Iran supplying the Taliban

[mrmouth]

IRAN is supplying the Taliban in Afghanistan with surface-to-air missiles capable of destroying a helicopter.

They believe the Taliban want to use the SA-14 Gremlin missiles to launch a "spectacular" attack against coalition forces in Helmand in the southwest of the country, where insurgents claim to be gaining the upper hand. Although coalition helicopters operating in southern Afghanistan are equipped with defensive systems to deflect an attempted strike, the SA-14 can evade such counter-measures.

It was a shoulder-held SA-14 supplied by Iran that Iraqi insurgents used to shoot down a Lynx helicopter over Basra in May 2006. Five British service personnel died in that attack, including Wing Commander John Coxen and Flight Lieutenant Sarah-Jayne Mulvihill, the first British servicewoman killed in action since World War II.

Although the Iranians are not natural supporters of the Taliban, they have been willing to assist them in the past to prevent Britain and the US gaining influence in the region. Special forces have previously intercepted arms shipments from Iran that would have helped the Taliban intensify a roadside bombing campaign that has killed coalition troops over the past 18 months.

However, coalition forces became aware of the presence of SA-14s only two weeks ago when parts from two of them were discovered during a US operation in western Afghanistan.

"The weapons are out there and we thought it was only a matter of time before they got one or two into the south," said a defence source. "A Taliban spectacular against British or American troops would reinforce an increasing view among ordinary Afghans that the Taliban are gaining the upper hand."

In the past eight months, small arms and rocket-propelled grenade attacks on British helicopters in Helmand have increased.


contd: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...9-2703,00.html

[Gumpfendorfer]

That's old news, last year two helicopters were downed near Khost I think it was. With Russian missiles. To what extend the Iranian government is involved remains unclear. Since 60% of all the afghan heroin goes through Iran on its way to Europe, Africa and the Middle East, it is therefore certain that an arms flow is going back into Afghanistan, whether from state actors or not. Al Qaida has also a presence in Eastern Iran, difficult to say what is going on there, other than it is extremely dangerous region. The US involvement in Baluch rebel movements against Iran is contibuting to that too. All the more reason to get Iran on board.

[Farnan]

That's old news, last year two helicopters were downed near Khost I think it was. With Russian missiles. To what extend the Iranian government is involved remains unclear. Since 60% of all the afghan heroin goes through Iran on its way to Europe, Africa and the Middle East, it is therefore certain that an arms flow is going back into Afghanistan, whether from state actors or not. Al Qaida has also a presence in Eastern Iran, difficult to say what is going on there, other than it is extremely dangerous region. The US involvement in Baluch rebel movements against Iran is contibuting to that too. All the more reason to get Iran on board.

If you're saying what I think you're saying I agree.

It doesn't make sense for the Iranian state to support the Taliban, that is like the US supporting Al Qaeda in Iran. It could quite possibly be bought from arms dealers.

[Barry Goldwater]

Don't the Iranians hate the Taliban and consider them heretics or something of the sort?

[Ahlerich]

not awake yet - misread - so nvm

[Kiljan Arslan]

actually this could be a way to screw with the Iranians in power considering their supplying their own enemies. Their own HERETICS.

[Carach]

actually this could be a way to screw with the Iranians in power considering their supplying their own enemies. Their own HERETICS.

could, but wont be.

[Mikelus Trento]

This is not good news, but it's hardly news. I suspect a goodly number of US casualties in Iraq have been suffered at the hands of Iranian munitions during the past eight years.

I'm also probably one of the few on the forum who wishes the US would take a more aggressive to Iran, for these actions, and because a nuclear weapon armed Iran will totally throw the region into disarray. And because of the oil flow, therefore a direct threat to our national security. I wish we would unleash the Israeli's.

I still hold them accountable for their taking of our embassy, an action most of the folks here on the forum probably weren't even alive for. Until an official apology is given, I don't think we should be talking to them.

That being said, I'm sure the OP is not naive enough to believe we aren't supplying arms to groups bordering, and within Iran, doing the same bad things the Taliban does to us. I know of one tribal group (I forget the name)
in the coastal part of W. Pakistan who raids regularly across the Iranian border who are supplied by us.

