All Roads Lead to Teheran
Milblogger Dadmanly on Iran in Iraq:
I had a chat today with my former OIF Company Commander. We spoke of the bug-swarm of Presidential wannabes, and then turned to the subject of Iran. How desperately important is has long been, to send Iran a message that can’t possibly be misunderstood. The last straw, for him, was Iranian arms and expertise, used against us in war in Iraq.
“You don’t hear a lot about all the helicopters being shot down, all of a sudden. [Military officials] aren’t saying anything about why.”
“Shoulder fired missiles from Iran?”
“Of course, where else would they be coming from?”
The CO mentioned that his wife asked him about those downed helicopters, mentioned in recent news reports. He said he got to thinking, and we both did, how for the first 2 years of OIF, air travel just wasn’t any concern for us. He flew rotary and fixed wing, in and around Iraq, to Kuwait, and never had any serious concern about being shot down. We felt this complacency in-air, quite in contrast to driving in convoys on the ground, where alertness and adrenaline defined the experience. Has that changed? Probably not, I worried about it immediately post 9/11 for civilian air traffic. We should have always expected the possibility in the combat zone, but like anything, you lose the expectation when it never happens.
There is nothing secret about Iranian offensive operations against us, directly or by proxy. I reveal nothing from classified Intel briefings in declaring that Iran and Syria have had a direct and heavy hand in everything the fledging Iraqi Government and the Coalition forces have faced in the nearly 4 years since we toppled Saddam Hussein. However much we have deceived ourselves, the attention of our enemies has never wavered, has never weakened.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 1:25 pm on Friday, February 2, 2007
15 Responses to “All Roads Lead to Teheran”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
February 2nd, 2007 at 1:44 pm
It makes one weep. And very, very, angry.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:59 pm
I believe I commented on the number of helicopters we’re losing lately in Iraq just a few days ago in the “Clearing the Earth of the Depraved” post.
Our helicopters sare quite capable of surviving on the battlefield provided they are used correctly. They aren’t designed to fly out in the open as they have been in Iraq.
Where could the insurgents be getting anti-aircraft weapons?
I believe we supplied the Taliban quite a few of them to take on the Soviets with…
February 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 pm
I believe we supplied the Taliban quite a few of them to take on the Soviets with…
Your revisionist history didn’t even get the decade right…
February 2nd, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Are you saying we didn’t supply the jihadis in Afghanistan with anti-aircraft missiles, PA?
I suppose Michael Ledeen and the other crazies didn’t supply Iran and Hezbollah with anti-tank missles either?
Anti-tank missiles that took out some IDF tanks recently?
Maybe we shouldn’t be handing out weapons in the Middle East like candy on Halloween?
February 2nd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
Alphie: The purple avenger is saying that the Taliban as an organization didn’t exist during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.
Taliban formed approx 1993-94.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
(yes, I see the notations about factual accuracy and bias being disputed. Haven’t looked at the discussion, but these dates jive with my memory of what I was reading in newspapers and magazines at the time. The Taliban was formed as a “reformist” movement, under supervision of Pakistani Intelligence Service, in response to the utter devastation the various Afgahn parties and warlord factions were inflicting upon each
other after the Soviet withdrawal).
Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan: Dec 25, 1979 to Feb 1989 (Merry Christmas to you too).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan
February 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 pm
You just keep talking, alphie. Frankly, I think that someone with your broad knowledge, sharp wit, and intellectual power is wasted commenting on this blog. I hear Al Franken is thinking of running for president. Now is the time to get on his team as a foreign policy adviser. You’re a cinch.
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:10 pm
alphie, you are the stupidest son of a bitch I’ve run across in a long, long time. I expected Jules Crittenden, being a fairly big hoss in the journalistic world, to attract a better class of troll. You, sir, are an embarrassment, not that I’m blaming Jules. Cruise ships can’t be blamed for the barnacles they attract.
Iran (and its proxy Syria) are feeling the heat now, pretty damn hot in fact. You (and I use the aggregate “you” here) have been bleating about Amrikiyah’s bloodthirsty desire to murder innocent Persian peasants for some time now. The fact that Amrikiryah hasn’t done it yet, despite having the World’s Biggest Nuclear Arsenal, is an inconvenient factoid, pay no attention to it. We could annihilate most of the middle east — simply recall our troops, flatten the whole of Central Asia, and live happily ever after on our oil shale reserves. We don’t need no steenkeen dictators in Bumfuck, Araby.
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Pardon the grammatical errors in the previous post. Alphie will appreciate the anger, but others might excuse a comment best left unmade in the midst of family emergency.
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:53 pm
If the neocons want to convince Congress to declare war on Iran, they’re gonna have to come up with better “reasons” than this crap, Rebecca.
America has supplied plenty of weapons capable of bringing down Apaches to groups across the Middle East.
To blame their past mistakes on Iran is pretty desperate.
We need some real proof next time, not fantasies.
February 2nd, 2007 at 11:11 pm
America has supplied plenty of weapons capable of bringing down Apaches to groups across the Middle East.
Tell us what those are alphie. Here’s a hint: RPGs-not so much with the Americans (not so much with the anti-aircraft use either, but we’ll start slow).
Stingers like we gave to the Mujahadeen (hey-alphie-not the Taliban) need regular upkeep and would have been more likely used against us in Afghanistan in 2001 (curiously enough they weren’t) rather than making their way all the way to Iraq.
February 3rd, 2007 at 12:02 am
Are you saying we didn’t supply the jihadis in Afghanistan with anti-aircraft missiles, PA?
Nope. You explicitly said the Taliban. The Taliban emerged 5 years after the Soviet pullout.
February 3rd, 2007 at 12:37 am
Well Cav,
We seem to have been selling the Iranians spare parts for their F-14s up until last week. Who knows what else the Pentagon has been seeling at their garage sales?
PA,
Close enough.
Were we all British up until the day the Declaration of independence was signed?
Or were some of us Americans before then?
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:33 am
Alphie: UFM, MANPADS, like other other hi-tech gizmos, require regular maintenance and TLC to be useful. It is incredibly unlikely that 20+ year old devices would still work after being in the CC&C of some Talib whose sole technical qualification is that he is a hafiz. The other reason why your hypothesis is untenable is that MANPADS have not been used in Afghanistan, where they were delivered.
The real question is why anybody thinks Iraq is the site of a civil war. It seems to me that it is the site of an international war that has recruited local players.
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:50 pm
So what you have there alphie is a baseless assertion.
Nice job, probably need to do better than that though.
February 4th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Alphie,
Close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neocon):
According to Irving Kristol, the founder and “god-father” of Neoconservatism, there are three basic pillars of Neoconservatism:
1. Economics: Cutting tax rates in order to stimulate steady, wide-spread economic growth and acceptance of the necessity of the risks inherent in that growth, such as budget deficits, as well as the potential benefits, such as budget surpluses.
2. Domestic Affairs: Preferring strong government but not intrusive government, slight acceptance of the welfare state, adherence to social conservatism, and disapproval of counterculture
3. Foreign Policy: Patriotism is a necessity, world government is a terrible idea, the ability to distinguish friend from foe, protecting national interest both at home and abroad, and the necessity of a strong military.
Was Neocon supposed to be an insult?