Who exactly is fighting the War on Terror?

[Patroklos]

If you meant possibly up to the amounts cited, fine. Either way it is safe to assume you think more was looted than I do.

[DRoseDARs]

Well as I indicated in the post that started this digression, it think it's a Hell of a lot more than anything Iran might have contributed.

[Patroklos]

I agree with you. I mean, that should be obvious. But I agree with those here that have already stated that has no bearing on whether Iran is also suppling munitions.

[Sirotnikov]

Report: Austrian rifles supplied to Iran have found their way to Iraqi insurgents

The Associated Press
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
LONDON

Sophisticated rifles supplied to Iran by an Austrian arms company in 2006 are finding their way into the hands of Iraqi insurgents, a British newspaper reported Tuesday.

American troops have recovered more than 100 "Steyr .50 HS" rifles in Iraq, part of an Austrian consignment of 800 such weapons delivered to Iran over American protests that they could be given to insurgents, the Daily Telegraph reported.

The Austrian government approved the sale of the rifles, made by precision weapons maker Steyr Mannlicher GmbH, after it concluded in 2004 that they would be used to fight narcotics smugglers.

"We checked the proposal very thoroughly," Austrian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Astrid Harz said, noting that the situation in Iraq and the region in 2003-2004 was very different then than it is today.

"What happened to the weapons then is the responsibility of the Iranians," Harz said.

In comments to The Associated Press that year, former Steyr owner Wolfgang Fuehrlinger said U.S. Embassy officials had expressed concerns that the rifles could be used against American troops in Iraq, adding that he had rebuffed a request to stop such sales.

The 12.7 x 99 mm rifles are about 1.2 meters (4 feet) long, weigh more than 12 kilograms (20 pounds) and count as an anti-armor weapon among experts because of the high punch of its projectile, Fuehrlinger said.

Franz Holzschuh, Steyr's CEO, said the company had not officially been contacted by anyone to verify the serial numbers on the rifles. He said there was a possibility the weapons were reproductions and that there were "thousands" of these in circulation.

"Fact is, we never delivered to Iraq," he said.

The U.S. imposed sanctions on Steyr in December 2005, forbidding it from obtaining U.S. export licenses to do business in America. The Austrian government condemned the decision at the time, saying it made no sense to punish the company after the fact.

Holzschuh said there were still U.S. sanctions against his company.

Britain's Ministry of Defense said it had also raised the issue with the Austrian government shortly after the sale.

"We discussed it privately with the Austrian government shortly after the sale," a Ministry of Defense spokesman said, on condition of anonymity in line with government policy. "Now the potential that these weapons could fall into the wrong hands appears to have happened."

[Ramo]

Libya didnt recognize Israel, its nuke program wasnt as advanced as Irans or as important domestically, and it was far weaker overall than Iran.

I was addressing the economci aspect; I addressed Israel later. Anyways, the nuclear program is only important domestically because of their diplomatic isolation. Take that away, and the popularity of the program ('specially with added carrots/sticks) starts to wane.

LC brings up a valid point, but the international community was serious about sanctions to stop a rogue state from going nuclear back then. As indicated by what happened a month earlier...

whatever the rationale, turning aside from its allies will effect its reputation, and will require some more substantial payback.

The rationale is important. The "prestige" factor is important only insofar as creating a rival political block. Take away that need, and that melts away. Since you like those Paradox analogies, in Victoria (or EU 3) terms, this is reducing your country's prestige for a substantial improvement in relations with neighboring states.

but AFAIK the student movement wasnt close to MEK, and the existence of such student revolts was not a motive to make the MEK more important. There is of course evidence of domestic discontent in Iran now as well.

My point is that the Iranian public is considerably to the left of its gov't. If there's upheaval, it's probably not coming from the right.

So they were also asking for a 2 billion dollar a year aid package? I hadnt seen that.

Obviously, a complete agreement hasn't been released, since Cheney refused to negotiate with them.

Anyway, diplo relations with Israel HAVE been a problem for Mubarak domestically,

Of course, Sadat and Mubarak are secular...

Obviously, negotiations would be helped a lot (to understate things) if Bush were to put the same effort into negotiating a comprehensive peace wrt Palestine that Clinton did...

AFAICT, and Iran had a population that had been exposed to 24 years of propaganda demonizing the lesser Satan, and had (and has) a substantial body of the citizenry that is firmly Khomeinists and bitterly hates Israel.

Which is what the money is for...

Lots of folks other than Cheney and Rummy dont trust the Iranian regime.

That's not the issue, unless you're suggesting that Powell is buddies with Khamenei...

If the Iranian IEDS are there only by "diffusion", and not deliberate supply.

Care to restate that?

[qI']m simply asking why Iranian support for Sunni insurgents who kill Shiite Iraqis is different in kind than alleged CIA support for the killing of Aldo Moro. The rationale behind such actions is comparable - allegedly Aldo Moro was killed because the CIA wanted to scare Italians into rallying against Communists. Iran could fund Sunni insurgents in order to scare shiites into supporting pro-Iranian militias, and to convince them that the Pro-US army (and the MNF) is not capable of protecting them.

Im NOT saying I have evidence that is what they are doing, but I dont see thats a priori absurd.[/q]

I don't believe that because, among other reasons, I think that SCIRI is far closer to Iran than Sadr is... I think I've spelled out the reasons why I think so enough, but the bottom line is that we can speculate all we want but the proof is in the pudding. There's some evidence that the Iranians are helping out the Peshmerga (given the arrests in Irbil) and the Mahdi Army. But the strongest evidence we have of Iranian arms shipments involve the Badr Corps:

He added that the Al-Qods force's top operations officer was detained in December in the compound of leading Shiite politician Abdel-Aziz Hakim with an inventory of weapons to be shipped, including mortars and sniper rifles.

Hakim's party, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, told the Americans that the weapons were meant for their protection, he added.

"We assess that these activities are coming from the senior levels of the Iranian government," he said, noting that the Al-Qods brigade reports to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070211/wl_mideast_afp/iraqunrestusiran

It's worth pointing out, as I'm sure you know by now, that Gen. Pace, the Chair of the JCoS, hasn't seen any evidence that the Iranian gov't is supplying the Sunni Arab insurgents.