Article

2005-08-22 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 02:38|| || Front Page|| [11136 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Granted, some handwrining. Fact is, the EU-3 angle is a surrogate for going to the UN because the UNSC and IAEA are disinclined to do anything constructive.

Funding the anti-regime elements sounds same as Michael Ledeen.

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 07:46|| 2005-08-22 07:46|| Front Page Top

#2 Iran is a big problem and the US knows it. But what can they do? Right now the large Iranian contingent in Iraq is mainly quiet regarding Coalition forces (concentrating on enforcing Sharia among the Iraqis and 'hustling' votes), but if the US were to bomb Isfahan (for example) I expect there would be major attacks on US logistics lines across the south. The US does not have a large enough force to maintain current operations in the center AND effectively defend its supply lines against Iran.
Even if Europe wanted to help (ha!) they don't have the ability to field a militarily significant force.
Whatever gets done about Iran in the near term is going to have to be covert and have at least some 'deniability'. 'Vandalism' against electricity network, rail or pipeline 'accidents', perhaps even a 'Three Mile Island' event?

Posted by glenmore">glenmore 2005-08-22 08:00|| 2005-08-22 08:00|| Front Page Top

#3 Iran, russia, china, and NKor have us over a barrel right now because of Iraq. But they arent thinking about the future, we'll be done in Iraq eventually and Sauron's eye will turn to these assholes. Then, they will want to negotiate, talk compromise, and make deals. With the exception of China, I think.
China will either tear itself apart like russia 1991 or we will have to do a major cold-war type build up to protect ourselves from them, the others will fade away when we free up from Iraq.
Just one guys prediction, but I don't think Iran, Nkor or russia have the ability or money in the latter two's cases to cause us much trouble in the long run.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2005-08-22 11:24|| 2005-08-22 11:24|| Front Page Top

#4 Illusions of a Spartan empire .com? Let's not fool ourselves into that one, the annual "our Town" presentation in Mansfield Ohio during the cold war was the closest we've come to the platonic state, and that was a boy scouts/DOD war propoganda PR illusion.

Or is this new Ephialtes you speak of ushering in the OWG? Smells of moonbat conspiracy theory, you been reading too much Kos?

Regardless, do you really think the Persians are going to do dick to put down this govt of theirs? Sadly, the current Iranian powers represent their best and brightest, mostly because they kill all who oppose them and indoctrinate all others. Otherwise the smart ones moved to America or Europe.

The infrastructure for an Iranian revolt is not there or we'd have already moved on it. Rather the Iranian infrastrucutre for a new shiia Iraq is well in place. As is the destruction of the Sunni minority, good riddance? Maybe not, they've been a solid balancing force against the Persians since the British propped up Faisal almost a century ago.

We're playing pinball with the deaf dumb and blind kid when we play pinball in Iran. So fuck playing pinball, that dream is dead, so let's move on.

Maybe we could generate some regional revolts but any serious plans for revolution? kaput.

And what, we take the leash off the Israeli bulldog?

Yeah, we're gonna do that and incur the PR wrath of the civilized world, cause make no mistakes they'll use the nukes we gave em if we let the leash go. And then we and the Israelis will be responsible for unleashing the first nukes since 1942.

Doubtful, much more likely we're going to see a new nuclear powered bunch of Mad Mullahs in Iran.

Leave it up to the Europeans to fuck up a situation royally, or at least to do what we expected them to do. Pacify.

So what option is left? An option I have seen you deny here previously, War with Iran.

What eventuality of yours am I missing?

Jesus coming down and smiting them?

Because all I see is a new nuclear armed enemy and a recipe for disaster.

Indeed I advocate that we unchain Mars on the Iranians and let slip the dogs of war, but I dine alone with my opinion very often. Noone seems to have the stomach for a real war anymore, if you would be able to call rolling over Syria and Iran a real war.

You smell of State Department employ with this revolution talk, let me guess after the Army and Laos, Dusseldorf, a closet office with a view of the Potomac, Jakarta, then Doha and maybe Sana'a, Muscat or Tunis, then Dhahran by way of some private consulting for an energy or defense contractor?

