Axis Mundi X discussion

Covert operations in Iran?

Comments Showing 1-31 of 31 (31 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
I had just caught a glimpse of this today, but didn't really hear any details. Does anybody know the story? Any opinions?

message 2: by Rusty (new)

Rusty (rustyshackleford) All I've heard is that the Israeli Army was doing combat drills the other day, the purpose of which some say is preparation to take out Iran's nuclear facilities. To which news I responded "Thank heaven someone is preparing for this".

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Well, I might have this wrong, but I thought they were saying that the U.S. congress approved a 400-500 million a year covert operation bill. Goals of the operation were stated to destabilize mullah support, and to establish human intelligent networks.

message 4: by Rusty (new)

Rusty (rustyshackleford) That is good to hear, although I would have preferred to hear it 3 or 4 years ago.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Yeah, it doesn't see the "diplomatic" route is getting anywhere.

message 6: by Rusty (new)

Rusty (rustyshackleford) Let me know if you find a good link to the story. Granted it was a cursory scan, but I couldn't find anything about it.

message 8: by Charissa, That's Ms. Obnoxious Twat to You. (new)

Charissa (dakinigrl) | 3620 comments Mod
uhm... If I have heard about it.... how secret could it possibly be?

Just sayin.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Well, I think it might be a "show of force" story. I haven't been able to find a complete story about it yet. I have a sneaking suspicion that this is a “HEY! Hockmed, we see what your doing and we want you to know we know" thing.

I could be wrong. Perhaps it is a policy that is intended to force Iran’s hand. Telling them in a not so suddle way, that their time of un-checked aggression is coming to an end, and if they intend to stay out of the Frey they need to back off, and back off now.

But again I haven’t seen anything complete so I am just spit balling here. I’m still looking for the full story, not just a blurb.

message 10: by Varmint (new)

Varmint the CIA figures out a way to track osama bin laden by his cel phone. the new york times runs it on the front page.

the CIA digs into international banking computers to track terrorist money. the new york times runs it on the front page.

the CIA has troops on the ground in iran identifying nuclear facilities. and....

do they not want us to win?

message 11: by Jackie "the Librarian", Cool Star Trek Nerd (new)

Jackie "the Librarian" | 1818 comments Mod
I would guess that they want to sell papers, Varmint. Doesn't look good though, you're right.

The CIA must be pretty leaky, though, for the New York Times to get all those stories.

message 12: by Charissa, That's Ms. Obnoxious Twat to You. (new)

Charissa (dakinigrl) | 3620 comments Mod
i dunno... If it's not a leak on purpose, I don't get how they don't get "secret". Dudes, if it's a secret, I don't wanna know about it. Chances are, if I know... well... Imadinnerjacket knows about it a well.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Imadinnerjacket HA! that sounds so close to his name. HEHE!

message 14: by Lori (new)

Lori hee, that's good, Charissa. I'm stealing it.

message 15: by Jackie "the Librarian", Cool Star Trek Nerd (new)

Jackie "the Librarian" | 1818 comments Mod
What do you all think? Does it make sense to use military force against Iran?

Would we be taking out a threat, or hitting a hornet's nest with a stick?

How far can our armed forces stretch, anyway? We have troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, we've already lowered standards for military enlistment, and practically offered bribes to get people to join. Even if we wanted to go in to Iran for sure, is it a practical possibility?

message 16: by Varmint (last edited Jun 29, 2008 11:02PM) (new)

Varmint the israelis will be the ones who pull the trigger. just like last year when they intruded on syrian air space, and accidentally made a building disappear.

message 17: by Lori (new)

Lori Going into Iran would be the stupidest thing we can do. Afghanistan is a mess with the Taliban on the rise again, Iraq is a mess, we don't have much of a track record. We don't have the military right now and hornet's nest is right. Jackie got bingo.

