Skip to main content

There are serious reasons to doubt the claim that Iran is supplying weapons to Shia militants in Iraq (not the least of which is they already own their government lock stock and barrel). But here we're going to dissect some photos from the Bush Administration's own slideshow.

More after the break.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
tnt
.
.
.
.
As you can see, the writing on this tnt is written in Farsi. You're not going to see much more of this, so take a good look at it.
.
.
.
.
mortars
.
.
.
.
So here we have some mortars! Written on in Latin alphabet I might add. Last I checked the Iranians used the Farsi alphabet, but never mind that. Look at the date of manufacture 9-2006. According to the slide, they were both made AND captured within 9 days? Wow, that's one fast terror superhighway they've got going there.

It gets worse than this. The Iranians are a longtime ally of the USSR/Russia, who supplied them with arms for a long time. Why would they use 81mm rounds? The Russians used 82mm rounds. And the abbreviation for High Explosive (HE) is in English?

Edit: I now have information that the Iranians do, in fact use 81mm rounds. Also, the Iranians do use English on their rounds, as they sell them to other countries. Still, why the games with dates?

Next slide please.
.
.
.
.

more mortars
.
.
.

So here we have a... eh? what the fuck? What kinda number is 54-02-06? What month or day is 54? And... there's no way 06 could possibly be the year, since this was supposedly captured in 2004.

So why are we trusting these serial numbers again? Next slide.
.
.
.
.
.
.
mortar
.
.
.
.
.
Here we have some MORE captured Iranian mortars. Look at the manufacture dates. 5/31/2006. That's the date format MM/DD/YYYY. Iran doesn't use that format, they use DD/MM/YYYY.
.
There are only 5 countries that use the MM/DD/YYYY format. Those are the Phillipines, Canada, Palau (a well-known terrorist haven), the Federated States of Micronesia, and.... the United States!

Also, notice how the fonts on all of these weapons look nothing alike. If these are standard-issue Iranian arms, don't you think the fonts would be a bit more.... regular?

I call bullshit if these are the best examples the Bush administration can dig up.

Hmmm... what to do.... what to do....

I know! Let's invade Palau!

.
.
.
.
.
Thanks to bi30.info for the pics and info.

If anyone can point out any more errors in the slides, let me know and I'll post it.

Originally posted to Hobelhouse on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:16 PM PDT.

Poll

Bullshit?

60%28 votes
15%7 votes
23%11 votes

| 46 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  tip jar (25+ / 0-)

    "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    by Hobelhouse on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:15:53 PM PDT

  •  I call bullshit too! (6+ / 0-)

    The US military sure as fuck doesn't label its munitions in a foreign language. Why would the Iranians? And if they are that stupid why should we be afraid they'll attack us? They'll be lucky to load there crappy malfunctioning nuclear weapon on a bamboo raft and make it a mile offshore before they drown.

  •  I rec'd you even though you made the (10+ / 0-)

    utterly ridiculous proposal to bomb Palau, when all the facts ineluctably point to those diabolical Micronesians.  

  •  I've also seen news reports (4+ / 0-)

    that say the projectiles in the IED's are too complex to have been manufactured in Iraq and must come from Iran. They're machined concave discs, I'm sure there is still simple machining equipment and competent machinist left in Iraq to make these parts ( besides they look like they could be just press stamped and torch cut also.). Too many American think if it can't be bought, it can't be had. They can't fathom just making the stuff.

    •  It depends (0+ / 0-)

      There are certain materials and processes that go into manufacturing armor-piercing rounds that are beyond simple machining.

      I'd have to get my hands on a fresh copy of the 60A series, but they're classified and I don't have them where I am right now.

      You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

      by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:56:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  we're talking EFPs, not HEAT (0+ / 0-)

        Yes, armor piercing anti-tank rounds (H.E.A.T.) are complex and difficult to manufacture.  But a  roadside EFP bomb is fairly simple as kartski noted.

        HEAT rounds require precise detonation timing and use narrow cones to intensify/focus the hypersonic molten metal.  Lots of precise geometries required. Can't find the link anymore, but a cross section of a HEAT round shows its complexity.

        An EFP (slight simplifying) is a open-ended canister packed with explosive and sealed with a copper dinner plate. See the diagram mid way down here: http://en.wikipedia.org/...

        We covered shaped charges for use in controlled demolition (linear versus conical) in my engineering classes thirty years ago.  Its not that difficult.

