American F16’s to Southwest Asia
From Leon de Winter’s excellent Weblog:
An Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear installations can only succeed under an American air umbrella. Today, there are signs that the US is sending air units to ‘Southwest Asia.’
We all know it ’s coming, the Mullahs know this as well - it is just a matter of time and surprise, sooner than later. I am still anxious to know how Joschka (Ann.: the former German Foreign Minister) thinks about this all.
Here is the message about the F16 deployment.
Oh God! Please! Let the Israeli Airforce strike the Iranian nuclear threats! And please, let George W. be wise enough not to put a spoke in Israel’s wheel! I beg You so much!
I agree with the point made by one (well, not the only one) poster on Mr. Winter’s website. I think the US is going to have to do it (and we are preparing, obviously). Isreal’s explicit involvement would be highly problematic given the recent political stress they are now under with Sharon’s recent political absence. I hope we do it sooner rather than later though. No matter what, the die has already been cast.
Comment by rc - January 11, 2006 @ 7:20 pm
This is from the “Stars and Stripes European Edition”.
Thursday, January 12, 2006
“The 2nd Brigade, 1st Armored Division from Baumholder, Germany, has already deployed to Kuwait and will remain there available as a call-forward force for the CENTCOM commander, to support operations in Iraq, the DOD announced Friday”.
This is interesting because we have a finite amount of combat ready brigades ready to rotate into SW Asia. You don’t casually deploy a combat brigade to Kuwait to just sit and train unless you anticipate using them for something. Naturally, they fulfill a role as the CENTCOM commander’s reserve for Iraq however, their deployed location begs the question as to what other roll they might serve. Hmmm, another piece on the U.S.—Iran chessboard…
Comment by Claudia - January 11, 2006 @ 11:14 pm
It will take more than the Eagles of Zion to do the job: the Iranians learned from the Israeli atacks on Iraq - their facilities are well protected against air attacks. It will take nothing less than ground forces to come in and dig them out.
Time to declare victory in Iraq and move our pawns one square over on the board?
Comment by ralphieboy - January 12, 2006 @ 12:37 am
Hmmm. Facing the stubbornness of both the Iranian’s regime(!) and Bush’s tin soldier warmonger policy, let’s at least hope this clash isn’t going to be as arbitrary and dissipative as the Iraqi one.
(Claudia, I was amused by you quoting from the “Stars and Stripes European Edition”, mwhaha. Now, I know where you borrowed your differenciated sapience in all things war:D)
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 12, 2006 @ 4:51 pm
Many of the 1st Armored Division returned from Iraq in early 2004. A year deployed..a year home….and a year deployed. Add to this that V corp is now 1st Armor. I wouldn’t read much into this deployment.
Comment by JLWB - January 12, 2006 @ 9:06 pm
Fubar
“Hmmm. Facing the stubbornness of both the Iranian’s regime (!) and Bush’s tin soldier warmonger policy, let’s at least hope this clash isn’t going to be as arbitrary and dissipative as the Iraqi one.”
You live where? In Europe?
You don’t care if Israel is wiped off the planet?
Nukes, the missiles that can deliver them to Israel, or Europe are now in play.. Do you worry about the current rulers of Iran? Do you think this is a joke?
Iran has crossed the line. That is what the UN said. Do you know why? Do you understand the danger? Do you have a clue about the timeline?
Comment by JLWB - January 12, 2006 @ 9:26 pm
ralphieboy,
Are you going to be one of those “pawns”?
If not, do not speak so lightly about them!
They are sons, daughters, husbands and wives, with people back home who suffer each day they are in harms way!
Comment by JLWB - January 12, 2006 @ 9:35 pm
JLWB,
There are forces of moderation in Iran, they nearly won the last election. But the conservative clerics had a strong ally in George Bush: by declaring them to be part of the Axis of Evil and then invading a neighboring AofA country, he assured that the fundamentalists would gain the upper hand.
Comment by ralphieboy - January 12, 2006 @ 10:44 pm
Not true and here’s why:
The problem with Iranian moderates is one of false labeling. The American liberal media, the former Clinton administration, and a large majority of European politicos have deluded themselves into believing that there exists in Iran a so-called “moderate” political element. They would have the people of the West believe that these Iranian moderates are modern internationalists, operating from within a similar frame-work of morals, values, and motivations. This is a semantic smoke screen and is patently false.
Saying that former Iranian president Rafsanjani and others of his ilk are “moderates” is like saying Hermann Goering was a “moderate” Nazi. The back ground of these “moderates” is only incrementally less extreme then the fanatic positions taken by the Mullah’s who have run Iran with an iron fist since the revolution.
The United States has always been a convenient foil for the ire of the Mullah’s and thus, a convenient distraction for the Iranian people, who might otherwise focus inward and consider a second revolution (this time against the theocracy). Every nation’s government requires an enemy. For the Mullah’s, the United States fits that roll, regardless of our invading and conquering their previous hereditary foe (Baathist Iraq). We and Israel constitute the Iranian version of an “Axis of Evil”.
The European’s will continue to delude themselves about Iranian moderates until the day that a mature and deliverable Iranian nuclear weapons force is rammed down their throats. This will most likely occur in the form of political/military blackmail during some near-future crises. We American’s wish you the best of luck.
Comment by Claudia - January 13, 2006 @ 9:06 am
Claudia,
let’s look a bit farther back to the 1950’s, when the US installed a brutal dictator in the form of the Shah, who stifled or co-opted all moderate opposition and left nothing but extremists to take over when his corrupt regime finally collapsed in the late 70’s.
This is a pattern that has repeated itself all over the Arab world and has led us to be considered their Axis of Evil.
There are moderate forces in Iran, but they are so stymied and browbeaten by the Mullahs that it will take generations for them to resurface.
