It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Iraq says no hard evidence of Iranian support for militia

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 8 2008 @ 09:43 AM

Iraq says no hard evidence of Iranian support for militia

Iraq said on Sunday it has no evidence that Iran was supplying militias engaged in fierce street fighting with security forces in Baghdad.

Government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said there was no “hard evidence” of involvement by the neighbouring Shiite government of Iran in backing Shiite militiamen in the embattled country.

Asked about reports that weapons captured from Shiite fighters bore 2008 markings suggesting Iranian involvement, Dabbagh said: “We don’t have that kind of evidence…"
(visit the link for the full news article)

Related News Links:

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 09:43 AM
Well Bush's smear campaign on all things Iranian just hit it's first pothole, those constant allegations of State-sponsored terrorism aren't showing much more than a weak link between Iran and Shiite Militias.

Funny how nations like Iran appear on the US's list of state-sponsors of terrorism, (, yet so called "Allies" are strangely absent, like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis shell out funds to Hamas, Fatah and Palestinian Militias ( while Pakistan harbors Osama Bin Laden and former Taliban

...Yet more hypocrisy.

Interesting note:

Iraq was removed from the list in 1982 to make it eligible for U.S. military technology while it was fighting Iran in the Iran-Iraq War; it was put back on in 1990 following its invasion of Kuwait.

One minute your friend, the next your foe, does US Policy ever have any consistency to it?
Your only a friend so long as your useful to them in some way and America can use you to pursue its interests, once that usefulness expires they deal with you as they see fit.

Hopefully people start waking up and realizing the Bush Admin is deliberately spreading the same kind of "evidence" about Iran as it did with Iraq, because they're gearing up for a possible attack.

They're crying wolf and they know it and it's time people realize Iran's threat to global security is being blown of proportion by the same Hawks who claimed that "Iraq can launch chemical attacks on the US within 45 minutes" and Saddam had WMD's.
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:05 PM
The blame game continues, whenever US Forces take casualties... blame Iran. This article covers how the US military keeps insinuating Iran is to blame for increased casualties and proliferation of weapons, without actually bothering to back up these claims.

What Lieutenant-General Raymond Odierno framed in terms of an Iranian policy, however, can be explained much more simply by the fact that the US military mounted more operations on Muqtada's Mahdi Army during the spring and summer.

In short, the rise in deaths of US troops in Baghdad last month reflected the increased pace of US operations against the Mahdi Army and the Mahdi Army's military response.

Odierno's reference to "sending more weapons in" continued the practice of the US administration to claim that Iranian officials actually ship weapons to Shi'ite militias in Iraq, despite the fact that no evidence of such a role has been found after four years of trying.

Odierno told the New York Times that explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) accounted for one-third of combat deaths suffered by "US-led forces" - including Iraqi and British forces - last month. But he said nothing about the proportion of total US troops killed or wounded by them.

Asia Times

So basically the US steps up offensives on the Insurgency, deploys more troops into hot zones and Shiite neighborhoods, scratch their heads when they suffer more casualties (uhh what exactly did you expect?) and then it's all somehow tied to Iranian support and policy.

What a nice a little load of crap. If you want to frame someone at least have the guts to accuse them of perpetuating an actual crime.
Sounds like Joseph Goebbels blaming Germany's economic struggles on the Jews.

Since when is circumstantial evidence a viable excuse for war?
Oh wait, Iraq...

Crying wolf yet again, sigh. I didn't fall for it the first time and I'm not falling for a second...

[edit on 8/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]

posted on May, 8 2008 @ 01:51 PM
Good find, S&F. Unfortunately when it comes to the hard-line, Pro-War Rabid Righters on these forums, you're pretty much yelling at a wall.

America has become so polarized there's no going back. The Cold Civil War is here, and until someone starts shooting it will be our reality for decades to come.

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 03:45 AM
Amen, ATS can feel like a Republican Convention sometimes..

But I do notice a growing trend of people who while they might have Conservative leanings are genuinely questioning Bush's Policy and the decision makers.

That's essentially what we need to do, just raise questions and questions until people see their arguments have more holes than Swiss Cheese.
This is just one hole in a long string of baseless accusations.

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 04:08 AM
I find it amusing to see the the US alleging they have captured Iranian made weapons as some sort of justification for military action against Iran. I have seen many photos before of members of groups on the US state department bogeyman list holding US made weapons

Are Russia or China to be put on the bombing list too for all the AK-47's and knock-offs used around the world by various nasty regimes and militant groups? Small arms are the tip of the iceberg. The US has supplied much bigger and more destructive armaments - aircraft etc - to some of the worlds despots that are used to oppress innocent people, in exchange for mineral rights and other trade items.

If a car bomb kills US soldiers, do they then want to go carpet bomb the nearest Ford factory?

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 04:27 AM
... I wouldnt beleive it.
A pro #te government looking to remove all sunni influence?

I think the US was fooled into allowing the Iraqi president to stay.
They didnt realise he'd side with Iran, more than them.

posted on May, 9 2008 @ 04:57 AM

or maybe he just wants peace and the USA out.

new topics

top topics


log in