Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Archive for the ‘Iran’ Category

Iran becomes more belligerent in the wake of the nuclear deal.

all-mullah-menPresident Obama and his foreign-policy admirers—a dwindling lot—hoped that the nuclear deal would make Iran more open to cooperation in the Middle East and with the U.S. Mark this down as another case in which the world is disappointing the American President.

Iran’s judiciary on Monday announced that Jason Rezaian, the Washington Post’s Tehran correspondent, has been convicted. He was on trial for “espionage.” Security forces arrested Mr. Rezaian and his wife, journalist Yeganeh Salehi, in July 2014. Ms. Salehi was later released, but the regime has held Mr. Rezaian “in a black hole for 14 months,” as his brother, Ali, told us. Mr. Rezaian, a U.S. citizen, has been denied even the basic rights the regime sometimes affords political prisoners, including bail and phone calls.

The timing of the conviction won’t escape students of history. Friday was the 444th day of his captivity. That was the number of days U.S. diplomats in Iran spent as hostages following the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Mr. Rezaian’s conviction three days later is the mullah equivalent of mailing a dead fish to an adversary.

Mr. Rezaian’s brother also told us that “I’d like the U.S. government to say [about Jason’s detention]: This kind of behavior has consequences. Up to now this has had no consequences. What have been the consequences? It hasn’t stopped them from getting their nuclear deal. And it hasn’t stopped them from getting over half a billion a month in sanctions relief since we started talking to them.”

The Iranian judiciary answers to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who last week issued an edict banning any talk with Washington. Supporters of the Iran deal are sure to blame Mr. Khamenei and his hard-line faction for the Rezaian case and the regime’s permanent anti-American posture. President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, deal supporters say, don’t share Mr. Khamenei’s view of America as the Great Satan.

Perhaps. But in a theocracy led by a man who rules as the Almighty’s vicegerent on Earth, the views of Messrs. Rouhani and Zarif count for little. That’s doubly so when it comes to Iran’s weapons programs. There, too, Tehran is already defying the U.S. and reneging on previous commitments.

On Sunday the regime tested a new long-range, guided ballistic missile code-named Emad (“Pillar”) in violation of the nuclear deal. United Nations Security Council Resolution 2231—which passed shortly after the agreement to harmonize its provisions with international law—prohibits Iran from conducting ballistic-missile work for eight years.

But the mullahs are nothing if not impatient, and the Islamic Republic has already made clear that it doesn’t intend to abide by the provisions of Resolution 2231 it dislikes. Testifying before the Senate over the summer, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry repeatedly vowed to sanction Iran if it cheated on missiles. Well, here’s an early test case, Mr. Secretary.

The more likely outcome is that the Obama Administration will find a way to explain that the missile test doesn’t violate the nuclear accord that Mr. Obama considers a crowning achievement. Meanwhile, Iran’s government will bank up to $150 billion that it can deploy to back its militia proxies in the Middle East. Add the new Iran-Russia offensive in Syria, and Tehran would appear to have taken the nuclear deal as a signal that it can now do whatever it wants without consequence.

Close to a deal

Iran55

A Message for Obama – “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil. “

by Joe Messina
Iran-nuclearRecently, when it serves him well, the president has resorted to beating on Christians with ridiculously out of context scripture references. Well, Mr. Obama, I have one for you.

“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” ~ Isaiah 5:20 English Standard Version (ESV)

Basically, woe to the confused who think right is wrong and wrong is right! Mr. Obama, I have been listening to your carefully chosen words with these 2 major boondoggles you have going on.

First, there’s Iran. You stated in a recent interview that you thought it was crazy that the legislators were out there “spinning” the Iran agreement that hadn’t happened yet (but then you said it did happen over a week ago.) You are concerned that the legislators are saying that Iran will not live up to the proposed agreement. Not that that matters. Iran won’t put it in writing and the legislators wouldn’t sign it anyway!

