HT Weapons of Mass Destruction

An apt description of this deadly dance. Also many good links to other strategy sites all assessing the the relative danger and likely responses to President MAD's and religious mento Yazdi recent run up to nuclear Armageddon to prepare the world for the hastened return of the !2th Imam from some water well in the ME.

*****

A Most Dangerous Dance

The nuclear tango with Iran continues. Two and one half years of negotiations resulted in failure and an Iran that has, if anything, grown more combative and intransigent. George Jahn of the AP, writing in the Washington Post, reports on Iran's latest gambits:

Iran will immediately retaliate if referred to the U.N. Security Council next week by forging ahead with developing a full-scale uranium enrichment program, a senior envoy said Monday. The comments by Ali Asghar Soltaniyeh, a senior envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency, reflected Iran's defiance in the face of growing international pressure over its nuclear program. Enrichment can be used in electricity production but it also is needed in making uranium-based nuclear weapons. Separately, Iran's top nuclear negotiator planned to travel to Moscow on Tuesday for a high-level session as talks intensified surrounding a proposal to have Iran's uranium enriched in Russia, then returned to Iran for use in the country's reactors _ a compromise that would provide more oversight and ease tensions.

The carrot and the stick. Refer us to the UN and we will accelerate our plans. Hold off and maybe, just maybe, this deal with the Russians might provide a way out for all of us. Iran correctly realizes that the unity of the West on this issue is a fragile thing. Military options are not great. The Europeans will prefer near anything that does not involve the US of force or serious sanctions. Internationally, the Russians seek profit, prestige, and a chance to stick it to the US. The Chinese simply watch and wait to see how things will play out, hoping to extract the maximum possible benefit from either side.

A Must Read

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

As commented in the thread below:

DAH!

Don't mess with Texas and don't mess with Texans. Or likewise don't "call" in a game of "Texas Hold'em" when your opponent is not bluffing.

Lastly don't bring small fisson nukes to a war with hydrothermic nuclear weapons. You wish for Allah's blessing may come true.

Unfortunately your fellow countrymen may not share in your prophetic vision.

*****

Peter Grier, The Christian Science Monitor:

Asked why they're suspicious of Iran's nuclear intentions, US officials point to Natanz.

Iran's Natanz nuclear site is in a remote area 200 miles south of Tehran. Key facilities are buried, with vehicle entrance ramps hidden beneath dummy buildings. Construction there has continued in recent months despite Iran's nuclear negotiations with the West - recent satellite photos revealed at least seven new buildings.

Iran's leaders have long said they are conducting nuclear research for peaceful purposes. They claim they want only to learn how to produce fissionable fuel for power plants, as they're allowed to do under terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

That explanation makes no sense for a nation with 10 percent of the world's known oil reserves, US officials and some outside experts say. They claim that the concrete and steel of Iran's nuclear infrastructure shows Tehran's true intentions.

Read More

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

DAH!

Don't mess with Texas and don't mess with Texans. Or likewise don't "call" in a game of "Texas Hold'em" when your opponent is not bluffing.

Lastly don't bring small fisson nukes to a war with hydrothermic nuclear weapons. You wish for Allah's blessing may come true.

Unfortunately your fellow countrymen may not share in your prophetic vision.

*****

Herb Keinon, The Jerusalem Post:

US President George W. Bush will not accept a nuclear Iran, John Bolton, the US ambassador to the United Nations, said Monday. Bolton, speaking from New York via video hook-up to the Interdisciplinary Center's Herzliya Conference, said that Bush was determined to pursue the issue through peaceful and diplomatic means, "but has made clear that a nuclear Iran is not acceptable."

According to Bolton, Bush worries that a nuclear-equipped Iran under its current leadership could well engage in a nuclear holocaust, "and that is just not something he is going to accept."

[...]

Read More

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

More thoughts from Iranian President MAD's religious mentor,ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi

*****

Hossein Bastani, Rooz Online:

The views of ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi and his disciples about a republic were the focus of news reports last week. His views gained attention because he is the principal theoretician of the ideology that took over the presidency of Iran in June 2005.

I do not wish to critique the philosophical views of the ayatollah in this article. What I would like to do instead is present his “application” of his views which form the foundations of the policies of the movement that he belongs to.

[...]

Six years ago Mesbah openly issued a Fatwa that, “an insulter to Islam must be killed and there is no need for a trial” (see the Friday mass prayer sermon of 11 Shahrivar of 1378). Since then, attempts have been made to implement his dictum. For example, during the serial trial of officials of the Ministry of Intelligence, one of the 5 accused said in Kerman, “We decided to do this based on a discussion we had with ayatollah Mesbah Yazdi in Qom. According to him, their blood was Halal [i.e. sanctioned by Islam].” Yazdi had warned just the day before the assassination attempt on Saeed Hajarian, an advisor to president Mohammad Khatami that what the press was doing was a hundred times worse than murder, adding that “one day the would be avenged.” “Shiite Muslims must under no circumstances become neighbors with their enemies or eat from the same pale,” he said. He even questioned the meaning of “unity” that had been advocated by other senior leaders of Iran, defining it as such: “whenever there is no commonality between various groups in the country, those that are softer in their views should unite with those that are very hard on theirs. The outcome of the remaining groups is clear. When a religiously rightful government takes over a society, its opponents must leave the country, or if they wish to live in it, then they must accept the government, even if the government has resorted to violence and force” (see Nowruz of 5 Khordad 1380).

