Iranian Alert - February 26, 2006 - Evidence is pointing to Iran being behind the bombing in Samarra

Regime Change Iran ^ | 2.26.2006 | DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin

[DoctorZIn]

Join Us At Today's Iranian Alert Thread – The Most Underreported Story Of The Year!

"If you want on or off this Iran ping list, Freepmail DoctorZin”

[EarlyBird]

The mosque bombing has Iran written all over it. They've had their hands involved in the "insurgency" in Iraq since the fall of Saddam. Hell, that's where Zarqawi flees to whenever it gets hot -- Iran.

Not sure about what you mean by "the war with Iran has begun". Who's going to war against them? The U.S? Iraq? Both?

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping.

[bnelson44]

If Iran is behind the bombing, why is Sadr suing for peace right now?

[TruthBeforeAll]

How convenient. (rolls eyes)

[alloysteel]

If Iran is LOOKING for a pretext that will involve them directly with the US, they have just about managed to poke the hornet's nest just a little too hard.

The name of the game is Muslims killing other Muslims. This would not be of major importance to most of the Western nations, except the conflict does not die down and remain within only their own borders.

There is simply no judicious way to settle this fight. The US is going to eventually have to wade in there like John Wayne as Rooster Cogburn riding out after "Lucky" Ned Pepper in "True Grit".

[popdonnelly]

I'm skeptical of the idea that the Shi'ite government of Iran would purposely destroy a Shi'ite shrine. Also, Sadr is acting like a peacemaker in this situation. If it was his intention to exploit Sunni/Shi'ite conflict, he wouldn't be doing so. There are any number of other players who could have pulled off the bombing of the Golden Dome.

[Paul_Denton]

In any war there is what you call acceptable losses. The mullahs ruling Iran are insane and it should be no surprise that they did the bombing. Not only that, president Bush vowed that the Shrine would be rebuilt. Perhaps the mullahs knew that and so did not consider it much of a loss.

[Marine_Uncle]

I got clued in earlier on from a different thread.
This just may prove out to be the case. Yes I had read through a number of the references.

[Marine_Uncle]

Try this one. We all continue to get new insights.
HERE

[Marine_Uncle]

To add a bit with no response required. Whoever carried out the attack was very carefull not to damage the tombs of the two caliphs. Only the dome was taken out. If it was done by the sunni to spite the shia they would have done a far more complete demolition. This job was quite surgical in nature.

[Paul_Denton]

Yes I know. And no neighboring structures were damages. Al Queda is never so surgical or precise. They do as much damage as they can. So all signs point to Iran.

[Marine_Uncle]

I basically concure after two days of argueing for possible ways zman might have pulled it off to make it look like a sunni sectarian job. All eyes are on Iran. And the questions folks continue to pose as to why if Sadr was in on it, he now is preaching peace, hugging and kissing his Sunni brothers on the cheek. I say. Sistani has had enough. Sistani wants nothing to do with the Iranian Mullahs. He pulled out years ago to be rid of them knowing they where a bunch of Godless sneaks. And he has finally put his foot down with the pup Sadr.

[bnelson44]

Sadr has gone against Sistani before

[bnelson44]

Sadr has gone against Sistani before

[Pistolshot]

If it's war he wants, let's show them what we mean by 'war'.

Time to say ..."Enough of negotiating with people who only want to kill us, time to defend ourselves."

It's us against radical Islam.

[Marine_Uncle]

Yes. He has. But Sistani has given much leeway. And when Sistani put his finger down after Sadr's stunts in Al Najaf, Al Hilla, Karbala etc., in 2004, Sadre returned to Sadr city, his milita was basically muzzled. And all their armed resistance stopped. The deal then went down to sort of just ignore the charges of murder the judge signed, and Sadr just sat around and sulked. At least that is my memory of the major confrontation. For a long time we did not even hear from Sadr. Remember how some of us would bring up where is the fat boy etc.. Then zmans nutzos went into the kill shia mode. After quite a few killings and bombings of Sadr folks, if you remember Sadr went ballistic and made the public statement he would find and tear zman into tiny pieces. Then as the constitutional drafting started, Sadr obviously again became quite vocal, and through in his to cents about how the constitution was a western thing etc., and apposed it, but then as he saw he was getting no where, joined the political process, supporting Hakim etc.. The as things moved along he got deeper into the political area where he obviously is now firmly planted. But he has behaved himself, in regards to inciting riots, sicing his milita on people type of stuff. In other words, been acting somewhat responsible and appearing to be representing his folks and the shia in general via. the political process.
That is why I think Sistani put his hand down and told Sadr to be carefull as to what he does. Play the politics if required but that is it.
Perhaps I am way off base.

[DoctorZIn]

They sent the message they wanted to send to the US.

If they continue to try to create a civil war then their threat would not be credible anylonger.

It is better for them to frighten the west.

They did that.

[wideminded]

Evidence is pointing to Iran being behind the bombing in Samarra

This title is misleading. None of the posted links appear to have anything to do with evidence. They are all just speculation and marginally related news items.