It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush: Iraqi IEDs built in Iran

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2006 @ 09:52 PM
link   
There is proof that some of the IEDs used by the insurgency in Iraq have been built in Iran, according to GWB:


Bush accuses Iran of making roadside bombs
By Alec Russell, in Washington
(Filed: 15/03/2006)

The White House has stepped up pressure on Iran by accusing it of helping to make the roadside bombs which have been so deadly for US forces in Iraq.

In a speech shoring up support for the war in Iraq before Monday's third anniversary of its start President George W Bush said some bombs seized there "were clearly produced in Iran".

"Teheran has been responsible for at least some of the increasing lethality of anti-coalition attacks by providing Shia militia with the capabilities to build improvised explosive devices [IEDs]," he said.

To back the accusation he cited the assessment of John Negroponte, head of intelligence, who has blamed Iran for the increased destructive capacity of IEDs. British and American commanders have previously accused Iranian forces of helping to make IEDs.
IEDs


The IEDs used in Iraq have increased in their potency and deadliness, and have increasingly become a larger factor in coalition deaths.

In a related article, Bush accused the LA Times newspaper of leaking sensitive details about the Pentagon's efforts to combat IEDs:

NEW YORK During a speech about Iraq on Monday, President Bush criticized a recent Los Angeles Times story that he said revealed sensitive information about the Pentagon's effort to combat improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The president did not mention the newspaper by name but White House officials later said he was referring to a Feb. 12 story in the Los Angeles Times.

"Within five days of the publication, using details from that article, the enemy had posted instructions for defeating this new technology on the Internet," Bush said. "We cannot let the enemy know how we're working to defeat them."
LA Times




posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 02:26 AM
link   
..and then you say....of course....How Convenient........



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Exactly, how convenient.


I bet if the USGov were trying to make a case against Syria for example, they'd say something along the lines of "the IEDs carry the hallmarks of Syrian design" or some other similiar assertion.

Not buying it. They'll say anything to make their case.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 02:51 AM
link   
Does this make any sense?

Something that could be made anywhere, is being made in Iran? I highly doubt it would make any difference if Iran decided not to allow 'building IEDs' on its land.

After all, they could just be improvised somewhere else....



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 03:10 AM
link   
Washington Post


Top U.S. Military Official: No Evidence of Iran Involvement in Iraq

By Bill Brubaker
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 14, 2006; 4:30 PM

Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, said today he has no evidence the Iranian government has been sending military equipment and personnel into neighboring Iraq.

On Monday, President Bush suggested Iran was involved in making roadside bombs, known as improvised explosive devices, that are being used in Iraq. And Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld last week accused Iran of sending members of its Revolutionary Guard to conduct operations in Iraq.

Today, Pace, the top U.S. military official, was asked at a Pentagon news conference if he has proof that Iran's government is sponsoring these activities.

"I do not, sir," Pace said.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 06:17 AM
link   
Of course. What was I thinking? Iran is Iraq's peace-loving neighbor to the east. They have that happy-go-lucky president who loves everyone.


They would never be involved in any terrorist activities!



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 07:03 AM
link   
It's really nice that the POTUS has this wonderful evidence, too bad he doesn't think highly enough of any of us to share it around.


Seriously..this is getting silly.

If there's anything to this story, I can't tell by looking at it. I'm not saying Iran absolutely isn't supplying hardware and technical know-how to the Iraqi resistance, I'm simply saying there's no evidence speaking to that fact (that I'm aware of).



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   
Agreed, WO.

Also, seriously, I have a question that maybe someone who has been there can answer: How is it that these IEDs are planted so close to their targets that they can do so much damage? I have heard that some are planted under the roads, true? And some are hidden in vehicles? Can't we do a better job at spotting them before they are detonated?



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I truely believe that if Bush said he had the cure for AIDS people in this site would say "WHat took you so long?!"


What's it like to hate everything and everone American? Not believe your leaders, distrust the press and think that everyone is out to persecute you?

Is Iran helping the terrorists? Yes. If you believe that then you are simply naive. Does anyone remember the tapes where Saddam says he shipped the WMD's to Syria with the help of Russia?



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by crmanager
Is Iran helping the terrorists? Yes. If you believe that then you are simply naive.


Huh? I'm confused here. (which isn't hard!) Do you think Iran is helping or not?


Yes, this is getting silly. Maybe Iran is helping terrorists, but hey, so is the U.S.!!!

The SCARY part is that there are still people who will believe it.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
"Teheran has been responsible for at least some of the increasing lethality of anti-coalition attacks by providing Shia militia with the capabilities to build improvised explosive devices [IEDs]," ]

Providing the capabilities , spin spin spin.

[edit on 15-3-2006 by The Links]



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   


How is it that these IEDs are planted so close to their targets that they can do so much damage? I have heard that some are planted under the roads, true? And some are hidden in vehicles? Can't we do a better job at spotting them before they are detonated?


Yeah, some have been embedded in the roadbed. Others have been concealed in rubble and junk along the side of the road, others in cars. One was in a goat or something, I think. The bombers most likely observe troop movements and plant their bombs on well travelled paths.

The best time to spot them is when they're being installed, and that's also the best time to neutralize them.

