You guys ready for the invasion of Iran?

BlokBlok

ᶘ ᵒᴥᵒᶅ
Sep 17, 2010
2,231
79
48
U.S. Says Iran-Tied Terror Plot in Washington, D.C. Disrupted - ABC News

FBI and DEA agents have disrupted a plot to commit a "significant terrorist act in the United States" tied to Iran, federal officials told ABC News today.

The officials said the plot included the assassination of the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States, Adel Al-Jubeir, with a bomb and subsequent bomb attacks on the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, D.C.

Bombings of the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Buenos Aires, Argentina, were also discussed, according to the U.S. officials.

The stunning allegations come against a backdrop of longstanding tensions between Iran and the United States and Saudi Arabia. In the last year, Saudi Arabia has attempted to build an anti-Iran alliance to push back against perceived aggression by Iran in the region.

Click Here to Sign Up for Breaking News and Investigation Alerts From The Brian Ross Investigative Unit

The State Department has listed Iran as a "state sponsor" of terror since 1984. Officials in Argentina have said Iran was behind an attack on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires in 1992.

Alleged Terror Plotter Claims He Was 'Directed By High-Ranking' Iranian Officials

The new case, called Operation Red Coalition, began in May when an Iranian-American from Corpus Christi, Texas, approached a DEA informant seeking the help of a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, according to counter-terrorism officials.

The Iranian-American thought he was dealing with a member of the feared Zetas Mexican drug organization, according to agents.

The DEA office in Houston brought in FBI agents as the international terror implications of the case became apparent.

The Iranian-American, identified by federal officials as Manssor Arbabsiar, 56, reportedly claimed he was being "directed by high-ranking members of the Iranian government," including a cousin who was "a member of the Iranian army but did not wear a uniform," according to a person briefed on the details of the case. Counter-terrorism officials said they believe the cousin may be part of the special operations unit of the Revolutionary Guard, the Quds force.

U.S. officials said Arbabsiar met twice in July with the DEA informant in the northern Mexico city of Reynosa, across the border from McAllen, Texas, and negotiated a $1.5 million payment for the assassination of the Saudi ambassador. As a down payment, officials said Arbabsiar wired two payments of $49,960 on Aug. 1 and Aug. 9 to an FBI undercover bank account after he had returned to Iran.

Federal agents said the DEA and the FBI recorded a number of meetings and phone calls between the informant and Arbabsiar, some of them from Iran.

Officials said Arbabsiar flew from Iran through Frankfurt, Germany, to Mexico City Sept. 28 for a final planning session, but was refused entry to Mexico and put on a plane to New York, where he was arrested.

Arbabsiar, a naturalized U.S. citizen, expressed "utter disregard for collateral damage" in the planned bomb attacks in Washington, according to officials.

He also reportedly told the undercover DEA informant that his contacts in the Iranian government could provide "tons of opium" for the Mexican cartels, according to officials who have reviewed the case file.

Officials said Arbabsiar is now cooperating with prosecutors and federal agents in New York, where the case has been transferred.

Senior Justice Department officials in Washington are reported to still be closely reviewing the specific language to be used in any charging documents.

A spokesperson at the Saudi embassy in Washington, D.C., said she was unaware of the alleged plot.


I would really question:
1. if there really was a plot
2. if Iran was actually behind it
 


The US isn't going to war with Iran.

1.) The US can't afford it.
2.) The US doesn't have the forces for an actual ground invasion.
3.) Iranians are united, not divided like the Iraqis were / are.
4.) Go look at a world map. China and Russia simply would NOT allow the US to occupy Iran.
 
The US isn't going to war with Iran.

1.) The US can't afford it.
2.) The US doesn't have the forces for an actual ground invasion.
3.) Iranians are united, not divided like the Iraqis were / are.
4.) Go look at a world map. China and Russia simply would NOT allow the US to occupy Iran.

Israel is precumming thinking about an invasion
 
"We will not let other countries use our soil as their battleground," Preet Bharara, the U.S. attorney in Manhattan, said at a press conference in Washington with Holder and FBI Director Robert Mueller. (AP article)

oh the irony
 
The US isn't going to war with Iran.

1.) The US can't afford it.
2.) The US doesn't have the forces for an actual ground invasion.
3.) Iranians are united, not divided like the Iraqis were / are.
4.) Go look at a world map. China and Russia simply would NOT allow the US to occupy Iran.

yeah, if we are wanting to change the way Iran operates, we'll have to do it on the D/L, through Iranians.

And Iran is more developed than a lot of people give them credit for. We don't always see it because they don't do much business with us. If you leave the country, they won't let you take a lot of money with you. By money, I'm talking gold and silver. And rugs. Some of the rugs they have laying around the houses over there would go for $15K over here.
 
