Spanningen tussen Iran en de VS # 2 of 3 ofzo

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 13:12 schreef Smoofie het volgende:

[..]

Iran is wel in het binneland erg fanatiek bezig met indoctrineren.

quote:

A former Revolutionary Guards commander has compared Iran’s Supreme Leader with the late Shah who was ousted from power following the country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.

In a piece that appeared in the newspaper Ettelaat on Monday, former IRGC Navy chief Hossein Alaei recounted the events of January 1978 in Qom city which would eventually lead to widespread demonstrations against the Shah’s regime and place Iran on an irreversible path towards revolution.

At the time, an article titled “Iran: Red and Black Colonialism” was published by Ettelaat newspaper, attacking the revolution's leader Ayatollah Khomeini by questioning his motives and accusing him of serving foreign powers. The publication of the piece, allegedly written by the Shah’s Information Minister Darius Homayoun, sparked massive protests in Qom.

During Iran’s eight-year war with Iraq in the eighties, Brigadier General Hossein Alaei, the first top commander of the IRGC navy at the time of its formation in 1985, turned into an important figure among Guard commanders.

It would appear that Alaei’s recent article is in response to a call by dissident filmmaker and writer Mohammad Nourizad for prominent Iranian figures to bombard the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei with critical letters. Nourizad, whose own seventeen open letters have questioned Khamanei’s conduct in the past two years, urged the retired admiral as well as fifteen other influential individuals to send similar letters to the Islamic Republic’s highest authority.

“9 January 1978 is the beginning of a popular and pervasive uprising which, in about a year, was able to expel the Shah from the country and bring an end to 2,500 years of monarchy in Iran,” Alaei writes. “But this incident was ignited very easily, and the regime itself provided the pretext.”

“The wrongful behaviour of the Shah’s security forces had amplified the people’s dissatisfaction with the monarchy and helped maintain it,” the former commander continued. “As the number of people killed on the streets, imprisonments and political prisoners rose, the Shah’s regime essentially lost its grandeur too.”

The article continues to add, “Up until that point, the people would not address the Shah directly in their protests but would try to voice their criticism of the lack of freedom of speech, the lack of political freedoms and the mistreatment by state agents such as the Imperial Guard. But a continuation of the state’s violent conduct and a harsh clampdown on protests caused the people to direct their opposition against the Shah himself and to demand a fundamental change in the ruling system.”

“The writing of letters to the Shah was [soon] under way and he was rightfully declared as the person behind all the country’s upheavals.”

In his piece, Alaei argues that the 1979 Islamic Revolution was aimed at preventing another “lifelong rule” and allowing Iranians “to determine their own destiny through free elections.”

Alaei then raises a number of questions he says the Shah “probably” pondered after being forced into exile, questions that might serve as an “important lesson for others.”

“Would the situation have not ended better had I shown restraint at the funeral of Imam Khomeini’s son and refrained from provoking the population with an offensive article written by my Information Minister under an alias? Wouldn’t my rule have lasted longer if, after the article was published in a state-owned newspaper, I had allowed it to be responded to,? Wouldn’t the affair have ended there if I had allowed for the people to hold peaceful protests …? Wouldn’t I have obtained better results had I not ordered agents to shoot at protesters … ?”

In an apparent reference to the illegal house arrest of opposition leaders Mir Hossein Mousavi and Mahdi Karroubi, Alaei writes that the Shah probably asked himself, “If instead of placing prominent [political leaders] under house arrest and exiling them to remote cities and imprisoning political activists I had paved the way for a dialogue, would I have been forced to flee the country?”

In mid-February 2011, Karroubi and Mousavi, who spearheaded the opposition Green Movement since the rigged 2009 election, were placed under an illegal and arbitrary house arrest after calling for protests in solidarity with the Arab Spring. Thus far, no formal charges have been put forth against them. Human rights groups say their continued captivity and maltreatment is inconsistent not only with human rights provisions, but also with Iran’s own constitution.

“If instead of accusing the people of being provoked by foreign [powers] I had refrained from insulting their collective intelligence, would I still have been forced to seek sanctuary abroad?” Alaei’s note continues. “If instead of accusing opponents of acting against national security I had accepted the opposition, recognised it as legal and guaranteed their rights, could I not have stayed in power longer?”

The former admiral, who always maintained a close contact with Mousavi throughout the years, has already come under fire from pro-regime websites for expressing his views. One such website called hima “hyena” attempting to discredit the Islamic Revolution by comparing it to the Pahlavi Dynasty.