    •  apparently the iraqis were smart enough for nukes (3+ / 0-)

      but too dumb to make a simple shaped explosive.

      surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat

      by wu ming on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:34:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Micronesions join the axis of Evil (5+ / 0-)

    That whole Axis thing is getting kinda crowded now that everyone is our enemy. How about rectangle of insidiousness?

  •  Nice work! (4+ / 0-)

    This casts some serious doubts, adding to the already faulty intelligence revealed by Seymour Hersh on this rumor.

    So much for HRC trying to pass off her vote on Kyl-Lieberman with this.

    John Edwards is the only electable candidate, but he's also the best. Why? He is the only candidate out of the big three who opposes tort reform legislation.

    by priceman on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:43:55 PM PDT

  •  Who are they trying to convince? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    truong son traveler

    The American people aren't going to buy it, no honest foreign government would buy it, and you can be sure of shit Putin doesn't buy it.

    Remember Putin? He was in Tehran today - virtually unreported on cable news, given the importance of what he said. I'd also add that there was the warning, according to Russian intelligence, of an assassination plot by suicide bombers in Tehran that caused Putin to delay his trip slightly.

    He said that Russian nationals would aid in the construction of Iran's peaceful nuclear site until it is completed. He said this while agreeing with Iran, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and... some other stan thatno Caspian nation should allow a third power on their soil to attack another Caspian nation. He said this while Russia is in a two week military drill period, announced shortly after Rice and Gates left Moscow and that coincides with the drills CHENEY is supervising in Portland, Pheonix and Guam.

    China issued a statement today saying they support Tehran too.

    Yesterday I said 'today was the most dangerous day I've ever lived through, and tomorrow might be worse.' Turns out I was right.

  •  Sorry (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Paulie200, DemCurious, dantyrant

    EOD field manuals state clearly that Iran uses the 81 mm mortar. They also use the F-4 Phantom and the F-14 Tomcat and the British-designed Crusader tank, BTW.

    Its eminently possible that Iranian munitions are being smuggled into Iraq.

    You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

    by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:54:27 PM PDT

    •  see this linky (0+ / 0-)

      You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

      by Oregon guy on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:58:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Link to Iran Defence Industry website (0+ / 0-)

        http://www.diomil.ir/...

        The markings (and caliber) are indistinguishable from a NATO round.

        You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

        by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:16:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The bastards even use our color codes! (0+ / 0-)

          You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

          by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:22:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Okay, but (0+ / 0-)

            ... why the MM/DD/YYYY date then? And I'm kind of skeptical - wouldn't the English site have it in English anyway? I tried checking the Farsi side but it's under construction.

            "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

            by Hobelhouse on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:23:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You'd think that the Iranians (0+ / 0-)

              would be supplying munitions the insurgents can read, anyway.

              "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

              by Hobelhouse on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:24:28 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's because (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sxwarren

              we sell the weapons to a third party, who then resells the weapons to Iran.  We can't let a little thing like a defining war for civilization upset the arms trade.  That's money in the pocket for our big donors.

              We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately. - Benjamin Franklin -5.13/-3.38

              by Grannus on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:32:16 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  still (0+ / 0-)

                how can we prove Iran sold it then?

                "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

                by Hobelhouse on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:48:36 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  We can't. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  truong son traveler, Spoc42

                  They are sold in bazaar's all over the Middle East.  You can buy anything you want if you have the money.  They may come from Iran, but it doesn't mean from the government.  It's like buying a rifle in Virginia and going to Michigan with it to hold up a bank.  Is Virginia supplying bank robbers with guns?  Technically yes, but in reality, no.

                  We sent the cash to Iraq in bundles of $100's, which promptly got lost.  We sent 190,000 weapons to Iraq, which promptly got lost.  When those weapons start showing up, do we bomb Washington DC?  They supplied them to the insurgents and supplied the cash to buy them also.

                  We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately. - Benjamin Franklin -5.13/-3.38

                  by Grannus on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:05:50 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Ordnance is even worse (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Grannus

                    The entire system is built to cater to shadowy deals - because that's how governments fund dirty wars with no accountability. Go read about end-user certificates and what-not sometime.

                    Also - its entirely possible that the pics are just stock photos. Its pretty common to see ordnance ID photos of "Egyptian" mortar rounds, say, but the pic will be of the (same design) Chinese mortar round, maybe with Arabic markings crudely drawn on, and sometimes maybe not. The idea is to understand which piece of ordnance you're dealing with - and to know what kind of filler is inside.

