Hezbollah/ Iran Training Sadr's Mahdi Army

[MOB]

http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2006/12/17/roadside_bombs_kill_troops_at_highest_rate_of_iraq_war/

Cheap and lethal, roadside bombs are the tactic of choice for both Sunni and Shia Muslim insurgent groups opposed to the US military presence. Authorities believe some insurgents are getting supplies and training from Iran and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

[MADem]

1. Well, sure...the Persians aren't gonna stop until they have hegemony over the middle east

Unless the Arab world unites and finds a way to push back at them.

They want to hark back to the glory days of the Persian Empire. I find their imperialism rather offensive, myself. They've nothing in common with the Arabs, save the shi'as. Their language, their traditions, even their food is different. Their attitude that they can be paternalistic bastards who determine the course of the Arab world is as hideous as our foolish pipe dream that we could democratize Iraq.

I think a little more self-determination is called for, nowadays....

[treestar]

2. Does this explain Ahmedinejad's anti-Israel stuff?

Because when I look at Iran, I don't see why they care whether or not there is an Israel. They are far away and hardly affected.

[burythehatchet]

5. All they care about is that Israel is a nuclear state that is

a protectorate of the country that openly called for the overthrow of a democratically elected government. Go figure.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

11. I would hardly call the government of Iran "democratically elected."

Just because you have a vote doesn't make it democratic.

[burythehatchet]

33. sorta like America?

[treestar]

14. So they figure Israel can hit them with a nuke?

But then why would Israel do that? Iran seems far enough away not to be a threat to Israel otherwise.

[MADem]

12. The Midget Mayor of Teheran is a puppet of the Ruling Council.

He has NO power of his own. The Council pulls the strings and out he goes. He is the sabre they rattle to keep the US at bay. He's the flag they wave to incite their fundie base. The only reason he has the gig is because the Council removed all of the progressive candidates from the ballot, and then rigged the votes via the mosques so he got most of the votes. It made FL 00 look like a free and fair election.

The majority of the population hates his ass. He was roundly booed, his picture was set on fire, and the crowd chanted "DICTATOR!!" at him recently...and this was at U of Teheran, where shit tends to happen. Seeds of revolution were planted there in the late 70's...in the 50's...and here we go again. The kids just want to have FUN. They're sick of the fundy version of sharia law.

Funny, as far as Israel goes, they used to have incredibly good back-channel relations with Iran--second to none under the Shah, and even under Khomeini, they could do business in plausibly deniable fashion. Back in the day, Mossad was all over that place, and Iran was kind of like a Switzerland for spies from Russia, Israel, the US, UK, you name it. The Israelis had some of the best HUMINT assets going, so they say...don't know if that is still the case, but it would not surprise me. --

[treestar]

20. I talked to an Iranian-American who had visited recently

And got the impression that unlike as the US media tends to indicate, the population, especially youth, is not really into the Muslim-fundie view now. More like you say, just want to live and have fun and text each other making fun of the clerics, who haven't figured out how to stop them from doing so, making a techno area of free speech not possible in earlier times.

[MADem]

23. Yep...Iranians are great people, really. They have cultural peculiarities, like any group, but

they're open, friendly, nice folks, by and large. The best of Iranians reminds me of the best of Americans--the things that we say are our attributes, the Iranians will say are theirs as well...compassion, willingness to help out and pitch in, friendliness, and so on. Of course, every country has its share of jerks, and both countries nowadays have huge assholes at the helm...

It is only a matter of time in Iran, I think, before they say 'ENOUGH!'. Most of the population is under thirty--they're sick of the crap and unwilling to put up with it for too much longer.

[treestar]

28. Some of the nicest people I know

are originally from Iran. It's harder to hate a group when you know some people from it. Makes you realize, the jerks are few and far between and every culture has them, and most of us don't want to fight.

Which is why I get so frustrated debating the freeper-types - they act like they can label an entire group as "wanting to kill us" and it is ridiculous - their ignorance of the world is astounding, if they truly believe what they are saying.