Not stopping Iran before they have their nuke (and indeed may already have one), will make dealings with them become much more difficult, and if action is needed, much, much more bloody.

It's a true cluster fark in the region, to a large degree caused by US failures in who we have, or are currently supporting (ie, Hussein, Saudi Arabia, the Shah)...even the precursors of the Taliban when they were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

I wonder if supplying Turkey with nukes would be a viable counterbalance to the Iranian threat?

[Primvs Sextvs Loverlord]

I'm also probably one of the few on the forum who wishes the US would take a more aggressive to Iran, for these actions, and because a nuclear weapon armed Iran will totally throw the region into disarray. And because of the oil flow, therefore a direct threat to our national security. I wish we would unleash the Israeli's.

A nuclear armed US has already thrown the area into disarray with a botched operation in Iraq launched on a bunch of false pretexts and a failing occupation of Afghanistan.

It's not American national security that's being threatened but a US hegemony over the resource-rich Mesopotamia/Central Asian region. The presence of an independent Iran (as opposed to a subservient and undemocratic Saudi Arabia, an occupied Iraq and an appointed puppet government in Afghanistan, etc) is making dominance difficult in the region especially with Russia sharing its borders with the areas that contain the resources that will be used for the next 100 years.

If anything, the Iranians wanted peace. Does anyone remember the Grand Bargain of 2003?

Iran promised:

- Full nuclear inspections
- Cutting off aid for Hamas and Hezbollah
- Normalizing relations with Israel if Israel withdraws from Gaza/West Bank

If:

- Iran is removed from the "Axis of Evil"
- The US guarantees it will not attack Iran
- The US lifts economic sanctions on Iran
- Europe is allowed to invest in Iran

The US didn't even consider this peace treaty. In fact, the Swiss diplomatic that brought this offer from the Iranis to the US was reprimanded.

I still hold them accountable for their taking of our embassy, an action most of the folks here on the forum probably weren't even alive for. Until an official apology is given, I don't think we should be talking to them.

How about an apology from the US for using that same embassy (and the same embassy members) to stage a coup in 1953 that overthrew the secular, elected and popular government of Dr. Mosaddeq and the installation of the Shah, whose Savak killed and imprisoned hundreds of thousands of people?

Moreover, the material found in the embassy only suggested one thing - the activities that took place within the confines of that compound broke all the rules of diplomacy. An embassy is not supposed to be used for subversive and covert operations.

So an apology is due but not from the Iranians.

That being said, I'm sure the OP is not naive enough to believe we aren't supplying arms to groups bordering, and within Iran, doing the same bad things the Taliban does to us. I know of one tribal group (I forget the name)
in the coastal part of W. Pakistan who raids regularly across the Iranian border who are supplied by us.

Jandullah or "Army of God". They routinely kill or kidnap Iranian border policemen.

[PointOfViewGun]

This is not good news, but it's hardly news. I suspect a goodly number of US casualties in Iraq have been suffered at the hands of Iranian munitions during the past eight years.

I'm also probably one of the few on the forum who wishes the US would take a more aggressive to Iran, for these actions, and because a nuclear weapon armed Iran will totally throw the region into disarray. And because of the oil flow, therefore a direct threat to our national security. I wish we would unleash the Israeli's.

I still hold them accountable for their taking of our embassy, an action most of the folks here on the forum probably weren't even alive for. Until an official apology is given, I don't think we should be talking to them.

That being said, I'm sure the OP is not naive enough to believe we aren't supplying arms to groups bordering, and within Iran, doing the same bad things the Taliban does to us. I know of one tribal group (I forget the name)
in the coastal part of W. Pakistan who raids regularly across the Iranian border who are supplied by us.

Not stopping Iran before they have their nuke (and indeed may already have one), will make dealings with them become much more difficult, and if action is needed, much, much more bloody.

It's a true cluster fark in the region, to a large degree caused by US failures in who we have, or are currently supporting (ie, Hussein, Saudi Arabia, the Shah)...even the precursors of the Taliban when they were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan.

