the First Gulf War (and in the more recent festivities as well). One of the things our guys liked best about them was their active IR: that big-ass infrared searchlight mounted next to the main gun on the turrets. This was supposed to allow the gunners to search out infantry and other targets at night. Our tanks use passive IR, so those nice big searchlights made really neat aiming points at some pretty extreme distances.
A report from the International Institute for Strategic Studies says that some of the tanks' serviceability may be in doubt. Yeah. I hear their trebuchets' serviceability might be in doubt, too. Their caltrops are pretty well kept, though.
There are around 640 armored personnel carriers. There are 8,196 artillery pieces of which 2,010 are towed, and over 310 are self-propelled. 8,196 artillery pieces less 2,010 leaves 6,186, less 310 leaves 5,876 that are neither towed nor self-propelled. I suppose that means they're pack howitzers, like the U.S. army used to pack around on mules in 1944 or thereabouts. Or maybe they're talking about mortars. NAVY:
There are 18,000 naval personnel. The navy has its headquarters at Bandar-e Abbas. Iran's navy has three Russian Kilo class submarines, three frigates and two corvettes.
As of 2001 the regular Iranian navy was in a state of overall obsolescence, and in poor shape because they had not been equipped with modern ships and weapons. The readiness of the three frigates is doubtful, and the two nearly 40-year-old corvettes do not have sophisticated weapons.
In late 2007 Iran launched a new locally made submarine and a navy frigate named as Jamaran. Jane's Defence Weekly has reported that Iran was also building missile-launching frigates copied from 275-tonne Kaman fast attack missile craft originally purchased from France in the late 1970s.
AIR FORCE:
The air force has some 30,000 personnel and 319 combat aircraft. However, serviceability may be as low as around 60 percent for U.S. aircraft types and 80 percent for Russian aircraft. There are F-14 and MiG 29 aircraft. There are also some aircraft impounded from Iraq -- Russian-built Sukhoi Su-24s and 25s. Iran also has transport aircraft and helicopters and one less AWACS plane.
In September 2007, Iran said it had tested two new domestically-produced jet fighters. State television said the Saegheh was a new generation of the Azarakhsh (Lightning) fighter. Iran said it was being built on an industrial scale.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
How high can they shoot?
Posted by: ed ||
09/29/2009 2:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
1990's NET > ISLAMIST IRAN = RADICLA MULLAHS "ACE" AGZ US or US-ALLIED ATTACK + INVASION is
* IRANIAN NUCBOMB + related STRATWEAPONIZATION.
* Unwillingness of anti-US World Powers to accept US-NATO control or domin of Iran's oil.
#4
Remember, Iraq at one point had the fourth largest army in the world. Then something happened to it ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 7:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Analysts are great at counting tubes and boots, but avoid developing 'combat effectiveness' measures that are subjective. One is simply bean counting and safe from commitment. The other is an art and subject to postmortem judgment. You don't stay employed in the latter without a sustained track record.
#9
Iran fought the Fourth Largest Army in the World® to a standstill over eight years of trench and missile warfare.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/29/2009 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Smaller by a couple of planes than it used to be....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/29/2009 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#11
They have a number of Special operations brigades that operate globally. They have proxy militias, Hammas etc.. that operate as well. This is good, cold war analysis, tank on tank stuff but the way we fight has changed. How many special operations teams in the Navy, how do they employ, what is their specialty, etc... Otherwise we will be counting tanks and they will be killing Americans.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
09/29/2009 17:16 Comments ||
Top||
#12
quibble - not all Azeris are necessarily disloyal to the regime. IIUC many Azeris who live in Teheran are assimilated, strongly fundamendalist, and more loyal than most ethnic farsis. In contrast to the Azeris in Tabriz.
European Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana said on Monday he was concerned about Iran's test firing of missiles amid growing tensions over the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions.
"Everything that is done in that context is a concern," he said on the sidelines of a meeting of EU defense ministers in Sweden, the current holder of the revolving presidency of the bloc.
Solana said last week's disclosure by Tehran that it is building a second uranium enrichment plant was something that had to be resolved "immediately" with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
When asked what sanctions Iran should face if it failed to comply with Western demands over its nuclear program, Solana said "now is not the time to talk about that."
It never is, is it ...
The EU official added that the aim of Thursday's talks in Geneva was "engagement, engagement."
Meanwhile, a Russian Foreign Ministry source told Interfax news agency on Monday that Russia was urging restraint from the international community in reaction to the Iranian missile launches.
"We should not give way to emotions now," the source said. "We should try to calm down and the main thing is to launch a productive negotiations process [with Iran]."
One that ends up with Iran having the bomb, the source almost added ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/29/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Already starting to downgrade the expectations, it seems.
#2
look at todays NYT. French and German (and Israeli) intell is considerably more concerned about reports of an Iranian warhead program than is US intell.
The upcoming visit by Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal Mekdad is the first in about five years and is part of US efforts to improve strained relations with Damascus.
Mekdad, who is currently in New York as part of the Syrian delegation to the UN General Assembly meetings, was to fly to Washington on Monday for talks with US government officials on "a range of issues," the embassy official said.
Mekdad's visit was part of "a continuing dialogue" with the Syrian government that began in March, the official said, without giving details. The official spoke on condition of anonymity in line with government regulations.
Mekdad's visit comes amid rising tensions between Syria and Iraq after Baghdad accused Damascus of serving as a launching pad for violence in Iraq. Iraq is demanding Syria hand over two members of Saddam Hussein's now-outlawed Baath Party who are blamed by Iraq for the August 19 truck bombings that killed more than 100 people in Baghdad.
Syria rejected Iraq's request, saying it had failed to provide evidence implicating the two suspects.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il apparently explained the deletion of the word "communism" from the country's constitution, which was revised in April. "It is difficult to comprehend communism. I will try to get socialism right," Kim was reported as saying by a spokesman for the state-run Minju Chosun newspaper.
North Korea wants a "goodwill" response from South Korea now that reunions of separated families are resuming, it said Saturday. Yoo Chong-ha, the president of the South Korean Red Cross, on Sunday quoted his North Korean counterpart Jang Jae-on as saying, "The North has extended a special goodwill gesture in resuming family reunions. How about the South doing the same in return?" 