[...]

No matter what the views of the ayatollah are, his students now rule Iran. And while he believes that Islamicising Iran is not yet over, he warns his followers that they should not think that just because a doctrinaire president has come to power no work is left for them. The ayatollah certainly has very loyal followers. In a seminar organized by his supporters and students last year (30 Azar 1384) they warned their opponents that they had “a duty to deal with any body in any capacity who criticized this leading Islamic personality” [i.e. Mesbah Yazdi].

I leave the reader to make up his own judgement about the direction this country is taking through the students of Mesbah Yazdi who have taken over the reigns of power.

[Hossein Bastani is a former secretary general of Iran’s Association of Journalists who now lives in exile.]

Read it All

HT Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin via WorldNet Daily

A pre-emptive U.S. and Israeli military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities is nearly inevitable, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

The incapacitation of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has made a pre-emptive attack on Iran more likely in the next nine weeks, Israeli sources tell the premium, online intelligence newsletter published by the founder of WND.

It was Sharon who vetoed the nearly unanimous recommendations of Israel's generals that a quick strike was the Jewish state's only chance at preventing Iran from building a significant nuclear arsenal.

Meanwhile, in Washington, there is growing concern that Iran's ultimate target is the U.S.

Earlier this month, Iran's Revolutionary Guards conducted a conference on the use of weapons of mass destruction – nuclear, chemical and biological. Included in those briefings were presentations on electromagnetic pulse weapons and other military technologies deemed to be under development for use against the U.S., rather than Israel or other enemies of the Islamic republic. Even one nuclear weapon, used in an EMP-style attack on the U.S., would prove catastrophic to the nation, a congressional panel studying the vulnerability of America to electro-magnetic pulse weapons concluded last year.

Such an attack would not require Iran to use long-range or intercontinental ballistic missiles, which it does not possess. But a simple Scud missile, with a nuclear warhead, could be fired from offshore and detonated above the U.S. wreaking near total devastation on the country's technological, electrical and transportation infrastructure. It would also have the advantage of offering Iran a degree of plausible deniability, given that "terrorists" armed with one nuclear weapon could achieve the same results.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Meanwhile, also in G2 Bulletin, missed in all the media attention on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's statements about wiping Israel off the face of the earth was the fact that he also called for the eradication of the U.S.

Ahmadinejad's speech in Tehran last fall, in which he called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth, got a healthy amount of coverage by the international media.

Yet, despite the number of stories published and broadcast, a key element of that address to 'The World Without Zionism" conference was overlooked, ignored – spiked, if you will – by major press organizations, according to a new report in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

It wasn't just a world without Zionism and Israel that Ahmadinejad and his friends in Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and other terrorist groups were envisioning. It was a world without the United States of America.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. In this case, it is literally true. Examine for yourself the photos published here of Ahmadinejad addressing the Tehran conference Oct. 26, 2005.

Some of them will look very familiar. Those showing the Iranian president gesticulating at a podium showing the name of the conference were published worldwide – from Al-Jazeera to the Associated Press. But those showing a wider view – and the complete poster for the event – are getting their biggest audience yet here in WND.

It is worth noting that Ahmadinejad didn't just stroll up to the podium. The Iranian government actually produced the visual aids you see here.

Yes, that is a ball representing the USA cracked at the bottom of that hourglass — with another representing Israel falling later.

It wasn't just the imagery of the conference that was overlooked, ignored, unreported and underplayed by the world press. It was also the anti-American substance of Ahmadinejad's speech.


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

"Is it possible for us to witness a world without America and Zionism?" he asked. "But you had best know that this slogan and this goal are attainable, and surely can be achieved."

What is he talking about?

Iran has developed a strategic "war preparation plan" for what it calls the "destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization."

Read it All

HT In From the Cold

Spook86 has some interesting comments

*****

Newsweek is out with a story that discusses "new technology" in the hunt for bin Laden. Actually, it's little more than a recap of how the military (and the CIA) are using drones to search for suspected terrorists, and take them out. This blog--and a number of others--have discussed UAV employment at great lengths, even noting that video feeds from the drones were greatly reduced in the run-up to the most recent strike, to increase security for the operation. Newsweek also makes the point--which we advanced last week--that the U.S. is now getting better information on the whereabouts of Al Qaida leaders, possibly from within the organization itself. According to the magazine, the CIA now has a large liaision team operating in Pakistan, and information developed by those agents is starting to pay off.

But, in typical Newsweek-speak, the article still manages to take a shot at the Bush Administration. In the final paragraph, the authors note bin Laden's claim (made on his most recent audio tape) that he bled the Russians white in Afghanistan, and can do the same to the USA; they also suggest that "Americans" (read: the White House) don't want to listen.

"Don't let your strength and modern arms fool you," bin Laden said in his message. "We have nothing to lose. A swimmer in the ocean does not fear the rain." As he has so often, bin Laden closed by invoking his successful war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. "We bled their economy, and now they are nothing. In that there is a lesson for you." Perhaps there is. Americans just don't want to hear it from him."

