Iran massing troops on Iraq border

[conjur]

http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040615-055649-4707r.htm

Beirut, Lebanon, Jun. 15 (UPI) -- Iran reportedly is readying troops to move into Iraq if U.S. troops pull out, leaving a security vacuum.

The Saudi daily Al-Sharq al-Awsat, monitored in Beirut, reports Iran has massed four battalions at the border.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat quoted "reliable Iraqi sources" as saying, "Iran moved part of its regular military forces towards the Iraqi border in the southern sector at a time its military intelligence agents were operating inside Iraqi territory."

Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

 

[HappyPuppy]

Hee, hee, those silly Iranians are falling into our trap. Let them mass more troops, the more the better. It just makes it that much easier to take them out.

Ayatollah of Rock n Rolla!

GWB is a freaking genius!!!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

They will be dealt with...unless john "fvcking appeaser" kerry gets elected.

CkG

 

[maddogchen]

Well I hope they like sitting there for another 2 years.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

They will be dealt with...unless john "fvcking appeaser" kerry gets elected.

CkG

In what way is John Kerry an appeaser? And how do you define appeaser?

 

[HappyPuppy]

 

[HappyPuppy]

Bad post. Ignore.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

The "Fvcking Idiot" created this situation, which was totally unneccessary. Cooler heads had always predicted that Iran would be one of the beneficiaries of a power vacuum in Iraq -- one of the many reasons Bush the Elder stopped the troops short with a clear path to Bagdhad at the end of the Gulf War. This situation is 100% Bush's fault.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

They will be dealt with...unless john "fvcking appeaser" kerry gets elected.

CkG

In what way is John Kerry an appeaser? And how do you define appeaser?

Good luck getting a rational answer.

 

[glenn1]

Maybe since I've been out of the army things have changed (it has been six years ago since I was in), but I doubt we would have considered four Iranian battalions to be a credible military opposition force, much less an occupation force. That amount of Iranian troops wouldn't wield enough combat power to be capable of occupying anything larger than a school gymnasium, much less a country the size of Iraq. Plus we have enough projectable force on just whatever aircraft carrier that's on station in the Gulf at that time to make those four batallions combat ineffective within the space of a day or so.

 

[Bowfinger]

Interesting development. Why would Iran want to make sure we don't leave Iraq? Hmmmm.

 

[cquark]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger
Interesting development. Why would Iran want to make sure we don't leave Iraq? Hmmmm.

If I lived in Iran, I'd be paranoid about Iraq too after the 1980-1988 war. Of course, I'd be even more paranoid about having the US next door; after all, the US not only helped the UK occupy Iran during WW2, but overthrew their government in 1953, and engaged in naval battles against Iran on behalf of Iraq in 1987-1988.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040615-055649-4707r.htm

Al-Sharq al-Awsat quoted "reliable Iraqi sources"

.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

Thanks for that info conjur "Fvcking Idiot" lifer.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

They will be dealt with...unless john "fvcking appeaser" kerry gets elected.

CkG

Tell US how America will deal with them? Tell me IRan doesn't already have Nucular (bush speak) weaponry of some kinds?

Tell us that Iran does not already have Terrorists inside the USA waiting to strike??

The NEOCONVICTS really SCREWED THIS COUNTRY FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO COME

They created more terrorists than any administration in the history of mankind.

 

[glenn1]

Interesting development. Why would Iran want to make sure we don't leave Iraq? Hmmmm.

It's not about "maing sure we don't leave Iraq." This unit, basically reinforced regiment sized unit, is serving as a service support and "jumping off" spot for Iranian backed insurgent groups IMHO. These groups need a presence on the border for resupply, commo, and to assist and provide deception for insurgents to perform sensitive tasks like passage of lines from Iranian controlled into Iraqi controlled territory without detection.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Interesting development. Why would Iran want to make sure we don't leave Iraq? Hmmmm.

It's not about "maing sure we don't leave Iraq." This unit, basically reinforced regiment sized unit, is serving as a service support and "jumping off" spot for Iranian backed insurgent groups IMHO. These groups need a presence on the border for resupply, commo, and to assist and provide deception for insurgents to perform sensitive tasks like passage of lines from Iranian controlled into Iraqi controlled territory without detection.

Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Brilliant! It's not like we're woefully stretched thin as it is. Why, we have such airtight control over the situation in Iraq that starting another front against another enemy is just the ticket!

