| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
So much for the conventional wisdom.
From the Daily Times, with thanks to PR:
LAHORE: As NATO troops in Afghanistan have begun intercepting sophisticated Iranian arms bound for the Taliban, US, NATO and Afghan officials are growing more concerned about Iranian policy in Afghanistan, says a Knight Ridder report.It’s long been conventional wisdom that Iran would do nothing to destabilise Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s shaky government or aid the Taliban, against whom Iran nearly went to war with in 1998. The Taliban obtains the lion’s share of its weapons and other aid from the proceeds of opium trafficking and from supporters in Pakistan and Arab nations, the report says.
The recent seizures of Iranian arms by British troops in Afghanistan’s war-torn southern Helmand province are challenging that assumption, however.
“Iran appears to be playing a very small role, but it appears to be increasing,” said Seth Jones, an expert at the RAND Corp, a research centre that’s close to the Pentagon.
The intercepted weapons include the first so-called explosively formed penetrator bombs, devices that spit molten copper plugs that can penetrate the armour of American tanks, troop carriers and Humvees, said US officials who requested anonymity because the matter is classified.
The Bush administration accuses Iran of supplying the same weapons to Shia militias in Iraq. Iran denies the charge. Still, US officials and independent experts don’t think that Tehran wants the Taliban returned to power. “The Iranians don’t want the Taliban back,” said Barnett Rubin, a leading scholar on Afghanistan who met with Iranian officials during a recent visit to Kabul. “That is a red line for them.”
Posted by Robert at May 31, 2007 5:21 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
oh maybe the State Dept. can send over Pelosi to have a chit chat with the monkey man from iran. you know these talks the Democrats are so prissy about that Bush is just not being nice to iran/..
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 31, 2007 5:37 PM
Wouldn't Iran be supplying arms to the Taliban because they're fighting the US, and other anti-Iranian forces? The enemy of their enemy is their friend, to a point, anyway.
Posted by: jewdog at May 31, 2007 6:00 PM
"The Taliban obtains the lion’s share of its weapons and other aid from the proceeds of opium trafficking."
Scum!scum!scum! The religion of peace showing its concern and the concern of its god allah for the welfare of humanity. Make money selling life killing drugs to infidel men, women and children. Is this not a plot that only Satan would conceive of against humanity in such a way? Moslems, tell us the part about how this is required by your god. Tell us the part that this is a method allah sanctions to allow you to put him in charge of the world? Who could believe such evil is the work of a god? You and your god are psycopathic criminals in need of a padlocked cell where the guards must feed you very carefully for their own safety. One world, one planet. No to Islam!
at May 31, 2007 6:24 PM
Iran has a huge problem with people addicted to herion, seems what they peddle is also in their streets. what goes around comes around.
Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at May 31, 2007 7:13 PM
Welcome to Iran. The world of subsidised petrol, drug addiction and plastic surgery.
Yep I am scared of Iran.
at May 31, 2007 8:16 PM
I feel sorry for the average Iranian living under the thumb of the dictators who pretend elections, while staring down the gun barrel of America.
Posted by: Mert at May 31, 2007 8:25 PM
Pesty Iranians -- you "bother" me -- go away!
Posted by: champ at May 31, 2007 9:10 PM
maybe the State Dept. can send over Pelosi to have a chit chat with the monkey man from iran.
The way Iran's been cracking down on "morals", Nancy will have to be very careful with that headscarf.
Posted by: Bigfoot at May 31, 2007 9:16 PM
Iran needs the Money the Weapons bring in and the Taliban need not "win" to serve Iranian interests. Killing Infidels, is Killing Infidels.
Bomb Iran, or Starve them, Or Both. Pick A,B or C. But pick one and do it.
The unintended consequences will only get worst as time Jihads on.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at May 31, 2007 9:26 PM
The Taliban is a great threat to Infidels. Iran right now is a greater threat to Infidels. The Taliban tried to wipe out the Shi'a Hazara, and "the Iranians don’t want the Taliban back,” said Barnett Rubin, a leading scholar on Afghanistan who met with Iranian officials during a recent visit to Kabul. “That is a red line for them.”
Iran supplies arms to the Taliban, however, because right now the Taliban uses those arms against the Infidels in Afghanistan, all those NATO troops. Iran also supplies weaponry to Al Qaeda, it is believed, in Iraq (as well as to other groups), because though Al Qaeda in Iraq leaders have declared the Shi'a to be "Rafidite dogs" and "Infidels" still, Al Qaeda uses those Iranian-supplied explosives to blow up American troops.
Is there a lesson here somewhere? Is there something that the hearts-and-minds "counterinsurgency strategists" -- see Petraeus, see Kilcullen, see that "counterinsurgency manual" that fails to mention Islam except in brief passing, and therefore does not mention the nature of Islam, or why the enemy, rightly undrstood, consists of all those who believe the Jihad is a central duty of adherents of Islam -- are possibly missing?
Is there some way, anyway, for us to get out of the way and have the Taliban and Iran mix it up, or approximate proxies thereof?
In Iraq? In Afghanistan?
Let's see.
Prizes to all who send in the correct entries.
Posted by: Hugh at May 31, 2007 9:27 PM
When will the international community deal with this cancer? Iran is taking a page from Saddam's playbook in terms of defying the will of the global community.
Posted by: Triphammer at May 31, 2007 9:50 PM
For those of you on PST, there will be an interesting program tonight at 9:00PM on the History Channel entitled: IRAN;THE NEXT IRAQ.
Posted by: Mackie at May 31, 2007 11:45 PM
Why is NATO upset?
Did Iran forget to bribe them?
at June 1, 2007 5:50 AM
While we are "holding historic talks" with the Iranians, I do hope nothing complimentary is said, and I do hope no concessions or apologies given...
...the only thing that should be said is:
"STEEEEEERIKE TWOOOOOO!''''
at June 1, 2007 6:19 AM
for some reason, exsgtbrown, i see you making the big ol' umpire gesture with that...
Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at June 1, 2007 9:20 AM
And Missy Rice is doing what?
Posted by: joeblough at June 1, 2007 10:50 AM
striking out...
Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at June 1, 2007 4:21 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)