Iran War, bin Ladin hunt

How will the upcomming Iran War affect, specifically, the hunt for bin Ladin? Many people beleive that bin Ladin himself is in Iran, though I tend to think that he is in and around waziristan. But surely the border regions in that area are porous, and there are people criss-crossing back and forth, even IF the iranian government doesn't approve of it. There are US troops in Afghanistan, and Pakistani troops in waziristan, and they operate against taliban and al-Qaida elements.

What effects will having US troops in the border region of Iran have then, with respect to fighting the taliban and al-Qaida?

I am def. one that believes he's in Iran.

Prob. even had a trial for him...and he's serving his time (what maybe 10 year term?)...in a Posh' Cell in Iran...now...no one can get him and no running required ....that's what i'd do if i was in that situation) take the lesser evil.
(Osama prob. figure they gon'a be a bit nicer then a US trial).

It' be Iran's benifit to have him....one...he know's Afghan very well.

But who know's.....if we did....we'd have him....just like Sadam.

Y'r Canadian friend,
Sven

Bin Laden? He's probably sitting in a CIA safehouse somewhere, eating cakes, and shooting at milk bottles out of the window with his SKIF A-3000.

With respect, its not just the US forces that are in Afghanistan at the moment.

As for the continuing hunt of OBL, I'm not sure if he is still a primary target anymore. In all honesty, the Intel on this guy should have had him locked up ages ago. How can one man evade a World wide search, with numerous countries involved in the hunt? Hmmmmm

Maybe we should think deeper as to where he 'actually' is. I leave that one for you guys to work out..........

Originally posted by Nygdan
How will the upcomming Iran War affect, specifically, the hunt for bin Ladin? Many people beleive that bin Ladin himself is in Iran, though I tend to think that he is in and around waziristan. But surely the border regions in that area are porous, and there are people criss-crossing back and forth, even IF the iranian government doesn't approve of it. There are US troops in Afghanistan, and Pakistani troops in waziristan, and they operate against taliban and al-Qaida elements.

First off, you are assuming, with unbacked certainty, that there will be a war with Iran. Secondly, the hunt for OBL has been going on since the 1990s. Thirdly, with Iran's known and established support, aiding and abetting of known terrorist groups and organizations, there is great cause to believe or assert that Iran has become a 'haven' of sorts to OBL. Conventional thinking and wisdom continues to assert that OBL is in certain mountainous areas of SE Afghanistan and Pakistan, when in valid probability, OBL may be simply operating out of Iran and simply transits or shifts from his 'hole' in Iran to areas in SE Afghanistan and Pakistan. Conjecture aside, there is no disputing that the area OBL is transitting in, out, and around are OBL supportive/supporting.

The hunt for OBL will not be hindered no more than it currently is because hypothetically, there will be no Iran war.

What effects will having US troops in the border region of Iran have then, with respect to fighting the taliban and al-Qaida?

The effects will be the same as they currently are being that there are already US and Coalition troops in and around various border regions of Iran.






seekerof

i am a firm belief that we (US) have a connection with BinLaden he is either in our protective custody or has been in our custody, just like i wrote in the thread this morning that i created my relative that witnessed what he did is no story teller but he was so iritated but what had happened and with the topic of our conversation he had to spit it out what he thought was going on and i honestly believe him.

Look, after the al-qaida rap video you knew someone was fooling with us.

Originally posted by Seekerof
First off, you are assuming, with unbacked certainty, that there will be a war with Iran.

Iran will not back down, and the US can't permit it to have nukes. Therefore, there will be a war.

and around are OBL supportive/supporting.

Yes, and having access to iran via occupation forces seems like it could make a critical difference, having ground intelligence for that whole region of asia would have to have some sort of positive effect no?

What effects will having US troops in the border region of Iran have then, with respect to fighting the taliban and al-Qaida?

The effects will be the same as they currently are being that there are already US and Coalition troops in and around various border regions of Iran.
Yeah but they can't operate openly within Iran, control traffic on entire cities, or easily accept information from being trying to curry favour with the US as occupiers of iran. It seems like it would have to be helpful in some way or another.

More war-mongering spin! Who are these 'many people' who are so convinced?

Link 2 bogey men and double the justification for another anti-Arab crusade.

Any evidence at all for OBL being in / supported by Iran?

If the plan is to invade every country he MIGHT be hiding in how come the US hasn't invaded Pakistan or Saudi?

This has nothing to do with justifying invading a sovereign nation because we think bin ladin might be there and want to get him.

I am saying, once we invade and occupy iran, how will that affect the hunt for him? Help? Hurt? Will it be the major break? Will there be more interest in getting him after that, the public interest in getting him seems to have waned somewhat.

Perhaps thats because the pentagon has been busy making up lies and creating a mythos around Zarqawi, as part of an admitted pyschological operation upon the american public in order to galvinize support for the war in iraq, as detailed in this discussion thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Perhaps the lack of interest and pressure to get bin Ladin has resulted from those actions?

