PERSIAN GOD KING
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,361
- Reaction score
- 0
He is not the shah, he dies ages ago. this is just some @sshole thinking he is a shah.
hahaha its so funny.
US Thwarted $1.5mil Iranian plot to kill Saudi ambassador
- Thread starter pak-marine
- Start date
hahaha its so funny.
Hussein
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,263
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
the shah who was leading the country before 79 is dead (story of US ambassy, when Iran asked USA to not accept him in their hospitals)
but he is his son. in Egypt he self named him as "shah"
Actually less than 5% of Iranians outside are supporting the shah but he still believes he can be shah
but his mom is really really sicky..
another fun part : he says to be in the "green" .
the green leaders say they accept everyone except the sect of radjavi
when they said this they thought about many leaders that they had to move out of the country but not really especially him
Irfan Baloch
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 20,975
- Reaction score
- 214
- Country
- Location
Alhamdollilah
its refreshing to read these comments from yourself
I wish and hope there are more of you in SA that share this view
I wish people of both countries and their leaders are smart enough to overcome this crises, where is our Islamic conference that we used to have? all its worth at least it gave us a join platform instead of someone else deciding for us.
remember the Iranian stance during war on iraq (world thought |Iran will use it to seek revenge against Iraq) but it didn’t, it condemned the Kuwaiti invasion but also condemned the way NATO slaughtered the Iraqis.
Maybe Turkey can lead the way and resolve this crises and find the truth.
We cant just dismiss it like Americans would but its hard to ignore the source of the claim.
longbrained
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2011
- Messages
- 3,390
- Reaction score
- 0
So can this self declared king go back to Iran? Do green people in Iran like him to be the king?
Mosamania
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2011
- Messages
- 10,171
- Reaction score
- 5
- Country
- Location
People must realize the changing scenarios of KSA and not continue to push the ridiculous statements of "puppets" and "wahabbi kuffars" etc. We are an independent sovereign nation who are looking out for our own interests same as any powerful self-respecting nation on this planet.
Hussein
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 4,263
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
of course not !
maybe (if he was more respectful) he could come back for living there but never in political position
PERSIAN GOD KING
BANNED
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2011
- Messages
- 4,361
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL HELL NO! this guys dad and was puppet and he will be one also.
when we says things like we would like a monarchy regime we are not referring to this creature,
somebozo
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2010
- Messages
- 18,872
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
The colonial / Anglo Saxon politics thrive on divide and conquer..preaching hate is one of their basic fundamental. One of the marked achievement of King Abdullah is kicking our of US forces from Saudi Arabia, who had been stationed in since their puppet king fahad invited them and called the swine eaters "our friends" Kuffars are friend to nobody. Saudi Arabia has no interest in opening a political dispute with Iran, and they have already take care of religious disputes. You dont bother us and we dont bother you is the order of the day. The US defense contractors are suddenly finding their sales nil.
Long Live King Abdullah, May Allah Bless King Abdullah!
The kuffars wants a regime change in Iran in the name of democracy but the candidate they are backing is a decedent of Monarch who only wants his lost glory back and exact revenge on iranian people. What a hypocrisy!
Iran + Arabs = strong regional heavy weight which means very bad news for Israel and the zionist thieves busy stealing oil.
A question of common sense, what would Iran get by assassinating Saudi diplomat when it is itself cornered to the point of desperation and is actually looking to dissolve tensions with the Arabs? Iran is looking for better regional position and trade ties then engage in rotten cold war era politics. One has to pay attention to the timings of this incident. Last year, during hajj there was this self professed Iranian scientist who claimed to be kidnapped by Saudi intelligence and sent to USA but could not contain a single whereabouts in his story. He was most likely a Zionist complicit.
Long Live King Abdullah, May Allah Bless King Abdullah!
The kuffars wants a regime change in Iran in the name of democracy but the candidate they are backing is a decedent of Monarch who only wants his lost glory back and exact revenge on iranian people. What a hypocrisy!
Iran + Arabs = strong regional heavy weight which means very bad news for Israel and the zionist thieves busy stealing oil.
