31 die in suicide attack targeting Iran troops

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Tribes, rebels, religious factions, foreign elements. It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.

Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?



Link

TEHRAN, Iran - A suicide bomber killed five senior commanders of the elite Revolutionary Guard and at least 26 others in an area of southeastern Iran on Sunday, state media reported.

The official IRNA news agency said the dead included the deputy commander of the Guard's ground force, Gen. Noor Ali Shooshtari, as well as a chief provincial Guard commander for the area, Rajab Ali Mohammadzadeh. The other dead were Guard members or local tribal leaders. Dozens of others were wounded, the report said.

The commanders were inside a car on their way to a meeting with local tribal leaders in the Pishin district near Iran's border with Pakistan when an attacker with explosives blew himself up, IRNA said.

Iran's state-owned English language TV channel, Press TV, said there were two simultaneous explosions: one at the meeting and another targeting an additional convoy of Guards on their way to the gathering.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but the region in Iran's southeast has been the focus of violent attacks by a militant group from Iran's Sunni Muslim minority called Jundallah, or Soldiers of God, which has waged a low-level insurgency in recent years.

Tehran accuses the United States of backing Jundallah to create instability in the country but Washington denies this.

Jundallah accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution and has carried out attacks against the Revolutionary Guard and Shiite targets in the southeast.

State broadcaster IRIB said the attack occurred in the morning at the gates of a conference hall in the city of Sarbaz in Sistan-Baluchistan. The province is the scene of frequent clashes between security forces, Sunni rebels and drug traffickers.

However, the Guard themselves accused "foreign elements" linked to the United States of involvement and state television also pointed the finger at Britain, another traditional foe of Iran.

'Professional terrorists'
The attack and the allegations of foreign involvement are likely to raise tension between Iran and the West, a day before nuclear talks in Vienna including Iranian, U.S., French and Russian officials.

"Some informed sources said the British government was directly involved in the terrorist attack ... by organizing, supplying equipment and employing professional terrorists," state television said.

The television report said analysts believed the aim of the attack was to "re-direct" parts of the West's problems in Afghanistan across the border to Iran.

A Foreign Office spokesman in London declined to comment directly on the Iranian comments and instead issued a statement, saying: "The British government condemns the terrorist attack in the province of Sistan and Baluchistan in Iran and the sad loss of life which it caused.

"Terrorism is abhorrent wherever it occurs. Our sympathies go to those who have been killed in the attack and to their families," it said.

The Guard is an elite force seen as fiercely loyal to the values of the 1979 Islamic revolution. It handles security in sensitive border areas.

The Guard commanders targeted Sunday were heading to a meeting with local tribal leaders to promote unity between the Shiite and Sunni Muslim communities.

Comprising Sunnis from the Baluchi ethnic minority, Jundallah have waged a low-level insurgency in recent years, accusing the mostly Shiite government of persecution.

In May, the group took credit for a suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque that killed 25 people in Zahedan, the capital of Iran's Sistan-Baluchistan province, which has witnessed some of Jundallah's worst attacks. Thirteen members of the faction were convicted in the attack and hanged in July.

Jundallah has carried out bombings, kidnappings and other attacks against Iranian soldiers and other forces in recent years, including a car bombing in February 2007 that killed 11 members of the Revolutionary Guard near Zahedan.

Jundallah also claimed responsibility for the December 2006 kidnapping of seven Iranian soldiers in the Zahedan area. It threatened to kill them unless members of the group in Iranian prisons were released. The seven were released a month later, apparently after negotiations through tribal mediators
 

amdhunter

Lifer
May 19, 2003
23,332
249
106
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Tribes, rebels, religious factions, foreign elements. It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.

Edit: Article is about Iran, not Iraq. lul
(but for those wondering what I edited out, I was complaining about our troops causing most of the violence in the Middle East.)
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Tribes, rebels, religious factions, foreign elements. It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.

Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?

...