What say you .com?

Retired

Posted by Finally Retired 2005-08-22 14:11|| 2005-08-22 14:11|| Front Page Top

#5 hey Retarded, you must not stay up with RB or you'd know .com/PD's history.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-08-22 15:16|| 2005-08-22 15:16|| Front Page Top

#6 I'm sorry, Do you speak for .com? He didn't mention that in his posting. So,until he does

If I want any clarification on his postings or career from you I'll ask YOU, until then, don't assume I give a shit what you have to say.

Retired

Posted by Finally Retired 2005-08-22 15:56|| 2005-08-22 15:56|| Front Page Top

#7 :-) thanks

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-08-22 16:04|| 2005-08-22 16:04|| Front Page Top

#8 Be careful what you ask for, FR. You don't know .com, but you will soon. You just painted a target on your chest.

Posted by Darrell 2005-08-22 16:04|| 2005-08-22 16:04|| Front Page Top

#9 BTW numbnutz - "the nukes WE gave them"? Prove it. Britain and France enabled the Israeli nukes.

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-08-22 16:32|| 2005-08-22 16:32|| Front Page Top

#10 You smell of State Department employ with this revolution talk, let me guess after the Army and Laos, Dusseldorf, a closet office with a view of the Potomac, Jakarta, then Doha and maybe Sana'a, Muscat or Tunis, then Dhahran by way of some private consulting for an energy or defense contractor?

oh, now THIS is going to be fun!

Popcorn, anyone?

Posted by lotp 2005-08-22 16:42|| 2005-08-22 16:42|| Front Page Top

#11 Lol. Spartan empire illusions? WTF? Are you senile? What are you rambling on, about, anyway? And ramble you do - that's an almost worthless post. A collection of half-assed pseudo-thought - and pointedly unkind.

You obviously completely misread my comment - and you blather BS out your ass like a fool. Re-reading it, I can NOT see where the fuck you got your notions.

If you re-read it, very very slowly, I'm skewering the editorial assholes who are wringing their hands (a new low for WSJ/OJ, IMHO) and the traitorous dithering of our erstwhile allies - and laying a turd on Russia's doorstep (for their assisting the Mad Mullahs).

All of those I named are playing the part of Ephialtes. Are you sure you know who he was - your comments indicate you don't really know dick about the real meaning of Thermopylae. Will Bush be Leonidas? At the moment, he is - and he's planning, looking for his Thermopylae chokepoint battleground - Xerxes is till far away, by most estimates. The analogy fits the current situation all too well -- I am advocating a very different ending must be decided upon. There are three parties who can act to change the outcome of Mullahs acquiring nukes. At least one must act. How could I be clearer - and how the fuck could you have missed it? Blinded by your own brain farts?

What FrankG said in #5 is spot-on: I want the MM's and the entire Mad Mullah structure DEAD. Take a reading comprehension course - or STFU when you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

I've been advocating a strike against Iran since, at least, Oct, 2003 (comment #2). I began talking it about in those terms in April, 2003 (comment #8 - I posted as 'PD' back then) - that's awhile back, wouldn't you agree? Loooong before most folks. Sheesh, wotta pisser to have some nitwit come along more than 2 YEARS later and call me a limp-wrist, lol. I summarized what I though the options were in July, 2004 (comment #7) and again in Jan, 2005 comment #29).

Go ahead, read those links. You need the education. Then, when you realize what a jerk you were to post an attack, assuming you're even remotely honest with yourself, hie thee back into retirement. Oh, and kiss my hairy ass for attacking without a scintilla of understanding or even an effort to do so before spewing.

HAND / FOAD.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 16:58|| 2005-08-22 16:58|| Front Page Top

#12 Sigh, Several typos. Guess I got excited. Oh, and I forgot, you senile asstard, fuck off.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:02|| 2005-08-22 17:02|| Front Page Top

#13 Any of that popcorn left?

