Tagged: Middle East Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Masoud Dalvand 8:24 pm on 22 Feb 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , Middle East, , ,   

    Iranian Expansionism Destroying the Middle East 

    The aggressive expansionism of the Iranian Regime has caused violence and divisions across the Middle East, while their efforts to create regional proxy militias are worsening the situation in three already unstable countries: Syria, Yemen, and Iraq.

    It is well known that there are numerous Iran-backed Shiite militia groups fighting in Syria for the Assad regime, but some of these groups, like the Hashd Shaabi or Popular Mobilization Forces, are also working in Iraq to hamper peace and stability.

    In December, five Christian protesters were shot and injured by members of the Hashd al-Shaabi militia in Bartala, northern Iraq, while protesting as part of a larger group about assaults on Christians by the Shia militia.

    Captain Agathon Saleh said: “Many Christians are angry with practices of the Hashd al-Shaabi militia and consider them a continuation of violations committed by the Daesh terrorist group.”

    In Yemen, Shiite Houthi militia routinely attacks Yemeni government forces and civilians.

    Just last week, the Iran-backed Houthis kidnapped 300 people, mainly the elderly and children, in the town of Adeen. As it came so soon after the death of Houthi commander Abu Abdulrahman Al-Alwi, it is thought that this may have been retaliation.

    Yemen’s civil war began in 2014, when the Houthis took over the capital Sanaa and many other cities, forcing the internationally recognized government to flee to Saudi Arabia.

    However, it is in Syria where people have been most affected by Iran’s destabilization campaign as Iran-backed militias attack civilians and moderate opposition groups.

    Roughly 18,000 Shiite militiamen are said to fighting in Syria for the Bashar Assad regime, in a civil war that began in 2011 and many of them were recruited by the Iranian Regime or one of its proxies. This includes:

    • 10,000 Hezbollah fighters, who Iran deployed there from Lebanon

    • 5,000 fighters from Iraq’s Shiite areas, like Baghdad, Najaf, and Basra

    • 2,000 fighters from the Afghan Fatimiyun Brigade, who fight in the south of Aleppo, Damascus and Daraa

    • 500 fighters from the Pakistani Zaynabiyyun Brigades, who are fighting in the north of Aleppo

    On top of this, the Assad regime is using Iran-backed militia groups (or shabiha) to bolster its forces against the Syrian opposition. The 24,000-strong shabiha has been blamed for the killing of many anti-Assad protesters.

    The shabiha, believe to be funded by regime supporters including Assad’s cousin Rami Makhlouf, began to replace soldiers that deserted the Syrian army during the first year of the civil war, and their numbers increased dramatically as the Assad regime started losing power.

    Advertisements
     
  • Masoud Dalvand 4:17 pm on 16 Feb 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Middle East, ,   

    How The World Views Iran’s Role In Syria 

    By Heshmat Alavi

    As protests across Iran experience a variety of ups and downs following a major surge early this year, a wide array of analysts are seen writing about this important country’s domestic and foreign developments.

    More recently, concerns for Tehran are also increasing abroad as its international isolation begins to take its toll.

    To stand alongside the Iranian people, the international community must raise the cost of Tehran’s belligerence.

    In a piece some time ago I discussed How Iran Is Losing Europe, especially taking into consideration the distancing of France from Iran and President Emmanuelle Macron’s improving relations with the United States.

    Considering the fact that Iran’s economy is in desperate need of business ties with large French firms, such developments have become increasingly concerning for the Iranian regime’s ruling elite.

    President Macron recently threatened military action against the Assad regime in Syria, widely known to be remaining in power thanks to the support of Iran and Russia.

    “France will strike” if the Syrian conflict witnesses the use of chemical weapons against civilians, being in violation of international treaties, according to Reuters.

    “On chemical weapons, I set a red line and I reaffirm that red line,” Macron added. “If we have proven evidence that chemical weapons proscribed in treaties are used, we will strike the place where they are made.”

    Last May Macron emphasized chemical weapons use would represent a “red line” crossing. Updating his position, Macron took advantage of last Friday’s telephone call with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin to weigh in grave concern over signs of chlorine bomb usage against civilians in Syria.

    In recent weeks, rescue workers and aid groups in Syria, and the U.S. government, have been accusing Damascus of repeatedly deploying chlorine gas as a chemical weapon against civilians in Ghouta and Idlib.

    This highly dangerous chemical substance, which Syria claims to possess legally for purposes such as water purification, can be lethal when used as a weapon and causes suffocation.

