Syrian - Iranian summit in Tehran

with this group in one place, where are the cruise missiles???

US to abas, we will deal with it and you will not like it.............

This meeting is about al Qaeda being moved out of harms way in Iraq and into a front line attack against Israel out of southern Lebanon as US forces are driving them out of Iraq.

The Syrians and Iranians are coordinating the order of battle, logistics in moving them and the rearming of them.

L C,

Definintely coordinating logistics of fighting -- I agree with you there.

There appears to be evidence (here and other sources/sources) that the surge is having some impact--i.e. that people are leaving the theater.

I think even those against the Iraq War at this point probably would agree that we need to follow through on the surge. If for no other reason, than to avoid an impression of defeat.

Iraq is showing that the US can endure and prevail as necessary. Whether someone agrees with any of the premises for the war, let the world see al Qaeda pull out of Iraq first.

Obviously, all they want to talk about is how to cripple the United States. Certainly, we don't need a translator.

Must be a WAR summit - sure as hell couldn't be a peace summit.

The Syrians and Iranians are coordinating the order of battle, logistics in moving them and the rearming of them.

Posted by: Lame Cherry

And you can BET Russia is advising and supplying as well.

The Iranians are indeed preparing for battle:

.....Recently some Iranian "diplomats" were captured by the Americans in Iraq. It is now being discovered that these "diplomats" were in fact, Qods personnell....Qods forces are the ones training the Iraqi terrorists and the Qods forces are very good...

"The Qods (Jerusalem) Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is responsible for extraterritorial operations, including terrorist operations. A primary focus for the Qods Force is training Islamic fundamentalist terrorist groups. Currently, the Qods Force conducts training activities in Iran and in Sudan. The Qods Force is also responsible for gathering information required for targeting and attack planning. The Pasdaran has contacts with underground movements in the Gulf region, and Pasdaran members are assigned to Iranian diplomatic missions, where, in the course of routine intelligence activities they monitor dissidents. Pasdaran influence has been particularly important in Kuwait, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates.

.....It is getting hot...up in here...

Why isn't the Middle East a glass parking lot already?????

I don't get it. I just don't get it.

hey l guess they got real scared when GMA journalist
interviews the dictators, and now they are comparing notes. maybe Diane Sawyer can go to the summit and tell them that Americans really do like dictators. and Bush will be gone in a few years and to just hold out till then.

Land of the Alawites, Alawites many of whom may wake up in bed with their throats slit, if the Sunni Arabs finally rise up against Assad, whose Outreach Efforts to the Shi'a are getting to be just a bit much, and the memory of Hama a bit distant, and then there is also that little affair next between Sunnis and Shi'a next door. Some of those Alawite generals must be disturbed at the way Assad has been mucking about so clumsily in Lebanon, and in Syria having a few of the Alawite ruling class marry the odd ruling-class Sunnis in a hopeless attempt at intermarriage to protect the Alawites. These generals may be amenable to overthrowing Assad himself (he's clearly not as cunning as his fathre) in order to save themselves and other Alawites, within Syria itself.

Those generals can live without the Iranian fatwa declaring Alawites to be "honorary Shi'a" more easily than they can live with Sunni rage against them. Alawites, after all, constitute only 12% of the population.

I would say that this is very early evidence of something that many here don't want to hear, don't want to consider, and what's more, don't want to see materialize.

And that is Iraq becoming pacified.

What else can we make of this?

Al Sadr sprints for the safety of Iran, the streets of Baghdad are strangely quiet, the people are welcoming our troops, we have made several high profile killings, we've seen several detonations INSIDE IRAN, we've got a new General in charge who's met with success in every other place he's been sent in Iraq, such as Mosul.

It looks like our enemies have seen the need for an IMMEDIATE consultation to map out new methods for bringing down what we're trying to accomplish.

Moreover, all those who've said that Iraq was DESTINED to implode should note the haste of this meeting, the clear urgency of this meeting, and what's more, how can they continue to proclaim that all of the violence occurring within Iraq is homegrown, and isn't PRIMARILY sponsored from the outside, namely the Tehran/Damascus axis.

The reason that there has been violence is because of the determination of Tehran that there should be violence, that there should be blood, that sectarian strife should be spurred.

ALL OF THIS TELLS US that maybe, JUST MAYBE, we actually can pacify Iraq, that maybe, just maybe, Iraq ISN'T destined to be a "tarbaby."

Time will tell.

So let's give it a chance, and cut the defeatist, unAmerican utterances.

And yes, pulling for American defeat within a campaign of a larger war IS, whether you like it or not, whether you would prefer to think otherwise or not, IS NOT AMERICAN.