Posted by TomC 2005-08-22 17:03|| 2005-08-22 17:03|| Front Page Top

#14 TomC - Buttered or plain?

---

Bring it on, FR. I was too nice. Let's have another round, asshole.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:07|| 2005-08-22 17:07|| Front Page Top

#15 yup, i gotta back that up. Dot com, with whom im often in strong disagreement, is one for hitting the mullahs hard.

Myself, I have no idea how easy a hit would be to pull off. Doesnt mean I think it CANT be pulled off, i just dont think the relevant info is in the public domain.

and for alot of reasons I think a democratic revolution in Iran would be more desirable. And no, I dont think that it hasnt happened yet means it wont happen.

Posted by liberalhawk 2005-08-22 17:11|| 2005-08-22 17:11|| Front Page Top

#16 By all means buttered, it goes better with a good Pilsner and counts as a both a vegetable and dairy serving in the food pyramid.

Posted by TomC 2005-08-22 17:13|| 2005-08-22 17:13|| Front Page Top

#17 "democratic revolution in Iran"

Lh - Absolutely the desired option, I couldn't agree more - and I, too, hold out some small hope. If we had a CIA worthy of the name... Sigh. For the Persians to swing the Mullahs from the lampposts, themselves, would be even sweeter than blowing them to tiny bits with Holy TLAMs.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:16|| 2005-08-22 17:16|| Front Page Top

#18 Lol, TC. Vegetable? Okaaaay, if you say so, heh.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:16|| 2005-08-22 17:16|| Front Page Top

#19 Damn, .com.

If I would stop being lazy and post more do you think I would attract my very own nimrods to play with too? LOL

Posted by Laurence of the Rats">Laurence of the Rats 2005-08-22 17:19|| http://www.punictreachery.com/]">[http://www.punictreachery.com/] 2005-08-22 17:19|| Front Page Top

#20 Lol, LotR, sure! Just post, at some length - a few solid paragraphs will do the trick, on any topic and some comprehension-challenged turd will pop up. They float, y'know. ;-)

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:24|| 2005-08-22 17:24|| Front Page Top

#21 .com, agree about the WSJ. Don't feel like doing Iran again. It's only been a week and this is the end of August. What are the chances this editorial was written by Bret Stephens? I'll bet so and that he'll ruin the page.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-08-22 17:32|| 2005-08-22 17:32|| Front Page Top

#22 Mrs D - I don't know who the Stephens character you mention is, and the article doesn't identify who wrote it, but since they published it, well, that must mean that the Chief Editor signed off on it - and that really sucks. Sounded like Arnaud de Borchgrave at UPI / Wash Times to me, and that means bland, half-baked, nuanced shit, IMHO. Not something I would have associated with WSJ/OJ. Sigh.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:37|| 2005-08-22 17:37|| Front Page Top

#23 Bret Stephens was the guy who stuck up for Eason Jordan in the WEF flap and also the guy who had dinner with the anti-American German ambassador but wouldn't argue with the guy becasue he didn't want to break up the wives' friendship but then wrote an article about it. There was one other thing but I can't recall it now. Anyway, he's a growing power on the editorial page but seems to have a little too much of that Eastern elitist inside the beltway attitude for what I want to see when I'm drinking my first coffee. Robert Barkley was right when he said the WSJ was the only editorial page that sold a newspaper along with it as opposed to vice versa.

Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-08-22 17:45|| 2005-08-22 17:45|| Front Page Top

#24 A free and truly democratic Iran, hell yea. I might even be inclined to trust them with reactors. The Mad Mullahs no way, not ever.

The choice of how Iran is dealt with is up the the people of Iran. At some point in the undetermined future I have a feeling the people of Iraq will regret not taking to the streets and stringing up the "revolutionaries" if they don't act soon. A genuine revolt that is fully internal so no one can represent that some foreign hand was behind it.