    The “Syrians for Truth and Justice” organization is reporting how missiles carrying poisonous gasses targeting Ghouta belonged to Iran:

    “According to Bellingcat, the munitions used in the February 1 attack are Improvised Rocket Assisted Munitions (IRAMs), based on modified Iranian 107mm rockets. The standard warhead has been replaced with a large pressurized gas cylinder, and tail fins have been added to the rocket.”

    Such developments go alongside further troubles brewing for Iran, emanating from strong remarks by other senior U.S. officials and figures.

    Daniel R. Coats, Director of National Intelligence at a Senate Select Intelligence Committee hearing on Tuesday:

    “Iran remains the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism, providing financial aid, advanced weapons and tactics, and direction to militant and terrorist groups across the Middle East and cultivating a network of operatives across the globe as a contingency to enable potential terrorist attacks.”

    In yet another reminder of Iran’s troubles regarding the controversial nuclear deal, known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton emphasized in a FOX News TV interview of only three months remaining to U.S. President Donald Trump’s deadline regarding a decision over the accord’s future.

    Promises were made Tehran would join the community of civilized nations as a result of this deal. The result, however, has been anything but.

    U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson on Wednesday renewed his government’s call on Iran to withdraw from Syria, accusing Tehran of destabilizing the Middle East through military presence.

    “Iran needs to withdraw its military, its militia from Syria, and allow a hope for the peace process to take hold in Geneva,” Tillerson emphasized at a news conference in Amman, the capital of Jordan.

    As argued extensively in the past, an interesting insight is now provided into how Washington can impose meaningful pressure on Tehran at a time when protesters are chanting for Iran’s regime to “Let go of Syria, think about us.”

    New York Post article reads in part:

    “Now is the time for Trump to re-establish a robust military deterrent toward Iranian expansionism in close collaboration with regional allies. His administration declared the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist entity in October, and he should target key Guards’ bases and weapons in Syria accordingly. Such an approach could help prevent a larger-scale conflict.”

    Iran understands how more money pumped abroad will flame their already crisis-riddled political status quo back home.

    Washington may particularly be focusing on also closing Iran’s “land bridge,” connecting Tehran to Damascus to easily influence the entire region and connect to the Mediterranean.

    Iran’s regime is very vulnerable following the recent uprising. Public unrest and the protesters’ demands for fundamental change are Tehran’s Achilles’ heel.

    Identifying and supporting the very element that can realize this change is crucial.

     

    via How The World Views Iran’s Role In Syria — Iran Commentary

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 8:45 pm on 13 Feb 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , Middle East, ,   

    How the Iranian Regime Is Waging a Proxy War in the Middle East 

    Slide4

    NCRI: The Iranian Regime has been merging its proxy groups across the Middle East with existing local defence forces in various countries, which become a part of that country’s army.

    This is evidenced in an April 2017 memo from the Syrian armed forces, which stated that the defense forces would replace the Iranian proxies eventually. This may lead you to believe that Iran is removing itself from the Syrian conflict, but this is simply untrue.

    They are removing their proxies to go to other places in the Middle East, but once the ideology has been spread, the local defense groups will become Iranian proxies themselves and can become far more influential if everybody thinks that the Iranian Regime is not involved.

    This tactic has been used by the Iranian Regime already in Iraq with the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) and Lebanon with Hezbollah, two groups that are now immensely in their respective countries and its political system. The Iranian Regime has deployed the PMF and Hezbollah to Syria and other areas of conflict and even used them to train terrorists.

    The groups are even known to work together, as a video of Qais al-Khazali, the leader of PMF affiliate Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, at the Lebanese-Israeli border in December shows. In the video, Khazali states that he is there with Hezbollah to oppose Israel.

     

    This move doesn’t reduce the number of Iranian proxies involved in conflicts across the Middle East, but increases them. There are then more pro-Iran regional militias to help create Iran’s dream of a Shiite Crescent across the Middle East, which would make it easier to create more proxies by supporting more local defense forces.

    Through the Shiite Crescent, the Iranian proxies could spread across Europe and eventually across the world if they aren’t stopped.

    The Regime’s overall goal in creating more proxies is to export the Iranian Islamic ideology across the region and eventually the world, just as it already has done in Iraq and Lebanon.

    Iran regime's millitias

    Iran regime’s militias 

    Ahmed, a Hezbollah member, said that there are also Hezbollah factions in Syria and Iraq, which share the same ideology and regional goals.

