Posted on 06/15/2004 5:34:28 AM PDT by F14 Pilot
Edited on 07/12/2004 3:42:20 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
BTTT
The freeing of the Iraqi people and developing a true secular, costitutional republic there will have long term impact for the good...but in the near future, besides liberating those people, we are also protecting our own interests and both Syria and Iran have been working against those interests for a long time.
Same sources that said that we'd find butt loads of wmd's? Im hoping not!
DING DING DING .you are correct sir. The soviets pulled this kind of stunt all the time during the cold war. This is to check our reaction time and methods.
Yes we do have that intelligence.
Four battalions hardly a mass makes.
decent of them to gather up like that.
I can't believe that nobody here has realized the other possibility: Iran and Iraq fought an eight year war for control of the Shatt al Arab waterway and over the exact position of the border, both of which are still considered "disputed" by both nations today. When Iran and Iraq accepted the UN brokered cease-fire in 1988 it wasn't because they liked the solutions it offered, but it was instead that they were both tired of the fighting that had killed more than a million soldiers and severely damaged their economies. Iran still wants to control the Shatt al Arab, and Iraq still wants control of the Sunni Arab borderlands in Persian Iraq.
Iran may simply be viewing this an an opportunity to finally grab "their" disputed lands from an apparently weakened neighbor. They won't do so while we're there because they're not stupid enough to risk outright warfare with the U.S., but it should be obvious that they'll make a play for those lands the moment we leave UNLESS we leave Iraq with a fully functioning and modern military of its own.
Yes we do have that intelligence.
Oh, I'm sure we do. I just think the Israeli's may act on it before we would.
4 battalions = 1700 troops in the U.S. Army; Iranian units are typically understrength, so they might have "massed" 1000-1200 on the border. Quite a military force; I'm sure General Abazaid is burning the midnight oil on that one...typical idiot reporter; doesn't know a battalion from a division...
bump.
I suspect our drone planes are getting a pretty good view of all their activties.
I can't even begin to tell you how many times we had sorties out that entered Soviet airspace during the 80's just to check reaction times.
If we do nothing, the DNC will say it is because we are undermanned and that Kerry will expand the military to handle these threats.
If we MOAB them, the DNC will say that Bush is anothing more than a gun slinger looking to draw us deeper into the quagmire.
IMHO I would fly into Iran, turn around and shoot at the border. Then say to the world Iran killed its own units and are blaming the Americans.
You are wrong--Its a brilliant move. The Iranians will be focused on "the Great Satan" and a possible war and not looking at what the mullas are doing. This will silence any pro-USA people in Iran. Just as long as no one starts shooting... Iran would love to snatch the southern half of Iraq. If there was a rebellion in the south and if Kerry is elected and if all the US troops go home--Maybe they might pull it off. That's a lot of "ifs". Good reason for the US to stay.
I was air defense. 20k from the check border. REALLY REALLY APPRECIATE THE HELP!
Hadn't thought of that.
Very possible.
The title says Iran is "massing" troops, yet the body of the story only reports that Iran has "moved part" of its forces.
The report claims that Iran moved those forces to "the southern sector" near the Iraqi border. This would be a tactically foolish move to make, because of the terrain in that region is overrun with marshes, both in Iran and Iraq. Such poor geophysical terrain would hamper the freedom of movement of troops and constrain and slow any attack to narrow fields of fire, like what happened on the infamous "Road Of Death" from Kuwait City to Basra in 1991.
Additionally, the timing of this story, relative to the sailing of our seven carrier task forces, is unclear, but I find it highly unlikely that the carriers were sent to sea in response to Iranian troop movements. It is more likely that the troop movements were in response to the sailing of the carrier task forces, rather than the other way around.
Moreover, because of the 3,500 year-old pissing match between Persia and Babylon, Iran has traditionally stationed the majority of its military in very close proximity to Iraq. For example here is the Iranian Order of Battle. Those division stationed near the Iraqi border are highlighted in gray.
| Iranian Army Order of Battle | |
|---|---|
| First Army Headquarters | Tehran |
| Second Army Headquarters | Esfahan |
| Third Army Headquarters | Shiraz |
| 28th Mechanized Division | Kerman |
| 84th Mechanized Division | Khorramabad |
| 18th Armored Division | Tehran |
| 81st Armored Division | Qazin |
| 88th Armored Division | Ahvaz |
| 30th Infantry Division | Tehran |
| 40th Infantry Division | Hamadan |
| 58th Infantry Division | Ahvaz |
| 64th Infantry Division | Bandar 'E Mah Shahr |
| 77th Infantry Division | Tabriz |
| 23rd Special Forces Division | Tehran |
| 55th Parachute Division | Tehran |
| 351st SSM Brigade | Tehran |
| 75th Logistics Brigade | |
Who knows, after all is said and done, this story may prove to be prophetic in its warning. But there are too many aspects of it that say otherwise.
--Boot Hill
--Boot Hill
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.