Where do they think they learned how NOT to live in peace recently? How the west behaves is a horrible example for them to follow, particularly in Iran, which saw us support an unpopular dictator because it suited our interests.

As for the current administration, I'm not so sure...but it's been done before. Supporting "revolutionaries" against governments we don't like is a big part of how we've conducted foreign policy the past several decades, and even before that. Suicide bombing isn't something I see ANY administration supporting, but then again, a lot of times we've just handed over money and training to groups and they turned around and did not so nice things.

Long story short...I'm not entirely sure Tehran's accusation is too wild. I'd like to think we're beyond supporting anti-government groups to destabilize countries we have a conflict with, but we have a long history of doing exactly that, and I'm not sure things have changed that much.
 

iGas

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2009
6,240
1
0

It wasn't me, I'm not a terrarist.

In a brief statement on Sunday, the United States condemned the suicide bombing and denied it had anything to do with it. ?We condemn this act of terrorism and mourn the loss of innocent lives. Reports of alleged U.S. involvement are completely false,? said Ian Kelly, U.S. State Department spokesman.

It definitely look like the US involvement is deep within the bombing, because in the past the US publicly deny its involvement mean that it is the dirty dog that started the trouble.

 

Nemesis 1

Lifer
Dec 30, 2006
11,366
2
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Tribes, rebels, religious factions, foreign elements. It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.

Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?



Link

TEHRAN, Iran - A suicide bomber killed five senior commanders of the elite Revolutionary Guard and at least 26 others in an area of southeastern Iran on Sunday, state media reported.

The official IRNA news agency said the dead included the deputy commander of the Guard's ground force, Gen. Noor Ali Shooshtari, as well as a chief provincial Guard commander for the area, Rajab Ali Mohammadzadeh. The other dead were Guard members or local tribal leaders. Dozens of others were wounded, the report said.

The commanders were inside a car on their way to a meeting with local tribal leaders in the Pishin district near Iran's border with Pakistan when an attacker with explosives blew himself up, IRNA said.

Iran's state-owned English language TV channel, Press TV, said there were two simultaneous explosions: one at the meeting and another targeting an additional convoy of Guards on their way to the gathering.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility, but the region in Iran's southeast has been the focus of violent attacks by a militant group from Iran's Sunni Muslim minority called Jundallah, or Soldiers of God, which has waged a low-level insurgency in recent years.

Tehran accuses the United States of backing Jundallah to create instability in the country but Washington denies this.

Jundallah accuses Iran's Shiite-dominated government of persecution and has carried out attacks against the Revolutionary Guard and Shiite targets in the southeast.

State broadcaster IRIB said the attack occurred in the morning at the gates of a conference hall in the city of Sarbaz in Sistan-Baluchistan. The province is the scene of frequent clashes between security forces, Sunni rebels and drug traffickers.

However, the Guard themselves accused "foreign elements" linked to the United States of involvement and state television also pointed the finger at Britain, another traditional foe of Iran.

'Professional terrorists'
The attack and the allegations of foreign involvement are likely to raise tension between Iran and the West, a day before nuclear talks in Vienna including Iranian, U.S., French and Russian officials.

"Some informed sources said the British government was directly involved in the terrorist attack ... by organizing, supplying equipment and employing professional terrorists," state television said.

The television report said analysts believed the aim of the attack was to "re-direct" parts of the West's problems in Afghanistan across the border to Iran.

A Foreign Office spokesman in London declined to comment directly on the Iranian comments and instead issued a statement, saying: "The British government condemns the terrorist attack in the province of Sistan and Baluchistan in Iran and the sad loss of life which it caused.

"Terrorism is abhorrent wherever it occurs. Our sympathies go to those who have been killed in the attack and to their families," it said.

The Guard is an elite force seen as fiercely loyal to the values of the 1979 Islamic revolution. It handles security in sensitive border areas.