[cali]

27. This just isn't entirely true.

The more I read, the more it appears that Ahmadinejad does have some power, albeit limited and chiefly due to his brand of populism. You're right that the Guardian Council vets all candidates, but do you have any links to evidence that the vote was, as you claim, rigged from the Mosques?

Nor is it my understanding that the majority of the population hates him. Citing as an example, a small group of students, who demonstrated against him, is hardly evidence that most of the population hates him.

[MADem]

32. Yes it is. It's entirely true. The midget mayor serves only at the pleasure of the Council

Here is an Arab news article that talks about what happened with the latest elections (the turnout numbers are indicative of the clown's support, which is about level with the Monkey's): http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=89770&d=9&m=12&y=2006
Read this eye opening article: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/weekinreview/17MacFARQUHAR.html
In the days before the general election last Friday for the Assembly of Experts, an 86-member council that might well choose Iran’s next supreme leader, some candidates allied with Mr. Ahmadinejad’s clerical mentor were eliminated as unqualified. In addition, when the president visited Amir Kabir University in Tehran last week, a small group of students burned his picture and chanted “Death to the Dictator!”

The protest was less important than the way it was reported. It was featured on the evening news on state television, which is controlled by the Islamic Republic’s powerful, but possibly ailing, supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Conservative newspapers and the Web site run by the former commander of the Revolutionary Guards also reported it....such publicity seemed to signal that someone fairly senior is less than enchanted with Mr. Ahmadinejad.

“There is dissent in Iran,” said Vali Nasr, author of “The Shiite Revival” and a professor of Middle Eastern politics at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. “The perspective the U.S. has of Iran being a monolithic country under this demagogue is not correct.”

The first fissures in Mr. Ahmadinejad’s popular image come at a potentially significant moment. The Iraq Study Group recommended that the United States open a dialogue with Iran....... President Ahmadinejad, they point out, does not control the armed forces, which lack an air force and a navy anyway. The economy is so decrepit that Iran, a leading oil producer, has to import an estimated 40 percent of its gasoline.

“It’s time for a reality check — Iran is a third world power,” said Ervand Abrahamian, an expert at Baruch College on Iranian opposition movements....It is true that the president was once a Revolutionary Guard officer, and courts the military with important patronage, like allowing its business wing to branch into the oil construction sector. Over all, though, he faces limitations akin to those faced by former President Mohamed Khatami: the main levers of power — the 450,000-man armed forces, the judiciary and the state-run broadcasting service — all report to the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei.

The midget mayor is having popularity problems because he won't shut up. And they are being reported in the local AND world press only because the Supreme Council wants him boxed in. They make the decisions, not the puppet president, and certainly not the voters--the voters are given a choice of "approved" candidatespuppets. The Midget Mayor has been a useful tool, but now he's less useful so they'll just maybe have to swap him out with someone who presents a better face to the world.

The Supreme Council has decided they want to talk to us. Thus, they are marginalizing nutcase, and allowing more reformers in government (that also serves to quell dissent, which is rising in a big way). But make no mistake, this isn't "democracy in action." These decisions are strategic and designed so that the clerics can hold on to power.

Results emerging yesterday from Friday’s elections across Iran signal a bruising setback for Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, just 19 months after he won a landslide victory to become Iran’s president.

‘The Pleasant Scent of Service’, a candidate list endorsed by Mr Ahmadi-Nejad in the local elections, failed to make a nationwide breakthrough and, with partial results announced, was set to be a minority on the 15-seat Tehran city council.

In elections to the Assembly of Experts, the clerical body that chooses and supervises Iran’s supreme leader, the pragmatic conservative Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani bounced back from his defeat by Mr Ahmadi-Nejad in last year’s presidential election.

Mr Rafsanjani was comfortably in first place in Tehran, with over half the votes counted.

