U.S.: Large Cache of Weapons Discovered in Iraq Traceable to Iran
Associated Press
Monday, February 26, 2007
BAQOUBA, Iraq U.S. and Iraqi forces have seized a large weapons cache that includes parts for sophisticated roadside bombs that are believed to originate in Iran, U.S. military investigators said.
Military officials said that the arsenal is one of the biggest found north of the Iraqi capital and contains components for so-called EFPs explosively formed projectiles that fire a slug of molten metal that can penetrate armored vehicles.
The U.S. military has said elite Iranian corps are funneling EFPs to Shiite militias in Iraq for use against American troops.
Earlier this month, U.S. officials showed reporters in Baghdad pieces of EFPs they said were directly traceable to Iran.
An informant tipped off Iraqi police to the weapons stash Saturday, the military said in a statement. It was discovered near Baqouba, the provincial capital of Diyala province, about 35 miles northeast of Baghdad.
A military official declined to link the weapons to any particular militant group, but said the cache was found near a village where the Mehdi Army militia of anti-American Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr are strong.
Along with the EFPs, the weapons cache contained more than two dozen mortars and 15 rockets. There were enough metal disks to make 130 EFPs, the military said.
The origin of the weapons seized Saturday was being investigated, said Lt. Col. Michael Donnelly, spokesman for Multinational Division-North.
"This local tip led to what is the most potentially lethal IED cache seized in northern Iraq in the past eight months," Donnelly said.
The weapons were discovered under tarpaulins and in two large freezers and a water tank buried in a palm grove. One completed bomb was found as well as around 150 copper discs the key component of EFPs rolls of electrical wire, plastic pipes to use as casings, ball-bearings and batteries.
One U.S. official said the use of a narrow tube attached to the bomb as a simple sighting-device to aim it was characteristic of Iranian-linked devices used by militant group Hezbollah in Lebanon in recent years.
Last week, U.S. troops found a suspected Shiite weapons hideout in the southern city of Hilla that also included parts to make the lethal roadside bombs. A statement from the U.S. military Monday said that 63 weapons caches have been discovered during major U.S.-Iraqi security sweeps around Baghdad that began Feb. 14. The arsenals included anti-aircraft weapons, armor-piercing bullets, bomb components and mortar rounds, the statement said.
From Fox News.
Now, I know damn well this is an article on Fox News, and even though they're just posting an AP article, it's still total lies because it's on Fox News. So, I've found a similar article from CNN.
Y'know, not to be opinionated or nothing here, but when a country bombs the military force of another country, it's something some people like to call an "Act of War." Just throwing that in for if or when we actually do fight the Iranian forces that are murdering American soldiers, I can say "I told you so."
Thoughts? Disagree on it being a hostile action, that is, an act of war, against the United States?
Why do we still have those poor kids over there? Hasn't Bush made them suffer enough?
~Tobe
Do you have any idea how many military groups or governments have been supported by the U.S.? Like Iraq itself, which used the U.S. WMDs on Iran?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_contra
Iran's being bad. But %^$# no to going to war over it. That moron Bush went from a widely supported victory over the Taliban to civil war in both countries and massive debt, and has put the U.S. in a position where it can't do anything to Iran even if there was a good reason to. Osama won only because of Bush and the people who tossed their reason aside to support him.
Apparently not. He doesn't know when to quit. Which should've been like, 4 or 5 years ago.
v *points below to sig*
I'm not saying we're going to go invade Iran based on them supplying weapons. I'm saying Iran isn't just going to stop for no reason. If you didn't notice, they're bluntly saying they want nuclear weapon, Ahmedemijad (sp?) has clearly and repeatedly stated that the "Little Satan" (Isreal) and the "Big Satan" (The United States) will soon be vanquished from the world. Hm. A country, dead-set on developing nuclear weapons, who has openly and repeatedly told the world that they wish to destroy a smaller country in the area. Doesn't that seem a bit...connected?
Mmkay, Vec. Welcome to 1985.
I wish people had a more positive view of the US, sometimes. What the hell do you mean "Osama won"? We ousted him and his regime from power, chased him to some far-flung corner of the world, and we're starting to restore peace to a country with a lot of tear-jerker reasons for wanting it that I'm not going to get into. If you think Osama's winning, why are you living comfortably and safely in the US, instead of flinging yourself in a DuPont jacket at a tank in Baghdad?
Quote:
Why do we still have those poor kids over there?
Ask them why they still volunteer, and you'll have your answer.
What the hell do you mean "Osama won"?
Well, he managed to scare the bejeezus out of the entire American population, generate considerable strife and upheaval within all levels of government, and cause the passage of legislation that effectively deletes entire chapters from the Constitution, all by flying a couple planes into some office towers. If you're going to say Iran is killing American troops, you could also say that Osama killed Habeas Corpus in the United States. He also managed to escape from being cornered by British forces because of American bureaucratic bumbling, and is now most likely laying low in a palace in Syria or Pakistan or one of about two dozen other Al-Qaida-friendly countries that Bush wouldn't dare invade. I dunno if I would necessarily call that a win, but he certainly hasn't lost much.
I'm saying Iran isn't just going to stop for no reason.
So, give them a reason. And keep in mind a "reason" doesn't necessarily have to involve violence, as evidenced by North Korea's recent agreement to disarm its nuclear arsenal, which was reached entirely though nonviolent means. Violence is for cavemen and two-year-olds.
Um, not quite.
Guess what? Kim Jong says he has no intention of giving up the nukes. Not only that, but North Korea has claimed that the agreement only calls for a "temporary suspension of the operation of its nuclear facilities."
Kim Jong Il lied? I'm shocked.
But seriously, what disappoints me most about the Six Party Talks are two of the provisions in the agreement.