This article talks a little about the efforts to stop IEDs from being so effective.
www.spacewar.com...

There are lots of other articles, very much like that one, and none of them even touch the real issue, I think. The really important goal of these programs is (or should be) to develop a reliable way to blow up the bomber as he's travelling with his package, or, alternately, snuff the bomb's trigger.

Check out this picture

Here's an Iraqi IED going off.



And here's the crater left by one embedded in the road bed.



Can we mitigate that? To some extent, sure, but it looks to me like the sort of thing one would be better off to avoid entirely. If it can be defused or detonated at a distance, preferably from the air, using a drone, then the problem has pretty much been solved.

Waiting for it to go off so we can deal with it doesn't seem like the best option, just looking at the thing.

A good number of these things are big, these bombs. I've seen a lot that are just mortar rounds or old artillery cases repacked, but then there are the 400-500 lb ones. Installing that type of device requires privacy and some reasonable amount of time. That's when the bomber and the bomb are most vulnerable, so it makes total sense to attack it at that point. It's also worth mentioning that if you attack the bomb/bomber during this stage, you reduce the potential for collateral damage.

The Pentagon has surely thought most of this through, and they just don't want to say too much and spoil the surprise. I'm sure they're working on at least two or three technologies useful in this role, but it's all probably classified.

I hope the soldiers dying to these things are comfortable giving the Pentagon the benefit of the doubt. They say they need five or ten more years, but I think that's just unacceptable.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne

There are lots of other articles, very much like that one, and none of them even touch the real issue, I think. The really important goal of these programs is (or should be) to develop a reliable way to blow up the bomber as he's travelling with his package, or, alternately, snuff the bomb's trigger.
:
Can we mitigate that? To some extent, sure, but it looks to me like the sort of thing one would be better off to avoid entirely. If it can be defused or detonated at a distance, preferably from the air, using a drone, then the problem has pretty much been solved.
:
A good number of these things are big, these bombs. I've seen a lot that are just mortar rounds or old artillery cases repacked, but then there are the 400-500 lb ones. Installing that type of device requires privacy and some reasonable amount of time. That's when the bomber and the bomb are most vulnerable, so it makes total sense to attack it at that point. It's also worth mentioning that if you attack the bomb/bomber during this stage, you reduce the potential for collateral damage.

Thanks for the photos/facts. I also have wondered how those 500 pound bombs can get embedded in the roadway without being observed. And it seems that we can be using technology more than we have; like using robots equipped with cameras and explosive sensors to identify a loaded car. Then just step back 50 yards and launch a rocket at the car.

Five to ten years? Totally unacceptable. The coalition was using ir techology with some success before the details were leaked and the insurgency caught on.



posted on Mar, 15 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   


Thanks for the photos/facts.


No problem.




And it seems that we can be using technology more than we have; like using robots equipped with cameras and explosive sensors to identify a loaded car. Then just step back 50 yards and launch a rocket at the car.


I think the robots are great, they need more of them. The Iraqi police have been using them more and more, and they're becoming quite skilled with them.




The coalition was using ir techology with some success before the details were leaked and the insurgency caught on.


Yeah, I heard about that. :shk:

Here's another angle, using remote control insects to identify IEDs.

BBC Link

This is the kind of leak that benefits our side more than theirs.
Can't you just picture a paranoid mujahadeen smashing bugs all night, too sleepy to blow up the convoy in the morning?



posted on Mar, 16 2006 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Reuters

The top U.S. military officer said on Tuesday the United States does not have proof that Iran's government is responsible for Iranians smuggling
weapons and military personnel into Iraq.

Asked whether the United States has proof that Iran's government was behind these developments, Marine Corps Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon briefing, "I do not, sir."

Apparently even the USMC Generals do not share the Opinion of the Bush administration - why is that?

Well, he is Only a General - what does he Know!



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 03:04 PM
link   
First of all, these Iranian IEDs we are talking about are known as EFPs. Google it to find out more. The big big bombs you see on the news are not from Iran. What we don't know is if the Iranian Government is behind it or not. There is no doubt they are coming across the border. Maybe the Gov has proof, but I haven't seen it at my paygrade.

In Baghdad, we average a bunch of IEDs each day. Very few EFPs here, most are down south. Iran is supporting the Shia who are in the south. I don't think they have much interest in giving these to the Sunni, who are probably making their own.

EFPs can punch through armor with an explosively formed slug. But, it is a dumb slug and only hurts what it comes in contact with. If it goes through your backseat, the folks in the frontseat normally with be ok. An EFP is not a traditional shape charge so please don't refer to it as one.

IEDs are a fact of life over here and there is not much we can do to get all of them. It only takes 2 minutes for a car to drop one out of a hole in the passenger floorboard.

Training to spot IEDs doesn't work too well, since this country is full of trash, rocks, and debris. Our current tactics in total only account for less than 50% of them found. There are miles and miles of roads here, and the MNFI cannot sweep them all 24 hours a day.

Road surfaces can be melted with burning tires. The bombs are then put in the hole and patched. There are a lot of dirt roads in Iraq too. Easy to dig a hole and plant an IED.




top topics



 
0

log in

join