The Guard commanders targeted Sunday were heading to a meeting with local tribal leaders to promote unity between the Shiite and Sunni Muslim communities.

Comprising Sunnis from the Baluchi ethnic minority, Jundallah have waged a low-level insurgency in recent years, accusing the mostly Shiite government of persecution.

In May, the group took credit for a suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque that killed 25 people in Zahedan, the capital of Iran's Sistan-Baluchistan province, which has witnessed some of Jundallah's worst attacks. Thirteen members of the faction were convicted in the attack and hanged in July.

Jundallah has carried out bombings, kidnappings and other attacks against Iranian soldiers and other forces in recent years, including a car bombing in February 2007 that killed 11 members of the Revolutionary Guard near Zahedan.

Jundallah also claimed responsibility for the December 2006 kidnapping of seven Iranian soldiers in the Zahedan area. It threatened to kill them unless members of the group in Iranian prisons were released. The seven were released a month later, apparently after negotiations through tribal mediators

Did you actually mean that bolded part. We got any native Americans here that would like the opertunity to rip a man a new asshole??
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.
Are you being sarcastic here, or just oblivious?

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?
Our previvious admistatation had an established relationship with the terrirost group, as reported by ABC:

U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or "finding" as well as congressional oversight.

Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to its youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states.

I can't say I've seen any report of that relationship being ended, by the current administration or before. Also, that lack of government funding of such groups seems to have changed about a year after that report, as noted by The New Yorker:

Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country?s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations.

Again, I've yet to see anythign to suggest that program was stopped, by the current administration or before. So, while I don't know of any involvement in this particular attack, I do know it would be naive to dismiss the possibility.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
We, the US, have a habit of indicating in many ways that the enemy of our enemy is our friend.
I can't imagine we'd admit to doing that if we didn't have to... it would make no sense.
I can't imagine we'd not aid our friends in any endevor that furthers our interests.
But, without evidence of our involvement in the OP's article we and they can only suspect that there is a duck...

quack quack... quack..
 

TheSkinsFan

Golden Member
May 15, 2009
1,141
0
0
Even if we did have some contact with the group in the past, I'd simply call it Tit for Tat... "Tat" being 6+ years of direct Iranian involvement in training, arming, funding, and coordinating terrorist attacks against the Government of Iraq and Coalition Forces in Iraq.

I hope the Iranian Government collapses during my lifetime without any outside forces being directly involved, I really do. The people of Iran need to rise up and take their country back from the theological whackjobs currently running the show. The entire world will be better off for it.
 

theflyingpig

Banned
Mar 9, 2008
5,616
18
0
Originally posted by: Nemesis 1

Did you actually mean that bolded part. We got any native Americans here that would like the opertunity to rip a man a new asshole??

Fool. The native Americans were conquered properly. One side was slaughtered until they were forced into submission. That is how things are done. Now there is peace. Everyone knows this.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
Originally posted by: kylebisme
Originally posted by: Ozoned
It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.
Are you being sarcastic here, or just oblivious?

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?
Our previvious admistatation had an established relationship with the terrirost group, as reported by ABC:

U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or "finding" as well as congressional oversight.

Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to its youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states.

I can't say I've seen any report of that relationship being ended, by the current administration or before. Also, that lack of government funding of such groups seems to have changed about a year after that report, as noted by The New Yorker:

Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country?s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations.

Again, I've yet to see anythign to suggest that program was stopped, by the current administration or before. So, while I don't know of any involvement in this particular attack, I do know it would be naive to dismiss the possibility.

this is the BS you come up with now?

you're accusing the US to work with terrorist groups based on a news article?

have you gone mad?



I hope that this is a wake up call for Iran that even people in their own country dont like their policies.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.
Or maybe the iranians themselves, so they can blame others. After what they did to their own people after the recent election, I wouldn't be surprised.
 

0marTheZealot

Golden Member
Apr 5, 2004
1,692
0
0
Originally posted by: Freshgeardude
Originally posted by: kylebisme
Originally posted by: Ozoned
It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.
Are you being sarcastic here, or just oblivious?