Iraq is not becoming "pacified." Why can I say this with such assurance, when presumably I need not do so, and could then avoid having to eat crow very publicly later on? Because there is not a chance that the Shi'a government will ever give the Sunnis what they want. And what the Sunnis want is something no Shi'a government will, or in fact, should accept. Why, after 80 years of Sunni rule, and the deliberate impoverishment and bullying and murder of Shi'a (those who did not become "secular" Ba'athists, which meant collaborating in what was, behind all the folderol, a despotism of, by, and for Sunni Arabs), should the Shi'a Arabs, who constitute more than 60% of the population, give in? Oh, they may say, for the sake of another year or two of American help and, possibly, that American military equipment they have coveted and keep trying to get their hands on, that they are "prepared" to make the "compromises" necessary. It's nonsense; it's all talk. And so is any pretense of sweet-reason -- not that one has been seen to date -- by the Sunnis, who really believe, amazingly, that once the Americans leave they will be able to handle the Shi'a. They have a surprise coming.

Of course Baghdad --that's not Iraq -- is fairly calm. Shi'a militias have been instructed not to fight. Many of their leaders, including apparently Moqtada al-Sadr, have fled. So what?

If it pleases you to call this a success, go right ahead. In fact, please do keep calling it a "success" so that Bush can call it that, and call the troops home, and then we'll all be pleased.

I'll be pleased because the permanent warfare, sectarian and ethnic, within Iraq and without Iraq (as co-religionists elsewhere send in men, money, materiel, and as Sunni-Shi'a relations elsewhere steadily worsen because of what is going on in Iraq) will continue, and worsen, and the whole "pacification" business will then be seen to be the hollow "victory" (in a falsely-defined larger "victory") it is.

Great. The pacification is working. It's a smashing success. Couldn't be better. "On the whole insurgencies do this, do that" (on the whole my foot -- "on the whole" means nothing if the insurgency in question is a double insurgency, one of two kinds of Muslims, natural enemies, who are being kept apart by Infidels who keep thinking these people want Western-style "freedom" and are capable of Western-style political compromise, even though the belief-system of Islam does not admit of compromise with the enemy but only of a bipolar world of the victor, and the vanquished.

"Why isn't the Middle East a glass parking lot already?????"

As a perpetual optimist who still believes in the perfectability of mankind, I'll offer up a few answers:

1.) Israel has not been hit hard enough to trigger the Sampson Option, which is the most likely near-term cause of such an outcome.

2.) America is exhibiting intelligent restraint and knows that a vast majority of such handiwork, where needed, can be performed with conventional weapons alone.

3.) Further, America also recognizes that any first-use of nuclear weapons provides terrorist factions with total justification for nuclear reprisals on our own soil.

4.) Far too much of our and the entire world's economy continues to rely upon MME (Muslim Middle East) oil reserves to even consider such a ill-thought-out move.

5.) No genuine moral justification exists, as of yet, for the wholesale extermination of Muslims throughout the MME. While that may change sometime in the future, the day has yet to arrive.

6.) Should such a scenario become necessary, a far more likely starting point would be to selectively strike Cairo, Tehran, Riyadh and Islamabad, pour encourager les autres. Using neutron bombs against these four lone targets would be nearly as effective without the undesirable consequences of irradiating the entire MME or exposing our allies to massive amounts of fallout.

Pacified is not the best description.

It would be more accurate to say that the announcement of a surge (coupled with more aggressive rules of engagement) has forced a tactical retreat by al Queda and Iranian agents Given the circumstances, it would be more than a pyrrhic victory . . . if it is not temporary.

Let the world see this tactical retreat. Mock those who flee----humiliate publicly those who encourage others to suicide bomb while fleeing to save their own necks. Protestations by the Iranians regarding the treatment of "diplomats" are particularly worthy of mocking. Why we don't make more frequent use of humiliation in our communications to the ME I will never understand. Taunt the cowards---encourage the most radical to take dumb risks in an uncontrolled emotional response, and encourage the less stupid to be more passive and insecure.

Embolden what secular elements exists in Iraq. Baghad, like Beirut, used to be a fairly cosmopolitan city by ME standards. Seal off Iraq from the outside, and see what happens. And what the heck, use the Iranian incursion as an execuse to launch air strikes.

If we kick out the outsiders before we leave, a blood bath that occurs after we leave isn't a sign of weakness.

The question is: "Do the Sunni and Shia hate each other more than they hate us--'infidels' in Islam?"

Based on empirical evidence, the answer is "no!"

Hamas admires Hezbollah, Hezbollah helps Hamas, Teheran and Damascus now confabbing, Iran (Shia) sheltered Al Qaeda (Sunnis).

Will saudis help their Sunni "brothers" inside Iraq?

the hatered of Moslem for us outstrips the hatred they have for each other.

If this were not thecase, we could ally ourselves with one or the other to win this war.

We are "allied" with the Saudis, yes, but do you trust that they hold us in higher esteem that Islam?

Islam is not monolithic, but all factions inside of it believe that they must rule the world, make it Islamic.