The US isn't going to war with Iran.

1.) The US can't afford it.

Hmmm...that's the least of our worries.

From the end of the late 20's until the beginning of the "Lend Lease" act the US economy sucked.

WWII fixed that - for better or for worse, the entire US economy shifted to wartime production and grew at a staggering rate. It wasn't all debt financed either - there was a wartime tax (12% if memory serves me right) on pretty much everything that paid for it.

That was George Bush Jr's great mistake - he didn't bother paying for his wars. He had all the political capital necessary to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - he could have easily turned those wars into a huge boost for the economy by financing them internally instead of paying for it through (mostly) bonds sold to the Chinese. This would have only worked with large-scale military mobilization and he didn't bother trying that either. Regardless of your politics GWB's response to the situation was arrogant and ignored history.

If he had gone to war and improved the economy doing so he would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents ever.

I hated the dude and even I will admit it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ar Scion
It wasn't all debt financed either - there was a wartime tax (12% if memory serves me right) on pretty much everything that paid for it.

US-Debt-as-a-Percent-of-GDP-by-Year.jpg
 
Now selling draft insurance for $29.99, avoid serving by having one of your legs severed with a chainsaw!
 
Iran plotted an assassination? That's barbaric. How could a government actually consider doing such a thing. Oh wait...
 
Hmmm...that's the least of our worries.

From the end of the late 20's until the beginning of the "Lend Lease" act the US economy sucked.

WWII fixed that - for better or for worse, the entire US economy shifted to wartime production and grew at a staggering rate. It wasn't all debt financed either - there was a wartime tax (12% if memory serves me right) on pretty much everything that paid for it.

That was George Bush Jr's great mistake - he didn't bother paying for his wars. He had all the political capital necessary to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - he could have easily turned those wars into a huge boost for the economy by financing them internally instead of paying for it through (mostly) bonds sold to the Chinese. This would have only worked with large-scale military mobilization and he didn't bother trying that either. Regardless of your politics GWB's response to the situation was arrogant and ignored history.

If he had gone to war and improved the economy doing so he would have gone down as one of the greatest presidents ever.

I hated the dude and even I will admit it.

No.

Going to war by itself does not improve the economy. WWII sucked for most americans, having to ration and generally do without. Economic prosperity ensued only b/c the rest of the civilized world was utterly destroyed; they had to buy up our exports while we rebuilt their infrastructure. So unless we carpet bomb the globe without provoking nuclear action, it (post-war economic prosperity) ain't gonna happen again..
 
yeah, if we are wanting to change the way Iran operates, we'll have to do it on the D/L, through Iranians.

How about we just leave them alone, and only act after they've actually done something? Before 9/11, all this pre-emptive stuff simply wouldn't have flown with the general public. Now its the new norm. I guess people just blindly figure, "they said bad things about us, so we're going to war with them? ok, that sounds good!".

Besides, realistically, what is Iran going to do? They're not going to send a nuke over to Israel, because a) it'd probably be knocked out of the sky, and b) they know full well their country would turn into a sheet of glass within hours if they did that. Or what? The Iranian navy is going to go up against a US carrier group or two? That battle would be over before it even started, and the US sailors would feel as though they spent their day sinking fishing boats.

Just laugh at Iran until they actually act on their words, and do something. Getting all worked up over them is what both, the US and Iranian governments want. Makes Iran feel big, and keeps Americans scared & trusting.
 
The US isn't going to war with Iran.

1.) The US can't afford it.
The US can't afford not to be at war. The US army is so huge, they need to get a return on all the salaries they're paying. Only alternative would be to get rid of a huge amount of the military, and suddenly increasing unemployment like that wouldn't be a good move.
 
Iranians fucking hate their government. The reason they don't do anything is because they're terrified of them.

A good friend of mine is Iranian - two of his direct family members have been executed by the government, and he had to escape over here because he's gay, and if they found out, they'd hang him as well.

I think given the whole Arab spring thing, they're likely to go for destabilisation rather than invasion. Libya has turned out much better politically than Afghanistan or Iraq did (although it could still go horribly wrong yet).

If the US went into Iran, it would be doing so alone. None of the EU countries would back it up. I know that makes no difference militarily, but it would be a lot harder to square internationally. Although if another born again neo-con gets into office, all bets are off.
 
If the US went into Iran, it would be doing so alone. None of the EU countries would back it up. I know that makes no difference militarily, but it would be a lot harder to square internationally. Although if another born again neo-con gets into office, all bets are off.
Just saw this article. Looks like they're planning on "uniting the world" against Iran.
CBSNews: U.S. aims to "unite the world" against Iran
 
Eventually every middle eastern country will have been invaded and the oil will be safe.Bwahahahaha.:laughing-smiley-007