    He said: “All of these factions in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon will fight side by side with each other in the next war.”

    That is a very worrying prospect for anyone concerned about Iranian aggression and expansionism, national sovereignty, peace in the Middle East, and extremist Islamic ideology.

    This is another reason that the Iranian Regime should not be allowed to reach its 40th anniversary in 2019

     

     

     

     

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:35 am on 24 Jan 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Middle East   

    Iran Regime Is a Threat to Us All 

    Iran threat

    Houthis Terrorists supported by the Iranian regime

    NCRI – The Iranian Regime was founded on the principal of exporting their revolution- including their widely discredited interpretation of Islam- to the rest of the world. They have never given up on this idea and continue to pursue world domination through the use of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and proxy militias to fight for them.

    The Iran- sponsored Houthi militia in Yemen sought to overthrow the internationally recognised government, and replace them with former president Ali Abdullah Saleh. The Houthis captured the capital of Sana’a, and the Iranian Regime rejoiced at controlling another capital in the Middle East, but faced opposition from a Saudi-coalition, which stepped up the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

    Bruce Riedel, director of the Intelligence Project at the Brookings Institution, stated: “Iran is gradually increasing its support for the Houthi rebels in Yemen. Rather than eliminating the Iranian presence in the country, the Saudi-led war is giving Tehran the opportunity to become more influential there than ever. The Houthis … will need Tehran’s backing more as the stalemate continues … A war designed to weaken Iran is actually helping it against its regional rival.”

    In November, the Houthis attempted to fire a ballistic missile towards Riyadh International Airport in November, which was the first missile to be aimed at such a densely-populated area.

    The Iranian-made missile was thankfully destroyed in flight by Saudi forces before it could do any damage, but it is clear that the Iranian Regime at the very least supplied the missile and quite possibly order the attack. It is believed that the missile was disassembled, smuggled into Yemen, and reassembled by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its Lebanese-based proxy Hezbollah.

    The US considers this attack as evidence that Iran has violated two United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions on the Yemen crisis and Iran’s missile program.

    The Houthis have since followed this up another attempted missile attack on Riyadh in December, but this was once again thwarted by the Saudis. However, the Iran-backed Houthi warned that these attacks mark a new chapter, because now Saudi palaces, military bases, and oil facilities, are within missile range.

    Iran’s use of proxies is widespread in the Middle East. Iran armed Shiite militants in Bahrain as part of an effort to bring the country back under Iran’s control- despite Bahrain gaining independence nine years before the Regime took power- and in November, the militants created an explosion on a major oil pipeline in Bahrain to slow the supply of oil to Saudi Arabia.

    With the help of their proxies, Iran does not need to get their hands dirty and have widely escaped the consequences of their actions.

    When the US threatened sanctions against Iran for noncompliance with the nuclear deal (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA), IRGC Major General Mohammed Ali Jafari threatened to launch ballistic missiles on any US military base within 1,200 miles (the range of their ballistic missiles). Ironically, Iran’s use of ballistic missiles is one of the things that Donald Trump sees as a violation of the JCPOA.

    Following those comments, US Representative Ron DeSantis responded: “Iran’s behaviour… has only seemed to get worse. … The present course is untenable and Iran’s threatening behaviour is likely to increase in frequency.”

    In 1983, Iran attacked a US Marines barracks in Lebanon and killed 241 American service members using its terrorist proxy Hezbollah. There is no reason to suspect that they would not do so again.

    Iran also threatened France after various French politicians raised concerns about the Iranian missile program, Iranian expansionism, and called for a political dialogue on the subjects.

    IRGC Brigadier General Hossein Salami said: “If Europe wants to turn into a threat, we will increase the range of our missiles… we have no limitations for the range of our missiles in technological terms.”

    Anthony Chibarirwe wrote on The Trumpet: “These [European leaders were] exercising caution even in their efforts to preserve the JCPOA nuclear deal with Iran. But they aren’t doing so because they trust Iran or because they want it to go nuclear; they are doing so because they distrust and fear this belligerent Iran so much that they choose appeasement rather than confrontation. But their idealist school of thought will not solve the problem.”

