Does Not Compute: Pentagon's Iran "Evidence"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by skunk, Feb 12, 2007.

  1. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #1
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/6353025.stm
    _42561403_mortar416.jpg
    The above is a picture allegedly of a mortar of Iranian production, showing a Christian date, an English acronym (HE), and Roman script (in Times Roman, no less!). Does this make any sense at all?
     
  2. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #2
    My guess is that the Iranians acquired it from a Western manufacturer via The Carlyle Group. Why only support one side in a conflict when the real money is in supplying both?

    Dubya might be a bit thick, but his paymasters are anything but.
     
  3. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #3
    it's fascinating to me which lessons the iraq war framers learned from their war. but it's all the wrong things -- what they've apparently learned is that specificity is better is selling a war.

    so instead of getting google-earth like shots of buildings with annotations on them, now we're getting (independently unverifiable) specific instances of events and close-up photographs purporting to support it.

    instead of "WMD stored here", it's "this iranian bomb killed these soldiers."

    so far, the US press seems happy to repeat these allegations w/o much care about verifying it, but will the US public buy it? or will that even matter?
     
  4. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #4
    Times New Roman? Are you saying this bomb was created in Microsoft Office? :eek: :mad:
     
  5. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #5
    Lets see, My guess is western ideas "borrowed" by the Russians, then modified sold to the Iranians who then manufactor it and sell it to anyone in Iraq such as Al-queda,Sunni,Shiia,Kurd, and or to those insurgents from many nearby countries. Bushco has empowered Iran with its policy in Iraq? Jr should have listen to Daddy. What a mess, Iraq needed a Saddam to hold it together it appears. Ironic.
     
  6. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #6
    and an NATO standard caliber for medium mortars.. i don't know .. didn't the iran switch to russian calibets over the time already ? (i haven't found any informations on what mortars the iranians use)
     
  7. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #7
    Thinking Iran has no interest in Iraq, now that makes no sense.
     
  8. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #8
    This is not the US trying to set Iran up. The United States transferred blue prints for the construction of the 81 MM M-29 and/or M-252 Mortar to Iran. This was part of the Iran Contra scandal, during Iran's war with Iraq. Mortar hardware as well as CNC machinery were transferred (read sold) to Iran through fronts in the UAE and Saudi Arabia. This was stated in the now declassified 1991 General Accounting Office document NSIAD-94-98.

    Since the print on the mortars were printed in English, I think they might be left over from the Iran - Iraq war, probably the American-constructed stockpile still sitting in Iran's ammo dumps. Alternatively, they might also be stockpile left over from the Mohammad Reza Pahlavi -era. During those days, we enthusiastically sold Pahlavi everything from F-14s to troop trainers.

    So in summation, because of the above stated reason, I don't think this is a set up by the US Government to fake Iran's involvement in Iraq. If it were, they would probably have used a Mortar with Arabic printed on it so as not to allow the media make any linkage between the current state of Iranian military preparedness with the Iran-contra affair. The CIA isn't thaaaat stupid.
     
  9. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #9
    link(s), please.
     
  10. skunk thread starter macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #10
    Makes the 2006 "shell-by" date rather odd, then, doesn't it?
     
  11. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #11
    NSIAD-94-98

    not that you'll read it since its pretty long. :)
     
  12. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #12
    http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat4/150766.pdf
    General Accounting Office Report

    http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761573296/Iran-Contra_Affair.html
    History of the Iran Contra Gate

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_shah_of_iran
    History of the Phavia in Iran

    When I worked in DC, I spent more time than I care to think about over a specific transaction between one CIA front company and the Iranian Government.

    And yes, the irony of our own weapons being used against us is not lost on me.
     
  13. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #13
    Again. Iran has the manufacturing technology for this mortar, this could reasonably be an export model.
     
  14. skunk thread starter macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    The words "grasping" and "straws" spring to mind.
     
  15. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #15
    The alternative explanation does not seem logical to me. As much as I dislike the administration, the people there aren't that stupid. Certainly, if this was the works of the CIA, it isn't that stupid.
     
