BF2S Forums Iran Caught Red-Handed Shipping Arms to Taliban

It's funny that people automatically start on their 'Well america.... !' Defence(?)

Iran isn't an Iraq. They have actual uniformed military and if and when they start something it will no longer be just a petty war that everyone thinks iraq is, it will be a world wide thing.

nukchebi0 wrote:

OMG LET THE BOMBS FLY.

Seriously, I think the U.S. should justify bombing them with this. They have essentially been asking to piss the U.S. off and start a war. I think that they should give them what they want. Nothing like getting bombed with planes you can't see to straighten a nation up.

Also, they do have a military, but so did Iraq in 1991, which was just as strong and numerous as Iran's is now. What happened to this army? It got annihilated with a KDR of 1:1000 in favor of the U.S. (100 U.S. losses to 100000 Iraqi.) Considering Iran's consists of the same quality Soviet weapons, why would anything go differently.

Yeah, but Iran's army is better than Iraq's army, and the terrain is much, much more different than Iraq's.

ATG wrote:

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

Yeah, but Iran's army is better than Iraq's army, and the terrain is much, much more different than Iraq's.

So.

He didn't say occupy them, he said bomb them to fuck all.



Sorry Persians, but we are on a collision course and we will go to war with you UNLESS YOU GET RID OF YOUR GOVERNMENT.

Curse my lack of paying attention to detail.

Well I was expecting the US to go into Iran after we finish up in Iraq anyway, but I was hoping against it and I was hoping that we'd finally pull out of the Middle East. But now looks like we're gonna move to Iran very soon. I'd rather have it where we pull our troops out and then nuke the desert wasteland to smithereens and make it a bigger wasteland.

nukchebi0 wrote:

OMG LET THE BOMBS FLY.

Seriously, I think the U.S. should justify bombing them with this. They have essentially been asking to piss the U.S. off and start a war. I think that they should give them what they want. Nothing like getting bombed with planes you can't see to straighten a nation up.

Also, they do have a military, but so did Iraq in 1991, which was just as strong and numerous as Iran's is now. What happened to this army? It got annihilated with a KDR of 1:1000 in favor of the U.S. (100 U.S. losses to 100000 Iraqi.) Considering Iran's consists of the same quality Soviet weapons, why would anything go differently.

Iran = Middle East military power (ie. not like weak little Iraq)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran#Military
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Iran

And don't forget the AA.

Last edited by التعريفات (2007-06-06 23:12:22)

DesertFox- wrote:

That's verrryyy interesting. I can't wait to hear the explanation for this now.

QFT, tbh I#m not entirely suprised, and no, thats not because they are Arabian ffs

Is anyone really surprised that Iran would mettle in Afghanistan too??

Why on earth would they want two democracies on both sides of them?? The more free their neighbors are, the more free their citizens are going to want to become!! Keep in mind, Iran has a HUGE youth population that isn't exactly thrilled with the Mullahs running their country.

The USA needs to think long and hard about starting another war in the middle east. . . .Dont get me wrong, Iran deserves to get thundered, but at what cost? For christs sake, Israel could take out Iran. . . .

The US needs to keep waging a silent war i.e. with special forces, cyberwar, and economic sanctions.  Iran is a country you can get on their knees without exhausting military resources. . . . Keep those military resources ready to take out Hezbollah, the organization that would do Iran's dirty work for them!!

Last edited by fadedsteve (2007-06-07 00:51:06)

"Secretary of Defense Robert Gates stopped short earlier this week of blaming Iran, saying the U.S. did not have evidence 'of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban.'"

Wow. Robert Gates says that and ABC prints a story saying Iran have been helping the Taliban. The US media fails bigtime. This is so unbelievably reminiscent to the buildup to Iraq. Lies, conjecture, theories and more lies supporting military action based on a pack of lies. The fact they call it 'Iran's proxy war against the US' is hilarious given that the US are on their western border and on their eastern border tightening a noose around them.

WAKE UP USA.

Since when did 'not having enough evidence' become 'irrefutable proof'? Some of you guys need to seriously fucking sort yourselves out.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-06-07 02:07:21)

Fen321 wrote:

well well ...