The "hunt" for bin Laden?



I thought Bush and Buzzy Crongard didn't give a damn about him. Crongard even said we should leave him alone. I don't know what's the bigger joke, this lie or the fact that people fall for it.

I agree. It seems just a little to coincedental that these rumours of OBL being in Iran seem to have been raised just as the U.S is trying to drum up support for potential military action against them.

Once again, all heresay and conjecture.

As i understand it, Iran has very little patience for radical wahabi islam, as it showed by actively oposing the Taliban in Afganistan.

People's tenuous attempts at linking Iran to terrorism only have any grounding in fact when reffering to certain Palistinian organizations fight for freedom from their Israeli oppressors..

Correct me if i'm wrong here (which i'm sure you all will ) but ihave never seen any evidence of the Iranian government supporting radical sunni terrorism...

Have you?

I don't know what people are having trouble understanding here.

No one has said, recently, that bin ladin is in iran. ITs always been a possibility, but there isnt' some uptick in people claiming this. Infact, I am not claiming it either. I think he's probably in the afghan-pak border regions, not iran.

WHat I am asking is, give a large US troop presence in Iran, will it make any difference in the hunt for him? I am not citing his possible pressence as a justiifciation for war.

Originally posted by Nygdan
This has nothing to do with justifying invading a sovereign nation because we think bin ladin might be there and want to get him.

I am saying, once we invade and occupy iran, how will that affect the hunt for him?

*snip*

Perhaps thats because the pentagon has been busy making up lies and creating a mythos around Zarqawi, as part of an admitted pyschological operation upon the american public in order to galvinize support for the war in iraq, as detailed in this discussion thread:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Perhaps the lack of interest and pressure to get bin Ladin has resulted from those actions?

You assume you will invade & occupy a sovereign country? That's scary!

Justification for attacking / invading Iran aside, I think you're getting close to the truth: The US has invented the link between Iran and OBL, the 'fact' that he may be hiding there.

These myths and the other lies; the myth that all arab liberation struggles / terrorism are linked / part of a concerted campaign, the Axis of Evil etc etc for its own politcal / economic motives.

The US lies to its people all the time, telling them that others hate them and they need to invade oil-rich countries to defend themselves. The Zarqawi incident is just one of many examples

Linking OBL and Iran is just an attempt to convince the US public they should continue the crusade for oil / kill foreign people (and their own poor sons) to defelect attention away from the corruption of GWB and the US political system.

Personally I do agree that they will use Osama as justification to attack Iran along with the pretense of stopping it from continuing on with its Nuclear research. I also do not think he is in Afagastan. I believe he is probably in the United Arab Immerates, near the Saudi Border. It makes sense if you think about it. All of the tapes that is sent out, goes to the Al Jazir (sorry for the misspelling) media. So he would have to be or get tapes to those offices. Sending it by courier from another country would give his location away, so that is why I think he is there. Also he could blend in and has relatives in that area. Take the native terain, can we say what cave he is in, except it is somewhere in the middle east? And since his assetes are not frozen, since the Bush would not move against the Bin Laden family, it would also mean he has a means of income.
Just my thoughts.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by Seekerof
First off, you are assuming, with unbacked certainty, that there will be a war with Iran.

Iran will not back down, and the US can't permit it to have nukes. Therefore, there will be a war.

Unfortunately I think this will end up being the case. I hope some resolution is reached. I think that if this powder keg gets lit, the US won't only be stretched thin in the existing regions, but in new regions supporting Irans cause. There may be problems in Gaza, Syria, etc. It may get very chaotic.

I don't really believe that Osama Bin Laden is the US main concern. If it were you would have seen more troops on the hunt than in Iraq. It is not and will not be the biggest concern. Alive, he sure does provide a nice scare tactic for the media. Bin Laden came out today in a tape, where are those color alerts? Orange anyone?

I find it very unlikely that Bin Laden would be Iran, and that Iran are habouring him.

The reason why this is is because Bin Laden is an Extreme Sunni Muslim, a belief that views Shia Muslims (Which Iran is predominantly) as non-muslims, as bad as Jews and imperialists in their view, and worthy of only being killed.

This comes from the split within Islam that occured after the death of The Prophet Mohammad, in which a debate arose within Islam as to who was the successor to Mohammad. The Sunnis believed it was one man, while the Shias said that no, it's not him, it's another man, and so the Shias followed their own candidate as a successor to Mohammad which extreme Sunnis hated, as they saw their own candidate as the true successor, not the one the Shias had chosen, and anyone who diverged from this path could not be considered Muslim.

This is a dispute that has raged for at least a thousand years, maybe more, and continued with the Sunnis following the line descended from their chosen successor, and The Shias following the line descended from their chosen successor.