Prior to Iran’s widely disputed 2009 presidential election, Alaei had been cited as saying that during the Iran-Iraq war, then prime minister Mir Hossein Mousavi had “created a war economy that helped us fight Saddam Hussein.” “The country was stable, inflation was low . . . there was war, but nobody was hungry. We all respect him for his management.”

In what appeared to be a tacit warning to Iran’s ruling elite, Alaei ended his piece for Ettelaat by citing a verse from the Quran: “So learn a lesson, O ye who have eyes!” [1]

[1] Holy Quran, Surah 59, Verse 2.

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 13:14 schreef RnRdude het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat Amerika echt op het allerlaatste nippertje wilt wachten.. waarom een luchtaanval uitvoeren in economische crisis als het nog niet nodig is.

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 20:50 schreef Synthercell het volgende:
De belangrijkste vragen blijven onbeantwoord. Hoe kwam Iran in beeld na Iraq en Iraq na Afghanistan waar alles begon door 9/11. Saddam werd plotseling beschuldigd van massavernietigingswapens, WMD, ineens was Iraq wereldnieuws, toen de invasie (shock and awe) en daarna kwam in 2005 ineens Iran in beeld, Iran zou een kernwapen willen ontwikkelen. En tussendoor veranderden Egypte en Libie van regiem. Geen ideologische veranderingen in die landen, er kwam geen vrijheid voor die volkeren (tweede revolutie werd hard neergeslagen in Egypte, omdat dit blijkbaar de echte revolutie is, de echte vrijheidstrijd), terwijl die dat wel dachten, er kwam een vervangend regiem.
Iran is dus sinds 2005, dus alweer zeven jaar, in beeld en telkens in het wereldnieuws (blijkbaar niet gevaarlijk, want al zeven jaar anti Iran propaganda, wat vooral angst zaaien is in de massa)
Als je kijkt wat er wezenlijk in elk land is veranderd is het alleen een 'nieuw' regiem waar men een groot gedeelte volk achter weet te krijgen. Het gaat namelijk al de hele tijd om die volkeren, om de massa in elk land waar men 'regime change' erdoor drukte (precies wat G W Bush vlak na de aanslagen van 11 september verkondigde)
Waar het uiteindelijk allemaal om draait is om in het Midden Oosten een groot imperium tot stand te brengen (Arabische Liga, een unie) waar alle islamische landen op zijn aangesloten, precies zoals de Europese Unie alle Europese landen zitten aangesloten (niet geheel vrijwillig, vooral via veel vriendjespolitiek, propaganda, grondwet erdoor drukken en de euro werd erdoor gedrukt)
En in de VS is men nagenoeg hetzelfde aan het doen als een elite in Duitsland deed, een imperium via verkiezigen (de massa laten stemmen op een leider figuur via misleiding, bedrog, angst inboezemen (terreur, aanslag op de Rijksdag) en psychologische oorlogsvoering met de decorage, hakenkruisvlaggen, arenden, de krachtige symboliek oorlog tegen het volk)
Overal is men dus alleen maar bezig volkeren proberen te schaken, vooral dus in de westerse en landen in en rondom het Midden Oosten. Syrie en Iran moeten dit jaar worden veranderd van regiem, want in Amerika gaat dit ook gebeuren. Het moet allemaal synchroon verlopen die unievorming en 'empire building', want wat je ziet is eigenlijk hetzelfde als dat ontstond tussen de Sovet Unie (unie) en Ns Duitsland (rijk), spanningen en op een dag een grote oorlog. Twee imperiums (een unie en rijk, wat niets anders dan imperia zijn) tot stand brengen en die met elkaar in oorlog brengen. De geschiedenis herhaalt zich heel duidelijk helaas.

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 21:46 schreef Smoofie het volgende:

[..]

Beetje ver gezocht dit. Soms zijn de dingen gewoon zoals ze zijn. Vooral je Sovjet unie en "ns (?) Duitsland verhaal . Empire building .

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 21:51 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:

[..]