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 10:03 pm on 27 Dec 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Middle East, , ,   

    VIDEO: One way to counter Iran’s aggression? Change the map of the Middle East 

    The current political structure of the Middle East serves Iran’s interests

    The current political structure of the Middle East serves Iran’s interests

    Fox News, Dec. 25, 2017 – Iran’s geopolitical ascent is the most significant and dangerous development in the Middle East this century. But while the Trump administration’s new National Security Strategy properly identifies Iran as among the important challenges to U.S. security interests, it doesn’t offer a concrete strategy on how to counter Iran’s growing regional power.

    President Trump should follow the example of President Reagan, who pursued an offensive strategy to undermine the Soviet Union that included supporting indigenous anti-communist insurgents around the globe. Today, America should support indigenous forces that oppose – and seek independence from – Iranian domination.
    Reversing the strategic threat posed by Iran will require a continued U.S. military presence and military aid to local forces in Syria and Iraq. It will also require greater support for our regional allies, such as Israel and Jordan, which must contain the provocative actions of Iran and its proxies. But this defensive posture will not suffice even to contain Iran, let alone transform its trajectory.
    The United States also needs to recognize Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen for what they are: failed, artificial constructs now dominated by Iran. Iran has taken advantage of ISIS’ crumbling caliphate to increasingly consolidate control over these four nations.

     

    The current political structure of the Middle East serves Iran’s interests, and it’s time to upend it.

    Maintaining Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen in their existing forms is unnatural and serves Iran’s interests. There is nothing sacred about these countries’ borders, which seem to have been drawn by a drunk and blindfolded mapmaker. Indeed, in totally disregarding these borders, ISIS and Iran both have already demonstrated the anachronism and irrelevance of the borders.
    Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen are not nation-states as Americans understand them, but rather post-World War I artificial constructs, mostly created out of the ashes of the Ottoman Empire in a colossally failed experiment by international leaders.
    With their deep ethno-sectarian fissures, these four countries have either been held together by a strong authoritarian hand or suffered sectarian carnage.
    Indeed, the principal vulnerability of Iran’s regional strategy is its dependence on brutal regimes to rule lands riven by ethno-sectarian fissures. The United States should exploit this vulnerability by supporting those forces in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen that oppose Iran’s domination and seek greater self-determination or independence from their own capitals.
    The result could be transforming these failed states into loose confederations or new countries with more borders that more naturally conform along sectarian lines.
    Any redrawing of political relationships or borders is highly complex, and the United States cannot dictate the outcomes. But we can influence them. We would need to deeply examine each country for its unique qualities and histories, and consult closely our regional allies before deciding upon a policy.
    Here are some examples of policy conclusions that the U.S. government might draw:
    ·         We might cease supplying arms to Iraq and declare our support and strong military aid for an eventual Iraqi Kurdish state, once its warring factions unify and improve governance. We could support a federation for the rest of Iraq.
    ·         For Syria, we could seek a more ethnically coherent loose confederation or separate states that might balance each other – the Iranian-dominated Alawites along the coast, the Kurds in the northeast, and the Sunni Arabs in the heartland. We could also demonstrate we are not anti-Shia Muslim by improving relations with Azerbaijan, a secular Shia country bordering Iran that seeks a closer relationship with the United States.
    An added potential benefit of this approach could be a fomenting of tensions within Iran, which has sizable Kurdish and Azeri populations, thereby weakening the radical regime in Tehran.
    Some might argue this approach impractical, destabilizing and offers Iran new opportunities.
    Perhaps, but the region’s current trajectory is more dangerous. The burden is on the United States to adapt its policy to the dissolving of borders and responding to Iran’s aggression.
    Iran is not a status quo power content to consolidate its winnings; its emboldened radical regime is intended to dominate the region and destroy Israel. An Iranian-Israeli conflict looms ever closer as Iran establishes bases and missile factories in Syria, posing a second front in Israel’s north.
    In addition, Americans must concentrate on Iran’s continued development of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles that could eventually reach the U.S. homeland.
    Artificial states have been divided or loosened before with some success, such as the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia, which are all post-WWI formations. Bosnia and Herzegovina have also managed as a confederation.
    President Trump should take the offensive to Iran. The current political structure of the Middle East serves Iran’s interests, and it’s time to upend it.

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:08 pm on 25 Dec 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Middle East,   

    Mullahs’ Regime in Crises Explosive Situation in Iran & Meddling in other Countries 

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 11:25 am on 29 Nov 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Crown prince of Saudi Arabia, , Middle East, New Hitler,   

    Iran Regime’s Khamenei Is Modern Hitler 

    New Hitler

    NCRI Staff

    NCRI – No one should use the term ‘modern-day Hitler’ lightly. Hitler was responsible for one of the worst genocides in the 20th century and when most people compare modern politicians to him, they are trivialising that.