There's a major problem's with Osama's analysis (which Newsweek conveniently fails to mention). The Soviet economy of the 1980s was already on its last legs, burded not only by the War in Afghanistan, but trying to match U.S. defense spending under Ronald Reagan. Additionally, the mujahedin who fought the Soviet Army were aided and supplied by a superpower (the United States), which provided critical training and weaponry--namely Stinger missiles--that turned the tide of battle. Bin Laden's fighters also had the full support of the Pakistani government and intelligence services, another support element that is lacking this time around. While there are elements in Pakistan sympathetic to bin Laden, his troops cannot operate in the country or seek refuge with impunity, as they could twenty years ago.

Finally, Osama--and the editors of Newsweek--need a lesson in basic economics. The U.S. has a $5 trillion economy, and has managed to put a major dent in Al-Qaida with defense spending that is just over 3% of our GDP. Given those numbers, Osama better re-think his plan, and Newsweek needs to rethink its "analysis."

Read More

HT Wizbang

More news the MSM is burying the lede

*****

The BBC is surprised at this, but I'm not.

Iraqis and Afghans are the among most optimistic people in the world when it comes to their economic future, a new survey for the BBC suggests. . . .

In Afghanistan, 70% say their own circumstances are improving, and 57% believe that the country overall is on the way up.

In Iraq, 65% believe their personal life is getting better, and 56% are upbeat about the country's economy.

Just a poll, of course, but I don't find the results out of the ordinary at all. Think about it for a moment. Partisan demagogery and overwhelmingly negative media reporting aside, who in the world has had more change for them in the last few years - for the better - than the citizens of Afghanistan and Iraq?

The citizens of both those nations have enjoyed seeing oppressive former regimes cast down and a democratic form of government by the people replace them. And while things haven't gone perfectly over the last couple of years it is safe to say that the people of Iraq and Afghanistan are enjoying more personal freedoms and economic liberties now then they have in generations.

So the real question is this: Why wouldn't they be optimistic?

Read More

HT Powerline

A review of President Bush's speech yst by the legal eagles at Powerline

*****

Bush Scores Again

President Bush gave a terrific speech at Kansas State yesterday. For one thing, he was very funny. His visibly high spirits suggest to me that he thinks events are moving his way. You can read the speech in its entirety, along with an entertaining question and answer session, here. This is what the President said about the NSA international surveillance program:

I made the decision to do the following things because there's an enemy that still wants to harm the American people. What I'm talking about is the intercept of certain communications emanating between somebody inside the United States and outside the United States; and one of the numbers would be reasonably suspected to be an al Qaeda link or affiliate. In other words, we have ways to determine whether or not someone can be an al Qaeda affiliate or al Qaeda. And if they're making a phone call in the United States, it seems like to me we want to know why.

This is a -- I repeat to you, even though you hear words, "domestic spying," these are not phone calls within the United States. It's a phone call of an al Qaeda, known al Qaeda suspect, making a phone call into the United States. I'm mindful of your civil liberties, and so I had all kinds of lawyers review the process. We briefed members of the United States Congress, one of whom was Senator Pat Roberts, about this program. You know, it's amazing, when people say to me, well, he was just breaking the law -- if I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress? (Laughter and applause.)

Hmm, good point. Bush continued:

Federal courts have consistently ruled that a President has authority under the Constitution to conduct foreign intelligence surveillance against our enemies. Predecessors of mine have used that same constitutional authority.

Read More

HT Jihad Watch

This is very significant as it may be an indication that the tide is now turning in Iraq.

*****

Iraqi insurgents unite against al-Qa'ida

Once again, Muslim-on-Muslim violence provokes a backlash among Muslims. I am glad to see anything that diminishes Al-Qaeda's power in Iraq -- but until we begin to see the same kind of indignation among Muslims when Muslims kill non-Muslims, we will not be out of the woods. From Reuters, with thanks to the Constantinopolitan Irredentist:

BAGHDAD: Iraqi insurgents in the Sunni city of Ramadi have turned against their al-Qa'ida allies after a bomb attack killed 80 people, sparking tit-for-tat assassinations.

Residents yesterday said at least three prominent figures on both sides were among those killed after local insurgent groups formed an alliance against al-Qa'ida, blaming it for massacring police recruits in Ramadi on January 5.

"There was a meeting right after the bombings," one Ramadi resident said, speaking anonymously for fear of reprisals.

"Tribal leaders and political figures gathered to form the Anbar Revolutionaries to fight al-Qa'ida in Anbar and force them to leave the province.

Read it All

HT Terrorism Unveiled

Athena is not so concerned about al-Sadr's announced alliance with the Iranian Shia.

*****

It's suggested that because one Iraqi cleric with a relatively small militia says he would support Iran if the attacked, an entire Shia uprising could occur against the US in the event of an Iran showdown. Al-Sadr's militia and following is cause for concern, but it's not the end all, be all for Iraq.

Once again, people are quick to assume that the Shia community is monolithic in Iraq and that Iraqis identify (pdf) themselves soley along the lines of religious identity.

[...]

Read More

HT The American Thinker

January 24th, 2006

The power structure of the American media is undergoing a convulsion that surpasses even the revolution wrought by the advent of television broadcasting sixty years ago. At first, television was politically neutral, and neither party took comparative advantage of it. When John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon held their famous televised debates, television came of age as a power-granter in the electoral sphere.