A victory of such scale would strengthen Mr Rafsanjani’s standing in Iran’s collective leadership, where he has advocated a more pragmatic international approach and has criticised Mr Ahmadi-Nejad’s handling of Iran’s nuclear programme....“These elections are defeat for Mr Ahmadi-Nejad, if not an earthquake,” said an ally of Mr Rafsanjani. “The president should revise his more radical policies.” ... http://www.ft.com/cms/s/8b021d30-8de7-11db-ae0e-0000779e2340.htm

As for the mosque rigging, that is common knowledge--no secret at all. It's even mentioned here, but you can find it pretty much anywhere with a minute of googling: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_presidential_election,_2005

After the first round of the election, some people, including Mehdi Karroubi, the pragmatic reformist candidate who ranked third in the first round but was the first when partial results were first published, have alleged that a network of mosques, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps militiary forces, and Basij militia forces have been illegally used to generate and mobilize support for Ahmadinejad. Karroubi has explicitly alleged that Mojtaba Khamenei, a son of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, was involved. Ayatollah Khamenei then wrote to Karroubi and mentioned that these allegations are below his dignity and will result in a crisis in Iran, which he will not allow. As a reply, Karroubi resigned from all his political posts, including an Advisor to the Supreme Leader and a member of Expediency Discernment Council, on both of which he had been installed by Khamenei <2>. The day after, on June 20, a few reformist morning newspapers, Eghbal, Hayat-e No, Aftab-e Yazd, and Etemaad were stopped from distribution by the general prosecutor of Tehran, Saeed Mortazavi, for publishing Karroubi's letter.

Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the leading candidate, has also pointed to organized and unjust interventions by "guiding" the votes, and has supported Karroubi's complaint <3>.

Also, some political groups, including the reformist party Islamic Iran Participation Front, have alleged that Ahmadinejad had only ranked second because of the illegal support and advertising activities for him during the voting by the supervisors selected by the Guardian Council, while the supervisors should have remained impartisan according to the election law <4>. Also, the reformist newspaper Shargh has pointed to an announcement by Movahhedi Kermani, the official representative of the supreme leader in Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, mentioning "vote for a person who keeps to the minimum in his advertisements and doesn't lavish", which uniquely pointed to Ahmadinejad. <5>

Many of the controversies include the Guardian Council in the illegal activities, including it publishing an opinion poll before the election putting Ahmadinejad as the front-runner against all other opinion polls, and it announcing the partial results of the election on the day after the election, putting Ahmadinejad on the second rank while he was still in the third rank in the partial statistics published by the Ministry of Interior, which led to President Khatami going to the Ministry several times and explicitly asking the Council to not announce any more partial results.


A book that explains how the joint actually works: http://www.cfr.org/publication/11118/

Those students, they're pissed, but they are the tip of the iceberg. And that asswipe front man is NOT a progressive guy. Just because he joined the Bush Hater's Club doesn't make him a nice person, and I am stunned at how many people are clueless as to what he's actually all about. Anyone who can get behind the execution of teenagers for 'crimes against chastity' by hanging them from a crane is a sick fuck.

[Warren Stupidity]

38. Before we get too condescending about the peculiar

form of democracy practiced in the hideous theocracy of Iran, we should reflect that our own democracy is, to put it mildly, vastly deformed itself. True we do not have anything as overt as the Guradian Council, instead we do our vetting through more indirect means, but the effect: rigid orthodoxy for all serious candidates, is pretty well maintained.

[MADem]

40. Two wrongs don't make a right. Why must everything be a "compare and contrast" exercise?

Certainly our government system isn't perfect. I don't know anyone who would say it is.

But to suggest that because ours isn't perfect means that we can't criticize a government that is brutally repressive and viciously anti-human rights in everyday conduct is a bit too much. I mean, yeah, we have the death penalty too, but we don't hang teenagers with nooses suspended from cranes in public squares for crimes against chastity, or for being gay. We don't have a law on the books that formally prohibits females from running for President.

The government of Iran is a complete and total mess. Their revolution has been a failure. It's only a matter of time before the people get fed up and go for it again. I hope this time they can do it without too much outside interference.

[Warren Stupidity]

44. "But to suggest "

well of course I didn't suggest that we can't criticize Iran, I suggested that we not get too condescending about how malformed their democracy is as ours is not much better. And as a nation that has recently murdered something like half a million Iraqis, and is one of the leading state execution nations on the planet, and has one of the highest incarceration rates on the planet, I wouldn't be too strident about the brutality of the Iranian regime either. Something about glass houses and stone throwing comes to mind.

