US to target anti-Iraq activity

BBC ^ | Thursday, 11 January 2007, 16:05 GMT | BBC Staff

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

US to target anti-Iraq activity

Rice says Iran and Syria should "end their destabilising behaviour"

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has warned that the US will take action against countries destabilising Iraq.

Her statement comes hours after US forces stormed an Iranian consulate in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil - prompting condemnation from Tehran.

In a major policy speech, President George W Bush said the US would take a tough stance towards Iran and Syria, whom he accused of destabilising Iraq.

Mr Bush also vowed to increase troop numbers in Iraq by more than 20,000.

Democratic Senator Joseph Biden, the chairman of the influential Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he thought Mr Bush's strategy was a "tragic mistake".

Consulate raid

US troops raided the Iranian consulate in Irbil at about 0300 (0100 GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to Kurdish media and senior local officials.

	Our troops will have a well-defined mission President George W Bush Bush speech at a glance Can new way forward work? Iraqis react to Bush speech

Five US helicopters were used to drop troops on the roof of the consulate building, according to an Iranian website close to the revolutionary guards.

Vehicles cordoned off the access roads while troops broke down the front door, arrested five men inside and confiscated computers and documents, it said.

Iranian television has said they had been transferred to US central command in Baghdad.

Iran's foreign ministry condemned the attack, and summoned the ambassadors of Iraq and Switzerland which represents American interests in the Iranian capital to protest against it.

'Vital region'

Ms Rice was speaking alongside new Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Peter Pace, to give details of the Bush administration's revamp of its Iraq policy.

The top US diplomat said Iran and Syria should "end their destabilising behaviour" in the region.

	This is a very risky strategy because it is really predicated on not what the US troops do, but on what the Iraqis do James Carafano Iraq Study Group military adviser Reaction to Bush speech Excerpts of Bush speech

"The United States will defend its interests and those of our friends and allies in this vital region," she added.

She also said she was ready to meet Iran's leadership if it suspended its enrichment of uranium and pursuit of nuclear weapons.

"I repeat an offer that I have made several times, today. If Iran suspends its uranium enrichment, which is an international demand and not just an American one, then the United States is prepared to reverse 27 years of policy and I will met with my Iranian counterpart any time, anywhere."

On Wednesday, Mr Bush said fresh troops in Iraq would help to secure Baghdad's streets as part of the new strategy.

On Thursday, Mr Gates said he would seek to increase US forces by 92,000 soldiers and marines over the next five years for the long-term fight against terrorism.

In a poll conducted the day after Mr Bush's announcement, six in 10 Americans said they opposed an increase of troops in Iraq, with a substantial section of people saying they doubted that it would end the war more quickly.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

See Major link to BBC site for working links....too many to fix in the body of the story....

[Uncle Miltie]

"The bombing will begin in 5 minutes!"

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Iran has been asking for it.

[marvlus]

I hope this represents the beginning of the end of meddling from Iran and Syria. I endorse this tough stance, regardless of what Biden says!

[Ron2]

Nothing is going to end this thing until the military's orders are changed. During WWII, if our military saw the enemy, the shot them. Today, from what we hear, our military can't shoot unless they are shot at. This is crazy. They need to be able to put the fear of God, if I'm allowed to say that, into those people. We need another Patton, Bull Halsey, McCarthur, etc over there. I didn't like the speach our President gave last night. He sounded like a whipped pup. He should have come across like Roosevelt, hard and to the point.

Now....Democrats want to pull out, but they haven't stated what they would do if things went to hell in a hand basket after our pull out. We need to know what they would do before we pull out. We also need to rebuild our military numbers.....if that means a draft....so be it. We will be in a war with Iran, count on it.....it's just a matter of time and we can't let our troops go there without big numbers behind them. Unless we hit Iran strictly from the air.

[Vigilanteman]

I'm with you. More troops make no sense unless the rules of engagement are changed. Our military needs to be unleashed like they were in the initial invasion. If they are, then I can support more troops.