But television also contributed to the rise of a new concept of “mainstream media” - ostensibly neutral voices, reporting the objective news in a detached manner. Because of bandwidth limitations in VHF broadcasting, only three national television networks emerged, and rather than segmenting the market with politically distinctive news reporting and analysis, each network positioned itself as the “mainstream” outlet, so as to appeal to a broad plurality of viewers. The race for advertising dollars in a three-member oligopoly makes such behavior the only rational management policy if all three players have a reasonable chance at gaining the biggest market share by playing to the dominant middle of the market.

Television news in turn destroyed the afternoon newspaper industry. Nobody needed or wanted an after-work news update that had been edited and printed around noon at the latest, when television could provide a much fresher update free of charge. Live (at first) and in color (a bit later).

This creative destruction left all but a handful of cities with only one newspaper. The monopolist press lords also embraced the “mainstream” approach – supposedly detached and neutral reporters and editors reporting reality as it is to Americans awaiting the word from them.

Thus was born the Mainstream Media (MSM), a label beloved of bloggers, who consider themselves challengers to it.

[...]

A Must Read!

Being a good neighbor.

ITM weighs in on al-Sadr announcing alliance with Iran

*****

The leader of Mujahideen, defender of faith, future Ayatollah and higher leader of the Mehdi Army (may God keep him safe) Muqtada al-Sadr announced from Tehran during his latest visit to Iran that al-Mehdi Army will defend any neighboring or Muslim nation that comes under foreign invasion.
The statement was made during a meeting with Ali Larijani, Iran’s national security advisor who is also in charge of Iran’s nuclear program.

Poor Jacques Chirac, he didn’t put in his calculations that Mehdi Army would stand by Iran’s side! Now Mr. Chirac’s nukes which he spoke smugly about will be totally useless before the holy tide and heaven’s forces.

Poor Europe and poor America! For they didn’t put in their consideration when they challenged Iran that the army of the light will be defending the Islamic republic…

I feel sorry for this world when it tries to warn terrorists while terrorists fear no threats. On the contrary, they want to be threatened and warned as it feeds their propaganda machine and they will use such threats to say “We are on the right side and the proof is that infidels fear us and threatening us”.

I can hear turbans say “kill a million of us and we will kill a thousand of you and do not forget, our criteria for measuring triumph differ from yours; you live in the filthy present while we live in the glorious past”.

Poor Iraq, the new parliament will have 30 of the soldiers of the Mujahid leader, while those who carry PhDs like Kubba, Chalabi, Dabbagh or, or, or….got nothing…

I can’t blame anyone for this because this is what a great percentage of Iraqis chose and I won’t blame those Iraqis for their choice since for decades, they didn’t enjoy a healthy environment that allows objective thinking.

Like on Iraqi journalist said; the defeat of the seculars is a great loss for those who won the elections.

Link

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

End-of-days worldview

Victor Davis Hanson, Washington Times:

"The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land. As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map." So rants Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Given his apocalyptic rhetoric, we can understand why Mr. Ahmadinejad might want an arsenal of nuclear missiles. He would be able to shake down a constant stream of rich European emissaries, threaten the Arab Gulf states to lower oil production, neutralize U.S. influence in the region -- and, of course, destroy Israel.

In all his crazed pronouncements, Mr. Ahmadinejad reflects an end-of-days view: History is coming to its grand finale under his aegis. Mr. Ahmadinejad magically entrances even foreign audiences into stupor. Of his recent United Nations speech, he boasted: "I felt that all of a sudden the atmosphere changed there. And for 27-28 minutes, all the leaders did not blink."

[...]

Read More

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

Saul Singer, The Jerusalem Post:

This is the most grave situation that we have faced since the end of the Cold War, absent the whole war on terror.

- Sen. John McCain on Iran, on Sunday's "Face the Nation"

John McCain, Republican Senator from Arizona and presidential hopeful, is absolutely right about the gravity of the threat from a nuclear Iran. But does anyone notice something strange?

McCain strongly backed President George Bush in toppling Saddam Hussein, and is an unabashed hawk in the war against militant Islamism. Presumably, he cheered when Bush launched his doctrine of regime change against rogue regimes - the famed "axis of evil," of which Iran is a charter member.

Yet even McCain describes the Iran crisis as something separate from the fight against terrorism.

How can this be?

Read More

HT The American Thinker

Seems as though there is growing suspicion among the strategic thinkers that Zawahiri (AQ's #2)did die in the Predator attack. Time will tell if there are new video/audio releases that can be pegged after the strike.

*****

There have been a lot of conflicting statements and a fake photo designed to suggest that that the Damadola strike was clumsy and ineffective in getting the target and that anger in Pakistan and innocent victims were the principal result of the effort. But the fog is clearing. It appears that this was a well- conceived joint US-Pakistani intelligence operation which was very effective.

[...]

This was a well-surveilled site. And the intelligence apparently sound. I think Zawahiri died in that operation . Either we know this and are keeping it quiet for operational reasons or his was one of the four or five bodies reportedly removed from the site by unknown persons to preclude a solid identification without which it would be imprudent to announce he was killed.

[...]

Saturday’s report from the Times(UK) adds to my suspicion that Zawahiri was killed in the strike and his body removed to make forensic proof of his death impossible:

[...]

I certainly don’t know if Zawahiri is dead. And I do not criticize the Pakistani or U.S. authorities for suggesting he wasn’t killed in the absence of forensic proof.

