IRAN has formed battalions of suicide bombers to strike at British and American targets if the nation’s nuclear sites are attacked. According to Iranian officials, 40,000 trained suicide bombers are ready for action.
The main force, named the Special Unit of Martyr Seekers in the Revolutionary Guards, was first seen last month when members marched in a military parade, dressed in olive-green uniforms with explosive packs around their waists and detonators held high.
In a tape recording heard by The Sunday Times, Abbasi warned the would-be martyrs to “pay close attention to wily England” and vowed that “Britain’s demise is on our agenda”.
I've heard reports that the 40,000 number is way over stated, but so what?
If I recall, Hitler's orders were to 'Test the French boarder, if any opposition was encountered, pull back'.
We all know how that went.
Nazi troops waltzed right into France.
But, Great Britain is no France, or are they?
Blair Tells Bush Britain Won't Help U.S. Strike On Iran
LONDON -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair has reportedly warned U.S. President George W. Bush he cannot expect any military help from Britain for a strike on Iran.
Scotland on Sunday, citing government sources, reported that Blair has told Bush his country will not join an attack even if it has significant international support.
"We will support the diplomatic moves, at best," a Foreign Office source said. "But we cannot commit our own resources to a military strike."
7 comments:
40,000 trained 'suicide' bombers with their fingers on the trigger, huh?
Sounds a bit inflated to me.
Iran needs to be dealt with, and preferably before they have a warhead ready to launch!
However, I think about 99% of Ahmen-i-whatever's blustering is just that.
Exactly, 40,000 or not, they should be dealt with.
And is Tony Blair wussing out?
Is he really ok with just sitting back and talking with this nut-job?
I hope not.
Tony Blair is wussing out because, in my opinion, the British Parliament system makes for weak leaders. If he were to pursue a course of war against Iran, he could, and most likely would, be removed instantly by a vote of No Confidence.
We don't have anything equivalent to a No Confidence vote in the U.S. And, if Congress attempted to remove a President for anything other than a criminal offense, it would cause a Constitutional crisis.
Therefore, American Presidents are elected to pursue their agenda, not cowtow to the agenda of their party, as British Prime Ministers must.
Labour's untouchable majority in Parliament is gradually slipping away- and recently Blair has been defied on several important votes by his own Party. He's in a vulnerable position and seems unable to actually do anything about anything- the UK's problems are piling up around him while he does nothing.
Don't forget too that Labour are left-wing socialists- a sizeable portion of them are inherently anti-war.
What I can't understand is the reaction to the very clear threat Iran poses to the world. It's like Mark Steyn says in his latest piece-
You know what's great fun to do if you're on, say, a flight from Chicago to New York and you're getting a little bored? Why not play being President Ahmadinejad? Stand up and yell in a loud voice, "I've got a bomb!" Next thing you know the air marshal will be telling people, "It's OK, folks. Nothing to worry about. He hasn't got a bomb." And then the second marshal would say, "And even if he did have a bomb it's highly unlikely he'd ever use it." And then you threaten to kill the two Jews in row 12 and the stewardess says, "Relax, everyone. That's just a harmless rhetorical flourish." And then a group of passengers in rows 4 to 7 point out, "Yes, but it's entirely reasonable of him to have a bomb given the threatening behavior of the marshals and the cabin crew."
That's how it goes with the Iranians. The more they claim they've gone nuclear, the more U.S. intelligence experts -- oops, where are my quote marks? -- the more U.S. intelligence "experts" insist no, no, it won't be for another 10 years yet. The more they conclusively demonstrate their non-compliance with the IAEA, the more the international community warns sternly that, if it were proved that Iran were in non-compliance, that could have very grave consequences. But, fortunately, no matter how thoroughly the Iranians non-comply it's never quite non-compliant enough to rise to the level of grave consequences. You can't blame Ahmadinejad for thinking "our enemies cannot do a damned thing."
I can't see Blair actually putting resources into it. However there's no way that a military strike by the US would be condemned. And hopefully the same is true of Israel.
That story about pulling back from the French border cannot be correct. Before the German army got that far, it had already invaded Holland and Belgium, so a bit late to be turning around.
I recall photos of plump Baghdad bureaucrats wearing bomb belts during the runup to Iraq War II, vowing to throw away their worthless lives for Father Saddam.
That was just playacting. The real suiciders did show up, but later.
Could a nation of 25 million recruit 40K suicide bombers? Well, what's the count so far from 3M Palestinians? Not 5K (which is 40K divided by 8, the factor difference in populations, roughly), but well into the hundreds.
That there are 40K, or any significant number, of Iranians suiciders OUTSIDE Iran and equipped to blow seems unlikely.
The significant thing is that in Islam, suiciders are not a wasting asset. In every other society, they either do not exist or, notoriously in Japan in 1945, are run through pretty fast. The last kamikazes were largely involuntary.
So, given centuries of future Islamic warfare against the rest of the world, at some point they'll get to 40K. No doubt about it.
Iran's population is not 25M, its over 70, get your facts as BS free as possible.
Here's a good idea to deal with them: Not attack Iran. How about that? Do they have nukes right now? No. Are they going to get nukes? Maybe, if they do, good for them. Its note like they are going to use them anyway and die in the retaliation.
So who cares, ultimately?
BTW, i'm a jew with family in Israel.
Post a Comment