[burythehatchet]

4. YOU find Iranian imperialism offensive??! Are you series?

Is imperialism reserved for white folk these days?

[MADem]

7. A bit short on the reading comprehension abilities, are you?

I invite your renewed attention to the last sentence in the second paragraph of my above post. The bit about the hideous pipe dream. Do reread it.

Persians, ya know, are "white folk." Not that it matters.

[burythehatchet]

9. Yeah, just like Indians are often classified as caucasians

especially the migrants from the Rhine valley. No thanks.

[burythehatchet]

10. So then the message would be

"I feel bad that we do in your neighborhood, but please be cool about it and don't make a fuss".

[MADem]

13. I've no idea what the heck you're talking about. Do what in 'your neighborhood?'

If you're trying to suggest somehow, in a convoluted and very unclear fashion, that I somehow approve of US imperialism, let me put that assertion out on the curb. It's untrue.

It would help if you actually read the words before you answer....

[burythehatchet]

34. Whether you approve or not, US imperialism continues

it seems that for that action there is an equal and opposite reaction. We just don't like it when people react.

[MADem]

39. WTF are you TALKING about? Did you not READ what I wrote about the

US in my post upthread? What, you think that there can only be ONE imperialist in the world?
There's nothing for <<<ME>>> to approve, or not. Just because the Persians have imperialist designs on the Arab world doesn't mean the US doesn't do the same shit all over the globe, as do other nations. The subject here, though, isn't US imperialism.

I really don't get what the hell you're going for, here. Are you denying the Persian desire for hegemony, is that it? Because if you are, you're just dead wrong.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. You link does not substantiate your title's claim.

IEDs have been the tactic of choice for the predominantly Sunni insurgency since the fall of Bagdad in 2003. IEDs are not the weapon of choice for Hezbollah, and there is little or no evidence that the Shiite militias are either being trained by Hezbollah or by Iran. The article you cited inthe Globe simply notes that IEDs continue to be the most lethal tactic in use against our forces. The closest it gets to your claim is here:

"Cheap and lethal, roadside bombs are the tactic of choice for both Sunni and Shia Muslim insurgent groups opposed to the US military presence. Authorities believe some insurgents are getting supplies and training from Iran and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

Most of the explosives, US officials say, are assembled with munitions left over from Saddam Hussein's arsenal, while others are built from explosives smuggled across Iraq's porous borders."

However while stating the party line ("authorities believe") the reporter quickly contrasts that with the obvious reality: "Most of the explosives, US officials say, are assembled with munitions left over from Saddam Hussein's arsenal". No shit. That is why they have been in continuous use since the vey first week of the occupation.

Bryan Bender (the Globe reporter) does a credible job of both stating and discrediting the official War Party explanation for the onging lethality of the resistance.

The article however neglects to point out that as the roads are essential to the huge logistical supply problem our bases in Iraq present, the IED attacks are more than just lethal, they are exposing the weakest link in our force presence in the region.

However, lets go with your assertion. Ok, Hezbollah and Iran are training Shiite militias. What if anything ought we do about that?

[MOB]

8. I think it does

I think it does substantitate it as far as it probably can be substantiated at the present time. No use sifting through pages of redacted classified Intel reports.

I think, btw, that is reporting goes beyond the "standard War reporting." We seem to be getting a clearer picture of the war ever since the election (and Rummy's resignation).

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Then your reading comprehension is short

and you have no explanation for how IEDs have been in use by the predominantly sunni insurgents, who are certainly not trained by Iran or shiite Hezbollah, since day one. So your belief is based on faith as it is contradicted by plain fact.

However, more to the point. So what? What do you propose ought to be done about your alleged Iranian/Hezbollah support for the insurgency?

[malaise]

35. It does not n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

6. Let's suppose that's true. Then what? -nt

[Ms. Clio]

15. standard procedure here is to quote at least 4 paragraphs, not just one cherry-picked sentence

Your thread title is NOT the title of the article, and is very misleading.

Other than that, I second or third the question asked: So, what?