But it is clear as the fog lifts that this was not a clumsy U.S. military gaffe, but rather a joint operation which further cripples al Qaeda whether or not Zawahiri escaped to a deep cover in an area where there is a great deal of surveillance and interdiction taking place. Clarice Feldman 1 23 06

Read it All

HT Instapundit

• January 22, 2006 | 10:13 PM ET

Iran's growing nuclear program is causing some people to worry. Rep. Tom Lantos says it's now or never to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. Sen. Hillary Clinton is calling for sanctions. And Daniel Drezner says that the Bush Administration is being awfully multilateral:

The approach the Bush administration has pursued towards Iran -- multilateralism, private and public diplomacy, occasionally deferring to allies -- is besotted with the very tropes that liberals like to see in their American foreign policy. I'm still not sure what the end game will be with regard to Iran , but to date I can't see how a Kerry administration would have played its cards any differently than the Bush team.

Fred Kaplan isn't sure that there's any solution: "What's the next step? At this point, I must confess: I don't know. Neither, it seems, does anybody else."

Joe Katzmann is pretty depressed, too. And Tom Holsinger thinks the only answer is to invade Iran. (Conveniently enough, we have troops in countries on three sides, already).

And Jonathan Gewirtz offers a more positive view, suggesting that it's mostly posturing on the Iranians' part. I'd like to believe that, but...

We did a podcast interview with Jim Dunnigan, publisher of StrategyPage, a popular open source intelligence and military affairs site, and author/blogger/military reservist Austin Bay, who blogs at AustinBay.net. You can hear what they think is happening, and what they think the United States should do about it, by clicking right here.

Read More

(Also has hotlinks to podcast with Jim Dunnigan and Austin Bay)

As I've noted in the post The Memento Syndrome: Humanity's Short-Term Memory, we tend to think that anything that's relatively new in our lifetime, has never happened before. So this quote from John Quincy Adams on Islam, is revealing. From The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer, page 83:

John Quincy Adams on Islam:

"In the seventh century of the Christian era, a wandering Arab of the lineage of Hagar [i.e., Muhammad], the Egyptian, [.....] Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST.- TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE.... Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant ... While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men."

(Capitals are in the original -- the boldfacing has been added for this blog post.)

The behavior of radical Islamist terrorists has nothing to do with Iraq or Israel. It's been going on since the seventh century.

[...]

Read More

HT Blackfive

Fortunately someon told the JAG the facts of life and the order was rescinded.

*****

Via Seamus, this interesting and horrifying story of Army legal interference where it wasn't needed from the Washington Times - Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough's Inside the Ring:

Sniper rounds

An Army judge advocate general (JAG) temporarily banned Army and Marine Corps snipers from using a highly accurate open-tip bullet.

The JAG, we are told, mistakenly thought the open-tip round was the same as hollow-point ammunition, which is banned. The original open-tip was known as Sierra MatchKing and broke all records for accuracy in the past 30 years.

The difference between the open-tip and the hollow point is that the open tip is a design feature that improves accuracy while the hollow point is designed for increasing damage when it hits a target.

About 10 days ago, the Army JAG in Iraq ordered all snipers to stop using the open-tip 175-grain M118LR bullet, claiming, falsely, it was prohibited. Instead of the open-tip, snipers were forced to take M-60 machine gun rounds out of belts and use them instead.

[...]
Read More

Update:

See this update at Blackfive. This GI was trying to accomplish his mission and ran a foul of the legal eagles who think they know something but don't!

By CLIFFORD D. MAY
Scripps Howard News Service
18-JAN-06

Four years after terrorists slaughtered 3,000 innocent Americans, it should go without saying that the "international community" would not let a terrorist-sponsoring nation acquire nuclear weapons.

But it does not go without saying. On the contrary, the rulers of Iran, who subscribe to an ideology not appreciably different from Osama bin Laden's, are moving closer than ever to getting their own nukes.

And they are not bothering to disguise the uses to which the weapons may be put. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has infamously threatened to wipe Israel "off the map."

Less well-known: He promises a "world without America," adding recently that such a goal is "attainable, and surely can be achieved."

Europeans who hear such statements and think, "Oh, well, too bad for those Israelis and Americans, but not my problem," need to think again.

"The message of the (Islamic) revolution is global," Ahmadinejad also has said. "Allah willing, Islam will conquer what? It will conquer all the mountaintops of the world."

Hassan Abbassi, "intelligence" adviser to the Iranian president, has been more specific: "We have a strategy drawn up for the destruction of Anglo-Saxon civilization," he boasted. "We must make use of everything we have at hand to strike at this front by means of our suicide operations or by means of our missiles."

[...]

Read More

HT Austin Bay

Did I mention that the pirates of this region are the same as the Barbary Pirates of the Marian Corps anthem

The lede:

The U.S. Navy boarded an apparent pirate ship in the Indian Ocean and detained 26 men for questioning, the Navy said Sunday. The 16 Indians and 10 Somali men were aboard a traditional dhow that was chased and seized Saturday by the U.S. guided missile destroyer USS Winston S. Churchill, said Lt. Leslie Hull-Ryde of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command in Bahrain.