A question of common sense, what would Iran get by assassinating Saudi diplomat when it is itself cornered to the point of desperation and is actually looking to dissolve tensions with the Arabs? Iran is looking for better regional position and trade ties then engage in rotten cold war era politics. One has to pay attention to the timings of this incident. Last year, during hajj there was this self professed Iranian scientist who claimed to be kidnapped by Saudi intelligence and sent to USA but could not contain a single whereabouts in his story. He was most likely a Zionist complicit.
Irfan Baloch
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2009
- Messages
- 20,975
- Reaction score
- 214
- Country
- Location
its nice to see that there is no rant and flame war on the bases of the news that is claimed by the Americans
I am sure some people in the American Administration will be disappointed that why there are no Arabs chanting death to Iran and asking for its Annihilation on the bases of the story of the noble American secret services.
There is a symmetry in the allegation if you try to look at it. Compare it to the assassination of pro-Pakistani Burhan-uddin Rabbani and the ridiculous claim that Pakistan did it. As if killing one of the very few pro-Pakistani leaders that had a say in Afghanistan was in the interest of Pakistan? Doh? Likewise here, we got Iran who is trying to warm up to the Arabs and on the other hand it conspires against the most powerful and important Arab country that also has the Holiest Muslim sites that are precious and Holy to all Muslims? And if that’s not enough it tries to assassinate (allegedly) Saudi Ambassador in the worse country? Where every single move of Iranians is closely watched? How convenient eh? I wonder if the CIA will even recover a picture of Autograph signed by Ahmedin Nijad on one of the failed plotters too, now that will be “compelling evidence” and just to add more weight to the claim go and watch Fox news and they will be showing old video footage of Iranians throwing shoes and sandals at the pictures of Bush (they count it as an evidence too).
I am sure some people in the American Administration will be disappointed that why there are no Arabs chanting death to Iran and asking for its Annihilation on the bases of the story of the noble American secret services.
There is a symmetry in the allegation if you try to look at it. Compare it to the assassination of pro-Pakistani Burhan-uddin Rabbani and the ridiculous claim that Pakistan did it. As if killing one of the very few pro-Pakistani leaders that had a say in Afghanistan was in the interest of Pakistan? Doh? Likewise here, we got Iran who is trying to warm up to the Arabs and on the other hand it conspires against the most powerful and important Arab country that also has the Holiest Muslim sites that are precious and Holy to all Muslims? And if that’s not enough it tries to assassinate (allegedly) Saudi Ambassador in the worse country? Where every single move of Iranians is closely watched? How convenient eh? I wonder if the CIA will even recover a picture of Autograph signed by Ahmedin Nijad on one of the failed plotters too, now that will be “compelling evidence” and just to add more weight to the claim go and watch Fox news and they will be showing old video footage of Iranians throwing shoes and sandals at the pictures of Bush (they count it as an evidence too).
Even your own King believes that Iran did try to assassinate your countrymen, do you happen to have rainbow glasses, my friend?
Meengla
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2009
- Messages
- 7,735
- Reaction score
- 22
- Country
- Location
The accusation against Pakistan by Afghanistani puppet govt. (yes, I use this word deliberately; in fact, Karzai is even more of a puppet then the Soviet-backed Najibullah was) are rooted in the insecurity of the (current) Afghan ruling class: Without American backing some lamp-posts in Kabul await them.
In this vein, I hope I am wrong, the weak, insecure tyranny of Saudi Arabia is all too dependent upon American backing. The king of Saudi Arabia should have come out and declared that Iran gains nothing by orchestrating this utterly illogical and suicidal plot but, perhaps, the king wants to use American shoulder to fire his sectarian guns.
Also, those cheap shots by Indians here calling Pakistanis as 'ostrich' should perhaps read the 'Most Recommended' Comments by the liberal bloggers at NY Times--these bloggers, btw, are very much anti-Pakistan but they are apparently not very fond of a lying, runaway Military Industrial Complex either. A lot of these Comments clearly don't buy the official line propagated by the American govt.
In all this, I can't blame the Americans or even the Zionists. Both would gain by having two Muslim countries have a go at each other. I would primarily blame the ruling elite in Saudi Arabia for at least abdicating their role in making a united front; the Saudis are the best situated, the most resourceful, the natural leaders. Too bad they have an insecure ruling quasi-puppet elite ruling them at this crucial time in the region's history.