                    There's no way of knowing about the provenance of these 81 mm rounds - other than to say that, per Jane's, Iran uses the 81 mm round. Mind you, we still have 81 mm rounds in arsenals dating to the 1950's, and in the 1950's we sold mortar rounds to countries we aren't too friendly with anymore, like Iran.

                    The publication of this information AT THIS TIME - definitely psyops.

                    You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

                    by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:24:13 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

    •  Absolutely, and they are... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Paulie200, truong son traveler

      there is trade between the two countries, and there's been much migration back and forth as well. Iranian Shi'a were free to go on religious pilgrimages to Iraq, and did, in huge numbers.

      The issue: Why should we implicate the Iranian state in the smuggling when we don't assume, for example, that Mexican smugglers act on behalf of their government?

      •  Also note (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paulie200, dantyrant

        Many nations use English nomenclature and metric measurements for muntions. The old school "5-inch" and ".50 caliber" rounds are relics, really.

        OTOH, most Middle Eastern manufacturers use Arabic script, and the Israelis use both Hebrew and English...

        You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

        by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:13:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Quite right (0+ / 0-)

          Last year there was 'evidence' put forward about Iranian EFPs where the date stamps were suspect as well. The Iranian foreign minister laughed when confronted with the charge that they were 'his'.

          •  let's face it (0+ / 0-)

            what's printed on the weapons is interesting but means very little in terms of proof. If I had a factory twenty miles inside Iran, am I going to put my return address on weapons I know are headed for Iraq? no, I'm going to make them look like they came from somewhere else.

            But the point is not that the diarist is wrong; he/she may be right.

            the US/Bush/Cheney cannot go all Crusaders on the Middle East, launch continuing air attacks on an occupied country, and not expect people to fight back, and to buy weapons anywhere they can. Free trade, right W?

            We need to get out, not widen the war. The results of an airstrike on Iran will be to make things worse.

            fouls, excesses and immoderate behaviors will not be ignored at Over the line, Smokey!.

            by seesdifferent on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 08:20:17 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Without a doubt.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      truong son traveler

      some arms flow in from Iran.  Which brings up the question about why this wasn't anticipated by the (neocon, draft dodging) military planners in the Bush administration.  I'll bet my ass that it was anticipated by every military commander in the field, especially those generals with combat experience from Vietnam.

      Still it's not at all clear the Iranian government has anything to do with this. Maybe the Quds forces do, but god help the U.S. if we all have to answer for the actions of some of OUR intel operations and mercenaries.

      There really is no problem with the U.S. giving grief to the Iranians over this either.  A serious problem does develop when it suddenly becomes a casus belli, and is sold to the American people as another reason we have to attack Iran.

      •  At least this time (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Paulie200

        The weapons in question will actually exist!

        (/brightside)

        :shudder:

        You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

        by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:28:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  In spite of my comment above... (0+ / 0-)

          I'm still not totally convinced. It just makes sense that it would happen, but so far the only evidence I've seen is from the Bush administration. Until we get a credible source, it's still up-in-the-air.

  •  Even if the Iranians ARE supplying weapons, ... (5+ / 0-)

    that's not a cause for war.  The United States and most other countries have long taken the position that a non-belligerant has the right to sell weapons to one side or the other (or both) in a conflict without forfeiting its neutrality.

    Our entry into World War I was precipitated in large part by the Germans' refusal to recognize that right.  We were selling (or lending) armaments to the British, Russians and Chinese before the attack on Pearl Harbor.  Is the Bush administration going to take the position that the attack on Pearl Harbor was justified?  If not, it's difficult to see how they could justify an attack on Iran simply based upon it's supplying weapons to insurgents in Iraq.

    The Soviets and Chinese openly supplied armaments to North Vietnam during the Vietnam War, and we never asserted a right to bomb them in response.  And we were semi-openly supplying arms to Afghan insurgents who were using them to kill Soviet troops during the Soviet Union's war in Afghanistan, and they never bombed us for it.

    I've seen this debunking of the "Iranian arms" claims before, but to me, the more important point is that IT DOESN'T MATTER, because even if the Iranians are supplying arms to the Iraqi insurgents, that doesn't furnish a basis for us to go to war against Iran.

    "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security." -Ben Franklin

    by leevank on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:55:05 PM PDT

    •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

      That is correct. The insurgents are using mostly Egyptian and Russian 155mm artillery rounds to make their IED's. Should we be invading Egypt?

      You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

      by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:08:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  excellent n/t (0+ / 0-)

      fouls, excesses and immoderate behaviors will not be ignored at Over the line, Smokey!.

      by seesdifferent on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 08:21:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Pearl Harbor was justified! (say the Repubs) (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      leevank

      The twisted logic is almost laughable, if the results weren't so serious.