The dhow stopped fleeing after the Churchill twice fired warning shots during the chase, which ended 87 kilometers (54 miles) off the coast of Somalia, the Navy said. U.S. sailors boarded the dhow and seized a cache of small arms.

The dhow’s crew and passengers were being questioned Sunday aboard the Churchill to determine which were pirates and which were legitimate crew members, Hull-Ryde said.

I know Lieutenant Hull-Ryde. She was my escort when I was on the USS Carl Vinson, Kearsarge, and Normandy last summer. She’s an excellent information officer.

Read this for background on piracy and counter-pirate operations (a column of mine from November 2005).

[...]

Read More

HT LGF

sunday, january 22, 2006

According to a very disturbing report at the Telegraph, satellite images reveal secret expansion of Iran’s Natanz nuclear facility: Iran extends nuclear plant in secret. (Hat tip: Link Mecca.)

Iran has secretly extended the uranium enrichment plant at the centre of the international controversy over its resumption of banned nuclear research earlier this month, satellite imagery has revealed.

Seven buildings have been erected around the concealed centrifuges which Western governments fear will be used to manufacture weapons-grade uranium at the Natanz site, 200 miles south of Teheran.

The discovery has heightened fears that Iran is stepping up the pace of its suspected weapons programme, in breach of international agreements, since it removed International Atomic Energy Authority seals on nuclear equipment at the site 10 days ago.

Western intelligence agencies are focusing on alarming similarities in satellite imagery of Iran’s nuclear sites, which the regime claims are for civilian purposes, and atomic facilities in Pakistan used to make the raw materials for nuclear weapons, as they try to identify the purpose of the Natanz construction spree.

Read More

HT Austin Bay

Read Mohammed’s update at Iraq the Model.

Here’s the upside and downside:

All are convinced now that solutions lie within politics and negotiations but what concerns us now is that some parties will perhaps keep a high ceiling for their demands. It is true that no single bloc can form a government without forming a coalition with other bloc(s) but the number of seats each bloc got will remain the factor that decides the form of and terms of cooperation despite the calls for forming a government of national unity that overlooks election results and focuses more on dealing with the current challenges and dangers.

Al Qaeda definitely lost the election:

While the American embassy today resumed its talks with the Sunni leading politicians, 6 Iraqi militant groups announced that they will unite their forces and join the rest of resident of Anbar and Salahiddin in fighting al-Qeda. The new militant groups included the Islamic army, the Anbar martyr’s brigades and the 1920 revolution brigades.

This change sounds positive and encouraging. Although I always preferred that the government deals with such issues instead of militias because if those militias succeed in their new mission, they will have demands and they will gain leverage in later bargains when they will be asked to drop their arms (that’s if they have a plan to do so in the future).

For further background, here’s my post on the election results.

Link

[Austin Bay's previous post]

1/21/2006
The Bad News In The Iraqi Election

First the good news, which far exceeds the downside. Iraq has a democratically elected government, and this speaks volumes. Here are a few sample pages from the volumes. Iraq demonstrates it is possible for a predominantly Arab Muslim nation to escape tyrants and defeat terrorists. The Iraqi people are, to use the idiom, “pulling the gun away” –a phrase I first heard a Syrian friend of mine use and later a former Jordanian government minister. The ripples from Iraq are already changing the Middle East’s political landscape. Another volume: It is possible to escape “bad history” –embedded ethnic and religious conflicts. Escaping bad history is a step toward “modernity.” (We can and should debate what that entails, but one facet of a modern political system is the individual’s ability to express political and social opinions freely and without –how should I put it– excessive fear. A slap or harsh rejoinder is one thing, a bullet something else entirely.)

So what’s the bad news? I am disappointed in the poor showing of Iyad Allawi’s secular list(the Iraqi List). Allawi impressed me with his strategic savvy and tactical finesse. Allawi’s leadership in the critical months of July 2004 through January 2005 (think Najaf, Fallujah, and the elections) was extraordinary. He should have won a Nobel Peace Prize. Perhaps two decades from now, when the leftish who nominate candidates and elect prize winners are either dead or embarassed, Allawi will receive one.

Here’s an AP report on Allawi (via the Guardian).

[...]

Read More

HT Roger L. Simon

This and other comment have popped up in the Blogos today re whether the conventional wisdom of the ME states controlling oil my be a flawed perception.

*****

January 22, 2006: Oil... have we got it all wrong?

Jad Mouawad, writing in Friday's NYT, expresses the CW on the current standoff with the mullahs:

As world leaders and diplomats debate how to deal with Iran's nuclear ambitions, the worry among analysts these days is the fate of the country's oil sector. The prospect of sanctions against Iran might have been easily shrugged off a few years ago, when the world sat comfortably on millions of barrels of untapped oil capacity. But the picture today is quite different. Iran exports more oil than the world's current spare capacity.

Conventional as that thinking is, I would have been prepared to believe it had I not received an email today from Roger Stern of the Johns Hopkins University Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering. Stern was calling my attention to an article he had just published that he thought might be of interest to readers of this blog. I think he's right - at least it was of interest to me. Science News Daily describes the article:

In a peer-reviewed journal article, Roger J. Stern argues that the decades-old belief that petroleum-rich Persian Gulf nations must be appeased to keep oil flowing is imaginary, and the threat of deployment of an "oil weapon" is toothless. His review of economic and historical data also shows that untapped oil supplies are abundant, not scarce.