1) The DPRK and the US will start bilateral talks aimed at resolving pending bilateral issues and moving toward full diplomatic relations. The US will begin the process of removing the designation of the DPRK as a state-sponsor of terrorism and advance the process of terminating the application of the Trading with the Enemy Act with respect to the DPRK.
2) Recalling Section 1 and 3 of the Joint Statement of 19 September 2005, the Parties agreed to cooperate in economic, energy and humanitarian assistance to the DPRK. In this regard, the Parties agreed to the provision of emergency energy assistance to the DPRK in the initial phase. The initial shipment of emergency energy assistance equivalent to 50,000 tons of heavy fuel oil (HFO) will commence within next 60 days.
So basically, Kim's North Korea is no longer going to be considered a sponsor of terrorism, and will be getting free energy for...what, exactly?
If I ever run a country, I'll develop a nuclear program, just because the whole world will bend over and kiss my ass if I say I'll stop it.
Then, a year later, I'll start it again, because it kinda tickled the first time.
But seriously, what disappoints me most about the Six Party Talks are two of the provisions in the agreement.
Yeap, that's called "compromise". Nobody gets everything they want, but on the bright side thousands of innocent people won't have to die and hundreds of billions won't be spent killing them. That's always nice.
And it's not as though nothing will be done if Kim turns the nukes back on.
And it's not as though nothing will be done if Kim turns the nukes back on.
Then, a year later, I'll start it again, because it kinda tickled the first time.
Saint Petersburg Times:
[snip]In a series of media briefings this month, the U.S. military has displayed mortars, rocket-propelled grenades and a particularly lethal type of roadside bomb alleged to have been made in Iran. The military has acknowledged there is no direct evidence the Iranian leadership is responsible, and the Bush administration denies it is building a case for attacking Iran as it did with Iraq in 2003.
But skepticism abounds about the origin of the weapons, with critics wondering why those alleged to have been made in Iran had markings in English, not Farsi. And Monday, the New York Times printed a letter from an Iranian diplomat who said dates on some of the weapons shown - including a warhead marked 5-31-2006 - prove the U.S. claims are "preposterous."
"The dates are in the American date format - month first, day second - whereas the rest of the world does not use this format," wrote M.A. Mohammadi, press secretary for Iran's U.N. mission. Iran and most other countries put the day first, followed by month and year.
Judging from photos on the Web site of Defense Industries Organization, which makes weapons for sale as well as for the country's own defense, Iran does use English lettering - such as HE for "high explosives" - on at least some weapons in accord with international standards. However, none of the weapons shown on the company's site appear to be dated.
There are also visible differences between 81mm mortar shells known to be made by Iran and those displayed Feb. 11 by the U.S. military at a Baghdad briefing. The Iranian mortar shell has four horizontal ribs below the lettering and no date; the one shown in Baghdad has three ribs above the lettering and the date 3-2006.
Indeed, as skeptics have pointed out, the mortar shell displayed in Baghdad looks more like a shell that was made in Iraq - not Iran - around the time of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. After the most recent war began in 2003, coalition troops found caches of munitions throughout Iraq but failed to secure many of them. Tons of weapons fell into insurgent hands.
Given the Bush administration's track record of fabricating evidence, this is not at all surprising.
Quote:
I'm not saying we're going to go invade Iran based on them supplying weapons. I'm saying Iran isn't just going to stop for no reason.
Mmkay, Vec. Welcome to 1985.
I wish people had a more positive view of the US, sometimes.
You called it an act of war. So to spell it out for you, is the U.S. committing acts of war when they support various sides across the world, which most certainly didn't stop with Iran-Contra?
Quote:
If you think Osama's winning, why are you living comfortably and safely in the US, instead of flinging yourself in a DuPont jacket at a tank in Baghdad?
So those people who complain about STH360 aren't Sonic fans? If I didn't care about the place I'm living in, I wouldn't be complaining about Bush being a moron. Obviously countries run best when everbody sticks their head up the king's orifice.
How would I profit by blowing up myself and a tank?
Quote:
The dates are in the American date format
LMAO don't get idiots to do your fraud. It could be very smart trickery by a weapon maker, but given the record of Bush going to unqualified people for jobs, I doubt it.
Quote:
Ask them why they still volunteer, and you'll have your answer.
Don't need to, I got a 97% on the ASVAB, those recruitment were promising me everything short of a sexual favors to get me to sign the dotted line, all lies of course. I was only 16 for gods sake.
Anyway, thats not the topic here Ultra, go write some Naruto pronz. :p
~Tobe
How many thousands of people are employed by the US Government? How can every single one be so stupid as to have every conspiracy blown wide open by some guy in his mother's attic with an iMac? First 9/11, now these 'fake' weapons...Anyway, it just seems kinda sad that every victory is turned into defeat by unproven allegations passed off as fact. When it comes to blaming the Government, it is truly guilty until proven innocent.
The only other thing I have to say anymore is that the Saint Petersburg Times are said to have a very liberal bias. (This after a brief Google search.)
At first I read that as "Italian Weapons killing American Troops"
Lawl.
Quote:
Anyway, it just seems kinda sad that every victory is turned into defeat by unproven allegations passed off as fact.
Especially when you consider that in this case, the one producing the original allegations are Iran.
...
Guys, the key word there is "believed". Just like Iraq was believed to have WMD (other than the ones that the US would still have the receipts for, I wonder?).
As I understand it, even the House and the Senate aren't swallowing the line without more concrete proof this time.
And as far as North Korea goes, how much coverage is this Senate Committee report getting in the US?
We can only act on the best available intelligence we have at any given point. I highly doubt the US Government acts on intelligence unless they think it's credible.
I highly doubt the US Government acts on intelligence unless they think it's credible.
Anything more intelligent?