We see this continued to this day in the occasional Sunni-Shia blood letting in Pakistan, and of course, Iraq, with the blowing up of Shia mosques, the killing of Shias by extreme Sunnis, and Shias responding by killing Sunnis in Iraq.

In the 1990's, The Taliban, who are extreme Sunnis, caught some Iranian citizens and journalists in Afghanistan and killed them all. Iran, in response, lined troops on the border with Afghanistan.

As I have said, the extreme Sunni view sees Shias as non believers, as dogs, and according to Al-Zarqawi "Worse than Americans"

By attacking Iran, extreme Sunnis and Bin Laden would be very pleased indeed. First Saddam, a Secular Tyrant that Bin Laden called "A bad muslim" has been toppled and Iraq has become a battlefield against the US, next Iran, another mortal enemy.

The US versus Iran! Bin Laden hates them both. What joy it will bring to his heart to see two nations he despises killing each other.

Ahmadinejad? Bin Laden sees him as an infidel, the same as Bush.

If I had to guess where Bin Laden is, it's somewhere where America knows he is, but can't get him for political reasons.

Pakistan maybe.

Maybe even Saudi Arabia, garnering support for an overthrow there.

Somewhere where his capture would cause uproar to the community he hides in, a dangerous unstablising uproar.

Thanks Regensturm thought that was the case - not that Fox viewers will spot that one 'cos all muslims is bad and out to get us'.

Originally posted by Nygdan
Iran will not back down, and the US can't permit it to have nukes. Therefore, there will be a war.

Your right in both aspects, but consider this: North Korea did not back down, and at the time, the U.S. could not envision a North Korea with nuclear weapons. No war occurred. North Korea supports aspects of terrorism, and North Korea now has the capabilities to hit the U.S. West Coast.

Yes, and having access to iran via occupation forces seems like it could make a critical difference, having ground intelligence for that whole region of asia would have to have some sort of positive effect no?

Again, your assuming that the U.S. must or will attempt to occupy Iran in the event of the hypothetical U.S.-Iran war. I am not so certain that will be a legit objective, and if such an occupation did occur, it would be limited in scope--the U.S. would look to only occupy the bulk of Iran's oilfields located along the Iraqi border, in southern Iran (province of Khuzestan). Special forces would operate in other areas of Iran in disruptive screens or in the search for OBL, if they are not doing so already.

Yeah but they can't operate openly within Iran, control traffic on entire cities, or easily accept information from being trying to curry favour with the US as occupiers of iran. It seems like it would have to be helpful in some way or another.

Perhaps, but again, this is based off a hypothetical scenerio and a hypothetical objective of Iranian 'occupation,' either fully or limited in scope.






seekerof

[edit on 24-4-2006 by Seekerof]

Originally posted by Regensturm
I find it very unlikely that Bin Laden would be Iran, and that Iran are habouring him.

The reason why this is is because Bin Laden is an Extreme Sunni Muslim, a belief that views Shia Muslims (Which Iran is predominantly) as non-muslims, as bad as Jews and imperialists in their view, and worthy of only being killed.

No one is certain where OBL is but Iran is a possibility and one that can not, as of yet, be ruled out.

The sources point out that that Iranian border areas are a nest of the Mujahideen-i-Khalq, who are fighting a war against the government in Tehran. They are minority Sunnis, and they have good relations with some of the Afghan and Pakistani tribes. When the Iranian government has taken its regular crackdowns on the group, members have taken refuge in Pakistani or Afghani tribal areas.

The group has claimed responsibility for a number of attacks on government buildings in Tehran as well as attacks on the offices of Iranian President Mohammad Khatami. They derive most of their funds from smuggling arms and drugs, so they have good relations with other smugglers in the region, and the routes they use.

The sources say that bin Laden and close colleagues could have crossed into Iran using smuggling routes with the help of the Mujahideen-i-Khalq, and taken refuge in caves there that are said to be much more extensive and sophisticated than those of the Tora Bora.
Bin Laden traced to Iran (2001)

Other mentions:
Bin Laden fled to Iran, cook says (2002)
Source: Bin Laden in Iran (2003)
Some analysts suspect bin Laden slipped into Iran (2005)
Osama bin Laden 'in and out' of Iran in recent years - US lawmaker (2005)


Coincidence?
Osama bin Laden's Eldest Son Spotted in Iran: Report (2003)
Bin Laden’s son, Al Qaeda terrorists spotted in Iran (2003)

Originally posted by Regensturm
Ahmadinejad? Bin Laden sees him as an infidel, the same as Bush.

You do not mind if I ask for a source substantiating the above mention you have made?

Furthermore, despite ideological differences, what do both have in common? Commonality is certainly a motivator for overcoming certain ideological differences, thus allowing a partnership or understanding, of sorts, enough to allow those ideological differences to be set aside to obtain the greater goal(s).





seekerof

[edit on 24-4-2006 by Seekerof]