And what would we go in for, another "pre-emptive strike?"

message 18: by Charissa, That's Ms. Obnoxious Twat to You. (new)

Charissa (dakinigrl) | 3620 comments Mod
I have to give credit to NotBill for "Imadinnerjacket". I'm pretty sure I stole it from him. The full name is: My mood? I'm a dinner jacket! Heeeee.... it makes me squeal with glee every time I say it.

Gods I hope whatever we do in respect to Iran is either A) covert B) through a third party such as Israel C) in support of internal revolution D) in concert with international support and coalition forces.

Please no repeats of the Iraq mistakes.

message 19: by Lori (new)

Lori I don't even want Israel to do it as a pre-emptive strike! We'd still get the same hornet's nest, plus Israel would be wiped out I fear.

As for support of internal revolution, didn't we already leave them high and dry the last time, they have no reason to trust us at all.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Lori: as to the points you have truthfully made, I would argue that things are as they are because of the way we have engaged in this fight. Much like in Korea, and Viet Nam. Politian’s seem incapable of understand once the military is activated a government needs to back off and let the commanders do their job. During the ongoing conflicts that you have mentioned we have;
a) Been bogged down by political squabbling
B) been un-able to take the fight to those that openly engage us in battle (thus losing the initive, and fighting a defensive war, our military is an offensive machine)
c) Allot of propaganda mudding the waters as to what the real situation is. No matter what stance you take your opinions have probably been touched by propaganda from one faction or the other.

All these things make it difficult to eliminate our enemies. Make no mistake about it, they are our enemies. I am not speaking of the common man, women, child in the ME, I am speaking of those with regional control. They do have some support… How much support do they have? I don’t know, enough to repress the honest life loving people. That isn’t an accurate gauge to how much support they truly wield though. I think it was Al Capone who said “You can get more with a kind word and a gun, then you can get with just a kind word.” I think that is exactly what is happening in the ME. From the experiences I have gained from my time there I can say that most of the people do not support these actions, but are powerless to do anything about it. Particularly when their religious leaders are pushing them to do it.

What do I think will happen with Iran? This is a complex question. I see a few ways this can unfold. These possible paths differ pending on why this story (however limited in its release) was released. What were the intentions of however leaked/released the story, what do they hope to gain.

I think this article is just what I said it was earlier. A warning to Iran that the clock for a peaceful resolution to the situation is winding down. A statement that we have the capacity to engage them in military action. We DO have the capacity to completely decimate their military, just as quickly as we did to Iraq. I think (with this path) we should target military infrastructure. Bases, barracks, anti-air facilities, their laughable navy, everything. Wipe their military off the planet completely; we could do this with airpower alone. Leave the government and civil sectors alone, with the exception of nuclear facilities, they must go. The only weapon the Iran would have left to it is its contingent of suicide bombers. We have been engaging these charming fellows for a few years now. Nothing new there. There is no need for us to open another ground war. Any operation into Iran can be done with air. Possibly some small incursions.

With this path taken I am sure there would be a lot of rhetoric and hyper jaw jacking by imadinnerjacket, but really that is all. Any nuclear technology that they had has already been dispersed to whomever they are allied with. There is no stopping that at this time anyway. The only thing that slows the spread of nuclear technology is the expense and time required to do it. Terrorist organizations need willing and able countries such as Iran to build their materials and weapons for them.

I predict that with the Iranian Military out of the way the people of Iran would have the breathing room, and ability to set some terms for the direction the country will go from there. It is loosely based on a supposedly elected government system. This is where the covert operations come into play in a major way. I am assuming that as we speak they are setting up networks of insiders to gauge the “real” pulse of the Iranian people. Possibly even to set op groups of supporters. If the waters are right and the people are ready to join the peaceful world this coup could happen with in 18 months. I would assume more like 2-3 years for an ideal friendly network. Realistically I think we have less then a year before an open conflict starts between the US Israel and Iran. Will the rest of the world participate… who knows?

I know this is not going to be a popular stance, but it is what I see coming down the pipe.

message 21: by Lori (new)

Lori Russia would get involved as well.