Finally Retired don't act like an asshat.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0Ã¯Â¿Â½ Doom 2005-08-22 17:45|| 2005-08-22 17:45|| Front Page Top

#25 Mrs D - Oh, okay, that fool. I was with the crowd that thought he was a dick for not taking his so-called "host" on. Indeed, he is not cut from the same cloth as the others, Taranto, et al, that we've come to trust - almost unique in the MSM for me.

SPo'D - Amen. I wouldn't mind helping them with arms, planning, and even SF to take out hardpoints and protect their oil infrastructure during the real revolution. But without a functioning humint element in the CIA, that's not very likely. Perhaps, and this is very possible, the Israelis or others have penetrated Iran sufficiently to make up, somewhat, for the CIA's emasculation at the hands of Tenet and others. It would be soooo sweet...

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 17:57|| 2005-08-22 17:57|| Front Page Top

#26 You all applaud abu Troll Slicer, all I saw was a squished Bunny. Maker me weep. Reminds LOl ummm.. remnd LOL LOL hhhaaaaaaaaaa reminds me of frogger.

Posted by Shipman 2005-08-22 18:49|| 2005-08-22 18:49|| Front Page Top

#27 That was cruel. LOL! I could see in me little minds eye the trajectory of the response, LOL! sorry. Maybe things will work out. I remain positive.

Posted by Shipman 2005-08-22 18:52|| 2005-08-22 18:52|| Front Page Top

#28 If I weren't so busy picking dogshit up out of the yard, I'd have responded to your idiotic rantings sooner .com. Dogshit nonetheless.

I give you too much credit.com, you aren't an old State Dep. hack, you are a complete fucking idiot. Or else you'd know what the fuck I'm referring to when I point to the father of Athenian democracy, you fucknut.

However, let me digress in my criticism to say yes, Thermopylae is an excellent reference, and not the one I thought you were making with Ephialtes.Wrong Ephialtes, my misinterpretation.

However, that being said, go fuck yourself while the real warriors fight in the shade, that reference better for you asswipe? You're soooooo fucking bright for bringing in a historical reference. Everyone clap for .com today. hoorah, you fucking tool.

If I were attacking your comments, you'd have known it. I was trying to ascertain what your posting was advocating. I thought war with Iran, you obviously had sucking your own cock more in mind. And as for limpwristed, I won't insult the limpwristed by casting your stupid ass amongst them. Although I'm sure your Dixie Chicks album would give you away to a true conservative.

I hope you and your fucking debutante groupies weren't too upset by someone other than their god and master generating conversation on something you claim to be so knowledgeable on, a war with Iran.

Your prophetic postings? You want to act like every other half ass analyst wannabe in the fucking rational world hasn't been advocating atacking Iran,since well before 2003. Dumbass.

Quit fucking recycling half ass theorems your roomate wrote for your poly sci classes at Utah State Community College and see the reality that we aint gonna let Israel do shit, period. That would be diplomatically worse than the US itself attacking Iran directly. Israel is our bulldog, and we hold the chain. Not the other way around. If Israel attacks it will be as second fiddle- at best-to our forces.

So take a break from advocating your recycled biblical apocalyptyic bullshit psuedo prophecies and shut the fuck up for a change.

Otherwise, make your points more clearly, bitch.

Retired

Posted by Finally Retired 2005-08-22 18:54|| 2005-08-22 18:54|| Front Page Top

#29 Finally Fired - nice mouth. You blow your dog with that?

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2005-08-22 19:19|| 2005-08-22 19:19|| Front Page Top

#30 Okay, this thread has officially exceeded this moderator's obscenity threshhold.

Plus, it's boring.

Finally Retired, you were IMO off base with your original comment to .com. If you're going to come out swinging that way it is not too much to ask that you do a quick search through the archives first. That way the whole comment thread here doesn't get hijacked by the feces fest that was pretty much triggered by you.

I disagree with .com on a whole slew of issues and he is not always sweetness and light himself. It's just the case that your poke came first.

Can we please get this thread back on topic and leave the playground stuff outside?