Stern's analysis, titled "Oil market power and United States national security," appears in the Jan. 16-20 online Early Edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In the article Stern argues that the longstanding U.S. security concern that our oil supply could be threatened is wrong.

I had read this argument before, about the actual abundance (not scarcity) of oil, but I had never seen them fleshed out to the degree they have been in Stern's article. Of course, if true, the implications of this are many on the global war on terror. Although a scientist and writing, presumably, for his colleagues, Stern does not stint on these observations, pointing out how OPEC is a consortium generating wt (wealth transfer) to states like Saudi Arabia and Iran that export terrorism and may soon turn into nuclear-armed regional super powers. By believing falsely in the scarcity of their product, we have in a sense been suckered into their game.

The article is here. If there was ever a case of "read the whole thing," this is it. (Warning: Pdf... plus your algebra skills may be tested, if they are, like mine, a little rusty)

Read it All

HT ThreatWatch (Bill Roggio) via Instapundit

This is good news.

*****

Faultlines in Iraq's Islamist Insurgency
Groups vow to fight al-Qaeda, and Zarqawi's attempts to unite the insurgency
By Bill Roggio

The location of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaeda in Iraq’s commander, and the state of the Islamist insurgency have been recent topics of conversation. Late last year, ThreatsWatch stated the focal point of the insurgency has shifted from Anbar province to the regions north of Baghdad. Today, Coalition forces believe Zarqawi is currently operating “in Diyala province near Baghdad…If his presence in Diyala is confirmed, it will reinforce the belief that violence follows him around Iraq.”

The Sunday Times: reports that, according to “a leading insurgent who met [Zarqawi] two weeks ago”, Zarqawi “goes to sleep every night wearing a suicide belt packed with explosives,” and provides clues as to Zarqawi’s questionable status in relation to other insurgency groups. During a meeting designed to forge alliances with other Islamist insurgency groups, Zarqawi is reported to have “put on a show of humility at a two-day meeting to secure the co-operation of the Army of the Victorious Sect and other groups with Al-Qaeda in Iraq.”

Zarqawi is said to have personally attended to the needs of his guests, led prayer sessions and washed the insurgent leaders prior to prayer. While the acts committed by Zarqawi are not uncommon in the Muslim world, they are not the actions of a confident man secure in his position vis-a-vis the insurgent groups. Zarqawi is attempting to demonstrate his piousness in an attempt to convince the groups his commitment to Islam is sincere.

[...]

Zarqawi was able to secure the commitment of a little known Islamist group called The Victorious Sect and five small organization, however he was unable to reach out to two largest groups, Ansar al-Sunnah and the Islamic Army in Iraq, two groups that have worked with al-Qaeda in the past.

Ansar al-Sunnah’s decision is curious, as its goals are nearly identical to al-Qaeda: the ejection of the “occupation Armies” and the establishment of an Islamist state. There are obviously enough differences between the groups. And Ansar al-Sunnah may be keeping its distance from al-Qaeda based on the increased unpopularity of the group, and keeping the door open for future political maneuvers. The decision of the Islamic Army in Iraq is understandable, as this is a largely nationalist organization which resents al-Qaeda’s foreign leadership and slaughter of Iraqi civilians.

[...]

The defection of insurgent groups and Sunni support is a continuing trend which must give Zarqawi and al-Qaeda’s high command pause. The refocus of al-Qaeda efforts towards Afghanistan becomes understandable as more information on the fractionalization of Iraqi’s insurgency is released.

Read it All

HT Publis Pundit via Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

Robert Mayer, The Publis Pundit:

Below is a statement received from the Alliance of Iranian Women, a truly revolutionary group that opposes the gender apartheid committed by the mullahs in their country. It is a protest against Code Pink’s despicable use of Iranian women demonstrating against the regime in their anti-war ads. Given the huge opposition they’re getting for this heinous act, hopefully it will never happen again.
*****

The Alliance of Iranian Women protests the actions of the Code Pink activists who have distorted the legitimate struggle of Iranian women, for their human rights, to suit their own political and ideological agenda.

The top part of the picture is what the A.N.S.W.E.R coalition/Code pink activists, have photoshopped the top part of the photo (below), out of the original photo, shown in the bottom. First, they have mixed the picture of some western women to the original Iranian women’s picture. Then, not only they have made up slogans, in pink placards, they have even doctored the courageous gaze of the Iranian heroine into a Cheshire cat grin. The real sign in the back, in the original picture below, is calling for equal justice, not the irrelevant Arabic writing. The young woman in center of the photograph is holding a white sheet in her hand that reads: “We are the children of Cyrus, the pioneers of human rights,” not JOIN US. Also the girl, on the right holding the large sign was not a part of this demonstration; she is yet from another photo taken last year at the Tehran University sit-in that was in protest against the Islamic Regime paramilitary stations around the University campus. Her sign in the original picture read: “This space belongs to us”, not HOW MANY LIVES PER GALLON?

All we ask is: if you do not support us do not use us for your own political games and maneuvering.



[...]

Read More

HT Dr. Zin - Regime Change Iran

On A7radio:
Military Attack against Iran Now Imminent
10:36 Jan 20, '06 / 20 Tevet 5766

World renowned investigative reporter and terror expert Kenneth R. Timmerman, author of the bestselling book "Countdown to Crisis: the Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran," and Carl Limbacher, reporter for NewMax.com, reveal that the US and Israel will destroy Iran's nuclear facilities in less than 10 weeks from now.