Anyway, here are some non-Pakistanis with 'ostrich' behavior. Enjoy.
U.S. Challenged to Explain Accusations of Iran Plot in the Face of Skepticism - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com
Al Bhatti
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 5,686
- Reaction score
- 6
- Country
- Location
Two articles relating to the news:
First
By Marwan Al Kabalan, Special to Gulf News
October 14, 2011
Saudi Arabia-Iran confrontation widens
Riyadh's success in containing Tehran will result in the emergence of a new balance of power on the ground
The announcement by the US Department of Justice that Iran was plotting to murder the Saudi ambassador to Washington is a dramatic development in the ongoing conflict between the two big regional powers in the Middle East and the Gulf region. Since the US invasion of Iraq, Tehran and Riyadh has been involved in an open confrontation over dominance of the entire region. The conflict is mainly political but has ideological and religious aspects too. Iran represents revolutionary Shiites whereas Saudi Arabia has been regarded as leader of moderate Sunnis with strong ties to the West.
For years now, officials and analysts have been expressing fears about the increasing sectarian tension in the Arab world that is threatening to turn into a full-fledged confrontation. In an interview with ABC news in November 2006, King Abdullah II of Jordan warned that the sectarian violence in Iraq was threatening to spiral out of control. Unless some very strong action is taken on the ground, the king added, the Middle East was likely to face the prospect of three civil wars in 2007 — in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon.
A year earlier, the king was criticised for cautioning of a Shiite crescent that stretches from Tehran to Beirut, through Iraq and Syria. Many Arab commentators believed that the king was exaggerating Iran’s rising influence and that he was driven by unwarranted fear of a Shiite revival in the Middle East. A few months later, an American scholar from Iranian origins came with just the same idea. Vali Nasr, a Professor at the US Naval Postgraduate School, wrote his famous book: The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future.
Nasr argued that by toppling Saddam Hussain, the US may have just liberated and empowered Iraq’s Shiite majority and helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the broader Middle East for years to come. The US had also ridden Iran of another regional Sunni foe, the Taliban government in Afghanistan, lifting yet another restraint on Tehran’s regional ambitions.
These developments have rattled Sunni Arab governments, especially Saudi Arabia, which openly criticised the US for destroying the Sunni-led regime in Iraq and hence letting the ‘Shiite genie’ out of the bottle. But, this year things seem to have taken even a more dramatic turn. The Arab Spring, which came as a pleasant surprise for the pro-democracy activists in the Arab world, turned into becoming another element in the conflict between the Saudis and the Iranians.
Anxious to prevent Iran from taking advantage of the fluid situation in the Arab world, the Saudis took the unusual step of getting directly and openly involved in a decisive confrontation over the future of the region.
Last March, Riyadh led a coalition force from the GCC countries into Bahrain to help the government crush the Iran-backed Shiite protest movement. Following the collapse of Egypt’s Mubarak regime, the Saudis rushed to provide financial handouts to the new Egyptian government. Had the Saudis refrained from doing so, the Iranians would have gladly provided an alternative. Saudi Arabia is also leading mediation efforts to help resolve the political crisis in Yemen. Here too the aim is to stop Iran from using its local allies to establish an anti-Saudi government in Sana’a. In 2009, the Saudi army provided direct support for the Yemeni government against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels.
Last summer, Saudi Arabia invited Jordan and Morocco to join the GCC to consolidate its position vis-a-vis Iran’s increasing interference in the internal affairs of the GCC. Sporadic unrest in the Shiite-majority eastern province of Saudi Arabia is seen as part of a Shiite revival inspired by the empowerment of Iraqi and Lebanese Shiites and supported by Iran.
The latest episode in the Iran-Saudi conflict is clearly manifested in Syria, wherein the two countries have taken opposite sides. Iran, alongside the Shiite-dominated government of Iraq and the Lebanese Hezbollah, is supporting the Syrian regime. Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni regimes in the Gulf are, on the other hand, backing the protest movement, seen by many — right or wrong — as a Sunni revolt.