  16. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #16
    Could it just be that someone sold it to them because they asked for what they wanted?
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    okay, i'm dumb, so you'll have to spell it out for me.

    that pdf to which you linked included precious few references to iran and no references to m-29 or m-252 mortars. in fact, i got ahead of myself, i should have asked how those specific mortars relate to the image in the first post. is what i see one of those models? if so, how do those links support that iran got them? and if not, what is that model number and why did you give me links which, to me, don't seem to support what you're saying?

    in general, i can buy that US munitions have ended up in iranian hands. but that's a long way from saying the iranians are attacking US troops in iraq, with or without our originally-supplied or copies-so-good-they-silkscreened-them munitions.
     
  18. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #18
    So you're saying the only two ways this evidence came to light was that either we captured it, or it was a CIA forgery?

    What about other possibilities? What if this was given to us by a "Curveball" style informant? Planted for us to find?

    Plus, even if proof was presented that this was in fact manufactured in Iran and captured off a guy trying to set if off against American troops, that doesn't come close to pinning blame on the upper echelons of Iran's government. I would assume a black market exists for Iran's arms, just as it does for US arms.

    Remember, these are people who either bought hook line and sinker the story that purportedly came from Italian intelligence about Iraq's attempts to purchase yellowcake in Niger, or sold it to the public despite knowing it was false. That doesn't give me confidence that someone (and we all know there are only a handful of people pulling the decision-making strings in this administration) hasn't either made a similar mistake, or is counting on the gullibility of the press and the public to conceal a similar falsehood until it is too late to prevent war.

    The Big Picture item to keep your eye on here is that this administration knows it cannot get another AUMF for hostilities against Iran. The only way they can get their war with Iran is if they can justify it under the current AUMF for Iraq. That's why the issue of Iran's involvement in Iraq is so critical.

    Congress needs to aggressively challenge the administration's evidence here, and even so runs the risk of not being able to act until we're already at war in a third nation in the region.
     
  19. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #19
    The shell was purportedly found in Iraq in an insurgent cache. Why does the logical explanation automatically become "Iranian shell supplied by Iranian government"?

    Wouldn't it be just as likely they scrounged it up from a lost/diverted/stolen coalition dump? Wouldn't it be even more likely they were procured from unscrupulous arms dealers who couldn't care less from where they source their wares?
     
  20. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
  21. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #21

    See... What I'm wondering is why we're looking at the casing when the residue would tell more. The forensics of bombs can be very exact. Owing to the inherently risky nature of the industry most manufacturers of high explosives keep very specific tabs on their formulae, what they leave as residue and exactly what chemical fingerprint is produced. A good lab with live contacts within the industry can narrow a round down to it's manufacturing batch by it's bomb residue alone.
     
  22. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #22
    Because the casing was the evidence produced by the administration at a closed-door briefing where the experts quoted are allowed to remain anonymous and no photographs or recordings were allowed to be made of what was said or shown.

    Good luck getting a forensic analysis of the bomb residue.

    On a side note, can you imagine the furor if, say, North Korea produced evidence like this showing that the US was actively involved inside their borders, and the North Koreans then used said flimsy evidence to prop up further harsh rhetoric and threats of attack against the US?

    TPTB would scream bloody murder, and how flimsy the evidence was, and how you couldn't take NKs word for anything etc etc...
     
  23. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #23
    i agree with you 100%... however what i was trying to say was that if the iran senario were to have happened that was how it would've happened. i also don't think it was a cia plant
     
  24. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #24
    i merely stating that as a likely explanation to if iran did supply the munitions
    theory. im also saying that this is not the cia trying to set the Iran up, as suggested by that one poster.
     
  25. carbonmotion macrumors 6502a

    carbonmotion

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    #25
    it might also be cross listed under the m-7xx series. try looking that up. i've read so many variations that its hard to keep track. i know this much. m-29 is the older system used during the cold war while the m-252 system was used in the 80ties... there is a variant called the m-7xx series.

    im not saying its the gospel truth, I'm saying its a possibility, a very likely one at that. although since i don't have any primary sources, it's just circumstantial speculation
     

Share This Page