[MOB]

16. What are your thoughts?

Hezbollaid

By Daniel Politi

Posted Tuesday, Nov. 28, 2006, at 5:14 AM ET

The New York Times leads with an anonymous "senior American intelligence official" telling the paper Hezbollah has played a role in training some members of Iraq's Shiite militia groups. According to the official, Hezbollah in Lebanon has trained anywhere from 1,000 to 2,000 members of the Mahdi army, the group led by Muqtada Sadr, and some members of Hezbollah have gone into Iraq to help train militia members. The Los Angeles Times leads with a dispatch from Baghdad that reveals previously unaffiliated Iraqis are joining sectarian militias, as well as increasingly violent neighborhood watch groups, in large numbers after last week's bombings and ensuing retaliations. The Washington Post leads with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan declaring urgent steps need to be taken in order to prevent a civil war in Iraq, which is very close to breaking out. National security adviser Stephen Hadley said the United States needs to "adapt" to the circumstances in Iraq.

USA Today leads with a new report by the United Nations and the World Bank that says efforts to curb Afghanistan's heroin production have been largely unsuccessful. Afghanistan's poorest have been the main people hurt by the attempts to get rid of the country's opium. Afgahnistan produces 87 percent of the world's opium, and a large chunk of the country's people are dependent on the crop for sustenance. The Wall Street Journal tops its worldwide newsbox with President Bush's departure for a NATO summit, which marks the beginning of a week that will consist of "crucial diplomacy about Iraq's future."

Iran has allegedly played a key role in uniting Hezbollah with the Mahdi army. Syria has also cooperated, but it is not clear whether senior government officials knew of the arrangement. Although Iran wants a stable Iraq, it apparently made a decision it could benefit from short-term instability in its neighboring country to discredit the United States.

Any revelations of links between Iran and the Iraqi insurgency should probably be met with skepticism since it would help the Bush administration for the information to come now, at a time when more people are calling on the United States to meet with Iran. To the Times' credit, it does treat the information with open skepticism, noting who could benefit from the revelation. Apparently concerned any word about these links could be seen as a (mis)information campaign, the NYT points out the revelation came "in response to questions from a reporter."

At the same time, though, there is little to counter the official's statement, besides the doubtful quote from one expert, who is quickly countered by another analyst who says it doesn't seem far-fetched. For what it's worth, the Post's lead story mentions near the end that an intelligence official also told the paper Iran has increased its efforts inside Iraq in the last year.

The LAT interviews several of the new members of the Shiite and Sunni groups, who say they joined the paramilitary groups because they don't trust the official forces to keep them safe. And everyone feels threatened these days. According to government counts obtained by the LAT, 524 people have been killed since Thursday.

The Post's lead also has some interesting nuggets of information thrown into the story. According to officials, Vice President Cheney was "basically summoned" by Saudi Arabia to discuss Iraq, and the trip was not the simple meeting of two allies, as was initially portrayed. The paper also talks to an intelligence official who says Sadr's Mahdi army has grown quickly in the last year and now has anywhere from 40,000 to 60,000 members, which makes it more effective than the official Iraqi army.

Although Annan, along with the Bush administration, isn't calling the violence in Iraq a civil war, others are not shying away from that claim. Some analysts have used the description in the past, and now everyone notes NBC has become the first television network to officially adopt the term. The LAT says it was the first major news organization to use it as a matter of policy starting from October, "without public fanfare."

The Post fronts a Marine Corps intelligence report from August that says U.S. troops are no longer able to control the insurgency in Iraq's Anbar province. Although the WP had already reported on the existence of the report in September, it now was able to get its hands on a copy, which reveals the bleakness of the situation in the western part of Iraq. Sunnis in Anbar are constantly fearful for their lives, as al-Qaeda in Iraq basically runs the province.

Everyone notes Iraqi President Jalal Talabani met with Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, yesterday and they vowed to work together to end the violence in Iraq.

Confirming previous statements, the WP and WSJ report the British defense secretary said many of the country's troops will be leaving Iraq in the next year.

The LAT is alone in fronting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's speech where he offered several concessions to the Palestinians if they promised to work toward peace. Olmert said Israel would be willing to release prisoners, get rid of checkpoints, and release the money it has kept from the Palestinian government.