You also say that the way we’ve been handling Iraq isn’t working and hasn’t worked for 30 years. Shouldn’t we use an entity’s previous track record or “MO” (modus operandi) to anticipate how they will respond? Our military experts do it. Financial experts do it, and you’ve even cited them many times. Business experts do it to predict the market and consumer buying trends. But Obamavision seems to be blind to this. It seems you believe that you have the Midas touch and everything you do is golden. Actually, I think you’re more like Schleprock from the Flintstones. You have a dark cloud that follows you around and everything you get involved with fails!

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Iran-nuclear-300×226.jpg

Iran-nuclearAnd now you want to give Iran a chance because you say this time they will actually stick to the agreement. Interestingly, almost every Middle Eastern leader thinks otherwise, but your crystal ball must be clearer than theirs. The fact that in the past they have cheated and lied to U.N. inspectors doesn’t concern you. The fact that they built an enrichment facility deep inside a mountain so we couldn’t see it doesn’t concern you. The fact that they have been playing war with their navy ships while bombing replicas of American ships doesn’t concern you. And what about the fact that their leader says there is no agreement, says you are lying, and says that they will not do anything until ALL restrictions are removed? Remember, you said restrictions would be removed gradually. Why don’t you call him out? Prove you’re not lying to us and that you have a spine. Never mind. I knew you wouldn’t.

The agreement says we won’t be able to inspect their military installations. Does that mean they promised us with a cross my heart and a kiss up to Allah that they will not be having any uranium on the bases? To coin an old seventies term, “Sure, I’ll still love you in the morning.”

Then, there is Cuba. Mr. President, you say we have been handling them the same way for 50 years and it has changed nothing. You’re right, I agree! They still oppress their people. The Castro brothers are still vicious dictators. They still imprison and torture political prisoners. Their 1% percenters are the Castro brothers. They still imprison homosexuals (so much for human rights!). But none of those things bother you. And you think that if we just lighten up and start doing business with them again all that will change?

Don’t you think if they really wanted freedom for their people they would have installed, or allowed to have elected, a democratic government? Just sayin’!

What do you think normalizing relations with an oppressive, communist, human rights offending government will do for them, and for that matter, us?

image: http://cdn1.eaglerising.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/castro-obama-300×167.jpg

castro obamaRaul Castro wants money and an apology for how we have treated them over the years, and I have a sneaky suspicion, Mr. President, that you’re trying to figure out how to do that! I’ll tell you what, you get them to apologize for the human rights violations they have committed against their people since they took over and you can tell them, well, nothing. We did nothing wrong.

You tap the phones of all our friendly allies and then give a pass to the nations who hate us. You won’t help arm or rearm those who are willing to really fight for freedom for their people, but you will allow Iran, another human rights oppressing, woman and homosexual-hating country to get closer to creating a nuclear weapon.

Mr. Obama, I really am seeing the hate and distain you have for the American way of life and living.

America has always had issues but has always worked at correcting those issues and mistakes (although maybe not fast enough). We have righted many wrongs. We have even helped our enemies rebuild. We have fed and defended peoples all over the world. We are not the big, bad country that you make us out to be. And still, you continue to beat on us, yes all of us, except a chosen few that you deemed worthy.

Newsflash, Mr. President, we will come back. You are awakening a sleeping giant. Even from within your own Party they are seeing the damage you do, and although they can’t stand Republicans, they can’t stand what you’re doing to this country even more!

Next to you, Joe Biden looks like an Oxford Professor, and I am sure Jimmy Carter is dancing in his living room knowing when he leaves this earth he will no longer be known as the worst president ever. Your real danger comes from thinking you know more than lifelong military experts, lifelong economic experts, lifelong foreign affairs experts, and that you simply know more than anyone else on the planet!

You have confused right with wrong. You have confused truth and lies. And you are confused as to who the ultimate judgment comes from. As a professing Christian, I am sure you won’t mind if I ask my brothers and sisters in Christ to pray for God to open up your eyes with understanding so you can see what you need to do to make things right again.