I wonder if supplying Turkey with nukes would be a viable counterbalance to the Iranian threat?

You seem to be ignoring few important points. Some of these terrorist groups were created and trained decades ago. Turks found American manufactured weapons on the hands of PKK. Last but not least I don't understand people assuming Iran having nukes or pursuing the goal to manufacture nukes without smallest proof. This is exactly how it happened in the past 15 years. Stage one: frame the enemy and isolate it.

Giving Turkey nukes wouldn't change anything. First, Iran doesn't have nukes. Second, Turkey wouldn't help US if it decided to invade or attack it.

Legend says Turkey already has nukes through US from Pakistan. Should Turkey be targeted too?

[Farnan]

Turks found American manufactured weapons on the hands of PKK.

Turks have American Manufactured weapons, the PKK have been fighting the Turks for decades. Where oh where could those weapons have come from.

[Kiljan Arslan]

that they do. considering that the taliban thinks that shias are equal to apostates,

[mrmouth]

Well, for the people with selective reading skills, it clearly states that we have intercepted arms shipments coming into the country from Iran, previously. So the idea that Iran supporting the Taliban is somehow similar to us supporting AQ is ridiculous, and flat out wrong.

And this is a big deal. With relatively modern shoulder fired anti air missiles now making their appearance in A-stan, it reinforces the idea that the enemy has in fact begun a shift towards targeting the all important helo transports we rely on in a country with no major road network.

Its something that has been speculated on, and expected for years. We always knew that the logical next step would be a sustained campaign against out air lift and air transport capability.

So while it might not keep some people here from getting any sleep, I can assure you that it is the other way around for commanders on the ground. It marks a shift. And its a shift we have seen before not long ago, in the same country. That put the nail in the coffin of a superpower.

[Mikelus Trento]

Well, for the people with selective reading skills, it clearly states that we have intercepted arms shipments coming into the country from Iran, previously. So the idea that Iran supporting the Taliban is somehow similar to us supporting AQ is ridiculous, and flat out wrong.

And this is a big deal. With relatively modern shoulder fired anti air missiles now making their appearance in A-stan, it reinforces the idea that the enemy has in fact begun a shift towards targeting the all important helo transports we rely on in a country with no major road network.

Its something that has been speculated on, and expected for years. We always knew that the logical next step would be a sustained campaign against out air lift and air transport capability.

So while it might not keep some people here from getting any sleep, I can assure you that it is the other way around for commanders on the ground. It marks a shift. And its a shift we have seen before not long ago, in the same country. That put the nail in the coffin of a superpower.

You completely missed the point I was making about the US CURRENTLY supplying anti-Iranian groups to commit violence against Iran and its troops...and instead focused on a reference to our FORMER support of the pre-Taliban during the Russian occupation days.

I just can't get too excited about Iran doing the same thing to us that we are doing to them.

[roy34543]

I have to admit, it could not be the iranian government but "wealthy international donors" , youd be surprised how many people have ridicolous amounts of money they will throw at the drop of a hat. Its not too much of a stretch to think that theres someone who hired out a company to build some missiles to ship to the taliban.

[Farnan]

Coming from Iran does not equal support by the Iranian government.

[motiv-8]

Considering the nebulous nature of borders in all of the central Asian countries, including the east of Iran, I would be highly suspicious of the claim that this means active involvement by the Iranian government. It would represent a paradigm shift in Iranian foreign policy in the region as it has existed since 1994, and considering Afghanistan has a small, but still extant, Shi'a Tajik population of which the Taliban are not too fond, it makes it all the more dubious.

You should really gather some more information before posting.

Source your claims before reserving the right to talk down to a moderator.

[PointOfViewGun]

Source your claims before reserving the right to talk down to a moderator.

For something that obvious I don't really have to.

[motiv-8]

For something that obvious I don't really have to.

Riiiighhht. One can only assume with a statement so obvious that you are blowing smoke and that Farnan is correct.

[PointOfViewGun]

Riiiighhht. One can only assume with a statement so obvious that you are blowing smoke and that Farnan is correct.

Come again?