    However, there is one leader to whom that comparison applies without a shadow of a doubt: Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran.

    In a recent New York Times interview, Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammad bin Salman not only called the Iranian regime’s top mullah, “the new Hitler of the Middle East” but also warned that, as we saw from former British PM Neville Chamberlain, “appeasement doesn’t work”.

    Prince Mohammad noted that the last thing anyone wants is for Iran to repeat the actions of Nazi Germany across the Middle East.

    The problem is that the Iranian Regime is already repeating history, as many Iranian dissidents, human rights groups, and families of political prisoners have long reported.

    Prince Mohammad comparison of Khamenei to Hitler is not extreme, it’s not shocking, and the most newsworthy thing about it is that some people fail to see the similarities.

    • Dictator hell bent on controlling the world even if it means ruining their country in the meantime? Check.

    • Oppressing and imprisoning religious and ethnic minorities? In Shiite Iran, minorities such as the Baha’i, Kurds, Christians and Sunnis are routinely oppressed.

    • Secret Police to enforce security at home and abroad? This would be the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and its paramilitary branch, the Quds Force

    • Taking control of other nation states under the pretext of fighting a foreign enemy? For Khamenei, it is the proxy control of Yemen and Syria in order to expel ISIS.

    • Taking control of all news media and turning it into propaganda? Since President Rouhani came to power hundreds of journalists have been imprisoned, tortured and even executed.

    • Able to gain appeasement from the West through a maligned deal aimed at curbing their ability to wage war? This would be the 2015 Iran nuclear deal

    It is now time to confront the mullahs for their destabilizing behaviour, especially now that Iran had threatened to launch ballistic missiles against Europe after receiving criticism from the French President Emmanuel Macron.

    Laura Carnahan wrote: “The irony of Iran’s actions to Hitler’s speeches to blaming its enemies for driving Germany into the ground in the aftermath of World War I is striking and serves as a reminder that repeating the mistakes of the 1930s today will only lead down a path of regional conflict and even more suffering for the Iranian people.”

     
  • Masoud Dalvand 9:25 pm on 20 Nov 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Arab Community, , , , Middle East,   

    Welcoming Positions of Arab Community Against Clerical Regime and Calling for Effective and Feasible Action 

    Iranian Resistance welcomes the decisions adopted by the extraordinary summit of the foreign ministers of Arab States, such as condemnation of the mullahs’ regime for “its continued involvement in Arab affairs which feeds sectarian and religious strife” and “support for terrorism and terrorist groups in Arab States with advanced weapons and ballistic missiles,” and the referral to the United Nations Security Council for “violations of Resolution No. 2231 on the development of the ballistic missile program” and “violations of the Resolution (2216)” with regard to Yemen….and considers it as a necessary step to confront the policy of exporting fundamentalism and terrorism of the mullahs regime ruling Iran that must be completed with a series of practical measures.

    The clerical regime is in extreme need of export of terrorism, war and extremism for its survival. Since three decades ago, the Iranian Resistance has emphasized the need to confront this regime as the greatest enemy of peace and tranquility in the region and the world. Failure to pay attention to this threat and negotiation and appeasement has allowed the regime to expand the unprecedented wave of terrorism and war and massacres to regional countries from Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine to Yemen, Bahrain and Afghanistan, and even beyond the region.

    Some of the necessary measures to complete the positions of Arab foreign ministers, as well as the decisions of the Riyadh Conference (April 2017) and the Islamic Cooperation Organization Summit in Istanbul (April 2016) are as follows:

    1. The expulsion of the mullahs regime from the Islamic Cooperation Conference and all regional institutions and organs, and awarding Iran’s seats to the National Council of Resistance of Iran as the only democratic alternative to the religious and terrorist dictatorship ruling Iran;

    2. Complete termination of economic and diplomatic relations of Arab and Islamic countries with the Iranian regime;

    3. Adoption of necessary regional and international measures to expel the Revolutionary Guards and its mercenary militias from the countries of the region, in particular, Iraq, Syria and Yemen, and to prevent the Iranian regime and its militias from sending troops and weapons to the above countries in pursuance of Security Council Resolutions 2216 and 2231;

    4. Providing comprehensive political, financial, military and weapons support to the Syrian democratic opposition, and banning any Iranian regime’s interference in the negotiations on Syrian crisis;

    5. Putting the IRGC in the terrorist lists, and complete prohibiting of dealings with its affiliated companies;

    6. Condemning the mullahs regime’s crimes against the Iranian people, in particular the execution of 120,000 political prisoners, including the massacre of 30,000 prisoners in 1988, and supporting the people’s will to overthrow this anti-human regime;

    Terrorism and extremism in its present form has emerged in this region since the reign of mullahs, and these destructive and deadly policies will end only with the overthrow of this regime. This is a matter within reach because of the hatred and disgust of the whole people against this regime and the presence of a national opposition and a powerful and organized alternative.