Otherwise, move aside and let Joe drive…

Read more at http://eaglerising.com/17232/a-message-for-obama-woe-to-those-who-call-evil-good-and-good-evil/#OxtAL6AfUZyMA0tA.99

Iran Is Stalling Probe Into Their Nuclear Weapons Research, Have Failed To Comply With Turning Over Info

nat_iran-deal_31515_539_332_c1
So they’re still spitting in the eye of the investigators right now, and not complying with requirements, and yet Obama still will do anything to keep this farce going.

VIENNA (Reuters) – Iran is failing to address suspicions it may have worked on designing an atomic bomb, according to the latest report by a U.N. watchdog, potentially complicating efforts by world powers to reach a deal with Tehran on its nuclear program.

The report by the International Atomic Energy Agency said Tehran had still not provided information it was due to produce more than two months ago to help advance a long-running IAEA inquiry into suspected nuclear weapons research.

The confidential document was issued to IAEA member states less than three weeks before the Nov. 24 deadline by which Iran and six global powers are seeking to end a decade-old standoff over the Islamic Republic’s atomic activities.

“Iran has not provided any explanations that enable the agency to clarify the outstanding practical measures,” it saidThe IAEA was referring to two steps that Iran had agreed to carry out by late August, by providing information concerning allegations of explosives tests and other activity that could be used to develop nuclear bombs.

Iran denies any intention of seeking atomic weapons, saying its nuclear program is aimed at generating electricity.

The U.N. agency said the two sides last met on Nov. 2 in the Iranian capital and had agreed to meet again as soon as possible, but not before Nov. 24. “There is no progress, basically,” one diplomat familiar with the Iran file said.

The continuing deadlock in the IAEA’s investigation suggests that any renewed headway will probably have to wait until after the negotiations between Iran and the United States, Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia are concluded.

Iran wants the talks to lead to a removal of international sanctions on its oil-dependent economy, but Western officials say it must step up cooperation with the IAEA to help clarify longstanding concerns about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

VIENNA TALKS

While the six powers want Iran to scale back its uranium enrichment program – and thereby lengthen the timeline for any covert bid to assemble nuclear arms – the IAEA is investigating allegations of past Iranian research on designing an actual bomb.

Even though it has long been clear that the IAEA’s inquiry into the possible military dimensions of Iran’s program will not be completed before the target date for a deal with the powers, Western diplomats had hoped for more progress by now.

Iran and the powers will meet in Vienna from Nov. 18 to try to seal a long-term agreement resolving a stand-off that over the last decade has raised fears of a new Middle East war.

Experts differ on the need for Iran to come clean about all its alleged bomb-related work: some say that full disclosure is necessary to make sure that any such research has since ceased, while others argue this objective can be achieved without a full “confession”.

Iran’s arch-enemy Israel and hawkish U.S. lawmakers may pounce on any accord if they feel it does not sufficiently resolve the issue.

“Concrete progress is needed on the central issue of whether Iran has worked on nuclear weapons and is maintaining a capability to revive such efforts,” said U.S. expert David Albright and former IAEA chief inspector Olli Heinonen said in a commentary this week.

The U.S.-based Arms Control Association said it would be naive to think that Iran’s leaders would admit to any bomb work.

The main goal should be for an agreement to ensure that the IAEA obtains sufficient information to determine that Iran has halted any such activity, the research and advocacy group said.

(Editing by Mark Trevelyan)

Iran: ‘America Cannot Do a Damn Thing’ to Stop Us

iranmap
Iran appears to be in no hurry to reach an agreement with the United States and other international powers that would prevent it from gaining the capability to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran’s top leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said last week that his regime has little to fear from U.S. military action after President Obama’s West Point commencement address last month in which he emphasized the limits of U.S. military power, The New York Times reported last week.

Khamenei’s statement suggests he has concluded the administration has abandoned the threat of military force to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Speaking from a stage decorated with a banner proclaiming “America Cannot Do a Damn Thing,” Iran’s supreme leader on Wednesday asserted that the Obama administration had “realized that military attacks are as dangerous or even more dangerous for the assaulting country as they are for the country attacked.”