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: glenn1

Interesting development. Why would Iran want to make sure we don't leave Iraq? Hmmmm.

It's not about "maing sure we don't leave Iraq." This unit, basically reinforced regiment sized unit, is serving as a service support and "jumping off" spot for Iranian backed insurgent groups IMHO. These groups need a presence on the border for resupply, commo, and to assist and provide deception for insurgents to perform sensitive tasks like passage of lines from Iranian controlled into Iraqi controlled territory without detection.

Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Do you think WE HAVE more divisions TO START A FULL SCALE MIDDLE EAST WAR

 

[glenn1]

Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Don't even need that. Send in one ODA (Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha) to maintain recon on the supporting unit, and have another or two on call for DA (direct action) to wipe out the insurgents during the period after they disengage from their parent unit and before they've completed their crossing. A small team of insurgents is pretty easy to sneak across the border. Not so when you're riding an infantry battalion most of the way in, that's like trying to hide a piano under a napkin.

Take out a couple of insurgent teams in a row and the Iranians will get the message pretty quickly. They may not be the brightest military minds in the world but they aren't stupid. When your scouts or guys you're trying to infil start disappearing, that's a pretty clear sign where NOT to go in the future.

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Brilliant! It's not like we're woefully stretched thin as it is. Why, we have such airtight control over the situation in Iraq that starting another front against another enemy is just the ticket!

1st, what makes you think that we are actually stretched thin?
2nd, what actual proof do you have that the situation in Iraq is not under control?
3rd, what proof do you have that an enemy exists in the place that the op suggested?

4th, why does my sarcasm deserve to be called brilliant?

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Brilliant! It's not like we're woefully stretched thin as it is. Why, we have such airtight control over the situation in Iraq that starting another front against another enemy is just the ticket!

1st, what makes you think that we are actually stretched thin?
2nd, what actual proof do you have that the situation in Iraq is not under control?
3rd, what proof do you have that an enemy exists in the place that the op suggested?

4th, why does my sarcasm deserve to be called brilliant?

Never mind, I see who I quoted now. My bad, I am not interested in the dramatics.

 

[Perknose]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Brilliant! It's not like we're woefully stretched thin as it is. Why, we have such airtight control over the situation in Iraq that starting another front against another enemy is just the ticket!

1st, what makes you think that we are actually stretched thin? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
2nd, what actual proof do you have that the situation in Iraq is not under control?No, stop, really, you're cracking me up!
3rd, what proof do you have that an enemy exists in the place that the op suggested?

Then, the clueless little nipper asks:" 4th, why does my sarcasm deserve to be called brilliant?

Brilliant? Brilliant! You obviously can't recognize sarcasm directed your way even when it rears up and bites you in the ass. You're brilliant!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

They will be dealt with...unless john "fvcking appeaser" kerry gets elected.

CkG

In what way is John Kerry an appeaser? And how do you define appeaser?

Good luck getting a rational answer.

Good luck gettin ANY answer from you.

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Oh boy...what fun we have to look forward to if we pull out soon.

Thanks again, George "Fvcking Idiot" Bush.

:roll: Yeah - I suppose it's now Bush's fault Iran looks to be power hungry?

The "Fvcking Idiot" created this situation, which was totally unneccessary. Cooler heads had always predicted that Iran would be one of the beneficiaries of a power vacuum in Iraq -- one of the many reasons Bush the Elder stopped the troops short with a clear path to Bagdhad at the end of the Gulf War. This situation is 100% Bush's fault.

Yeah, the fact that Iran is the one who is moving their troops and wants more power is Bush's fault. Gotcha. I alway knew Bush was part of the Ayatollah :roll:
Oh, and Iraq wasn't "totally unneccessary" - it was necessary because Saddam didn't do as he said he would do.

CkG

 

[Vadatajs]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Maybe, we should send one of our divisions in that direction and see if they want to play?

Brilliant! It's not like we're woefully stretched thin as it is. Why, we have such airtight control over the situation in Iraq that starting another front against another enemy is just the ticket!

1st, what makes you think that we are actually stretched thin?
2nd, what actual proof do you have that the situation in Iraq is not under control?
3rd, what proof do you have that an enemy exists in the place that the op suggested?

4th, why does my sarcasm deserve to be called brilliant?

I've never seen anybody pWn themself before, so this is a first. Congradulations