Clearly, the Iranians are facing a counter-offensive that threatens the project they have been pursuing for years just when it appeared to be coming to fruition. The relative success of the Saudis in containing Iran will result in the emergence of a new balance of power on the ground. Given the emerging situation, Iran might choose to use all sorts of strategies and tactics to limit the damage and reverse the tide of events. The foiled attempt to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington DC, who seems to be playing a key role in his country’s policy to contain Iran, must been understood within this context of this grand regional conflict.
Dr Marwan Kabalan is the Dean of the Faculty of International Relations and Diplomacy, Kalamoon University, Damascus, Syria.
gulfnews : Saudi Arabia-Iran confrontation widens
----------
Second
By Patrick Seale, Special to Gulf News
October 14, 2011
Will Israel bomb Iran without notifying the US?
The danger is that Netanyahu may seek to break out of the current political isolation by mounting a spectacular attack
In recent weeks, intense discussions have taken place in Israeli military and intelligence circles about whether or not to launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Apparently, the key question in the debate was how to ensure that the United States took part in the attack or, at the very least, intervened on Israel’s side if the initial strike triggered a wider war.
Reports of these discussions have caused considerable alarm in Washington and in a number of European capitals. Some western military experts have been quoted as saying that the window of opportunity for an Israeli air attack on Iran will close within two months, since the onset of winter would make such an assault more difficult.
Concern that Israel may decide to attack without giving the US prior warning is thought to be the main reason for the visit to Tel Aviv on October 3 of the US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta. His aim seems to have been to rein in the Israeli hawks.
Amos Harel of the Israeli daily Haaretz summed up Panetta’s message as follows: America is standing by Israel, but an uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran could spark a regional war. The US will work to defend Israel, but Israel must behave responsibly.
At his joint press conference with Israel’s Defence Minister Ehud Barak, Panetta said: “The US is very concerned, and we will work together to do whatever is necessary to keep Iran from posing a threat to the region. But doing so depends on the countries working together.” He repeated the word ‘together’ several times. In other words, Israel should not act without an American green light.
In recent years, Israel has often threatened to attack Iran. Why has the subject been revived this time? Is Israel worried that Iran is close to acquiring the capability to manufacture a nuclear bomb? Most intelligence experts agree that Iran has not yet made a decision to build nuclear weapons. A more likely Israeli motive is its concern that the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany — the so-called P5+1 — may accept an Iranian offer of renewed talks.
Israel’s greatest fear is that the P5+1 will reach a compromise with Iran which would allow it to continue enriching uranium for civilian purposes. This might then lead in due course to the world agreeing to co-exist with a nuclear Iran. If that were to happen, Israel’s monopoly of nuclear weapons — a key asset in maintaining its regional military supremacy — would be lost.
Iran has, in fact, made several recent overtures to the US and its allies. When he was in New York last month to attend the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told The Washington Post that Iran would stop producing uranium enriched to 20 per cent if foreign countries would provide the fuel needed for the Tehran research reactor, which makes medical isotopes. Some 850,000 Iranians are said to depend on such isotopes for cancer treatment.
Late last month, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, sent a letter to Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, requesting fresh talks with the P5+1 to try to resolve the long-standing dispute. Yet another overture was made by Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi when, in an interview with Asia Times on September 29, he said that Iran was “prepared to undertake the necessary efforts to restore mutual confidence, and if there is a specific concern, it should be addressed in talks... We must look for innovative proposals.”
Fereydoun Abbasi, head of Iran’s Atomic Organisation, has invited Yukiya Amano, Secretary-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to visit Iran and inspect its nuclear facilities. ‘Our recommendation is that Amano accept this invitation... Today, the situation is that we are again ready to consider the fuel swap,’ he said. (This was the proposed swap of a large quantity of low-enriched uranium for a small quantity of 20 per cent enriched uranium for medical purposes. Amano’s IAEA board is due to meet in Vienna on November 17-18, a meeting that is keenly awaited.
Several influential voices have been urging the US to respond positively to Iran’s overtures. “Why not test Iran’s seriousness?” asked Reza Marashi in an article in the Huffington Post on September 30. Marashi is a former Iran desk officer at the US State Department and is now Director of Research at the National Iranian American Council.