    National Council of Resistance of Iran – Foreign Affairs Committee
    November 20, 2017

     
    • bluemoone 11:33 pm on 20 Nov 2017 Permalink

      That’s a well-thoughtout plan but I do have a few questions regarding some of the points. At the top of the list is the part about the terror list. It’s a bold move, but I fear that the people might get caught in that net. You’ve seen the clumsy, bigoted way that our government tried to ban certain countries under that guise. I can understand having sanctions on the government but it would be good to not have the people suffer more than they already have in doing so. I don’t know if there is a way to accomplish that. The other was the abandonment of diplomacy. I think that still may play a part is giving support to the resistance. What about the UN bringing charges against the regime? Can that be done? Also, does the Arab states you mention include Saudi Arabia? I only ask because they have gotten ill-concieved assistance from the US and does appear to be in favor of terroristic actions, as does the US. The US interference in the government of other countries has never worked out favorably for its people largely due to our government’s motivations of greed and not the bettering of humanity. I don’t want our government to make things worse than they already have and that is very likely. I would like to ask any country considering such bold moves to be strategic in their actions and make it a priority that whatever they do, that they design their actions to support the people of Iran and minimize or eliminate the blowback on them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • eliza rudolf 6:01 am on 22 Nov 2017 Permalink

      Great 😊

      Liked by 1 person

    • Masoud Dalvand 10:36 am on 22 Nov 2017 Permalink

      Thanks Eliza.

      Like

    • Masoud Dalvand 11:06 am on 22 Nov 2017 Permalink

      Thank you for the comments you have written to me. While agreeing with the concerns you raised, I must first recall a historical record of these actions. It is more than 38 that the United States, in spite of some apparent and small measures, has essentially prevented the fall of the regime’s dictatorship from ruling Iran overwhelmingly by its appeasement policy. Do you know that the United States, with its foolish attack on Iraq, has been giving it in a golden tray to the Iranian clerics and Quds terrorists? In contrast, more than 15 years , the legitimate and fair resistance of the Iranian people was placed on terrorist lists. Of course, the politics of the countries of the Middle East, Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries have also been affected by this policy by the United States and Europe, with the dictatorship of this regime. Therefore, as a result of this policy, the appeasement of the United States and Europe and the Arab countries, the party that has benefited most, is only the criminals and terrorists ruling Iran. The party that has seen the most damage is only Iranian people and their free and legitimate resistance. If the Arab countries are awake today, it is because of the fears that they have created in their hearts as a result of the advance of the Iranian regime and the terrorist forces. Iraq and many parts of Syria and Yemen are in control of Quds terrorist forces and their mercenaries. They want to occupy Saudi Arabia. Lebanon is under the control of the terrorist group Hezbollah, the mercenary of Iran. They want to occupy Saudi Arabia. Lebanon is under the control of the terrorist group Hezbollah, the mercenary of Iran. Well, you see that the Arab community and the US government have not yet done anything against this regime. Their threat is not at all a war with this regime. If the United States and Europe and Arab countries listened to the Iranian resistance 30 years ago, they would not have supported the regime. Now, absolutely, the Iranian resistance is not calling for sanctions that harm the Iranian people. Iran’s economy and oil are under the control of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). They use oil money to build a ballistic missile and a nuclear program to threaten the world, such as North Korea. They also export their fundamentalist religious ideology and terrorism to scare of the region countries and U.S. and EU , and the United States. It must cut off the vital arteries of the terrorists and criminals ruling Iran. I do not think these countries are so serious and determined. The only way to uprising the Iranian people and overthrow this regime is through the Iranian resistance and the establishment of freedom, human rights and sustainable democracy in Iran.
      Hope I could explain and answer to questions, thanks again dear Danelle. Good luck.