Nederland wordt onderdeel wereldimperium

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 17:41 schreef GewoneMan het volgende:

[..]

omdat ze dan weleens te laat kunnen zijn

quote:

US, Israel in open rift over Iran: Big joint military drill cancelled
DEBKAfile Exclusive Analysis January 15, 2012, 3:31 PM (GMT+02:00)
Tags: US-Israel Iran nuclear Moshe Yaalon military option sanctions
Barak Obama

US-Israeli discord over action against Iran went into overdrive Sunday, Jan. 15 when the White House called off Austere Challenge 12, the biggest joint war game the US and Israel have every staged, ready to go in spring, in reprisal for a comment by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Moshe Yaalon in an early morning radio interview. He said the United States was hesitant over sanctions against Iran's central bank and oil for fear of a spike in oil prices.
The row between Washington and Jerusalem is now in the open, undoubtedly causing celebration in Tehran.
Nothing was said about the 9,000 US troops who landed in Israeli earlier this month for a lengthy stay. Neither was the forthcoming visit by Gen. Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint US Chiefs of Staff, Thursday mentioned.

The exercise was officially postponed from spring 2012 to the last quarter of the year over "budgetary constraints" – an obvous diplomatic locution for cancellation. It was issued urgently at an unusually early hour Washington time, say debkafile's sources, to underscore the Obama administration's total disassociation from any preparations to strike Iran and to stress its position that if an attack took place, Israel alone would be accountable.

Israel's Deputy Prime minister further inflamed one of the most acute disagreements in the history of US-Israeli relations over the Obama administration's objections to an Israel military action against Iran's nuclear sites in any shape or form. Yaalon ventured into tricky terrain when he pointed out that US Congress had shown resolve by enacting legislation for sanctions with real bite. But the White House "hesitated." He went on to say: "A military operation is the last resort, but Israel must be ready to defend itself."
The friction was already fueled last week by the deep resentment aroused in Israel by Washington's harsh condemnation of the assassination last Wednesday, Jan. 11, of the nuclear scientist Prof. Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, and absolute denial of any US involvement.

Although Tehran has since accused the United States of the attack, the White House treated it as the defiant sign of an approaching unilateral Israeli military operation against Iran to which the administration is adamantly opposed.

Friday, Jan. 13, the Pentagon announced the substantial buildup of combat power around Iran, stationing nearly 15,000 troops in Kuwait - two Army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit – and keeping two aircraft carriers the region: The USS Carl Vinson, the USS John Stennis and their strike groups.

Debkafile's military sources report that a third aircraft carrier and strike group, the USS Abraham Lincoln, is also on its way to the Persian Gulf.
This massive military buildup indicates that either President Obama rates the odds of an Israel attack as high and is bolstering the defenses of US military assets against Iranian reprisals - or, alternatively, that the United States intends to beat Israel to the draw and attack Iran itself.

The official purpose of Gen. Dempsey's visit next Thursday was supposed to be coordination between the US armed forces and the IDF. But his main object was another try to dissuade Israel's government and military leaders from plans to strike Iran without Washington's prior consent.
The "budgetary constraints" pretext for cancelling Austere Challenge 12 is hard to credit since most of the money has already been spent in flying 9,000 US troops into Israel this month. Although the exercise in which they were to have participated was billed as testing multiple Israeli and US air and missile defense systems, the exercise's commander, US Third Air Force Lt. Gen. Frank Gorenc, announced that the event was more a "deployment" than an "exercise."

Its cancellation leaves Washington and Jerusalem at loggerheads in four main areas:

1. President Obama believes he is rushing through the sanctions against Iran's central bank CBI and oil restrictions with all possible speed. He needs time to persuade more governments to support him. Israel sees little real progress in the crawling diplomatic bid for backers and is impatient for action. At the rate the sanctions are going through, they will not be in place before the end of 2012 and by then, Iran will have already acquired a nuclear weapon.

Israeli leaders also suspect that the Obama administration may be foot-dragging deliberately in the hope of encouraging Iran to enter into negotiations and so avoid a military showdown. They point out that all previous rounds of talks were exploited for Iran's forward leaps in their nuclear weapon drive, free of international hassle.
2. President Obama insists on the US acting alone in attacking Iran with no Israeli military involvement. This would leave him free to decide exclusively when and how to stage an operation. He is counting on the tightened military and intelligence cooperation he has instituted between the two armed forces and agencies to safeguard Washington against the surprise of a lone Israeli action.
But Israel has declined to make this commitment - even in the face of US officials' efforts at persuasion.

3. US military strategists are counting on an Iranian reprisal for an attack on its nuclear sites to be restrained and limited to certain US military assets in the region, Israeli targets and oil installations in the Persian Gulf, including a temporary and partial closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which one fifth of the world's oil passes.

They expect Israel to refrain from striking back for Iranian attacks and to leave the payback option entirely in American hands. US officials have said they fear an Israeli overkill would tip the entire American military operation into imbalance and generate unforeseen consequences.
The incoming US troops were therefore armed with the sophisticated missile interceptorTHAAD systems (easily transportable Terminal High Altitude Area Defense hit-to-kill weapons) to show the Israeli government that the US would stay on top of all the military moves against Iran - offensive and defensive alike.