In an article in the International Herald Tribune on September 29, Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists, and Ali Vaez, director of the Federation’s Iran Project, urged the US and its allies to take Ahmadinejad at his word. They even suggested that the western powers should provide Iran with 50 kilograms of fuel for the Tehran research reactor as a humanitarian gesture that would buy Washington goodwill with the Iranian people, while curtailing Iran’s enrichment activities.
None of these appeals is likely to be heard. US President Barack Obama has collapsed in the face of pressure from powerful pro-Israeli lobbies and a fervently pro-Israeli US Congress. As he is seeking re-election next year, we will hear nothing more of the call he made during his 2008 campaign for the need for diplomacy with Iran.
The danger is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may now seek to break out of Israel’s current political isolation by mounting a spectacular attack on Iran. Having lost Turkey and Egypt, and facing a revolt by the international community against his Greater Israel ambitions, he may think that the time was ripe to seize the initiative. His calculation may be that a lethal blow against Iran would weaken an already deeply-troubled Syria and leave Hezbollah orphaned. Israel would have killed three birds with one stone.
Will Israel seek an American green light if it decides to attack Iran or might Netanyahu believe that Obama, enslaved to Israeli interests, would have no choice but to follow suit?
According to the October 6 edition of TTU, a French intelligence bulletin, the US and Israel are planning an unprecedented joint land forces exercise next May with the goal of establishing a common ‘intervention force’ ready for action in the event of a major regional war. Admiral James Stavridis, head of Eurocom — America’s European command — paid a recent unpublicised visit to Israel for talks with General Benny Gantz, Israel’s chief of staff. According to TTU, the plan is to set up American command posts in Israel and Israeli command posts in Eurocom. Cooperation between the two powers has rarely been closer.
These are dangerous times in the Middle East.
Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East affairs.
gulfnews : Will Israel bomb Iran without notifying the US?
First
By Marwan Al Kabalan, Special to Gulf News
October 14, 2011
Saudi Arabia-Iran confrontation widens
Riyadh's success in containing Tehran will result in the emergence of a new balance of power on the ground
The announcement by the US Department of Justice that Iran was plotting to murder the Saudi ambassador to Washington is a dramatic development in the ongoing conflict between the two big regional powers in the Middle East and the Gulf region. Since the US invasion of Iraq, Tehran and Riyadh has been involved in an open confrontation over dominance of the entire region. The conflict is mainly political but has ideological and religious aspects too. Iran represents revolutionary Shiites whereas Saudi Arabia has been regarded as leader of moderate Sunnis with strong ties to the West.
For years now, officials and analysts have been expressing fears about the increasing sectarian tension in the Arab world that is threatening to turn into a full-fledged confrontation. In an interview with ABC news in November 2006, King Abdullah II of Jordan warned that the sectarian violence in Iraq was threatening to spiral out of control. Unless some very strong action is taken on the ground, the king added, the Middle East was likely to face the prospect of three civil wars in 2007 — in Iraq, Palestine and Lebanon.
A year earlier, the king was criticised for cautioning of a Shiite crescent that stretches from Tehran to Beirut, through Iraq and Syria. Many Arab commentators believed that the king was exaggerating Iran’s rising influence and that he was driven by unwarranted fear of a Shiite revival in the Middle East. A few months later, an American scholar from Iranian origins came with just the same idea. Vali Nasr, a Professor at the US Naval Postgraduate School, wrote his famous book: The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future.
Nasr argued that by toppling Saddam Hussain, the US may have just liberated and empowered Iraq’s Shiite majority and helped launch a broad Shiite revival that will upset the sectarian balance in Iraq and the broader Middle East for years to come. The US had also ridden Iran of another regional Sunni foe, the Taliban government in Afghanistan, lifting yet another restraint on Tehran’s regional ambitions.
These developments have rattled Sunni Arab governments, especially Saudi Arabia, which openly criticised the US for destroying the Sunni-led regime in Iraq and hence letting the ‘Shiite genie’ out of the bottle. But, this year things seem to have taken even a more dramatic turn. The Arab Spring, which came as a pleasant surprise for the pro-democracy activists in the Arab world, turned into becoming another element in the conflict between the Saudis and the Iranians.
Anxious to prevent Iran from taking advantage of the fluid situation in the Arab world, the Saudis took the unusual step of getting directly and openly involved in a decisive confrontation over the future of the region.