A “military attack is not a priority for Americans now,” he said in a speech commemorating the 25th anniversary of the death of his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. “They have renounced the idea of any military actions.”

Democratic & GOP senators defy Obama with Iran sanctions bill

iran_ticking_time_bomb
Twenty-six senators, half of them Democrats, defied President Obama on Thursday by introducing a bill that could impose new sanctions on Iran — despite urgent pleas from the White House to shelve the legislation.

The Obama administration has voiced concern that such a bill could imperil nuclear talks. Several sources told Fox News that White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other top officials had been calling top Democrats over the last 24 hours urging them not to move forward.

But they introduced the legislation Thursday afternoon. The bill calls for “prospective sanctions” that go into effect if Iran violates a nuclear deal it reached with world powers last month.

Those include a global boycott on Iranian oil exports within one year and measures against several Iranian industries.

“Current sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table and a credible threat of future sanctions will require Iran to cooperate and act in good faith at the negotiating table,” Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement.

The legislation is sponsored by 13 Democrats and 13 Republicans.Twenty-six senators, half of them Democrats, defied President Obama on Thursday by introducing a bill that could impose new sanctions on Iran — despite urgent pleas from the White House to shelve the legislation.

Several sources told Fox News that White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other top officials had been calling top Democrats over the last 24 hours urging them not to move forward. After it was introduced, Obama’s chief spokesman, Jay Carney, said the bill could “derail” nuclear talks and “divide the international community.” The White House also threatened to veto.

But the senators pushed the legislation arguing that it could help bring about a better deal in the end. The bill calls for “prospective sanctions” that go into effect if Tehran violates the nuclear deal it reached with world powers last month or lets it expire without a long-term accord.

The measures include a global boycott on Iranian oil exports within one year and the blacklisting of Iran’s mining, engineering and construction industries. The goal, according to supporters, is to strengthen the negotiating leverage of the Obama administration as it seeks to pressure Iran into a comprehensive agreement next year that would eliminate the risk of the Islamic republic developing nuclear weapons.

“Current sanctions brought Iran to the negotiating table and a credible threat of future sanctions will require Iran to cooperate and act in good faith at the negotiating table,” Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said in a statement.

The legislation is sponsored by 13 Democrats and 13 Republicans. It was introduced by Menendez and Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill. Among the prominent senators to join as co-sponsors were Sens. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.; John McCain, R-Ariz.; and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Under the Geneva deal with Iran, the Obama administration promised no new sanctions for six months. It has furiously lobbied Congress not to act during that period.

Asked about the bill on Thursday, Carney said: “We don’t think it will be enacted, we certainly don’t think it should be enacted.” He said it was not necessary, since Congress can “act quickly” to sanction Iran at any point if necessary.

Under the bill, the administration would have to certify to Congress every 30 days Iran’s adherence to the interim pact. Without that certification, the legislation would re-impose all sanctions that have been eased and put in place the new restrictions. Foreign companies and banks violating the bans would be barred from doing business in the United States. Beyond the economic measures, the bill includes potentially contentious language requiring strong American action if Israel decides to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s nuclear program. Israeli Prime Minister Benajmin Netanyahu has regularly issued such threats.

A Senate vote is unlikely to happen until January at the earliest.

Kirk called the draft law “an insurance policy to defend against Iranian deception.”

Iran’s foreign minister has said new sanctions could scuttle hopes of a diplomatic resolution. Iran maintains its program is solely for peaceful energy production and medical research purposes, but the United States and many other countries harbor severe doubts. Israel is perhaps most adamant in insisting Iran’s true intentions are to develop an atomic weapons arsenal.

Highlighting the divisions among Democrats about new sanctions, Sens. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., penned an opinion piece Thursday saying the package of restrictions “would run the risk of derailing efforts toward a peaceful resolution, and risk the unity we have achieved with the world community that has been so crucial.”

“We shouldn’t pass legislation now that would endanger negotiations that most people and countries want to succeed,” they said. “Such congressional action now could bolster the efforts of Iran’s militants to kill the deal.”