The NYT is not impressed: "Those steps, essentially confidence-rebuilding measures, are far short of serious negotiations to end a conflict that is nearly 60 years old." The LAT's editorial page, however, sees it differently and says Olmert "unexpectedly extended an olive branch to the Palestinians."

USAT fronts word that several states and counties are banning people from smoking around children, even if it is in their homes or cars.

The papers note the U.S. Supreme Court decided not to intervene in a dispute over whether a federal prosecutor could review the phone records of two NYT reporters. This means the United States attorney in Chicago, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, could begin looking at the records this week.

Phoning it in … The LAT's Joel Stein makes the startling discovery that Hannidate, the dating service on conservative Fox News commentator Sean Hannity's Web site, allows same-sex couples to meet. Shocking! Where on earth does Stein get his ideas?

[Warren Stupidity]

18. No you first.

You've been asked three times at least here "so what", so it would be polite now for you to respond to the question.

[MOB]

21. Must you react to the news?

Can you not think for yourself?

[Ms. Clio]

22. can you not answer the question?

that would require you thinking for yourself, too.

[Warren Stupidity]

31. For a nube you are quite the number.

So can you answer the question? I concede your nonsense that Hezbollah and Iran are training and supplying the inurgents. What do we do about it?

[Ms. Clio]

19. My thoughts are based on the entirety of the article

They resemble Warren Stupidity's.

My question, again, is so what? Do you want to declare war on Iran and Hezbollah, or what?

[Ms. Clio]

24. anonymous "senior American intelligence official"

From the article: "Any revelations of links between Iran and the Iraqi insurgency should probably be met with skepticism since it would help the Bush administration for the information to come now, at a time when more people are calling on the United States to meet with Iran. To the Times' credit, it does treat the information with open skepticism, noting who could benefit from the revelation. Apparently concerned any word about these links could be seen as a (mis)information campaign, the NYT points out the revelation came "in response to questions from a reporter."


Oh, and do you remember when the U.S.S.R. invaded Afghanistan, and the U.S. armed, trained, and financed the mujahideen? What did the Soviets do?


Very interesting edit you performed there -- you did not post that article in your original response to me.

[MOB]

25. IMO: This hurts Bush

Hi Ms. Clio. I strongly don't like the picture of your dog btw.

I disagree with Slate's reading. I think this hurts Bush.

Look, would Hezbollah be organizing in Iraq if we had not invaded?

Bush policies in the Middle East have *strengthened* Hezbollah. They have not weakened them. And then they attacked Israel and repealed the Israeli counter-attack - all of this has only *emboldened* them. IMO that is a massive foreign policy failure!\

on we're on track to continue our mistakes there by not talking to Syria or Iran about Iraq. That was a recommendation made by the Iraq Study Group. The role of Hezbollah is why that recommendation is made.

[Ms. Clio]

26. You disagree with everyone, except, it seems, your own faith-based interpretation

Hezbollah has no significance in Iraq.

[MOB]

29. You think this helps Bush??

Hezbollah in Iraq has no significance!?

They are insignificant?

Do you think they are insignificant in Lebanon, too?

[Ms. Clio]

30. Does what help Bush? Imaginary links to non-actual threats?

I will respond in simple, concrete sentences: Yes, Hezbollah is significant in Lebanon. No, Hezbollah is not significant in Iraq.

[Ms. Clio]

42. Goodbye, you dumbass troll

My dog has an additional comment on your intelligence and general character:

[Warren Stupidity]

37. yeah that was cute.

DU needs something like wiki where you can look back through edits to see what the poster actually changed.

[Jacobin]

36. Here's a newsflash

United States taxpayers are funding the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation that didn't attack it.

Further they are funding and arming BOTH SIDES of a civil war between Sunnis and Shia.

So, what is this claptrap again about Iranians getting involved in this mix? None of their business, did I hear.

Give me an ever lovin forkin break

[Roland99]

43. "Authorities believe". What authorities? The same ones believing in WMDs?

[Moderator]

45. locking.

The author is no longer with us.