      Like

    • bluemoone 2:00 am on 23 Nov 2017 Permalink

      No, what you’ve said supports my concerns even more. I agree that all countries, especially the US, needs to stop supporting criminals and needs to help, not hurt the Iranian people as well as the people of other countries that they have wronged; Honduras, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, India. I’m sure there’s more. It will only come to be if we get the criminals out of our government. That’s something that the American people have been waking up to, that nothing will change for the better until they are gone. I’m in full support of our government providing whatever assistance and backing the Iranian people need, as long as they are actually helping. They have had a long history of only helping themselves but part of that is our fault too for not doing more to stop them.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Masoud Dalvand 7:52 am on 23 Nov 2017 Permalink

      Thank you Danielle for your opinions, you have a high level human feelings and this is what I impressed by you always. Thanks again. Good luck.

      Like

    • bluemoone 8:20 am on 23 Nov 2017 Permalink

      Thank you Masoud. You are equally impressive.

      Liked by 1 person

  • Masoud Dalvand 10:14 pm on 30 Oct 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Middle East,   

    Secrets of the 1983 Beirut Bombings: The role of Iran’s IRGC 

    The 1983 double bombing in Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, left 241 American service members, 58 French military personnel and six civilians killed. (Supplied)
    The 1983 double bombing in Beirut, the capital of Lebanon, left 241 American service members, 58 French military personnel and six civilians killed, alongside hundreds of others injured.
    21 years later in 2004 Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) unveiled a “monument” in “honor” of that terrorist attack.
    This “memorial” column, installed in a section dubbed “Martyrs of the Islamic World” in Tehran’s Behesht-e Zahra Cemetery, carried a very vivid message: Iran’s IRGC was behind the 1983 blast targeting the peacekeeping force in Beirut.
    34 years have passed since that attack and today the IRGC has been designated a terrorist organization by the US Treasury Department. Such a measure deserves praise, yet is long overdue.
    On October 23 of that year a suicide bomber drove a water tanker into the US Marines barracks and detonated around 1,000 kilograms of explosives (equal to 15,000 to 21,000 pounds of TNT), transferred with large trucks into buildings where the Multi-National Forces in Lebanon were stationed.
    The United Nations was involved in a broader peacekeeping mission to bring an end to the Lebanese civil wars. The Islamic Jihad, an Iranian offspring terrorist group, claimed responsibility for the attacks.

    BACKGROUND

    In line with its pillar policy of exporting terrorism and warmongering across the Middle East, one of Iran’s first objectives was to launch a central command base for the IRGC and its local mercenaries in Lebanon. These elements were initially dispersed in towns and villages of the Baalbek area in eastern Lebanon near the border Jordan.
    In 1980, coinciding with Tehran paving the grounds to ignite the Iran-Iraq War, then Iranian regime leader Ayatollah Khomeini dispatched former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaee to Lebanon to blueprint possible terrorist attacks and hostage taking measures in this country, considered Iran’s “strategic depth.”

    (R-L) Mohsen Rezaee, Anis al-Naqqash, Mohamed Salih al-Hosseini and Mohsen Rafighdoust – Beirut, 1980. (Supplied)
    On September 10, 2003, Iran’s state-run Mashreq daily published a photo imaging Rezaee, former IRGC logistics officer Mohsen Rafighdoust, former IRGC foreign relations officer Mohammad Saleh al-Hosseini and Lebanese terrorist Anis al-Naqqash, said to be behind the first assassination attempt targeting former Iranian Prime Minister Shapour Bakhtiar in 1980.
    With support provided by the IRGC and under the command of former defense minister Hossein Dehghan, the Lebanese Hezbollah took over the Sheikh Abdullah Base in early September 1983. This site was the main center of the Lebanese Army in Bekaa Valley, and was later renamed Imam and transformed to become the IRGC’s main command center in Lebanon.
    From this very site the IRGC controlled Hezbollah militia units and directed the Beirut bombings alongside senior Hezbollah commanders, most specifically the known terrorist Imad Mughniyah.
    The orders for the Beirut bombings were first issued by the IRGC to Ali Akbar Mohtashemipour, Iran’s then ambassador to Syria. He then relayed the orders to IRGC units stationed in Beirut under Dehghan’s command.
    The Islamic Jihad organization was in fact a special ops branch. Until its final days in 1992 this entity was jointly commanded by the Lebanese Hezbollah and IRGC.
    Following the Beirut bombings France began aerial attacks in the Bekaa Valley targeting IRGC-linked bases. The US responded to these terrorist attacks by planning raids on the Sheikh Abdullah Base where the IRGC was training Hezbollah militias.
    On July 20th, 1987, Iran’s Resalat daily wrote the Beirut bombings citing Rafiqdoust, “… both the TNT and ideology behind the attacks that sent 400 American officers and soldiers to hell in the U.S. Marines command base in Beirut came from Iran.”