I think this response on the page hit it on the head

Tom wrote:

The way this story is written, it gives absolute authority to the analysis of one senior coalition official. (unnamed!)

His analysis may be dead on, but to present one unknown official's opinion as absolute truth without providing the evidence behind his analysis is deceptive reporting.

I find it perfectly plausible that the Iranian government may be behind these shipments, (it also could be someone at a lower level or smugglers,) but to write this story in the somewhat sensationalist way you did offers alot more weight (without evidence) than this report should receive.

If the report has evidence that the Iranian government is behind it, then, sure, make that headline, but hiding behind "Report says" and analysis of unnamed official without evidence should no longer be acceptable reporting in this country.

Not after similar reporting contributed to the war in Iraq.

:sigh:

If only I could karma that guy

I was laughing at the article thinking the same thing but that guy expressed is much better than I could. I hope many many people read it.

JahManRed wrote:

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote:

the U.S. did not have evidence "of the involvement of the Iranian government in support of the Taliban."

Christ, you blood thirst war mongers read between the lines and see what you want to see huh. Your so unbelievably gullible and ready to watch tens of thousands maybe hundreds of thousands die. Maybe if you weren't thousands of miles away in your air conditioned houses and seen the reality of war you wouldn't be so blood thirsty. And go get opinions of your own instead of sucking up the bias Media hype. Are yous so stupid that you are going to let the media and your government repeat the same lies and failures as Iraqi.

Gates is one of the few in favor of having a dialog with Iran and this is a very positive thing.  In this context he will not come out and say that Iran is responsible for supporting the taliban, when in fact all signs point to them being involved.  Military experts and analysts (including Richard Clarke who hates the fuck out of the Bush administration) have repeatedly pointed out that the types of IEDs and shape charges being used are benefiting from Iranian support.  In other words, its not so easy to jimmy-rig an old artillery piece to make a lethal weapon capable of penetrating heavy armor.

There are two different issues here.  One is should there be a war with Iran where the answer IMO is definitely not.  The second is whether Iran is providing assistance to Iraq and Taliban where it seems like they most likely are. 

If guys like Gates are to have credibility and support in the US administration against the "warmongers" then Iran needs to take a step in the positive direction.  I don't want a war in Iran but Iran is certainly doing alot to give the "warmongers" reason to have one:  nuclear enrichment, virulent rhetoric, supplying insurgents, taking british sailors hostage...

Send in the Spartans.

superfly_cox wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

superfly_cox wrote:

...nuclear enrichment, virulent rhetoric, supplying insurgents, taking british sailors hostage...

Can easily be rephrased: producing nuclear power for domestic/industrial consumption, decrying state terrorists Israel and responding to threatening comments made by other nations, [little or no proof insurgents are being supplied by Iranian authorities], capturing and releasing British sailors that wandered into Iranian territorial waters.

The answers are somewhere in between no doubt.

Poe, I'm against a war in Iran but I have a slightly different view.  Sure its simple to blame the US and I won't argue that they're not at fault here.  However, I also think its important to address Iran's role in this thing.  As you very correctly said: "The answer is somewhere in between" which is the case here.  We've no way of really knowing how much but I'm sure we can agree that Iran is not a saint by any means.  If we accept this then we can also agree that Iran should not be doing things that undermine American moderates' (Robert Gates) efforts to engage in a positive dialog with Iran.  Pragmatically speaking this is the correct approach...but unfortunately there's not much of that in either the US or Iran now-a-days.

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

Send in the Spartans.

why do you even bother visiting the D&ST when you have nothing of remote value to add?

His post count.

Seams we have the same point of view on the situation. I don't doubt that munitions are crossing the border from Iran into Iraqi. But unless its being orchestrated by the Iranian Government it can't be used as a pretext for war. And their is no evidence to support this. I don't think Iran is stupid enough to give the Bush administration the excuse it is so desperately looking for.

ATG wrote:

acEofspadEs6313 wrote:

Yeah, but Iran's army is better than Iraq's army, and the terrain is much, much more different than Iraq's.

So.

He didn't say occupy them, he said bomb them to fuck all.



Sorry Persians, but we are on a collision course and we will go to war with you UNLESS YOU GET RID OF YOUR GOVERNMENT.

If some other country would have said the same in the 80's...