      OK, in 1940 & 1941 we supply arms to Britain, China & Russia.  I mean tanks, planes, bombs - whole nine yards.  We give them lend-lease credit: pay us back after the war, if ever.  Oh, we even send trained pilots to Britain and especially China.  Hell, its American pilots flying American planes against the Japaneese (lookup "Flying Tigers").  Plus, we quit selling oil to the Japanese.  (though Bush's grandfather did keep extending credit lines to Krupps & other German firms to buy US material - till Congrtess stepped in and stopped him. whole 'nother story)

      So Pearl Harbor (a preemptive strike against a strategic military objective) was "a date that will live in infamy."  But if we strike against Iran?  Boy howdy, we're justified! Talk about definitions of hypocrisy.

  •  All of them seem to be Fabrications (0+ / 0-)

    and amateurish ones at that.

    Smuggling explosives into Iraq makes about as much sense as smuggling sand into Saudi Arabia.

    "We would cause tyrants in the Middle East to laugh at our failed resolve" - G.W.Bush So we're staying in Iraq so Duhbya doesn't get laughed at?!

    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:56:09 PM PDT

  •  How do you spell "F A L S E F L A G "? (0+ / 0-)

    08.04.07 It took the Titanic longer to sink than for the 110th Congress to surrender to Bush.

    by ImpeachKingBushII on Tue Oct 16, 2007 at 11:57:22 PM PDT

    •  ???? (0+ / 0-)

      "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      by Hobelhouse on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:11:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Possible, but probably not (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Paulie200

      (nm)

      You smug-faced crowds with kindling eye Who cheer when soldier lads march by, Sneak home and pray you'll never know The hell where youth and laughter go.

      by Oregon guy on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 12:22:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  if they could do this... (0+ / 0-)

      they would have planted WMD in Iraq long ago to save face...

      •  They don't care about "saving face"... (0+ / 0-)

        ...You've been watching too many pre-1940s movies. Bush couldn't care less about the term "honor"--his or ours. The neocon corporate fascist agenda isn't about honor or saving face, it's about regional and world hegemony. They didn't need to manufacture WMDs to justify invading Iraq. Why should they? Congress already bought into the meme and gave him all the power he needed with the 2002 AUMF so why should he beat an already dead horse to death?

        But he DOES need to make the connection between Iran and roadside bombs killing U.S. troops and by their past experiences with Congress, they'll fall for any line he feeds them and believe any false flag attack they(Team Bush) can conjure up that's even remotely credible. Besides, Pelosi/Reid know they don't have the votes to stop him anyway! They're not going to revoke the 2002 AUMF--or impeach this war crime family, and Bush can always fall back on the 1973 War Powers Act, which allows him to drop iron bombs on any nation he desires for 24/7 X 60 days, and without any further report or authorization for 30 days after the first 60!

        08.04.07 It took the Titanic longer to sink than for the 110th Congress to surrender to Bush.

        by ImpeachKingBushII on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 03:15:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Your pictures are (0+ / 0-)

    worth 1 million words.  Mr. Fish has a visual that's at least worth a few thousand:

    Cheers!

    (-9.00, -8.92) Those Who Hear Not the Music, Think the Dancers Mad

    by craigb on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:41:07 AM PDT

  •  This diary has too many holes (0+ / 0-)

    For starters:

    Why would they use 81mm rounds? The Russians used 82mm rounds. And the abbreviation for High Explosive (HE) is in English?

    Edit: I now have information that the Iranians do, in fact use 81mm rounds. Also, the Iranians do use English on their rounds, as they sell them to other countries. Still, why the games with dates?

    This is BASIC shit. How are you qualified to even decipher what the serial numbers mean, or who uses what round, or who sells to who, etc?

    Where are the links to anyone claiming THOSE particular rounds were seized in Sept 06? All I see is a picture collage. And FYI: That mortar that couldn't possibly be Iranian? IS Iranian. The next thing I need to do is verify if that 9-2006 is actually a date stamp (as it appears to be). But I NEVER assume. It's a good policy (ahem)

    https://naveodtechdiv.jeodnet.mil/...

    Look, I'm not saying I know for a fact Iran is supplying insurgents. But I'm sure as hell not going to base my opinion off of shoddy cyber research.

    Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

    by USArmyParatrooper on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:46:22 AM PDT

    •  The pictures are from (0+ / 0-)

      this slideshow the Administration gave.

