Moonlight Graham Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) Surprised no thread on this yet. If you've been living under a rock and haven't heard this story yet, here's a snippet: An elite Iranian military unit plotted to blow up the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the United States in a Washington restaurant packed with hundreds of diners, federal authorities revealed yesterday.The plot was coordinated by a US citizen, Manssor Arbabsiar, who arranged to pay $1.5 million of Iranian blood money to a man he believed to be a ruthless Mexican drug-cartel hit man, but who was actually an informant, the feds said. Full article here. There's been many pundits and analysts in the media casting doubt on the validity of this accusation by the US gov, and some accusing the White House of twisting or even fabricating this alleged terror plot. Some such articles: Reuters: Questions abound over Iran "plot" to kill Saudi envoy Iranian Terror Plot: Fake, Fake, Fake Would Iran Really Want to Blow Up the Saudi Ambassador to the U.S.? So what do you guys think? Just a plot from rogue Quds members? Sound fishy/made up? Credible threat? If credible, how should the US respond? Personally I'm very skeptical of the accusations. What would Iran gain from a successful attack vs the grave consequences of a US/Saudi military response? Why was easily traceable money wires and cell phone calls used by the accused? Why did Iran want to contract a Mexican drug cartel to pull off the bombing when, as a Mexican cartel expert on CNN claimed, these cartels have no previous experience bombing targets and also would be unlikely to take a measly (for them) 1.5 mil for it when such actions would incur a huge clampdown on the cartel(s) by Mexican and US govs. On top of this, history has shown that I have no reason to believe anything that the White House says. They need to bring forward a heck of a lot of evidence to convince me this may be credible. Edited October 13, 2011 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 I'll wait and see. I can't think of a reason for the White House to lie. It's not like they're going to start bombing Iran either way. It would not surprise me at all that there are elements of the Revolutionary Guard who may be playing their own game, not unlike how there were competing elements in the power structure of the USSR. One thing's for sure, Iran has had a hate-on for the Saudi regime for a long time, and I can well imagine Ahmadinejad, with his close ties to the Revolutionary Guard and the Basij, being behind such a ludicrous act. There is the beginnings of a power struggle between Ahmadinejad and Ayatollah Khameini and a desperate man can do strange things. One thing is for sure, I don't buy that Khameini or his inner circle would have pulled a stunt like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 So what do you guys think? Just a plot from rogue Quds members? Sound fishy/omade up? Credible threat? Hard to know at this point. I don't know what the Obama administration would gain from making up this type of allegation against Iran though. If credible, how should the US respond? Considering that the attack was averted, they have a wide range of ways to respond, from condemnation, to sanctions, to military retaliation. If the attack had succeeded, the US would have been forced into a more direct course of action. Personally I'm very skeptical of the accusations. What would Iran gain from a successful attack vs the grave consequences of a US/Saudi military response? Perhaps they thought the attack would not be traced back to Iran? Why was easily traceable money wires and cell phone calls used by the accused? Why did Iran want to contract a Mexican drug cartel to pull of the bombing when, as a Mexican cartel expert on CNN claimed, these cartels have no previous experience bombing targets and also would be unlikely to take a measly (for them) 1.5 mil for it when such actions would incur a huge clampdown on the cartel(s) by Mexican and US govs. Maybe whoever was in charge of the operation was sloppy? Terrorists are rarely as clever as they are made out to be in TV shows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Considering that the attack was averted, they have a wide range of ways to respond, from condemnation, to sanctions, to military retaliation. If the attack had succeeded, the US would have been forced into a more direct course of action. If such an attack could be traced back to the regime itself (ie. to the President or the Supreme Leader, or at the very least to senior levels of the Iranian government) it would constitute an act of war both against Saudi Arabia and the United States, and at that point, both countries would now have a very wide latitude of actions. I'm getting the feeling that the US isn't actually suggesting that senior elements of the regime were responsible. The frequent mention of the Quuds Force tells me that they're probably thinking that it was lower-level elements. What it does suggest to me is that despite all the outward appearances there is disunity in the regime's factions. The Supreme Leader has, so far as it understood, become very critical of Ahmadinejad bellowing foreign policy, so maybe we're seeing the outward signs of some strange inner tides within the regime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 One thing is for sure, I don't buy that Khameini or his inner circle would have pulled a stunt like this. Then why was a "stunt" like September 11 pulled? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 If such an attack could be traced back to the regime itself (ie. to the President or the Supreme Leader, or at the very least to senior levels of the Iranian government) it would constitute an act of war both against Saudi Arabia and the United States, and at that point, both countries would now have a very wide latitude of actions. I'm getting the feeling that the US isn't actually suggesting that senior elements of the regime were responsible. The frequent mention of the Quuds Force tells me that they're probably thinking that it was lower-level elements. What it does suggest to me is that despite all the outward appearances there is disunity in the regime's factions. The Supreme Leader has, so far as it understood, become very critical of Ahmadinejad bellowing foreign policy, so maybe we're seeing the outward signs of some strange inner tides within the regime. It's only a matter of time before the conspiracy theorists get a hold of this. I'm in your camp on this, it's a wait and see. There is the risk of a "WMD" situation as was the case of the Iraq war. However as bc2004 always says " if America wants war, there shall be war" THe million dollar question is what will the Saudis do? They have the resources for a war in the region. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 As if Iran would hire some guy to hire a cartel member to do thi I am not buying this obvious false flag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 I'll wait and see. I can't think of a reason for the White House to lie. No offence but this might be the dumbest quote of the decade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 "Considering that the attack was averted, they have a wide range of ways to respond, from condemnation, to sanctions, to military retaliation. If the attack had succeeded, the US would have been forced into a more direct course of action." The attack would have to be real then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Derek L Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 As if Iran would hire some guy to hire a cartel member to do thi I am not buying this obvious false flag Are you suggesting that there is no precedent with Iran using proxies to implement foreign policy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Here we go again. Why would Iran go after someone in the US when they could do the job right over there in Saudia Arabia? Would the US go to war with Iran, when it was Saudis that are connected to 9/11? To me, this sounds more like the military part of the CIA, trying to give reasons to go into Iran. Then, on the other hand, yeah it could be true but can you believe anything either country says? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) Here we go again. Why would Iran go after someone in the US when they could do the job right over there in Saudia Arabia? Would the US go to war with Iran, when it was Saudis that are connected to 9/11? .... Yes....let me make this perfectly clear...any disruption or threat to Saudi oil production and transport to the US and other markets will be met with a strong (military) response. The US did not nuke Canada over the Millennium Bomber either. Edited October 13, 2011 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Are you suggesting that there is no precedent with Iran using proxies to implement foreign policy? While ignoring the precedent that the CIA has been and is implementing the USA's foreign policy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Iran needs to hire the drug cartel to carry out a hit? sounds highly unlikely if they want to take out an envoy there are many places they can do it other than the US and and they're fully capable of doing the job themselves...sounds like someone operating on their own... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 While ignoring the precedent that the CIA has been and is implementing the USA's foreign policy. now that we know the US government has it's own death list and targets it's own citizens for assassinations it's all a bit much that now the US raises such a stink over this...and then we must ask who assassinated those Iranian scientists in Iran?... it comes down to only two suspects Israel or the US, where was the international outrage then? is this all about the US looking for an excuse to start yet another war for israels benefit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Then why was a "stunt" like September 11 pulled? An entirely different group of people with quite different aims and not, in fact, holding any sovereign territory that can be invaded, annexed or forced to pay reparations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Here we go again. Why would Iran go after someone in the US when they could do the job right over there in Saudia Arabia? Would the US go to war with Iran, when it was Saudis that are connected to 9/11? To me, this sounds more like the military part of the CIA, trying to give reasons to go into Iran. Then, on the other hand, yeah it could be true but can you believe anything either country says? I'd say it's probably significantly easier to go after a high-level official in the United States than in Saudi Arabia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Are you suggesting that there is no precedent with Iran using proxies to implement foreign policy? Iran is more careful than this, this was very shoddy amateurish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 It's only a matter of time before the conspiracy theorists get a hold of this. I'm in your camp on this, it's a wait and see. There is the risk of a "WMD" situation as was the case of the Iraq war. However as bc2004 always says " if America wants war, there shall be war" THe million dollar question is what will the Saudis do? They have the resources for a war in the region. I'm sure the Saudis would happily bankroll a war against the Ayatollahs. The problem is that I don't think the US has the least bit of interest in actually going to war with Iran. It is, in every way, an entirely different operation than Iraq or Libya. We're talking about a populace nation, a very large and disciplined military, both professional and volunteer, that would almost certainly make any invader pay for each mile of territory with blood. It is an entirely different geography which means different logistics. I guess you could bomb the country into the stone age, but still, Iran is not without air defenses and most certainly would be far more costly in lives in equipment. Taking on Iran has substantial geopolitical ramifications. Heck, Russia and China won't even let the West go after Iran's lone ally, Syria. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Iran is more careful than this, this was very shoddy amateurish The leadership of the regime certainly is more careful, but that does not mean that every element within the regime is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 (edited) The leadership of the regime certainly is more careful, but that does not mean that every element within the regime is. but the US says this IS coming from the TOP of the regime Edited October 13, 2011 by olp1fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Iran needs to hire the drug cartel to carry out a hit? sounds highly unlikely if they want to take out an envoy there are many places they can do it other than the US and and they're fully capable of doing the job themselves...sounds like someone operating on their own... Yeah that sounds a little out of whack. Just distraction for the bang up job Holder has been doing on the Fast and Furious? Yeah, this does not fit Iran's MO or known history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 but the US says this IS coming from the TOP of the regime I haven't seen any official actually say that at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted October 13, 2011 Author Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 Hard to know at this point. I don't know what the Obama administration would gain from making up this type of allegation against Iran though. Excuse to get UN or allies to slap tighter sanctions on Iran, or get countries them to better enforce the current sanctions? Take public attention off US economic woes the White House is currently getting a lot of blame for (election season is coming too)? Helps build a case for possible future bombing of Iran nuke facilities? Perhaps they thought the attack would not be traced back to Iran? Then why would they use easily traceable money wires from Iran to US? Maybe whoever was in charge of the operation was sloppy? Terrorists are rarely as clever as they are made out to be in TV shows. This wasn't claimed to be a typical terror plot from a non-state group of rag-tags, it is said to have been planned by the Iranian government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olp1fan Posted October 13, 2011 Report Share Posted October 13, 2011 I haven't seen any official actually say that at all. http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE79B7VO20111012?irpc=932 WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran's supreme leader and the shadowy Quds Force covert operations unit were likely aware of an alleged plot to kill Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United States, but hard evidence of that is scant, U.S. officials said on Wednesday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.