On these three points, the US and Israel disagree. Neither Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, nor Defense Minister Ehud Barak or Deputy Prime Minster Yaalon, who are responsible for all decisions on Iran, are willing to put all their trust for defending Israel in American hands or relinquish unilateral military options against Iran. They believe US officials when they assert that the administration is prepared to prevent Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon, but they want to see proof of the pudding and actions to back up the rhetoric. In the light of credible intelligence that Iran is very close to achieving its nuclear goal, Israel is holding on to its military option over American objections.

quote:

Op zondag 15 januari 2012 23:19 schreef RnRdude het volgende:

[..]

klopt Israel is het dan ook totaal oneens met deze tactiek van Obama

[..]

http://debka.com/article/21652/

quote:

Op donderdag 19 januari 2012 23:31 schreef Smoofie het volgende:
2e carrier in Hormuz, 3e zal later wel terugkomen.

quote:

AMSTERDAM - Iran zal de Straat van Hormuz sluiten, wat een legitieme aanleiding vormt voor een onmiddellijke luchtaanval op Iranese nucleaire doelen door de Amerikaanse en Israëlische luchtmacht.

Die voorspelling doet de Israëlische professor Yoram Dinstein, wereldwijd beschouwd als gezaghebbend oorlogsrechtexpert en –misschien nog belangrijker– het morele kompas voor de Israëlische regering en veiligheidsdiensten.

Dinstein is deze week in Nederland voor gesprekken met Nederlandse parlementsleden en het geven van universiteitslezingen. De professor is één van ’s werelds prominentste oorlogsrechtgeleerden. Dinstein is betrokken bij de pilotentrainingen van niet alleen de Israëlische luchtmacht, maar ook de Nederlandse luchtmacht en andere westerse strijdkrachten. Voor wettelijk advies is hij de belangrijkste adviseur voor de Israëlische regering.

Dinstein zegt er volledig overtuigd van te zijn dat Iran de Straat van Hormuz gaat afsluiten, waardoor de wereld wordt afgesneden van de olieproductie. Door de 35 zeemijlen smalle zeestraat vervoerden olietankers vorig jaar 17 miljoen vaten olie per dag, éénvijfde van de wereldwijd verhandelde ruwe olie. Afsluiting van de zeestraat is voor Israël een wettelijk ’casus beli’, een officiële aanleiding voor oorlog, zegt Dinstein.

Per dag varen 14 volle tankers door de straat, vooral met Azië als bestemming. De olie is afkomstig uit Iran, Irak, Koeweit en Saudi-Arabië. Afsluiting van dit zeegat heeft dramatische consequenties hebben voor de levering van olie aan de wereld. De bestaande alternatieven – pijplijnen naar de Rode Zee en de Middellandse Zee – hebben onvoldoende capaciteit om de gevolgen van een blokkade volledig op te vangen.

Dinstein voorspelt dat Iran op korte termijn haar troefkaart speelt: „Dit merkwaardige regime in Teheran zal een agressieve daad plegen die gezien kan worden als een gewapende aanval op lidstaten van de VN, zoals het met geweld afsluiten van de Straat van Hormuz. En daarna krijgen we oorlog met luchtaanvallen van Israël en Amerika. Geloof me of niet, maar herinner je dat ik de eerste was die dit voorspelde… Iran zal een aanval uitvoeren, die de aanleiding wordt voor dit scenario.”

Dinstein, oud-decaan van de universiteit van Tel Aviv, oud-voorzitter van Amnesty International in Israël en auteur van een reeks standaardwerken over oorlogsrecht, wordt geregeld geconsulteerd voor advies met de juridische afdelingen en adviseurs en de commandanten van het Israëlische leger (IDF) en de Israëlische veiligheidsdienst Shin Bet. Ook heeft hij nauwe banen met inlichtingendiensten wereldwijd. Op basis van die contacten zegt hij: „De oorlog met Iran zal 48 uur duren.” Verschillende opvattingen van Dinstein zijn door het Internationale Gerechtshof en het Internationale Strafhof verheven tot geldend internationaal recht.