      "A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward." - Franklin Delano Roosevelt

      by Hobelhouse on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 01:58:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That source (0+ / 0-)

        Is Iran.org

        What I'm looking for is (something) actually showing the administration posting those pictures with those claims, to include dates they were found.

        BTW, I already proved the mortar you doubted is Iranian... IS in fact Iranian.

        The only thing left is to prove the 9-2006 is a date stamp. It probably is, but when drawing such conclusion you need more than probably.

        And then also PROVE it was claimed to be found in Iraq in September of 2006. And even then you have circumstantial evidence at best.

        The bottom line is you're dealing with matters that are deeply involving for the Intelligence community. NOBODY is going to prove or debunk anything about Iran over the internet.

        Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction. - Dwight D. Eisenhower

        by USArmyParatrooper on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 02:08:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Anyone who would rely (0+ / 0-)

    on our intelligence community to provide useful, credible, or politically untainted information is a fool.  We are supposed to believe that the same "intelligence" folks that missed 9/11 and fit the facts around the policy prior to the Iraq invasion are all of a sudden able to discern that Iran is flooding Iraq with weapons?  What a bunch of crap!

    "We told the truth. We obeyed the law. We kept the peace." - Walter Mondale

    by luckylizard on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 02:48:11 AM PDT

  •  I don't know the proper words (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gustogirl, ImpeachKingBushII

    to express my views in this comment, on this thread.

    Here we have the largest supplier of killing machines and weapons on the planet invading a weak country, nearly half-way around the world - with a military budget is larger than all the rest of the world combined, killing tens of thousands or perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, uprooting an entire society, destroying their infrastructure, forcing 2 million refugees to flee their own country, all justified by a pack of lies - and having the gall to complain about a few mortar or rocket rounds possibly coming from a neighboring country.

    Hubris in the extreme, and so typical of the Bush Administration and the Pentagon.

    White House Officials - "Well, unfortunately, we can't talk about oil."

    by truong son traveler on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 02:54:30 AM PDT

    •  Exactly and the MM of the round is irrelevent... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      truong son traveler

      ...because they're not being supplied to be fired out of any mortar anyway, they're being configured as a static weapon or roadside bomb. The Iranians use 82mm and we use 81mm. The 1mm difference is irrelevent! Besides we already have an effective counter-measure for mortar attacks, but not IEDs:
      http://www.defensetech.org/...

      The point everyone is missing here is that it's not the round per se that's important, it's the arming devices being used to set them off. These are the ones that are killing our troops. These arming devices are much too sophisticated(too good) to be made by the Iraqis alone:
      http://64.233.169.104/...
      http://correntewire.com/...
      http://www.rense.com/...

      Someone else besides the Iraqis is manufacturing them (and I'm not saying we're killing our own troops) but I wouldn't personally put anything past the Bush crime family. Until someone proves otherwise, all options are on, and have to remain on the table until they are disproved. To do any less would be doing our troops a great disservice and would not be good intel or detective work.

      08.04.07 It took the Titanic longer to sink than for the 110th Congress to surrender to Bush.

      by ImpeachKingBushII on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 03:43:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Over a million have died (0+ / 0-)

      please don't hedge. Two studies have shown this, and they are unrefuted.

      fouls, excesses and immoderate behaviors will not be ignored at Over the line, Smokey!.

      by seesdifferent on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 08:22:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I agree that (0+ / 0-)

    the "Iranian weapons pipeline" is highly doubtfull.  However, the weapons in Iran's arsonal are not entirly Russian.  Prior to the ouster of the Shaw, they used a lot of western equipment.  Other than the F-14 and AH1 Cobra (US) the army uses US and British armored vehicles and artillery pieces.  My thoughts are that some of the equipment captured in Lebenon by the isrealies may have shown up as "evidence" in Iraq.  As far as the "9-2006" I can't believe that anybody really buys into that.

    Globalsecurity.Org
    http://www.globalsecurity.org/...

    Never underestimate the power of stupid people (Republicans) in large numbers.

    by pritchdc on Wed Oct 17, 2007 at 05:14:13 AM PDT

  •  Some points (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Habitat Vic

    First off, thanks for posting it.  The Administration has almost succeeded in convincing everyone that Iran is supply weapons, despite a lack of such information.

    Second, recognize what this is: OLD.  This slideshow was made a released OVER A YEAR AGO, and has been brutally dismantled by skeptics since then.  The research needs to be updated.

