user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Voted : Yes, sounds like more of the same from the Bush Administration
I can't tell you how shocked I am to find the Bush Admin assertions are false.
Really.
I can't.
Back around Thanksgiving (or maybe it was Father's day) of 2004 I remember watching the news at my relatives house and saw a headline across the bottom of the screen about a truck loaded with missiles and warheads being stopped at a checkpoint in northern Iraq. I went to their website two days later after I got back home and saw nothing about it anywhere.
Simple mistake or some kind of coverup, I have no idea.
Voted : No, I will explain in depth below
Firstly, I welcome your question and will pleased to address it.
Now, I am happy to explain and to expand upon the point that Iran is funding and assisting insurgents in Iraq. There are several cirumstances to be taken into account, and upon realising these, one will see that the opinions in the article do not clash with the point being made. There are several things to consider:
1) When it is asserted that Iran is 'assisting' or 'funding' certain insurgents in Iraq- it is not usually in the direct way that one may imagine. Indeed, one may imagine big supplies of guns, ammunition, and other such artillery. No, that is not what is being asserted at all. This is what IS being asserted: a) Iran provides MONEY to insurgents (this can be used to buy all sorts of supplies for terrorist plots) , b) while it is not asserted that Iran is providing heavy artillery, a supply of explosives and bombs has been thought of as slipping across the Iraqi-Iranian border (it is easy to assert that no large convoys of artillery have been passed over the border, but what is being asserted is that explosives, usually compact and carried over discreetly is supposedly occuring for the use in terrorist attacks that occur regularly in Iraq.) and c) People. Many insurgents are foreign born, and some may get in via the Iranian border.
2) However, in regards to the possibility of heavier artillery: It is still possible that a cross-over of sorts could take place. COnsidering the following: a) the Iraqi-Iranian border is quite large and difficult to keep account of EVERYthing crossing across the whole thing. And b) where there is a crossing of the border with artillery, one beleives that it would be done discreetly and not in any blatant or obvious way. That is to say that it could just be a small group of people, carrying in a couple of weapons each. I doubt also that large convoys of military supplies are crossing in alrge and blatant numbers. It is supposedly being done more discreetly. BOTH points lead to a conclusion that just because one has not detected any activity it does not mean that there is absolutely none of it going on.
3) What is the nature of the insurgency? What is the best way to support it? The following needs to be remembered: It is NOT an fully organised and structured and to varying degrees not even united in structure. The insurgency is NOT a full functioning army- so it is not the case of the Iranian army simply transferring supplies to another army over the border in the conventional sense of the understanding. These Iraqi militas and terrorist groups that form the insurgency would require what then and in what manner would it hypotheitically travel to them across the Iranian border (supposedly)? What weapons? Well, nothing really as organised or high-tech as Hezbollah for example, which was pretty much a functioning government in southern Lebanon. The weapons would be bombs for terrorism, and some artillery, possibly rocket laucnhers to bring down helicopters. These aren't exactly weapons that are blatant or difficult to transfer. It wouldn't take a large group to do so with such supplies and one would not doubt it would be difficult to detect.
If my points require even further clarification, I would be happy to do so.
One more thing I want to add as to 'Iranian support of insurgency in Iraq':
There is also the issue of people crossing the border FROM Iraq INTO Iran. That is insurgents have sometimes been suspected of crossing into Iran for sanctuary.
So add to my list:
4) Providing sanctuary- this is a more implicit way of 'supporting' and 'backing' the insurgency.
Soc:
I appreciate what you are saying, and I don't disagree that if there was opportunity, that some Iranians might provide informal support to Iraqi insurgents.
What has not been shown is that the Iranian government is supporting the insurgency in an organized fashion. And the Iranian government might be, but the U.S has offered no proof. And using such claims as one of the reasons for sanctions/and or an invasion is gross overreaching, in my opinion.
It's starting to sound like WMDs all over, again.
|
|