Posted by lotp 2005-08-22 19:23|| 2005-08-22 19:23|| Front Page Top

#31 I think you must have taken your brains that fell out for that dog feces Finally Retired. Take up a new hobby, reading comprehension doesn't appear to be something you are good at. Trolling at Rantburg won't last.
FOAD HAND

Posted by Sock Puppet 0Ã¯Â¿Â½ Doom 2005-08-22 19:26|| 2005-08-22 19:26|| Front Page Top

#32 Sigh. Wotta fuckwit.

My points were clear enough for intelligent folks. You are just too stupid and full of yourself to notice. That is what's most apparent in your asinine posts.

You have no plan, no salient points, nothing but spew - brainless pointless invective. Your posts make no sense. None. Your attacks make no sense. None. You're simply a hole, where a person should be. You deserve nothing. You merit nothing. You are nothing. *pffft*

You've resorted to ad hominem from the first - totally unwarranted. You haven't addressed a single point in those links I offered - just lame tripe about wanting to understand, I'm a State weenie, idiotic crap about bliblical stuff, blahÂ³, all perfectly irrelevant bullshit. Wotta load.

You made a stupid claim that I had "An option I have seen you deny here previously, War with Iran.". Prove it, asshole. I'll wager you're either just blowing out your ass (a Sphincter of Allan specimen) or you are another idiot who believes that, because you want it to be so, Magik happens and another 2 or 3 hundred thousand boots will Magikally materialize - just for you. You've substantiated nothing - just that you're inept and reduced to foolish half-witted blather.

You think you're tough and war-like, it seems. You're not tough - you're a joke. I've killed people, gutted them from crotch to sternum, that I respect more than you. They were men. You're something less - I wouldn't wipe my blade on your pathetic carcass.

You remind me of my ex-wife, only I doubt you can shine a knob like she could - you merely blow.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 19:40|| 2005-08-22 19:40|| Front Page Top

#33 What part of 'stop' do you guys not understand?

Posted by lotp 2005-08-22 19:47|| 2005-08-22 19:47|| Front Page Top

#34 While not as diplomatic as Finally Retired, after reading and re-reading the piece, I don't concur with com and D.

I see a pretty clear strategy from Bush for Iran. It's called timing. Bush is hoping that the EU-3 will come to the conclusion that they have been fucked over and over again by the Iranian regime. Whether or not this possibility is realistic, Bush has to play it out for domestic purposes too.

As the the US, Bush wants to get Dummycrats to the point of screaming that we aren't doing enough about Iran. You are already beginning to hear Dummycrats saying we picked the wrong country, and this will only ratchet up further as the EU-3 initiative has been a proven failure and Iran gets closer to full cycle capability.

In the interim, I agree with the WSJ Editorial Board (this was an editorial) that we should at minimum be supporting the anti-regime elements in Iran. This is very consistent with where Michael Ledeen (NR/AEI).

As for debating the merits of particular WSJ figures, take your debate elsewhere. Perhaps on Page 4.

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 19:48|| 2005-08-22 19:48|| Front Page Top

#35 I crossed posts with you, lotp. But I mean every fucking word of it. Ban me, if you think you must. You've flown off the handle over much less.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 19:51|| 2005-08-22 19:51|| Front Page Top

#36 Any non-Persian support for a genuine Iranian "revolution" will be taken as meddling by the evil amis and joos. It has to be the real deal. The best course is verbal support and making sure that "clean Persian hands" make the kind of money to support a popular uprising.

Posted by Sock Puppet 0Ã¯Â¿Â½ Doom 2005-08-22 20:05|| 2005-08-22 20:05|| Front Page Top

#37 This article is a joke. You can tell by the way it ends with a funny punchline:
"...barring the Iranian national soccer team from the World Cup... would be the beginning of a serious Iran policy."

Posted by Darrell 2005-08-22 20:17|| 2005-08-22 20:17|| Front Page Top

#38 Darrell:

Operative words "for starters"

I am no diplomat, but making a stand and being consistent is essential. Why in the hell would be oppose the theocracy's nuclear efforts and brutalization of Iranians and turn a blind eye towards letting their newly elected president speak at the UN? Why would we not oppose their national soccer team from playing in the World Cup? Do you realize how important the World Cup is to Iran?