The military unit commanders also need to be given authority to dismiss any "embedded reporter" who is acting as propogandist for the enemy. Right in the middle of the desert if necessary.

[marshmallow]

The country which has done most to "destablize" Iraq is the USA with this crazy invasion. Whatever else Iraq was under Hussein, it was stable.

Now we're threatening Iran and Syria and sending more troops?

This is getting way out of control for a conflict which was supposedly "over" in 2003. Bush is a man of poor judgment. Invasion was a bad call and now he's going from bad to worse. So much for Jim Baker's recommendations.

I'd be hanging out for 2008 except that the leadership alternatives on offer then are likely to be even worse. We're in a mess.

[steel_resolve]

You should be ashamed of your position. Iraq was stable? Iraq was a countrywide gulag where the most unspeakable atrocities were committed. And seeing how hussein was trying to reconstitute his wmd's, how long do you think it was going to stay stable? Go back to the dummie board dummie.

[penelopesire]

"US to target anti-Iraq activity"

let's hope they start at the DNC....lol

[KeyLargo]

Poll to freep

Did Bush's speech last night convince you it is essential to send more troops to Iraq?
Choice Votes Percentage of 33 Votes
Yes 7 21%
No 26 79%
Thanks for sharing your opinion -- check back here for results later, or check them by watching NBC5's 6 p.m. news.

http://www.nbc5.com/index.html

Scroll down right side of page.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Basics here:

[penelopesire]

LOL...

[wildbill]

You have a wonderfully descriptive alias.

[Darnright]

Iran has been asking for it.

And this is probably a good time to give them a reply.

[canadianally]

Well, the best way to unite Iraqi Shia and Sunni is to whip up their rage against the Persians. Hell, even the harcore "insurgents" prolly hate the Persians more than the Americans. This is excellent on so many levels.

I should note that it was the illegal actions of Iran against the US Embassy in 1979 that started my love affair with current events. In essence, I became a news junkie at age 13. I was restricted to ABC World News with an aerial antenna. When I was 14 I used my savings to buy a shortwave and the rest is history. By the time I was 17 I had a working knowledge of Russian and German. And a deep-rooted hatred of communists and mullahs!

[IrishMike]

Do you think President George W. Bush should increase the number of U.S. troops fighting in Iraq?
Choice Votes Percentage of 15631 Votes
Yes 7629 49%
No 7543 48%
It doesn't matter 459 3%
Thank you for participating.

[Kimberly GG]

"The bombing will begin in 5 minutes!"

"In a major policy speech, President George W Bush said the US would take a tough stance towards Iran and Syria, whom he accused of destabilising Iraq."

As one senator just explained on Fox...all he took Bush to mean was that a better job will be done with Iraq to secure it's borders. Now imagine that. Secure IRAQ'S borders.

[KeyLargo]

It's looking better. But, if the results turn out favorable for anything GW does NBC Chicago TV may not announce the results on tonights' broadcast.

[juliej]

Marshamallo, the countries that have destabilized Iraq are SYRIA AND IRAN! get that straight. We must go after them - we can do it over there or in front of your house.

[marshmallow]

Section I (Fundamental Principles)

Article 2

Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation . . . No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.

Any idea where that statement comes from?

I'll give you a clue.

It's the Constitution of a country in the Middle East. The country's name begins with "I"

Hands up those who said "Iran".

Wrong.

It's Iraq.

This is what Americans are dying for. A country which is an Islamic Republic. A country where Christians are being progressively persecuted, killed and forced to flee the country in increasing numbers while Islam is strengthened and codified in the Constitution.

From where I sit, the man Hussein was not the enemy. The enemy is a creed, a belief system; Islam and the Bush Administration has given the thumbs up to a Constitution which gives ever more support and solace to it, while Christians suffer.

Sorry, I'm not on board with Bush's fiasco.