[...]

Read More

HT Winds of Change and Stratfro via Chicago Boyz

Here are four essays from the last several days re the case for a premptive strike or other actions against Iran.


The Case for Invading Iran
by Guest Author on January 19, 2006 01:24 PM

by Thomas Holsinger

America has come to another turning point – whether our inaction will again engulf the world and us in a nightmare comparable to World War Two. This will entail loss of our freedom as the price of domestic security measures against terrorist weapons of mass destruction, though we might suffer nuclear attack before implementing those measures. The only effective alternative is American use of pre-emptive military force against an imminent threat – Iranian nuclear weapons, which requires that we invade Iran and overthrow its mullah regime as we did to Iraq’s Baathist regime.

All the reasons for invading Iraq apply doubly to Iran, and with far greater urgency. Iran right now poses the imminent threat to America which Iraq did not in 2003. Iran may already have some nuclear weapons, purchased from North Korea or made with materials acquired from North Korea, which would increase its threat to us from imminent to direct and immediate.

Iran’s mullahs are about to produce their first home-built nuclear weapons this year. If we permit that, many other countries, some of whose governments are dangerously unstable, will build their own nuclear weapons to deter Iran and each other from nuclear attack as our inaction will have demonstrated our unwillingness to keep the peace. This rapid and widespread proliferation will inevitably lead to use of nuclear weapons in anger, both by terrorists and by fearful and unstable third world regimes, at which point the existing world order will break down and we will suffer every Hobbesian nightmare of nuclear proliferation.

[...]

Read it All

*****

Our Darkening Sky: Iran and the War
by Joe Katzman on January 20, 2006 06:14 AM

Parthenon ruins

"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher.

Night shall be thrice night over you,
And heaven an iron cope.
Do you have joy without a cause,
Yea, faith without a hope?"
-- G.K. Chesterton, The Ballad of the White Horse

In the wake of Tom Holsinger's article "The Case For Invading Iran," I was going to enter a comment, but it became long enough to deserve a full post. To begin with, it's time to lay my own cards on the table.

I personally believe that we're very likely to see at least 10 million dead in the Middle East within the next two decades, with an upper limit near 100 million. I do not believe pre-emptive action will be taken against Iran. I do, however, believe the extremist mullahs in Iran mean exactly what they say. They are steeped in an ideology that believes suicide/murder to be the holiest and most moral act possible. They have been diligent in laying strategic plans for an offensive Islamic War against Israel, America and the West. Plans backed by 25 years of action, and stated no less clearly than Mein Kampf. I believe that Ahmedinajad's talk of 12th Imam end-times and halos around his head at the UN aren't the ravings of an isolated nut, simply an unusually public (and unusually noticed) expression of beliefs that are close to mainstream within their ruling class. That class of "true believer" imams and revolutionary guard types have been quietly consolidating their control over all sectors of Iranian society over the last few months, and I do not believe anyone in the world today has both the will and the capability to stop them. A key pillar of The Bush Doctrine is about to fail.

At some point within the next decade, therefore, I believe that they will not only have nuclear weapons, but that they will act to make good on their stated beliefs and plans. With eventual "3 Conjectures" level results as noted above. I hope you're all invested in solar, folks, and have some panels up on your houses.

It gets worse.

[...]

Read it All

*****

Just A Second – It’s Not That Dark Yet (And We Have A Really Big Flashlight)
by Armed Liberal on January 20, 2006 10:45 PM

“Diplomacy is the art of saying ‘nice doggie’ while reaching for a stick.”

Tom and Joe have (respectively) blogged the case for immediately and unilaterally invading or bombing Iran in response to their obvious intention and capability to build nuclear weapons.

I’m unconvinced, and I think that they are overlooking several critical points which need to be considered in making a decision of this import.

[...]

Read it All

*****

Stratfor: Geopolitical Intelligence Report - January 17, 2006


Iran's Redefined Strategy

By George Friedman

The Iranians have broken the International Atomic Energy Agency seals
on some of their nuclear facilities. They did this very deliberately
and publicly to make certain that everyone knew that Tehran was
proceeding with its nuclear program. Prior to this, and in parallel,
the Iranians began to -- among other things -- systematically bait the
Israelis, threatening to wipe them from the face of the earth.

The question, of course, is what exactly the Iranians are up to. They
do not yet have nuclear weapons. The Israelis do. The Iranians have
now hinted that (a) they plan to build nuclear weapons and have
implied, as clearly as possible without saying it, that (b) they plan
to use them against Israel. On the surface, these statements appear to
be begging for a pre-emptive strike by Israel. There are many things
one might hope for, but a surprise visit from the Israeli air force is
not usually one of them. Nevertheless, that is exactly what the
Iranians seem to be doing, so we need to sort this out.

There are four possibilities:

1. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, is insane and wants to
be attacked because of a bad childhood.
2. The Iranians are engaged in a complex diplomatic maneuver, and this
is part of it.
3. The Iranians think they can get nuclear weapons -- and a deterrent
to Israel -- before the Israelis attack.
4. The Iranians, actually and rationally, would welcome an Israeli --
or for that matter, American -- air strike.

[...]

Read it All