Fox News’ Ed Henry and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

In A Single Move Obama Abandons Israel And Preserves Iran’s Nuclear Machinery

“And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Genesis 12:3

If you think that Barack Obama is a friend of Israel, you are clinically insane. If you think that America will do anything to stop Iran from creating a nuclear bomb, you are disconnected from reality. What you are watching is the United States turning its back on the nation of Israel in particular, and on Jews in general.

Mark it down. Unless Israel strikes, Iran will get their nukes, and they will use them.

From Independent UK: It marks a victory for the Shia in their growing conflict with the Sunni Muslim Middle East. It gives substantial hope to Bashar al-Assad that he will be left in power in Syria. It isolates Israel. And it infuriates Saudi Arabia and Qatar and Kuwait and other Sunni Gulf States which secretly hoped that a breakdown of the Geneva nuclear talks would humiliate Shia Iran and support their efforts to depose Assad, Iran’s only ally in the Arab world.
obama-hates-israel-jews-netanyahu
In the cruel politics of the Middle East, the partial nuclear agreement between Iran and the world’s six most important powers proves that the West will not go to war with Iran and has no intention – far into the future – of undertaking military action in the region. We already guessed that when – after branding Assad as yet another Middle Eastern Hitler – the US, Britain and France declined to assault Syria and bring down the regime. American and British people – those who had to pay the price for these monumental adventures, because political leaders no longer lead their men into battle – had no stomach for another Iraq or another Afghanistan.

Iran’s sudden offer to negotiate a high-speed end to this cancerous threat of further war was thus greeted with almost manic excitement by the US and the EU, along with theatrical enthusiasm by the man who realises that his own country has been further empowered in the Middle East: Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov. Assad’s continued tenure in Damascus is assured. Peace in our time. Be sure we’ll be hearing that Chamberlonian boast uttered in irony by the Israelis in the weeks to come.

But there’s no doubt that Geneva has called Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s bluff. He may huff and puff, but if he wants to bash Iran now – on the basis that Israel must remain the only nuclear nation in the Middle East – he’s going to be on his own when his planes take off to bomb Iran’s nuclear plants. The AIPAC attack dogs can be sent up to Congress again by that most infamous of Israeli-American lobby groups to harry Republicans in support of the Likudist cause, but to what purpose? Did Mr Netanyahu really think the Iranians were going to dismantle their whole nuclear boondoggle?

When he said yesterday that “the most dangerous regime in the world took a significant step towards obtaining the world’s most dangerous weapon”, many Arabs – and an awful lot of other people in the world, including the West – will have wondered whether Israel, which long ago obtained the world’s most dangerous weapon, is now – in rejecting the Geneva deal – the world’s most dangerous government. If Mr Netanyahu and his clique in the government decide to twit the world’s major powers amid their euphoria, he may bring about – as several Israeli writers have warned – the most profound change in Israel’s relations with the US since the foundation of the Israeli state. It would not be a change for Israel’s benefit.

But six months – the time it takes to solidify this most tangential of nuclear agreements – is a long time. In the coming days, Republicans in Washington and the right-wing enemies of President Rouhani will demand to know the real details of this febrile game at Geneva. The Americans insist that Iran does not have the “right to enrichment”. Iran insists that it does. The percentages of enrichment will have to be examined far more carefully than they were yesterday.

Mr Rouhani – or Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader whose dark wings hover over every elected Iranian leader – says that the fear of an Iranian nuclear weapon will be seen by future generations as a “historical joke”. Netanyahu says the whole shenanigans in Geneva will prove to be a “historic mistake”. The Sunni Saudis, always waiting to spot the winner before opening their mouths, have already sat down with their Sunni Qatari and Kuwaiti allies to commiserate with each other over Shia Iran’s new victory. In Damascus, I suspect, Bashar, himself an Alawite-Shia, will tuck the kids into bed and share a glass with wife Asma and sleep well in his bed tonight. source – Independent UK