Originally posted by: Ozoned
Do you think that our current White house administration would facilitate or support this kind of covert operations?
Our previvious admistatation had an established relationship with the terrirost group, as reported by ABC:

U.S. officials say the U.S. relationship with Jundullah is arranged so that the U.S. provides no funding to the group, which would require an official presidential order or "finding" as well as congressional oversight.

Tribal sources tell ABC News that money for Jundullah is funneled to its youthful leader, Abd el Malik Regi, through Iranian exiles who have connections with European and Gulf states.

I can't say I've seen any report of that relationship being ended, by the current administration or before. Also, that lack of government funding of such groups seems to have changed about a year after that report, as noted by The New Yorker:

Late last year, Congress agreed to a request from President Bush to fund a major escalation of covert operations against Iran, according to current and former military, intelligence, and congressional sources. These operations, for which the President sought up to four hundred million dollars, were described in a Presidential Finding signed by Bush, and are designed to destabilize the country?s religious leadership. The covert activities involve support of the minority Ahwazi Arab and Baluchi groups and other dissident organizations.

Again, I've yet to see anythign to suggest that program was stopped, by the current administration or before. So, while I don't know of any involvement in this particular attack, I do know it would be naive to dismiss the possibility.

this is the BS you come up with now?

you're accusing the US to work with terrorist groups based on a news article?

America has worked with terrorist organizations for a long, long time. Except they aren't called terrorist organizations by our media, they are called "opposition groups".
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,700
6,257
126
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.
Or maybe the iranians themselves, so they can blame others. After what they did to their own people after the recent election, I wouldn't be surprised.

Possibly, but since the area borders Pakistan and the Taliban seems to just want to create havoc everywhere, They're still my prime suspect.
 

sciwizam

Golden Member
Oct 22, 2004
1,953
0
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.
Or maybe the iranians themselves, so they can blame others. After what they did to their own people after the recent election, I wouldn't be surprised.

Possibly, but since the area borders Pakistan and the Taliban seems to just want to create havoc everywhere, They're still my prime suspect.

BBC: Iran accuses Pakistan
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Dunno if the new Admin is supporting Jundullah, but the last one apparently was, and there's a flywheel effect involved. Setting up radical islamist organizations is a tricky business, as we've seen in the past. They don't quit just because we say so.

Face it, guys, plausible deniability doesn't really exist in the context of bush admin raving for regime change in Iran and US history of involvement in such activities for decades.
 

Ozoned

Diamond Member
Mar 22, 2004
5,578
0
0
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Dunno if the new Admin is supporting Jundullah, but the last one apparently was, and there's a flywheel effect involved. Setting up radical islamist organizations is a tricky business, as we've seen in the past. They don't quit just because we say so.

Face it, guys, plausible deniability doesn't really exist in the context of bush admin raving for regime change in Iran and US history of involvement in such activities for decades.
Blame America. (1st) Couldn't possibly be any other explanation.
 

woodie1

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2000
5,947
0
0
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.
Or maybe the iranians themselves, so they can blame others. After what they did to their own people after the recent election, I wouldn't be surprised.

Wouldn't put it past them.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,277
0
0
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Originally posted by: Jhhnn
Dunno if the new Admin is supporting Jundullah, but the last one apparently was, and there's a flywheel effect involved. Setting up radical islamist organizations is a tricky business, as we've seen in the past. They don't quit just because we say so.

Face it, guys, plausible deniability doesn't really exist in the context of bush admin raving for regime change in Iran and US history of involvement in such activities for decades.
Blame America. (1st) Couldn't possibly be any other explanation.
There's no doubt about the u.s.' desires and dubious history. I guess the question is if we wouldn't be more subtle than this - and a lot bigger or far-reaching.
 

Schadenfroh

Elite Member
Mar 8, 2003
38,416
4
0
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.