Again, this is "for starters" and it would not be a joke in Iranland

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 20:27|| 2005-08-22 20:27|| Front Page Top

#39 Com, your soccer team is herewith banned from the World Cup. Finally Retired, you will not be able to speak in NYC before the UN general assembly.

God

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 20:30|| 2005-08-22 20:30|| Front Page Top

#40 You believe the mullahs would think twice about Islamic world domination if a soccer season is at stake? Think again, tool of The Great Satan.

Posted by Darrell 2005-08-22 21:03|| 2005-08-22 21:03|| Front Page Top

#41 Smile when you refer to me as The Great Satan (and keep it between the two of us, heh).

In fact, the Iranian regime requires some degree of legitimacy for internal consumption and external gamesmenship. Removing them from the World Cup (huge in global stage), is but one "for starters" (don't forget, "for starters")step of a constant build up apace of their steps towards nuclear weaponry-- when the real games begin (hint: it won't be soccer)

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 22:04|| 2005-08-22 22:04|| Front Page Top

#42 What in the world makes you guys think the World Cup folks, run by Germany this time IIRC, will do anything of the sort? Lol. Not a chance. Period. They'll put on knee-pads - and not for playing ~~soccer~~ football.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 22:35|| 2005-08-22 22:35|| Front Page Top

#43 Oh, dear. *weakly leans back in chair, wiping tears of laughter from the corners of eyes*

This has got to be a first, .com -- congratulations! Nobody has ever thought of you as State Dept. material before, let alone careerist. Although I imagine such could consider invective a foreign language to be studied, not unlike Russian or Farsi.

As for Mr. Retired, congratulations to you, too. I see you plan to make use of your newfound freedom.

However, it is generally not considered good manners to enter your host's home roaring semi-coherent obscenities... at least if you wish to be invited back. Please re-think your approach, as this is Fred's private playground, at which we are all guests. If you have thoughtful and informed commentary on the posted article, or any of the posts, we would be pleased to learn what you may have to teach, as we do from one another. But I think you will need to give us your bona fides, so that we can judge your contributions accordingly. (I, to give an obvious example, wouldn't dream of commenting on matters military except in the most general sense, although I might have very strong opinions on debutante activities, even though in my family we gave up such sillinesses several generations ago.)

Posted by trailing wife 2005-08-22 22:46|| 2005-08-22 22:46|| Front Page Top

#44 Com, I thought you fell on the sword.

What makes you think they won't. Feel free to speculate, there's a lot of that of late.

Posted by Captain America 2005-08-22 23:26|| 2005-08-22 23:26|| Front Page Top

#45 CA - what else is there in a vacuum of hard data?

And what, pray tell, are you doing ,if not speculating? Lol. Give me a break.

Posted by .com 2005-08-22 23:59|| 2005-08-22 23:59|| Front Page Top

#46 tw - lol! I did not intend to post any comments, today. I just posted a few articles I found interesting. The in-line comment was, I thought, pretty obvious. The Thermopylae parallel suggested itself to me without efffort - and I believe it applies, so far. I have no idea where FR came from or what his itch was.

Posted by .com 2005-08-23 00:02|| 2005-08-23 00:02|| Front Page Top

00:02 JosephMendiola
00:02 .com
23:59 .com
23:50 JosephMendiola
23:41 Jan
23:37 11A5S
23:26 Captain America
23:25 Jan
23:20 Sock Puppet 0Ã¯Â¿Â½ Doom
23:17 JosephMendiola
23:05 JosephMendiola
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:46 Angie Schultz
22:46 trailing wife
22:42 Old Patriot
22:41 gromgoru
22:38 Vlad the Muslim Impaler
22:37 Poison Reverse
22:35 .com
22:35 gromgoru
22:30 mmurray821
22:30 Poison Reverse
22:30 Frank G
22:24 Poison Reverse