Mistake

Iran-Nuke-Fix-590-LI

Iran: Managing U.S. Military Action in Syria

Iranian President
Iran: Managing U.S. Military Action in Syria
Analysis
SEPTEMBER 4, 2013 | 0630 Print Text Size
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in Tehran on Sept. 3. (BEHROUZ MEHRI/AFP/Getty Images)
Summary
Conventional wisdom says that a weakened Syria would undermine Iran’s regional influence, but a U.S. military intervention in the country could actually benefit Tehran. The government there has devised a sophisticated strategy for responding to a U.S. attack. Of course, Tehran would activate its militant proxies in the region, including Hezbollah, in the event that the United States launches an attack, but it would also exploit Washington’s visceral opposition to Sunni jihadist and Islamist groups to gain concessions elsewhere.

Analysis
Iran already has engaged diplomatically with many of those involved in the Syrian conflict. Over the past weekend, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, the foreign affairs and national security head for the Iranian parliament, led a delegation to Damascus, presumably to discuss the potential U.S. attack. Earlier on Aug. 29, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani over the phone. Their conversation followed U.N. Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Jeffrey Feltman’s visit to Tehran, where he and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif likewise discussed Syria. Even the Omani sultan paid a rare visit to Iran, reportedly carrying with him positive messages from the Obama administration for Iran’s new government.

Notably, the rhetoric from Tehran — particularly from its military leadership — has been relatively tame. Typically the government antagonizes Washington when U.S.-Iranian tensions heat up, and indeed the Syria situation has aggravated tensions. Syria is a critical Iranian ally, and the survival of the al Assad regime is a national security interest for Tehran. Iran cannot afford to directly retaliate against the United States, but it is widely expected to retaliate indirectly through militant proxies.

Skillful Maneuvers

Iran’s strategy involves more than just activating these proxy groups. It entails the kind of skillful maneuvering it displayed as the United States sought regime change in Afghanistan and Iraq. Tehran cooperated with Washington, and it benefited greatly from the downfall of the Taliban and Saddam Hussein accordingly. The Iranian strategists who helped devise those approaches are once again in power. Zarif, for example, was Tehran’s point of contact with the George W. Bush administration in the early days after 9/11.

However, the Syria situation differs from those of Afghanistan and Iraq. This time it is Washington’s aversion to regime change that Tehran is trying to exploit. In fact, the only real reason the United States would want to replace al Assad is to curb Iran’s regional influence, which grew considerably after Saddam’s ouster. But Washington does not want to supplant al Assad only to see Damascus come under al Qaeda’s control. This partly explains why Hossein Mousavian, a close associate of Rouhani, wrote an op-ed Aug. 29 that said regime change in Kabul is “a blueprint for new collaboration” between Washington and Tehran. Mousavian called for U.S.-Iranian cooperation to extend beyond Syria to better manage the crisis-ridden region.

While the potential exists for U.S.-Iranian cooperation on Syria, U.S. military action undoubtedly would weaken the country. This carries serious risks for Iranian interests. An unfriendly Syria could cut Tehran off from Hezbollah, its pre-eminent non-state Arab ally, and jeopardize the position of its Iraqi allies.

However, limited airstrikes on Syria that do not undermine the al Assad regime could actually work in Iran’s favor. Such airstrikes could divide the rebellion between factions that oppose military intervention and those that favor it. Through their Syrian, Lebanese and Iraqi allies, the Iranians would then be able to better manage the rebellion, which includes radical Islamist elements.

Because these elements have been gaining more territory, the United States may need Iranian cooperation in forging a new Syrian polity. Washington is currently preparing to speak directly to Tehran over the controversial Iranian nuclear program. The Iranian government has already linked these two issues, and it believes it could use Syria to its advantage as it negotiates the nuclear problem.