De professor bevestigt –„Formeel vertegenwoordig ik toch niet mijn regering.” – de Israëlische luchtaanvallen op nucleaire installatie in Irak in 1981 en de aanval op een door Noord-Koreanen gebouwde nucleaire reactor in Syrië in 2007. Formeel weigert de regering elk commentaar over die aanvallen. Volgens Dinstein verkeerde Israël destijds met beide landen in een staat van oorlog. Israël zal dan ook de Iranese installaties aanvallen, zodra Iran de Straat van Hormuz afsluit, wat als oorlogsverklaring wordt opgevat. „Voor nu hebben we alleen nog uitwisseling van onvriendelijkheden, geen staat van oorlog met Iran. Maar Iran zal de Hormuz-straat afsluiten en Israël en de VS zullen dan aanvallen.”

twitter:

AP twitterde op maandag 13-02-2012 om 14:23:14 BREAKING: Israeli prime minister accuses Iran of being behind car bombings in India, Georgia. -EF reageer retweet

quote:

In India is een Israëlische vrouw gewond geraakt bij een bomaanslag op de auto van de ambassadeur. Dat heeft het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken van Israël bekendgemaakt.

Het is niet bekend of de ambassadeur in de auto zat.

De diplomatenauto explodeerde vlak bij de Israëlische ambassade in de hoofdstad New Delhi. Hoe de gewonde vrouw eraan toe is, is niet bekendgemaakt.

Ook bij de Israëlische ambassade in Georgië was een incident. Daar werd een granaat gevonden onder de auto van een Israëlische diplomaat. De granaat is onschadelijk gemaakt.

quote:

Op maandag 13 februari 2012 14:28 schreef Nibb-it het volgende:
Nogal een aanname

quote:

Iran has built up its naval forces in the Gulf and prepared boats that could be used in suicide attacks, but the U.S. Navy can prevent it from blocking the Strait of Hormuz, the commander of U.S. naval forces in the region said on Sunday.

Iran has made a series of threats in recent weeks to disrupt shipping in the Gulf or strike U.S. forces in retaliation if its oil trade is shut down by sanctions, or if its disputed nuclear program comes under attack.

"They have increased the number of submarines ... they increased the number of fast attack craft," Vice Admiral Mark Fox told reporters. "Some of the small boats have been outfitted with a large warhead that could be used as a suicide explosive device. The Iranians have a large mine inventory."

"We have watched with interest their development of long range rockets and short, medium and long range ballistic missiles and of course ... the development of their nuclear program," Fox, who heads the U.S. Fifth Fleet, said at a briefing on the fleet's base in the Gulf state of Bahrain.

Iran now has 10 small submarines, he said.

Military experts say the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet patrolling the Gulf - which always has at least one giant supercarrier accompanied by scores of jets and a fleet of frigates and destroyers - is overwhelmingly more powerful than Iran's navy.

But ever since al Qaeda suicide bombers in a small boat killed 17 sailors on board the destroyer U.S.S. Cole in a port in Yemen in 1996, Washington has been wary of the vulnerability of its huge battleships to bomb attacks by small enemy craft.

Asked whether the U.S. Navy was prepared for an attack or other trouble in the Gulf, Fox said: "We are very vigilant, we have built a wide range of options to give the president and we are ready... What if it happened tonight? We are ready today."

Iranian officials have threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, the outlet to the Gulf through which nearly all of the Middle East's oil sails.

Asked if he took Iran's threats seriously, Fox Said: "Could they make like extremely difficult for us? Yes they could. If we did nothing and they were able to operate without being inhibited, yeah they could close it, but I can't see that we would ever be in that position."

He added that diplomacy should be given priority in resolving the tension.

"So when you hear discussion about all this overheated rhetoric from Iran we really believe that the best way to handle this is with diplomacy... I am absolutely convinced that is the way to go. It is our job to be prepared. We are vigilant."

Contacts between the U.S. Navy and Iranian craft in the Gulf region were routine, Fox said, referring to cases where his sailors helped Iranian ships that were in distress or threatened by pirates.

In addition to commanding the Fifth Fleet, Fox is also the commander of a multinational naval task force charged with ensuring Gulf shipping routes stay open. Although most of its firepower is American, the task force also includes other Western countries and the Gulf Arab states.

The European Union slapped an embargo on Iranian oil last month, which is due to kick in completely by July 1. The United States and EU have both imposed new sanctions on Iran's central bank which make it difficult for countries to pay Tehran for oil and for Iran to pay for the goods it imports.

quote:

Op maandag 13 februari 2012 14:51 schreef Jor_Dii het volgende:
Dit kan niet goed blijven gaan, de VS stuurt al maanden aan op een confrontatie. Die gaat komen.