    34 years have passed since that attack and today the IRGC has been designated a terrorist organization by the US Treasury Department. (Supplied)
    On August 14th, 2005, World Net Daily wrote in this regard: “…Two years ago, a US federal court order identified the suicide bomber as Ismail Ascari, an Iranian national.”

    TEHRAN EXPRESSING JOY

    There should be no feeling of positivity in response to terrorist attacks, no matter where in the world. Terrorism is terrorism.
    Yet the Iranian regime follows no such standards.
    The state-run Rasekhoon website posted a piece literally praising the Beirut double attack.
    “…Two massive explosions, six minutes apart, levelled the US Marines command center and the interventionist French forces command base … The heroic reaction… against US and French bases in Beirut delivered a heavy blow to Western powers and forced them to leave Lebanon in a humiliating manner.”

    THE LEGAL WAR

    “A US federal judge has ordered Iran to pay more than $813 million in damages and interest to the families of 241 US soldiers killed in the 1983 bombing of a Marine barracks in Lebanon,” according to Agence France-Presse.
    “After this opinion, this court will have issued over $8.8 billion in judgments against Iran as a result of the 1983 Beirut bombing,” Judge Royce Lamberth, presiding over this case, wrote in the ruling.
    In late April of last year Iran’s state-run Javan daily, said to be affiliated to the IRGC, wrote:
    “In 2003 relatives of the US Marines killed in Lebanon’s terrorist bombings 30 years ago, successfully gained the opinion of a U.S. appeals court to receive compensation from Iran. Four years later, in 2007, a U.S. federal court issued an order demanding this payment be extracted from Iran’s frozen assets.”
    In September 2013 a US federal court in New York presided by Judge Katherine Forrest ruled in favor of the families of the Beirut bombings victims.
    In July 2014 an appeals court in New York turned down a request filed by Iran’s Central Bank and ordered $1.75 billion in compensation from Tehran’s frozen assets be distributed amongst the victims’ families. This ruling was issued by a three-judge panel of the 2nd branch of New York’s federal appeals court.
    That same year Iran’s Central Bank filed for an appeal, arguing this ruling is in violation of US’ obligation according to accords signed back in 1955. With their notion turned down, Iran’s Central Bank referred the case to the US Supreme Court.
    On April 20th, 2016, America’s highest court ordered $2 billion dollars from Iran’s blocked assets to be extracted and used to pay the families of the Beirut bombings victims. Enjoying 6 votes in favor in the face of two against, this order was adopted despite Iran’s Central Bank request for an appeal.

    THE STATUS QUO

    For more than thirty years the curtains have gradually fallen and the true face of Iran’s IRGC, as a source of support for terrorism, has become crystal clear. Rest assured the footprints of this notorious entity will be found in more crimes inside Iran, around the Middle East and across the globe.
    This is further proof of the necessity of strong measures against the IRGC as the epicenter of Iran’s war machine.
    Utter belligerence has been Tehran’s offspring for four long decades. The time has come to say enough is enough.
    The victims of the 1983 Beirut double bombings, and literally the millions of others who have perished due to Iran’s policies, should know their blood was not shed in vein.
     
  • Masoud Dalvand 6:11 am on 15 Aug 2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Middle East, , ,   

    As North Korea Defies U.S., Iran Sees Opportunity 

    Liked by 1 person

    The Media Express

    For those who are following the latest in the U.S.-North Korea saga, it is clear that the U.S. has its attention fully focused on this Korean dictatorship. Reports have also surfaced that North Korea has mastered a key component to making a nuclear missile. President Trump has indicated that the U.S. is ready to counter any aggression on the part of North Korea, but in the meantime, experts warn that eyes should not waver from Iran.

    The Iranian regime could benefit greatly from the North Korean advances, simply because of their economic relationship, which has allowed Iran to give the North Koreans much needed cash in exchange for their military knowledge and expertise.

    If North Korea gets away with building a nuclear weapon, in spite of the protests of the U.S. and the international community, then Iran will try to do the same.

    “It’s a human and emotional response…

    View original post 309 more words

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: