Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: x0847Marine on October 22, 2007, 12:49:53 PM
-
During the US attack on Afghanistan, during a meeting in Europe between Ryan Crocker (deputy assistant secretary of state), Hillary Mann and a team of Iranian diplomats, the Iranians agreed to:
Provide assistance to US pilots downed near Iran
Let the U.S. send food in through the Iranian border
Agreed to restrain some "really bad Afghanis,"; Tehran quietly placed Gulbuddin Hekmatyar under house arrest.
Iran supplied the US with specific intelligence about Taliban assets that should be attacked. On top of that, they let it be known they were willing to hold "Unconditional talks" with the US.
Rumsfeld and Cheney rejected the idea. Deputy national security advisor, Stephen Hadley wrote a memo known as "Hadley's Rules", that stated:
"If a state like Syria or Iran offers specific assistance, we will take it without offering anything in return. We will accept it without strings or promises. We won't try to build on it."
After a full year of 'back door' high level diplomacy between Iran and the American government, without any prior warning to those involved in these talks, Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech. Either Bush didn't know the Iranians helped, and offered to talk unconditionally.. or Bush just doesn't care. Despite calling Iran evil, negotiations with Iran continued every month for another year.
When Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann went public with the Iran talks, the White House fired them and imposed "prior restraint".
Iran also agreed agreed, via the a fax from the Swiss, to:
"Decisive action" against all terrorists in Iran
An end of support for Hamas and the Islamic Jihad
To cease its nuclear program, and also an agreement to recognize Israel.
The Bush administration ignored the offer, then lodged a "formal complaint" with the Swiss government about their ambassador's meddling.
http://www.esquire.com/features/iranbriefing1107
-
Ah yes, Esquire the magazine has always been the source for indepth polical news.
-
I think even Bush has figured out we couldn't handle another large scale military op at this point.
-
The U.S. military has reported that Iran has smuggled advanced surface-to-air missiles into Iraq for the purpose of downing U.S. combat aircraft.
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2007/me_iran_10_22.asp
-
Originally posted by Tiger
Ah yes, I am a tard!
:aok
-
I turn to esquire when I want fair un-biased op-ed, don't you all?
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
During the US attack on Afghanistan, during a meeting in Europe between Ryan Crocker (deputy assistant secretary of state), Hillary Mann and a team of Iranian diplomats, the Iranians agreed to:
Provide assistance to US pilots downed near Iran
Let the U.S. send food in through the Iranian border
Agreed to restrain some "really bad Afghanis,"; Tehran quietly placed Gulbuddin Hekmatyar under house arrest.
Iran supplied the US with specific intelligence about Taliban assets that should be attacked. On top of that, they let it be known they were willing to hold "Unconditional talks" with the US.
Rumsfeld and Cheney rejected the idea. Deputy national security advisor, Stephen Hadley wrote a memo known as "Hadley's Rules", that stated:
"If a state like Syria or Iran offers specific assistance, we will take it without offering anything in return. We will accept it without strings or promises. We won't try to build on it."
After a full year of 'back door' high level diplomacy between Iran and the American government, without any prior warning to those involved in these talks, Bush gave his "axis of evil" speech. Either Bush didn't know the Iranians helped, and offered to talk unconditionally.. or Bush just doesn't care. Despite calling Iran evil, negotiations with Iran continued every month for another year.
When Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann went public with the Iran talks, the White House fired them and imposed "prior restraint".
Iran also agreed agreed, via the a fax from the Swiss, to:
"Decisive action" against all terrorists in Iran
An end of support for Hamas and the Islamic Jihad
To cease its nuclear program, and also an agreement to recognize Israel.
The Bush administration ignored the offer, then lodged a "formal complaint" with the Swiss government about their ambassador's meddling.
http://www.esquire.com/features/iranbriefing1107
How many iranian created / supplied IED's have killed US troops?
-
i don't see how anyone who watches fox news could possibly trust any other news source.
:rofl
-
At that time and under the previous Iranian governmental leadership it would have been possible to have an open discussion with them concerning their helping against terror activities. BUT as usual our government screwed up and even though I don't agree with US foreign policy I still support our government and will do so through the good and the bad.
I have a few contacts in that part of the world from business relationships and up until a year or so ago news and views flowed freely back and forth. In general anything other than hello and how is your family is not exchanged with those same contacts any longer. One of my contacts that I consider a friend told me of an encounter with a group of extremely fit, Caucasian, western (non-European) men in the areas bordering the Baluchistan regions near Afghanistan and Pakistan. This was immediately after the big kick off in Afghanistan after 9/11.
-
Originally posted by Tiger
Ah yes, Esquire the magazine has always been the source for indepth polical news.
Not like most of the expert posters here, I reckon. Ain't got nuthin' but I hate your source! ;)
-
Originally posted by Yeager
The U.S. military has reported that Iran has smuggled advanced surface-to-air missiles into Iraq for the purpose of downing U.S. combat aircraft.
http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/WTARC/2007/me_iran_10_22.asp
And just cause it's the trendy thing:
"This newspaper exists because we believe the world's most influential nation is poorly served by U.S.media outlets that focus on domestic political and cultural issues to the exclusion of relevant news affecting the other five-and-a-half billion people in the world. The Internet is perhaps the most obvious facilitator of an increasingly global economy and culture. While the United States is the world's leading power, in the years since the U.S. retreat from Vietnam, and especially after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the American media outlets have significantly decreased available resources for the coverage of international news. "
Yardle yardle yardle blah blah (waive a flag then wrap your fave agenda in it) humpity pumpity (look ma, I'm biased, too), etc.
:D
-
One of my contacts that I consider a friend told me of an encounter with a group of extremely fit, Caucasian, western (non-European) men in the areas bordering the Baluchistan regions near Afghanistan and Pakistan.
====
Ok, Im lost here...what were you getting at?
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Ok, Im lost here...what were you getting at?
The first part is confirmed by the second. :D
-
If there were any justice in the world, (and there ain't much) all those Iranian and muslim apologists would be the first to go when muslim terrorists set off a nuke or two in a western country.
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
Tehran quietly placed Gulbuddin Hekmatyar under house arrest.
Hekmatiyar still alive!? What a "biography"!
Key word: "quietly".
Some nations start media-hype, some just do what they should. Who will ever remember that in 2001 Russians sent hundreeds on tanks, BMPs and tons of ammo and arms to Northern Alliance? We had two pontoon bridges across Pianj river, 201st infantry division provided advisors and training to Afghani resistance, and now Americans made us withdraw from Tajikistan to keep heroin traffic going.
Keep watching TV guys. It's soothing.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
If there were any justice in the world, (and there ain't much) all those Iranian and muslim apologists would be the first to go when muslim terrorists set off a nuke or two in a western country.
So far we had apartment houses blown up in Moscow, no one gave a flying **** in the West. It could be my house blown up to bricks - so i had a chance to free you from my whining here.
Ain't too hard to guess what people here think?
And we brought flowers to American Embassy on 9-11 and later when Columbia crashed. My flowers were among the first on the snow for Columbia.
You host people responsible for deaths of thousands of my compatriots. You, not Iran. Iran helps us clicking them like lice. Not your regimes, I mean US and UK.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
So far we had apartment houses blown up in Moscow, no one gave a flying **** in the West. It could be my house blown up to bricks - so i had a chance to free you from my whining here.
Ain't too hard to guess what people here think?
And we brought flowers to American Embassy on 9-11 and later when Columbia crashed. My flowers were among the first on the snow for Columbia.
You host people responsible for deaths of thousands of my compatriots. You, not Iran. Iran helps us clicking them like lice. Not your regimes, I mean US and UK.
Well, we did what we could to stop future communist leaders like Stalin from murdering millions of your people. No thanks necessary, it wasn't soley for your benefit.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
Well, we did what we could to stop future communist leaders like Stalin from murdering millions of your people. No thanks necessary, it wasn't soley for your benefit.
Thanks!? For plans of burning millions of Soviet people!? For my nation breaking it's spine for defense for 50 years, after defeating the deadliest enemy in human history?
You are definitely over any morale.
I find it insane.
Your regimes ****ing hire terrorists on govt jobs. Pests. Planning another aggression against another free country, who's only fault is trying to live their own way, no coca-cola and chewing-gum.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Thanks!? For plans of burning millions of Soviet people!? For my nation breaking it's spine for defense for 50 years, after defeating the deadliest enemy in human history?
You are definitely over any morale.
I find it insane.
Your regimes ****ing hire terrorists on govt jobs. Pests. Planning another aggression against another free country, who's only fault is trying to live their own way, no coca-cola and chewing-gum.
It's ok, really, no thanks needed. :aok
-
Originally posted by AKIron
It's ok, really, no thanks needed. :aok
i may make you feel but I can't make you think (c) Jethro Tull, Thick as a Brick, 1972.
-
What is a "stike" anyway?
Mark
-
Originally posted by Mark Luper
What is a "stike" anyway?
Mark
Stike - In England, 13-14th centuries, a quantity of 25 eels. Ten stikes made a bind of eels. Sometimes spelled strike.
stike (http://www.sizes.com/units/stike.htm)
:cool:
-
That is very interesting JB. Thanks for the info.
Word.
Mark
-
you bet.
;)
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Your regimes ****ing hire terrorists on govt jobs. Pests. Planning another aggression against another free country, who's only fault is trying to live their own way, no coca-cola and chewing-gum.
And yours doesn't? The USSR flooded the 3rd world with cheap weaponary, now it comes back and bites you on the backside.
-
Vulcan, Yemen, Angola and Cuba don't produce terrorists.
OTOH UK and US give political asylum to Chechen murderers, UK courts didn;t find enough evidence when Russians sent a video-tape with Akhmed Zakayev cutting off fingers from Orthodox priest, and the priest himself. US hired Ilyas Akhmadov in DoS, it's awesome. Can you imagine Russia hiring Osama for a job in Kremlin?!
And don;t tell me it's "democracy" and so on, democracy is a dangerous nuisance. I am all for totalitarism. At least it's honest.
-
Originally posted by AKIron
If there were any justice in the world, (and there ain't much) all those Iranian and muslim apologists would be the first to go when muslim terrorists set off a nuke or two in a western country.
Well, most of them live in the big cities.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
in 2001 Russians sent hundreeds on tanks, BMPs and tons of ammo and arms to Northern Alliance?
In an arms deal valued at ~$40 million. I wonder where the Northern Alliance got that kind of money, don't you?
Ah...
Woodward does provide one hard number that is worth pondering. Cash outlays to reward friendly warlords and buy off Taliban sympathizers totaled $70 million, which the president considered "one of the biggest bargains of all time."
-
If the USA wants to hunt down "evil iranians" why not acting against the Mujaheddin-e-Khalk.
This group is defined by the USA as a terroist organisation. Like the Al Kaida.
Like the Al Kaida the MEK-terrorists kill innocent civilians by bombing and other actions.
Unlike the Al Kaida the MEK-terrorists have a known base. In Iraq.
Unlike the Al Kaida the MEK-terrorists are protected by US troops against iraqis (who were torured by the MEK during the Saddam-time).
Instead of fighting these terrorists the US government protects terrorists wwho are officially defined as terrorists by the USA.
Strange way to fight the terror. By supporting the terror.
-
Originally posted by babek-
Strange way to fight the terror. By supporting the terror.
It seems to be a well-tested practice. In 1999 they bombed Yugoslavia "into stone age" supporting "Kosovo Liberation Army" (UChK) that was declared a terrorist organization by the US congress.
-
You mean they bombed Serbia which was mowing down civilians at the time? Nothing compared to the sacking of Grosny though....
Anyway, what to expect from somebody who had to learn about the Hitler-USSR pact on this forum.
BTW, Boroda, I just came home from a former USSR annexed country. Lithuania, something you have named a "buffer".
They do not seem to like you guys at all. Which is, when you look into their history, quite understandable. But of course their "terrorists" had to be bashed down, tsk tsk, calling themself "partisans."
So, point is, this is not a simple world.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
It seems to be a well-tested practice. In 1999 they bombed Yugoslavia "into stone age" supporting "Kosovo Liberation Army" (UChK) that was declared a terrorist organization by the US congress.
Indeed very strange.
I would understand it, if a nation calls terrorists "freedom fighters" and then supports them.
Like the USA once did with the terroristic Mujaheddin in Afghanistan.
But I cant understand that a nation calls a group officially terrorists and then fully supports them.
Mr. Bush claims, that he wants to fight world wide terrorism.
But obviously there are "good" and "bad" terrorists for him. Otherwise he wouldnt gave the order to protect the MEK-terrorists in Iraq who performed and still perform their bombing attacks against innocent civilians.
-
Pushing the chesspieces indeed. You just choose your team.
Lots of stuff been going on in S-Amarica as well as Latin America as well....
-
Originally posted by Angus
Pushing the chesspieces indeed. You just choose your team.
Lots of stuff been going on in S-Amarica as well as Latin America as well....
Thats maybe true.
But again the simple questions:
1. Are the USA under Bush fighting against international terrorism ?
2 Are the MEK defined as terrorists by the USA ?
3. Are US troops in Iraq protecting the MEK-terrorists and their base ?
4. Is it possible to fight international terrorism, if you support terrorists?
-
Originally posted by Boroda
And don;t tell me it's "democracy" and so on, democracy is a dangerous nuisance. I am all for totalitarism. At least it's honest.
I almost choked on my breakfast Boroda.... Thick as a brick is an endearing quality you may have mastered as well as us... And that beauty is definantly in the eye of the beholder...
Thanks again for the great belly laugh's I really enjoy reading your posts...
BTW I am surrounded by russians here and my family fled during the revolution
when the totalitarians "peacefully" took control.
We have manifest destiny and you had Stalin.... Not much difference unless you take into account millions of deaths compared to 10's of thousands...
TJ
-
Have one terrorist fighting another, that's a cunning chessmove. :D
And as for your totalitarianism Borda, or may I say exclusive communism, those I've met and were under it don't seem to find it good at all.
Been recently both in E-Germany (former), and Lithuania, as well as Poland before. That was the general impression. In Lithuania especially.
Well after all theyhad to go through mass executions and deportations BEFORE Hitler. Then came Hitler with his version, and after the USSR slammed the door in again, they had had enough of those bosses.
BTW, the military deal between Hitler and Stalin already started there, in August 1939.
Then came the cold war and the just totalitariaism. Lots of skirmishes and then interrogations, torture and executions.
Vilnius was in decay, but starting to look better. Guess what, they're always running across bodies around there when fixing streets and such, - originating under USSR regime. Seem to have been dumped anywhere suitable as filling.
You should visit the place some day, but be vary, a Russian with your opinion might get quick into trouble there.
And I guess you will figure out where I'd like to stuff your totalitarianism :t
-
babek... by now you should be familiar with the american double standard in regards to supporting terrorists, it smacks of racists undertones when you calculate the where, when and why.
it would seem logical to expect such lapses of morality from a large group of paranoid caucasians that are force fed mainstream media hysteria.
as for these evil iranians...
well... ahmadinejad is literally moping the floor with these rude people that interview him. from wallace to rose they carry such an aryan twang with their fingers waving in the air... and yet... in the end ahmadinejad politely makes mincemeat out of them all... it's such a joke.
i expected a blabbering religious idiot like bush... but ahmadinejad is a very clever, articulate and polite persian. he chooses his words carefully to force the issues about the root causes and not just the symptoms of the problems in the middle-east... i suppose that is why the cowardly inepto-cons want nothing to do with him.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
How many iranian created / supplied IED's have killed US troops?