Last March, Riyadh led a coalition force from the GCC countries into Bahrain to help the government crush the Iran-backed Shiite protest movement. Following the collapse of Egypt’s Mubarak regime, the Saudis rushed to provide financial handouts to the new Egyptian government. Had the Saudis refrained from doing so, the Iranians would have gladly provided an alternative. Saudi Arabia is also leading mediation efforts to help resolve the political crisis in Yemen. Here too the aim is to stop Iran from using its local allies to establish an anti-Saudi government in Sana’a. In 2009, the Saudi army provided direct support for the Yemeni government against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels.
Last summer, Saudi Arabia invited Jordan and Morocco to join the GCC to consolidate its position vis-a-vis Iran’s increasing interference in the internal affairs of the GCC. Sporadic unrest in the Shiite-majority eastern province of Saudi Arabia is seen as part of a Shiite revival inspired by the empowerment of Iraqi and Lebanese Shiites and supported by Iran.
The latest episode in the Iran-Saudi conflict is clearly manifested in Syria, wherein the two countries have taken opposite sides. Iran, alongside the Shiite-dominated government of Iraq and the Lebanese Hezbollah, is supporting the Syrian regime. Saudi Arabia and the other Sunni regimes in the Gulf are, on the other hand, backing the protest movement, seen by many — right or wrong — as a Sunni revolt.
Clearly, the Iranians are facing a counter-offensive that threatens the project they have been pursuing for years just when it appeared to be coming to fruition. The relative success of the Saudis in containing Iran will result in the emergence of a new balance of power on the ground. Given the emerging situation, Iran might choose to use all sorts of strategies and tactics to limit the damage and reverse the tide of events. The foiled attempt to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington DC, who seems to be playing a key role in his country’s policy to contain Iran, must been understood within this context of this grand regional conflict.
Dr Marwan Kabalan is the Dean of the Faculty of International Relations and Diplomacy, Kalamoon University, Damascus, Syria.
gulfnews : Saudi Arabia-Iran confrontation widens
----------
Second
By Patrick Seale, Special to Gulf News
October 14, 2011
Will Israel bomb Iran without notifying the US?
The danger is that Netanyahu may seek to break out of the current political isolation by mounting a spectacular attack
In recent weeks, intense discussions have taken place in Israeli military and intelligence circles about whether or not to launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Apparently, the key question in the debate was how to ensure that the United States took part in the attack or, at the very least, intervened on Israel’s side if the initial strike triggered a wider war.
Reports of these discussions have caused considerable alarm in Washington and in a number of European capitals. Some western military experts have been quoted as saying that the window of opportunity for an Israeli air attack on Iran will close within two months, since the onset of winter would make such an assault more difficult.
Concern that Israel may decide to attack without giving the US prior warning is thought to be the main reason for the visit to Tel Aviv on October 3 of the US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta. His aim seems to have been to rein in the Israeli hawks.
Amos Harel of the Israeli daily Haaretz summed up Panetta’s message as follows: America is standing by Israel, but an uncoordinated Israeli strike on Iran could spark a regional war. The US will work to defend Israel, but Israel must behave responsibly.
At his joint press conference with Israel’s Defence Minister Ehud Barak, Panetta said: “The US is very concerned, and we will work together to do whatever is necessary to keep Iran from posing a threat to the region. But doing so depends on the countries working together.” He repeated the word ‘together’ several times. In other words, Israel should not act without an American green light.
In recent years, Israel has often threatened to attack Iran. Why has the subject been revived this time? Is Israel worried that Iran is close to acquiring the capability to manufacture a nuclear bomb? Most intelligence experts agree that Iran has not yet made a decision to build nuclear weapons. A more likely Israeli motive is its concern that the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany — the so-called P5+1 — may accept an Iranian offer of renewed talks.
Israel’s greatest fear is that the P5+1 will reach a compromise with Iran which would allow it to continue enriching uranium for civilian purposes. This might then lead in due course to the world agreeing to co-exist with a nuclear Iran. If that were to happen, Israel’s monopoly of nuclear weapons — a key asset in maintaining its regional military supremacy — would be lost.