    The US has made a number of very weak claims since this information was released.  Most of the claims follow very weak trails, e.g. we kill this guy who knew this guy who was a Shiite so he must have been known Iranians who must have been in the IRGC who must have had orders from the Iranian government to supply weapons...

    However, there are some data points that are worth considering (and I'm sorry I can't post links, I'm at work and I don't have by research handy):

    1. The EFPs

    The heart of the US claim in the slideshow was that the EFPs could only be made in Iran.  This conclusion skips over a lot of problems: a) All you need is a good machine shop, and they exist everywhere in the world, b) Iraqis are perfectly capable people, and until 1991 were far more advanced technologically than the Iranians, and c) Even if Iraqis were unable to make these themselves, they could easily ship in parts or machines from anywhere in the world, nothing requires the source to be Iran.

    More to the point, since this slide show was made, the US has uncovered several EFP factories inside Iraq itself, utterly destroying the they-must-have-come-from-Iran meme.

    Finally, many of the claims of EFPs are false.  An Australian was killed a week or two ago in Afghanistan and they tried the same story about how this must have been an EFP from Iran.  However, the Australian media reported a couple of days afterwards that the local commanders admitted the bomb was nothing special, it was an old design like the Afghans had used against the Soviets.  So many of these EFP claims are false from the very start.

    1. The 240mm rockets (both of them)

    US bases are attacked all the time from rockets and mortars.  Twice in the past few months, US forces have claimed to identify attackers using a 240mm rocket that caused casualties.  

    These are big rockets.  They are hard to come by.  Iran does use them.  But (sadly for the propagandists) that is where the story ends.  There is no direct link between these two rockets and Iran.  Other countries use them as well.  The insurgents could have acquired them from anywhere.

    Further, even if they were from Iran, that does NOT show the Iranian government is supplying weapons.  Hell, we claim we are not supplying weapons, and already 190,000 of our weapons have gone missing.  So we find two rockets?  That is not government supply line.  

    This leads into the third and most important point:

    1. The Hezbollah Analogy

    It is widely accepted that Iran supplies Hezbollah with weaponry.  Lets accept that, and then look at what it would actually for a faction to be supplied by Iran.  Hezbollah has hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons.  They have well over 10,000 unguided rockets of all shapes and sizes.  While rocket attacks on US bases are often a few mortar shells fired by a single group who them runs to avoid a counterstrike, Hezbollah was able to fire over 4,000 rockets at Israel in the recent war.

    Additionally, Hezbollah has a very large arsenal of advanced anti-tank missiles.  These knocked out dozens of Israeli tanks, including the Merkava, the most heavily armored tank in the world.  But absolutely NONE of these advanced missiles have been found in Iraq.  Did Iran just forget these owned this extremely advanced weapon?

    Likewise, Hezbollah has advanced anti-aircraft missiles.  These were able to shoot down a couple of Israeli helicopters and to effectively keep the most Israeli helicopters away from battlefield.  However, in Iraq, there have been very few reports of advanced anti-aircraft missiles.  Most of our helicopter losses (and these have been significant) seem to have come from RPG-type rockets or from older anti-aircraft missiles, which Iraq was awash in.   Additionally, most helicopter losses appear to have come in the Sunni areas, rather than the Shiite areas which Iran supposedly supplies.  Admittedly the data here is poorer since the US does not always identify the type of weapon which brought down a helicopter, but there are very few reports of advanced missiles which Iran is known to possess.

    Finally, Hezbollah used advanced anti-ship missiles to nearly sink an Israel gunboat.  There is no evidence of a single anti-ship missile in Shiite hands in Iraq.

    So, we know what is SHOULD look like if Iran was supplying a Shiite force.  We have an example.  But NONE of those weapons appear to be in Iraq.  We can thus conclude at a minimum that if Iran is supplying Iraqi Shiites, they are doing an incredibly poor job of it.

    1. FOB Sitting Duck

    The US has recently announced plans to build a small base near the Iranian border.  Ignoring the strategic confusion (do Iranian gunners need target practice), does this strike anyone as odd?  The US has been saying for several years that Iran is supplying weapons.  The US has been making multilevel claims to try to up the apparent casualty figures (Iran supplies many of the EFPs which make up many of the IEDS which cause most of the casualties) for many years.  Only NOW, in late 2007, are we getting around to the incredibly inventive step of building a base to guard the border?  

    The fact that the US has gone more than 4 years without building such a base tells you that the US did not consider it a serious need or a serious problem.  And that, more than anything, shows that the US does not believe its own claims of Iranian weapons flooding Iraq.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site