A bunch? a-lot? many dozens? Lets not be surprised a country is protecting it's interests against near-by unfriendly forces. On top of that, they're helping their shia brethren... exactly like the "quagmire" Veep Dick spoke of.
Iran are no sweethearts, the ruling mullahs are every bit as sociopathic and crooked as some of our leaders, what makes them extra loony is their religious fanaticism. They sent waves of children armed with .3c plastic keys to heaven, rakes, rocks and sticks into battle, head on into heavily armed Iraqi units.
The point is that it didn't have to be this way, but it is.. only thanks to a few stubborn so called leaders with proven track records as liars when it comes to military action.. when Bush says hes committed to a diplomatic solution, remember he and his neoclown lackeys ignored Irans diplomatic efforts and gestures... for no apparent logical reason.
And BTW, this is all fairly well documented, from CSPAN to the Wash post.. but not widely reported, Paris, Britney & OJ were obviously more newsworthy events.
I don't recommend those scared of learning something Google the names in the article to verify their story.
This article (http://www.lefigaro.fr/english/20071023.WWW000000390_increasing_danger_of_war_through_incomprehension_between_united_states_and_iran.html) sums it up fairly well.
"In fall 2001 Iran made three gesture to the United States. First, Tehran condemned the 11 September attacks, with the utmost resolve. Next, Iran helped the Northern Alliance to drive the Taleban out of Kabul, at the beginning of November. And last, in December, Iran supported all the US initiatives at the Bonn conference on Afghanistan's political and political reconstruction. Iran was then extremely surprised to find itself featuring on the "axis of evil ""
-
"Iran are no sweethearts, the ruling mullahs are every bit as sociopathic and crooked as some of our leaders, what makes them extra loony is their religious fanaticism. They sent waves of children armed with .3c plastic keys to heaven, rakes, rocks and sticks into battle, head on into heavily armed Iraqi units."
I'd seperate that (although tidings have come from "christian" camps in the USA training similar stuff), and add that the Iranian President took part in those operations. Oh, he was not wearing a TNT belt, probably just a handgun and a bullhorn...
-
Originally posted by x0847Marine
A bunch? a-lot? many dozens? Lets not be surprised a country is protecting it's interests against near-by unfriendly forces. On top of that, they're helping their shia brethren... exactly like the "quagmire" Veep Dick spoke of.
Iran are no sweethearts, the ruling mullahs are every bit as sociopathic and crooked as some of our leaders, what makes them extra loony is their religious fanaticism. They sent waves of children armed with .3c plastic keys to heaven, rakes, rocks and sticks into battle, head on into heavily armed Iraqi units.
The point is that it didn't have to be this way, but it is.. only thanks to a few stubborn so called leaders with proven track records as liars when it comes to military action.. when Bush says hes committed to a diplomatic solution, remember he and his neoclown lackeys ignored Irans diplomatic efforts and gestures... for no apparent logical reason.
And BTW, this is all fairly well documented, from CSPAN to the Wash post.. but not widely reported, Paris, Britney & OJ were obviously more newsworthy events.
I don't recommend those scared of learning something Google the names in the article to verify their story.
This article (http://www.lefigaro.fr/english/20071023.WWW000000390_increasing_danger_of_war_through_incomprehension_between_united_states_and_iran.html) sums it up fairly well.
"In fall 2001 Iran made three gesture to the United States. First, Tehran condemned the 11 September attacks, with the utmost resolve. Next, Iran helped the Northern Alliance to drive the Taleban out of Kabul, at the beginning of November. And last, in December, Iran supported all the US initiatives at the Bonn conference on Afghanistan's political and political reconstruction. Iran was then extremely surprised to find itself featuring on the "axis of evil ""
Iran felt threatened by the Taliban. To imply they wanted them out to help the US is disingenuous at best. Perhaps you might want to learn something yourself? http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2370239