The Taliban murdered a few Iranian diplomats a few years back, right? I would not be surprised if they decided to strike at them again.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,528
9,750
136
Originally posted by: Schadenfroh
Originally posted by: sandorski
Probably the work of the Taliban.

The Taliban murdered a few Iranian diplomats a few years back, right? I would not be surprised if they decided to strike at them again.

Maybe fellow Iranians who lost the election. Can't be a terrorist kingpin nation and keep all your ducks in order all the time.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Ozoned
Tribes, rebels, religious factions, foreign elements. It's to bad these people can't learn from the examples of the west, and just learn to live in peace.

Hm. Funny how easy it is to reach that sort of view.

We currently don't have any apparent danger of states battling each other, or 'tribal' conflicts in our non-tribal society - while we are living in the richest nation in the world.

Of course, not all of our 'neighbors' are as lucky, as we've used force and the threat of force against near and far, Guatamela, Cuba, Chile, Panama, etc.; Iraq, Vietnam, etc.

If we were in a more similar situation to Iran, with more of their pressures, who can say we wouldn't be worse?

Did we suffer a decade long invasion and war with a milllion casualties including our schools being gassed, sponsored by a foreign power nothing has been done about?

But for our domestic peace - yes, no trouble there - after the Genocide of native Americans, after our civil war with more killed than all other wars combined. Never any trouble with the centuries of blacks as slaves or discriminated against, as white mobs beat ''freedom riders' and needed the US military to be sent within our borders to quell their bombing black churches. We get along fine with Mexico, after taking half of it.

And our cultural roots - never any Sunni-Shia-like conflicts during centuries of European wars between Caholics and Protestants, 'religions of peace' - or the crusades.

No, just make us the most powerful military nation, the richest nation, with the most nuclear weapons, and we'll find a way not to have tribl clashes. We're civilised.

Funny, though, how a civilised nation killed two million Vietnamese with its policies of colonization and war. Has Iran killed two million outside *its* border, anywehre?

Has it killed two hundreds thousand outside its border? Twenty thousand?

You know, the west set up conflict in the Middle East - for over a century, building up the radical religious groups as proxy forces in order to divide and conquer, to create armies to fight the nationalists who opposed the Western invasion by turning their own people against their own nations, a little like the way Osama turned our own airliners agiainst ours. You remember 'Lawrence of Arabia'? That's sort of what he was doing, while Churchill built Iraq out of three enemies to keep them from uniting against England.

Those savages. We're the peaceful nation. Now that w'ere the most powerful and richest nation, no need for tribal wars.

Funny though, how Afghanistan was doing pretty well under a leftist government we decided to undermine (leading it to ask the USSR for protection), how Iraq used to be a relatively prosperous nation despite problems, how Iran had a Democracy instead of corrupt clerics or a US brutal dictator running it, but did the crime of wanting out of an expoitive deal under the barrel of a gun for its oil from England and the US. How the thugs running Saudi Arabia or Egypt do so with our providing security.

Even the west's greatest conflict - talk about factions 'not getting along' as they competed for global market share, with WWII - spilled over to the Middle East, with Israel, as Palestnians were forced to pay for the crimes of the west who committed the Holocaust by giving up their lands, and after their resistance lost, becoming occupied territories.

Not our problem.

Maybe there's a little more to the story than 'those people who can't get along and end vioence'.'

We more seem to resemble the Japanese in their behavior to simply not notice their history in China in WWII. But our states aren't in any real danger of war now.

We *don't* resemble Germany, who took strong responsibility for what their nation did under the leadership of an evil Austrian. What they did, our right would scream against.

You talk about the Western nations living in peace - nations who have a long history of colonization and slavery and religious wars other less than peaceful activities.

Perhaps you should learn the history before you criticize the other nations.
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
It's too bad Iraq couldnt take out Iran before we took out them.

I wont shed a tear over any religous fundamentalist.