I'm leaving now, this is scaring me too much right before bed.

I have a 12 yo son....

message 22: by Hayley (new)

Hayley | 576 comments Bloody hell Nick thats a long post.

I'm not sure where I stand on this issue, being British there isn't much in news regarding this, we're still get reports regarding Iraq and Afganstan.
I do believe that if open conflict does start, Britian will be probably go in there because the UN will have asked them too - I don't think we have a British Army anymore, I think we're the UN army - the UN spot trouble and calls Britian. I'm just wandering how long it will be before Britian are called into Zimbraque(sp)to control and ctop the violence?

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
I feel your un-ease Lori.

Sorry Hayley didn’t mean to ramble on like that. It is kind of hard to capture the dynamics of a situation that complex without being long winded. I don't even think I articulated it very well. Was it at lest a little bit coherent?

message 24: by Lisa (new)

Lisa | 129 comments Aw, shit. "Afghanistan? Just practice. Iraq? Just practice. This time? We'll get it right. Trust us. Mission accomplished in 100 days or you get your confidence in us back, 100% guarantee."

I'm keeping my confidence in the bank, thank you very much.

I don't care how fucked up a country is, US invasion just doesn't make it better anymore.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
I didn't say anything about invading. We don't need to.

message 26: by Hayley (new)

Hayley | 576 comments Don't worry Nick it made sense - though reading it first thing in the morning was hard work. I know what you mean Nick, its hard for me to grasp sometimes because we aren't always given the same news stories over here, as you get over there. In a way I kinda want to say let them bomb the shit out of each other, as long as it doesn't come knocking on my own back door. The Iranians and the Isrealis haven't anything to me, yes, its a worry that Iran have such a large range Nuclear weapons but as long as the aren't sold to the Taliban or another terrorist fractions intent of destorying the western world then we have no worries - though I suppose it will be a case of the highest bidder when it comes to selling the weapons.

Lisa, I agree, invasion by another counrty whether it be Britain or the US does not make things better, in fact I think sometimes things get worse. I was at uni when we invaded Iraq and its still going on nearly four years later.

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
I don't suggest doing nothing Heyley. That wouldn't solve anything. Waiting around for them to get strong enough to cause real damage is a bad idea. In my opinion.

message 28: by Hayley (new)

Hayley | 576 comments I know but sometimes you get sick of hearing about how the US, Britain and other countries getting involved and then it not acheiving much - I mean things have inproved in Afganistan, for the people, but if things have improved why are we still there because although things inprove nothing actually changes - we could spend the next ten or twenty years in these countries and spend billions of pounds funding the wars and see no change in the way they view the Western World.

My brain hurts from thinking about this!!

Servius  Heiner  | 1980 comments Mod
Israel doesn’t have the marbles to pull this off alone. If they were to leave the job half done what would happen to Israel? We would end up bailing them out. That would be a big mess. So given this completely hypothetical thread (since we really don’t know the value of the story that spawned it is) I would assume we would work in tandem with them to cripple the Iranian military in a series of fierce air strikes. Maybe a few slap and snatch missions for key personnel. Again totally working off the top of my head.

message 30: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 1062 comments Seymour Hersh is a POS. I wouldn't piss on him if his face were on fire. And yes, if it's being reported by him, it's not much of a secret.

There's been some massive student led riots very recently. The Basij cracked down heavily and there were several deaths and many detained. The ruling mullahs are universally hated. Dinnerjacket has crippled their economy through his program of "self reliance". We have 2 competing time tables: One is how long it will take for the ruling regime in Iran to implode, the other is how close they are to building a nuke. Now even El Baradei agrees that they could be just 6 months away. What a tool. Hence, we have Israel practicing their bomb run. Israel will go in if they feel they have no alternative.

message 31: by Not Bill (new)

Not Bill | 1062 comments Varmint: in response to your question - no, they do not want us to win and have been actively working for our defeat since '03.

back to top