Comment by ralphieboy - January 13, 2006 @ 10:42 am
It’s heart warming to know that all the Mullah’s want to do is light up the Arab world with cheap electricity. If only George Bush would just let them. I’m sure once they do they will just give away all of that oil that they are sitting on to the rest of the world because they will not need it. Think what a better place the world would be if George would just let them.
Comment by L. Burg - January 13, 2006 @ 12:13 pm
Hello JLWB,
“You live where? In Europe?”
Aye. Europe is a good place to live in while our world is going nuts these days. Although our politicians are pretty good in keeping up with Orwellian laws since 09/11.
“You don’t care if Israel is wiped off the planet?”
You ask? Sure I do. I hope for them this won’t happen and I also recognize there’s not a spark of chance to get peace into Isreal soon. Maybe one day the tension will settle down more or less by itself like the Irland conflict? I don’t say LET’S JUST FUCKING SIT THERE, SCREW OUR THUMBS AND WATCH THEM KILL THEMSELVES. If Iran doesn’t stop it’s proceedings and the clash is inevitable, I hope at least the world will manage this conflict in unity and not let warmongers from US/UK go play anarchy games to their own rules, if any.
“Nukes, the missiles that can deliver them to Israel, or Europe are now in play.. Do you worry about the current rulers of Iran?”
Yes I do! First of all for the people of Iran itself. In the long term for us EU citizens, too. UN has to react quick.
“Do you think this is a joke?”
What exactly?
“Iran has crossed the line. That is what the UN said. Do you know why? Do you understand the danger? Do you have a clue about the timeline?”
Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes.
»Now let’s get to arms and kill ‘em all these damn Iranian bastards, aight!?«
Please don’t be silly.
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 13, 2006 @ 6:08 pm
So what do you suggest, Fubar?
Comment by M. Meyn - January 13, 2006 @ 6:15 pm
I suggest the UN to act prudent but quick and cohesive, whatever it takes. If it lets the warmongers just march into another Arabian country without legal ground once more, as if it were a badly designed computer game from the Cold War era, the Iranian regime would have achieved what the international terrorists did not yet do: To split the western world apart.
Sanctions, if the Iranian regime doesn’t listen to the UN.Overthrow, if it is being a serious Threat to the world.
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 13, 2006 @ 6:40 pm
Fubar,
the only chance of a “diplomatic” solution of this conflict is strong pressure and threatening by the USA, the EU + Russia and China! So far especially the Russians were happily delivering nuclear technique to iran. Fortunatly there seems to be some movement in Russias behaviour lately. But lets face it, chances are small these nations will form a strong alliance of political pressure on Iran. The results of a gathering of the UN security council are unclear aswell, not to mention Mr. Kofi “Dhimmi No.1″ Annan who thinks the involvement of the council is a bad idea.
Lets face it. Iran pokers high because they think the west is weak (especially the eu) and russia and china wont stand in unity with the west. Lets just hope they’re wrong…
Comment by Don Loc - January 13, 2006 @ 7:37 pm
Fubar, when did the UN ever “act prudent but quick and cohesive”? Where?Bosnia? Sudan? Rwanda? Give me ONE, just ONE example where the UN came in and actually put an end to the killing.
So, Fubar, “if the Iranian regime doesn’t listen to the UN.Overthrow, if it is being a serious Threat to the world.” You expect the UN to be able or willing to do this? And which countries in the UN will do this deed? We wouldn’t want the “warmongers” involved. So, without the Americans, Brits, Ausies and some really good people in Eastern Europe, who do you think will overthrow the government in Iran? And they will use “whatever it takes”……..what do you mean by whatever it takes?
“Serious threat”? They have said they want Isreal gone…..totally gone….and they are getting nukes. Prehaps you don’t think that dropping nukes on Isreal is a serious threat to the world. Which other countries do you feel can be destroyed without it being a serious threat?
I really hope you are not the idiot you seem to be! It would be nice if you were just a concerned person trying to promote reasoned discussion on important topics. Then again, you are FUBAR….which says it all!
Comment by JLWB - January 13, 2006 @ 9:07 pm
Hello JLWB,
in your last comment of haggard speculation and infantile insulting, there is even one sentence worth replying:
“when did the UN ever “act prudent but quick and cohesive”?”
The UN don’t have strike forces themselves yet, for practical reasons, only peacekeeping ones. However, members of the UN have obliged themselves to keep to international laws and have often done so through mandates.
You cannot simply go into a country, invade it and kill a few dozen thousands of people in the way, just because your country’s current legislation thinks it is ok. If you do so, the Iranian regime can as well easily come up with some faulty argumentation to do this upon Israel. Or why shouldn’t it?
The only reason the US regime hasn’t been called to account for possible war crimes is Mr Bush’s threat to send troops to Den Haag. If this is the way you think the world is working, then congrats! You’re an international anarchist.
I am a concerned person trying to promote reasoned discussion on important topics. You?
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 14, 2006 @ 2:30 am
(Claudia, I was amused by you quoting from the “Stars and Stripes European Edition”, mwhaha. Now, I know where you borrowed your differenciated sapience in all things war:D)
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 12, 2006 @ 4:51 pm
“…as opposed to your antiwar.com website, Fubar?”
Nice job…asshat!
Comment by Claudia - January 14, 2006 @ 3:57 am
Well, Mrs Claudia, I’m not reading only biased news to get the picture.
Comment by Capt. Fubar - January 16, 2006 @ 10:41 pm
L’information interessante que vous avez! I’am allant revenir bientot.
Comment by sex - June 10, 2007 @ 10:00 am
i’am really impressed!!
Comment by sesso - June 20, 2007 @ 5:05 am