Iran has, in fact, made several recent overtures to the US and its allies. When he was in New York last month to attend the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told The Washington Post that Iran would stop producing uranium enriched to 20 per cent if foreign countries would provide the fuel needed for the Tehran research reactor, which makes medical isotopes. Some 850,000 Iranians are said to depend on such isotopes for cancer treatment.
Late last month, Iran’s chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, sent a letter to Catherine Ashton, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, requesting fresh talks with the P5+1 to try to resolve the long-standing dispute. Yet another overture was made by Iran’s Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi when, in an interview with Asia Times on September 29, he said that Iran was “prepared to undertake the necessary efforts to restore mutual confidence, and if there is a specific concern, it should be addressed in talks... We must look for innovative proposals.”
Fereydoun Abbasi, head of Iran’s Atomic Organisation, has invited Yukiya Amano, Secretary-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to visit Iran and inspect its nuclear facilities. ‘Our recommendation is that Amano accept this invitation... Today, the situation is that we are again ready to consider the fuel swap,’ he said. (This was the proposed swap of a large quantity of low-enriched uranium for a small quantity of 20 per cent enriched uranium for medical purposes. Amano’s IAEA board is due to meet in Vienna on November 17-18, a meeting that is keenly awaited.
Several influential voices have been urging the US to respond positively to Iran’s overtures. “Why not test Iran’s seriousness?” asked Reza Marashi in an article in the Huffington Post on September 30. Marashi is a former Iran desk officer at the US State Department and is now Director of Research at the National Iranian American Council.
In an article in the International Herald Tribune on September 29, Charles Ferguson, president of the Federation of American Scientists, and Ali Vaez, director of the Federation’s Iran Project, urged the US and its allies to take Ahmadinejad at his word. They even suggested that the western powers should provide Iran with 50 kilograms of fuel for the Tehran research reactor as a humanitarian gesture that would buy Washington goodwill with the Iranian people, while curtailing Iran’s enrichment activities.
None of these appeals is likely to be heard. US President Barack Obama has collapsed in the face of pressure from powerful pro-Israeli lobbies and a fervently pro-Israeli US Congress. As he is seeking re-election next year, we will hear nothing more of the call he made during his 2008 campaign for the need for diplomacy with Iran.
The danger is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may now seek to break out of Israel’s current political isolation by mounting a spectacular attack on Iran. Having lost Turkey and Egypt, and facing a revolt by the international community against his Greater Israel ambitions, he may think that the time was ripe to seize the initiative. His calculation may be that a lethal blow against Iran would weaken an already deeply-troubled Syria and leave Hezbollah orphaned. Israel would have killed three birds with one stone.
Will Israel seek an American green light if it decides to attack Iran or might Netanyahu believe that Obama, enslaved to Israeli interests, would have no choice but to follow suit?
According to the October 6 edition of TTU, a French intelligence bulletin, the US and Israel are planning an unprecedented joint land forces exercise next May with the goal of establishing a common ‘intervention force’ ready for action in the event of a major regional war. Admiral James Stavridis, head of Eurocom — America’s European command — paid a recent unpublicised visit to Israel for talks with General Benny Gantz, Israel’s chief of staff. According to TTU, the plan is to set up American command posts in Israel and Israeli command posts in Eurocom. Cooperation between the two powers has rarely been closer.
These are dangerous times in the Middle East.
Patrick Seale is a commentator and author of several books on Middle East affairs.
gulfnews : Will Israel bomb Iran without notifying the US?
Unbeliever
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2009
- Messages
- 553
- Reaction score
- 0
Every day I look more into this, I am more in disbelief and so is the "Western media" by the way.. After having been lied to about the Iraq War people and journalists are very weary.
You can demonize western media all you want but even New York Times and the Washington Post(!) are very skeptical about the whole thing.. so are many German and European Media outlets..
However once again the Young Turks nailed it:
So I remain very skeptical about the whole thing and tend towards the informant making it all up under pressure and the incentive of being payed..
You can demonize western media all you want but even New York Times and the Washington Post(!) are very skeptical about the whole thing.. so are many German and European Media outlets..
However once again the Young Turks nailed it:
So I remain very skeptical about the whole thing and tend towards the informant making it all up under pressure and the incentive of being payed..
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