Welcoming Disruption

Iran cannot rule out the possibility that even limited U.S. action will weaken the regime. Nor can it conclude that Washington does not intend to conduct a more extensive, less symbolic air campaign against al Assad. But it can, however, prepare for either outcome. Strategists in Tehran know that the Americans have air superiority, but they know Iran has the advantage on the ground in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

Iran is thus positioned to foment an insurgency. (And the U.S. invasion of Iraq enhanced Iran’s experience in fomenting insurgencies.) Any insurgency would worsen sectarian tensions in Syria and throughout the region, in turn further radicalizing Sunni militias. Jihadists gaining ground would force the United States to work with Tehran to contain Sunni radicalism.

In the unlikely scenario that the United States becomes embroiled in another major war, extricating itself from that war would necessarily require Iran’s cooperation. But what really gives Iran leverage is the fact that since 9/11, jihadists and Islamist groups have had the opportunity to gain power when Arab regimes collapse.

Unlike Syria’s Arab neighbors, which want stability in the region, Iran welcomes disruption. It is reasonably secure internally, and it knows its spheres of influence may weaken but ultimately will not dissolve. Strategists also believe that having lived under sanctions for decades, Iran has grown accustomed to suffering. So while chaos in Syria would threaten inherently weak Arab states, it would not affect Iran quite as much. Tehran could then exploit Arab chaos to its advantage.

In light of these risks, it is unlikely that the United States would deliberately engage in a large-scale military intervention in Syria. But Iran can never be too sure about U.S. intentions, and it has to account for the unintended consequences of even minimal military action. It is for this reason that Tehran has planned for multiple contingencies.

A lot can go wrong when plans are executed, especially when the situation is as fluid as it is in Syria. For Iran, this fluidity offers some risks, but it also offers some opportunities. The commonly held belief that a post-al Assad Syria invariably would be bad for Iran is not a guarantee.

Read more: Iran: Managing U.S. Military Action in Syria | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook

The 12th Imam: Why a Former Iran Official Oddly Admits to Syrian Gas Attacks

b and a

Barry Secrest Charlotte Conservative Examiner

Most of us know all too well that very few things escape into the general media from the Islamist Dictatorship that is Iran.

Which is why a recent admonition from a former Iranian president simply has to lead the Obama Regime and Congress into wondering why, exactly, the strongest Syrian government supporter, that being Iran, seems to want the US to attack Syria.

The short blip of a story appeared in Reuters today and had to leave many scratching their heads in confusion.

According to the Reuters post, a resident and highly-placed politician in the Iranian government seems to be admitting that the Syrian government did indeed gas its own people, even after numerous UN Officials have indicated that Al Qaeda rebels easily could have been the culprit.

Below is the Reuters story:

(Reuters) -Former Iranian President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani said the Syrian government, a strong ally of Tehran, had carried out chemical weapons attacks against its own people, the semi-official Iranian Labour News Agency reported on Sunday.

“The people have been the target of chemical attacks by their own government and now they must also wait for an attack by foreigners,” Rafsanjani said, according to ILNA.

“The people of Syria have seen much damage in these two years.” (Reporting By Yeganeh Torbati, Editing by William Maclean and Andrew Heavens)
Now, if Iran, a serial liar on the world stage, wishes for the US to stay out of the Syrian civil war conflict, which is predicated on whether or not the Syrian government gassed thousands of its civilians, why would an Iranian politico come out and admit that the Syrian government did, in fact, gas its own people?

This, in truth, should tell the Obama Regime and Congress everything else it needs to know about whether or not it might be wise to stand down in Syria.

Iran knows that any sort of US attack would further alienate the already embattled Obama Regime and US, while pushing the Mideast that much closer to an all-out conflagration. It’s as if Iran is begging for the US to attack, which puts the US in nothing if not a “Rook and Pawn” position should it choose to carry out such a uselessly impotent offensive.

Remember, too, Iranian fundamentalists both await and believe that a legendary prophetic Islamist war leader, the 12th Imam, will only return when the world is in full chaos, and this could be the preceding keystone event that sparks the eventual chaos.

One other thing: News articles reporting a seeming oddity, which are less than 100 words long, typically stink of a government propaganda event, this one originating within the Iranian Government, notwithstanding.

Proceed cautiously….

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN