Official Iran Thread

Attacks are more openly discussed in the Knesset this time. It's different.

This report ought to be different too, talking about the construction of weapons.

We'll see. I'm not going to be surprised if it happens.

edit:
More here:

- - - - - - -
U.S. concerned Israel could strike Iran
By Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr

The United States has become increasingly concerned Israel could be preparing to strike Iran's nuclear program, a senior U.S. military official told CNN on Friday.

The U.S. military and intelligence community in recent weeks have stepped up "watchfulness" of both Iran and Israel, according to the senior U.S. military official and a second military official familiar with the U.S. actions.  Asked if the Pentagon was concerned about an attack, the senior military official replied "absolutely." Both officials declined to be identified because of the extreme sensitivity of the matter.... (more)
- - - - - - -


Also don't forget that it's unusual that someone like Peres says something like that.
 
Forostar said:
Attacks are more openly discussed in the Knesset this time. It's different.

This report ought to be different too, talking about the construction of weapons.

We'll see. I'm not going to be surprised if it happens.

I've heard the Israeli government say things like that before. I'm not taking it seriously before a bomb actually drops on Iran.

On the other hand, yeah, I wouldn't really be surprised. If this year in politics has taught us one thing, then that the only thing to be expected is the unexpected. I see a lot of people who seem to crave for instability and chaos. Whether they call it "grassroots activism", "occupy movement", "Financial stability facility" or whatever, it's obvious that people are tired of the outdated equilibrium that has been slowly grinding our societies to death within the last thirty years. The greatest economical and civilisatory boost is always achieved when the rubble is being rebuilt and Phoenix rises from the ashes. The crave for destruction is there, but will we survive it this time? As Brecht said, mighty Carthage fought three wars. After the first one, it was still mighty, after the second one it was still habitable. It could not be found after the third one.

I predict that in ten or twenty years, no-one will speak of Israel or America or Greece or France anymore. Everyone will speak of China.
 
Sorry mate, I edited something in my previous post (bad timing). :)

I'm off to bed now!

Interesting observation you made there. It'll be in the back of my mind.
 
Here's an interesting report from an anti-government website.

Opposition activists warn about strike against Iran
created 11/10/2011 - 02:21, updated 11/10/2011 - 02:24

GVF — More than 120 Iranian authors, activists and journalists have issued a strong warning about the ramifications of a possible military strike against Iran.

In a statement, the intellectuals said that the “disturbing wave” of military threats against Iran were “reckless and unwise.”

“The significant and fateful developments of the Arab Spring, and in particular the eye-opening fate of the Libyan dictator and his bigoted regime—which was brought about following the direct military intervention of NATO forces—is tempting others to seek a similar scenario in order to free Iran from the yoke of this oppressive theocracy,” the statement said.

“Such irresponsible statements and actions seriously threaten the Iranian nation and Iran, and it is cause for [grave] concern.”

Lُast week, the Guardian published a story about British military planning in anticipation of a possible strike against Iran. “British military planners are examining where best to deploy Royal Navy ships and submarines equipped with Tomahawk cruise missiles over the coming months as part of what would be an air and sea campaign,” the report alleged.

The Israeli press have also been speculating that the country might eventually launch a military attack against Iran even without a US go-ahead.

However, Germany’s Foreign Minister warned that war talk would strengthen Iran’s hard-line rulers, while Russian President Dmitry Medvedev describe the threats of war as “pretty dangerous rhetoric.”

On Tuesday, the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) fourteen-page annex to its quarterly report on Iran expressed “serious concern” about the nature of the country’s nuclear programme, giving rise to concerns about further punitive measures.

Following the publication of the report, Iran’s ambassador to the agency, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, said that IAEA chief Yukiya Amano was “playing a very dangerous game.”

In their statement, the Iranian opposition activists said that while they favoured a peaceful transition to democracy, they did not believe undermining the country’s territorial integrity could ever lead to freedom, democracy and human rights.

“We believe, and state out of responsibility, that humanitarian aid and democracy cannot come from the barrel of a gun. Guided missiles cannot bring humanitarian aid and democracy; humanitarian aid and democracy do not fall from bombers onto civilians; unmanned drones guided from far away cannot fire humanitarian aid and democracy [towards the people].”

The statement went on to add, “We are against military strike against our country Iran under any pretext, including concerns about the regime’s irresponsible adventures in its nuclear activities.”

The activists maintained that while the Iranian regime’s violation of human rights had to be exposed for all to see, there was also a need for raising awareness about the threat of military action against Iranian soil.

“For the sake of the country’s interests, we strongly advise the Islamic Republic to cooperate with the IAEA and international inspectors in order to address any uncertainties about the country’s nuclear programme and to avert the threat of war and carnage.”

In October, the Coordination Council of the Green Path of Hope, the Iranian Green Movement’s highest decision-making body, predicted that in the event of any challenge to the country’s sovereignty, Iranians would undoubtedly rise to defend their homeland regardless of differences in political and ideological leanings.

“Most certainly, any Iranian with any ideology or belief will stand to defend his or her country’s sovereignty and national interests, but we must not confuse defending Iran with defending statesmen who have had a significant role in creating this crisis,” the council noted.

Source

I talked about this with a few of my Iranian friends, and we all agreed that, not only is the nuclear program non-existent in the minds of the oppressed people, but also that further sanctions and bombs falling from the sky is the very last thing the Iranian people need right now. Add to that a complete failure of so-called analysts and experts appearing in the media who demonstrate repeatedly that they have no idea what they are talking about, and what is left is a bloody mess.
 
Thanks. To be honest I don't give a hoot for the Russian opinion. They never care about doing anything, whatever happens in a foreign country, just like China, especially when they have their own interest.

I understand the concern of the Iranian opposition though. An attack would strengthen the unity of the country and strengthen the support for the current government.

“We believe, and state out of responsibility, that humanitarian aid and democracy cannot come from the barrel of a gun. Guided missiles cannot bring humanitarian aid and democracy; humanitarian aid and democracy do not fall from bombers onto civilians; unmanned drones guided from far away cannot fire humanitarian aid and democracy [towards the people].”

This is more of less what Israeli say, but in this case they say the danger comes from Iran. Nuclear attacks cannot bring democracy indeed. They bring death and that's why they want to destroy them.

In its latest and toughest report so far on Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said on Tuesday that it had information indicating Iran had carried out tests "relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device".

The IAEA said the research includes computer models that could only be used to develop a nuclear bomb trigger.

A senior Foreign Office figure has revealed that ministers have been told to expect Israeli military action, adding: ‘We’re expecting something as early as Christmas, or very early in the new year.’
 
Perun said:
I predict that in ten or twenty years, no-one will speak of Israel or America or Greece or France anymore. Everyone will speak of China.

No sooner? :p

In all seriousness, China's economy overtakes the US one in 2016 (I believe). That's in 5 years. I think we all will live in interesting times (damn, China again!).

As for the Iran situation, the US has got to be begging Israel to shut up, another war is the last thing this country needs.
 
Israel is pretty aggressive and self-confident, as a result of several wars where they employed their well organized and equipped army against opponents that lacked both factors, and beaten them. The pressure about Iranian nuclear program is smoke and mirrors, especially when you know that Israel already possesses nuclear weapons. Consider Pakistan-India relations after they became nuclear powers; their own little version of MAD took place, and like Cold War MAD, resulted in a detente. Besides, Iran would never nuke Israel because of neighboring Muslim states. The size of Israel and it's climate characteristics guarantee fallout and radioactive winds deep into Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan...

In reality, Iran is afraid of Operation Babylon II. In 1981 Israelis made a surprise air to ground strike in Baghdad, destroying Osiris type nuclear reactor. All independent western research affirmed that reactor was used for civilian purposes only. French (reactor was sold and implementation supervised by France) engineers said that it would take significant reconfiguration, and then decades of operation, to manufacture enough Pu-239 for a single nuclear bomb. Israel is afraid of Sejil-2 MRBM. Iran can fire missiles onto Israel. They don't need to have nuclear warheads - as I've said before their territory is small and narrow, if Iran managed to acquire Russian nanotech compression warheads, one is enough to blow up an average Israeli army base.

Both are trying to wage war by proxies, Iran sponsoring militant Islamic organizations on/near Israeli territory, Israel trying to deceive western powers into direct action with false Iranian nuclear weapons program threats. If you ask me, them both should be left alone to do as they wish, both of them have a finger on the trigger but are afraid to pull it. Then they might start talking.

On a sidenote;

112_460s.jpg
 

:D
 
OK, now this is seriously alarming...

Iran protesters storm UK embassy in Tehran


Britain has threatened "serious consequences" for Iran after protesters stormed the British embassy in Tehran, ransacking offices and diplomatic residences and triggering one of the worst crises in bilateral relations since the Islamic revolution 32 years ago.

A mob including members of the paramilitary basij brigades, under the control of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, surged through lines of riot police and broke into the embassy and a separate residential compound, the Qolhak Gardens, in northern Tehran, chanting "Death to England" in scenes reminiscent of the seizure of the US embassy in 1979.

British diplomatic staff ran for safety and locked themselves in their offices and homes, with one group of about a dozen pinned down by the crowd while others were jostled, although there were no serious injuries. The crowd ripped the gildedUK crest off the embassy, pulled down the union flag and replaced it with the Iranian one, and threw satellite dishes off the roofs of embassy buildings. They also smashed windows and scattered thousands of papers in the street in front of the embassy, where British, US and Israeli flags were set alight.

At the Qolhak compound, a crowd roamed the wooded site where embassy staff live in flats and bungalows set among the trees, complicating the Foreign Office's efforts to confirm their safety.

Police only appeared to have regained control of both compounds by late evening, when the Tehran police chief, Hossein Sajedinia, announced that they had been emptied of protesters, and that some would be prosecuted. Iran's foreign ministry issued a statement expressing regret over the "unacceptable behaviour by [a] few demonstrators" and promising an investigation.

In London, David Cameron chaired a meeting of the cabinet's emergency committee, COBR, and the foreign secretary, William Hague, threatened "serious consequences" for the embassy invasion, which he described as "a very serious failure by the Iranian government". He is due to make a statement to parliament on Wednesday. A Foreign Office source said Britain's response would be "clear and robust".

Cameron said on Tuesday: "Those responsible for this criminal attack must be prosecuted. The Iranian government must recognise that there will be serious consequences for failing to protect our staff. We will consider what these measures should be in the coming days."

Hague said: "The United Kingdom takes this irresponsible action extremely seriously. It amounts to a grave breach of the Vienna convention which requires the protection of diplomats and diplomatic premises under all circumstances. We hold the Iranian government responsible for its failure to take adequate measures to protect our embassy, as it is required to do."

He confirmed that by 6pm, all the embassy's British staff had been accounted for, and most local employees had been warned not to come in on Tuesday in anticipation of trouble. But he added: "We are urgently establishing the whereabouts of our locally engaged security staff to ensure their wellbeing." He advised British nationals to "stay indoors, keep a low profile and await further advice".

The US and France also condemned the embassy raid, while the UN security council passed a resolution condemning the incident.

"The members of the security council condemned in the strongest terms the attacks against the United Kingdom's embassy in Tehran, Iran, which resulted in intrusions into the diplomatic and consular premises, causing serious damage," the Portuguese UN ambassador, José Filipe Moraes Cabral, said.

"Expressing their deep concern at such attacks, the members of the security council called on the Iranian authorities to protect diplomatic and consular property and personnel and to respect fully their international obligations," the UN statement said.

A British official added that the priority was assessing the scale of the damage and ensuring the security of all staff before announcing a response. He said there had been no significant injuries.

"There was some pushing and shoving but nothing too serious," the official said. "Some staff had their freedom of movement restricted. At one point, there was a group of about a dozen in one location, with a few Iranian police guarding the door and demonstrators roaming around outside. So a hairy and scary situation but nothing that could be described as a hostage situation."

The storming of the British embassy was the latest, and most violent, blow struck in a long-running battle of wits over Iran's nuclear programme. Diplomats had been expecting a major protest in Tehran on Tuesday to mark the first anniversary of the assassination of a senior Iranian nuclear scientist, Majid Shahriari, one of three killed over the past two years in the streets of the capital. The protesters carried picture of the dead scientists, who have been made martyrs to Iran's nuclear cause and symbols of the state's determination to press on with its programme in defiance of UN security council resolutions calling for a suspension of uranium enrichment.

It only became clear when the crowds began to gather outside the embassy on Ferdowsi Avenue and at Qolhak gardens on Tuesday morning that Britain would be the sole target of the protests, but it was not altogether surprising. Relations between Iran and the UK have almost always been tense since the Islamic revolution of 1979, and full ambassadorial ties have been the exception rather than the norm. In 1986 members of the Revolutionary Guards beat up the British charge d'affaires and 2007 saw the Iranian detention of 15 British sailors and marines in disputed waters along the Iraqi border. They were released after nearly two weeks in captivity.

Relations continued to deteriorate after the 2009 presidential election, when the regime blamed Britain for supporting the opposition Green movement. Iranian staff at the embassy were detained and ordered to resign their positions. Ordinary Iranians were warned not to have any contact with British diplomats. The Tehran municipal authorities meanwhile reinvigorated a long-running campaign to wrest back control of the 50-acre Qolhak Gardens, given to the British diplomatic mission by the Persian monarchy in the 19th century.

The latest crisis began with the publication this month of a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency, citing "credible" evidence that Iranian scientists had experimented with a nuclear warhead design and could be continuing to do so. The UK was the first to respond with punitive measures, cutting all ties to the Iranian banking system and parliament, the Majlis, which retaliated on Sunday by calling for the expulsion of Britain's ambassador, Dominick Chilcott, and the permanent downgrading of bilateral relations.

Richard Dalton, who served as ambassador to Tehran from 2002 to 2006, said the bilateral relationship had always been troubled, but Tuesday's riot was the first actual incursion into the embassy.

"This takes us to a bad feeling in bilateral relations we have not seen for a couple of decades. In my time, there were frequent demonstrations and we were always concerned that this would happen," he said. "The plan if it did happen was to sit tight and call on the [Iranian] authorities to fulfil their legal obligation to protect the embassy, which is an obligation the Iranians do recognise.

"The positive part of this is that the Iranians seem to have done the right thing in the end. The negative side, which is very serious and worthy of strong complaint, is that they didn't seem to have an adequate police presence to stop it happening in the first place."

A British official said that the police had ample warning that there could be violent protests directed at the embassy.

"It was transparently clear that some hardline pro-regime elements were putting it about on the internet and on social media: let's go and trash the Brits. So there is no doubt that if they wanted to stop this from happening they could have. When it came to opposition demonstrators they didn't have the same difficulties," the official said.

Diplomats and observers who reviewed video footage of the incident said it was clear from the clothing, placards and behaviour of some of the protesters that a significant number were basiji, who were the regime's shock troops in crushing street protests after the 2009 election.

Some of the placards bore the picture of Qassem Suleimani, the head of the Quds Force, the Revolutionary Guards' external wing, which has been active in Iraq and Syria. The US blamed him and his force last month for an alleged plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the US in a Washington restaurant where he would be dining.

Suleimani, seen as a radical and growing force in the constant jostling for power in Tehran, once wrote to General David Petraeus, telling the then US commander in Iraq that it was he, Suleimani, who controlled Iranian foreign policy in the region.

The storming of the embassy came at a time when conservatives in the parliament, judiciary and security forces are resisting efforts by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to defuse the rising tensions in Iran's relations with the rest of the world, amid ever-tightening sanctions, growing diplomatic isolation and chronic economic problems. Some diplomats said Monday's events were as much a measure of the internal turmoil inside the Tehran regime as the bitterness of its relations with the west.

In other media, the Iranian government is reported to have condemned the attack as "unacceptable", and that in the course of the event, foreign French and German schools have also been affected.

This raises a couple of questions for me:

-Who instigated the attack? As the article notes, a large part of the mob was made up of basijis... which means that this is hardly a popular uprising. The basijis are those guys firing at random in large anti-government crowds. The reminiscence of the 1979 occupation of the American embassy is quite eerie, and I think it is not completely accidental.

-If, what I believe, the Iranian government is behind this, what is their goal? Why would they provoke western governments on this level? Ahmadi may be a nutjob, but the majority of the government is, if anything, not weary of life.

-What German school was attacked, and how is my mate who might currently be working there?
 
Perun said:
-If, what I believe, the Iranian government is behind this, what is their goal? Why would they provoke western governments on this level? Ahmadi may be a nutjob, but the majority of the government is, if anything, not weary of life.

An analist on TV said it might be to show the population an active reaction vs the West. Besides only ignoring demands, also some initiative, aggression, to show that they rather intimidate others instead of the other way around.

Perun said:
-What German school was attacked, and how is my mate who might currently be working there?

:S I hope all is OK with your mate and other people there.
 
Forostar said:
An analist on TV said it might be to show the population an active reaction vs the West. Besides only ignoring demands, also some initiative, aggression, to show that they rather intimidate others instead of the other way around.

That doesn't make very much sense to me. If the government wanted its people, or anyone else, to know it is behind this, why does it deny any participation?
 
Perun said:
That doesn't make very much sense to me. If the government wanted its people, or anyone else, to know it is behind this, why does it deny any participation?

To make it look like a popular revolt against the west?
 
I nearly crapped my pants when I saw this at work. I was convinced that the U.S had no basis for their current "let's invade Iran next" rhetoric, and well... this happens. I'll be following this very closely.
 
bearfan said:
To make it look like a popular revolt against the west?

Possible, but I have a hard time thinking that there is one person in the government left who believes that would work. The government body is too big for a self-deception of this scale.

Forostar said:
Let's say that they don't mind it happened.  :)

Well, as I said, I am more than certain the government is behind this. The people who stormed the embassy were basijis. They are known for some hot-headed actions, but they wouldn't do something of this magnitude without some sort of official consent.
 
Isn't this a bit hypocritical guys? When "one of us" is involved things are taken more seriously? Sorry, but I couldn't resist.
 
Forostar said:
Isn't this a bit hypocritical guys? When "one of us" is involved things are taken more seriously? Sorry, but I couldn't resist.

What do you mean?  :huh:
 
Forostar said:
Onhell's post. Not your mate.

I'm still not quite sure what you're onto there. Where has Onhell stated this involves him or "one of us"?
 
Onhell said:
I nearly crapped my pants when I saw this at work. I was convinced that the U.S had no basis for their current "let's invade Iran next" rhetoric, and well... this happens. I'll be following this very closely.
 
I still don't get what you mean by him being hypocritic. But let's leave that to be discussed between the two of you.
 
Back
Top