Gates: U.S. can prove Iran's Iraq role

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
Wanderer
Jedi Master
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-21 07:02pm
Location: Freedom
Contact:

Gates: U.S. can prove Iran's Iraq role

Post by Wanderer »

Yes you can :roll:

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer 37 minutes ago

SEVILLE, Spain - Serial numbers and markings on explosives used in
Iraq provide "pretty good" evidence that
Iran is providing either weapons or technology for militants there, Defense Secretary Robert Gates asserted Friday.

Offering some of the first public details of evidence the military has collected, Gates said, "I think there's some serial numbers, there may be some markings on some of the projectile fragments that we found," that point to Iran.

At the same time, however, he said he was somewhat surprised that recent raids by coalition and Iraqi forces in Iraq swept up some Iranians.

Just last week, Gates said that U.S. military officers in Baghdad were planning to brief reporters on what is known about Iranian involvement in Iraq but that he and other senior administration officials had intervened to delay the briefing in order to assure that the information provided was accurate.

Speaking to reporters at a defense ministers conference here, Gates said Friday, "I don't think there was surprise that the Iranians were actually involved, I think there was surprise we actually picked up some."

He and other U.S. officials have said for some time that Iranians, and possibly the government of Iran, have been providing weapons technology, and possibly some explosives to Iraqi insurgents.

The improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have been a leading killer of U.S. forces in Iraq, where more than 3,000 servicemen and women have died in the nearly four-year-old war.

Gates, who is attending his first
NATO defense ministers meeting, said Iran is "very much involved in providing either the technology or the weapons themselves for these explosively formed projectiles. Now they don't represent a big percentage of the IED attacks but they're extremely lethal."

Gates said the raids combined with the movement of an additional U.S. aircraft carrier into the Persian Gulf have created a stir, but said the Bush administration has no intention of attacking Iran.

Meanwhile, the defense secretary has been getting a lukewarm response here to his plea for allies to send more troops and aid for a spring offensive in
Afghanistan.

Gates said the U.S. made no additional commitments for more troops of its own. He recently extended the tour of a brigade in Afghanistan, where the U.S. has 27,000 troops — the most since the war began in 2001.

U.S. and NATO military leaders in recent months have repeatedly called on alliance members to send reinforcements and lift restrictions on where their troops can serve. On Thursday, Gates secured smaller offers from some nations, but he met resistance from key allies.

France and Germany are questioning the wisdom of sending more soldiers, while Spain, Italy and Turkey have also been wary of providing more troops.

"When the Russians were in Afghanistan, they had 100,000 soldiers there and they did not win," German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung told reporters.

The meeting in southern Spain did produce some offers, however.

Lithuania, which already has 130 troops in Afghanistan, offered to send an unspecified number of special forces, helping to fill a key shortfall.

Germany says it will provide six Tornado reconnaissance jets but not significantly augment its 3,000 troops in the north. The Italian government said it would send a much-needed transport plane and some unmanned surveillance aircraft, but it is struggling to secure parliamentary backing for the finances needed to maintain a contingent of 1,950.

Spain also said it would send four unmanned planes and more instructors to help the Afghan army.

Gates said that after nearly five years at war with the Taliban, this spring will be critical because it could give the people of the country more hope.

"Each spring for the last several years, the Taliban have been more aggressive and there has been an increasing level of violence," he said. "There is a consensus on the part of the ministers that it is important that this year we knock the Taliban back."

The end of winter has traditionally brought an upsurge in attacks by Taliban militants in Afghanistan. U.S. commanders have already predicted that this spring will be even more violent than last year, when a record number of attacks included nearly 140 suicide bombings.

About 15,000 of the American troops are serving in the NATO-led force, which now totals about 36,000, while the other 12,000 are special operations forces or are training Afghan troops.

___

On the Net:

NATO: http://www.nato.int
Amateurs study Logistics, Professionals study Economics.
Dale Cozort (slightly out of context quote)
User avatar
Lonestar
Keeper of the Schwartz
Posts: 13321
Joined: 2003-02-13 03:21pm
Location: The Bay Area

Post by Lonestar »

I believe it, there is no doubt in my mind, none, that Iran has a role in raising Hell in Iraq.


This isn't a swipe at Iran, it's in their interest to do so, as it reduces our ability to take serious(re: anything besides bombing them) military action against them.
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."
User avatar
Admiral Valdemar
Outside Context Problem
Posts: 31572
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:17pm
Location: UK

Post by Admiral Valdemar »

I'm sure we can all let them off the hook over Iraq's WMD. I mean, we can't be expecting them to get it right all the time now, can we? I see no reason to dispute this newfound link, for it is obviously substantial enough to merit warfare as a consequence.
User avatar
Molyneux
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7186
Joined: 2005-03-04 08:47am
Location: Long Island

Post by Molyneux »

1) Does the mustard gas and sarin residue we found count as WMD? I'm not being snippy, I really don't know if they fall under that classification.

2) Am I the only person who read the title and thought, "Why the heck is the Windows guy commenting on Iraq?"
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
User avatar
Lonestar
Keeper of the Schwartz
Posts: 13321
Joined: 2003-02-13 03:21pm
Location: The Bay Area

Post by Lonestar »

Molyneux wrote:1) Does the mustard gas and sarin residue we found count as WMD? I'm not being snippy, I really don't know if they fall under that classification.
Sure, BUT the big deal is that the Bush Administration(that is, this information was presented as true to a trusted Face, Colin Powell) was talking about Nuclear Weapons and more complex Chemical/Biological agents, not crap you can make mixing bleach and ammonia.(and which may have been molding away in a storehouse for years anyway)
"The rifle itself has no moral stature, since it has no will of its own. Naturally, it may be used by evil men for evil purposes, but there are more good men than evil, and while the latter cannot be persuaded to the path of righteousness by propaganda, they can certainly be corrected by good men with rifles."
User avatar
Admiral Valdemar
Outside Context Problem
Posts: 31572
Joined: 2002-07-04 07:17pm
Location: UK

Post by Admiral Valdemar »

A Cessna with a crop spray attachment and some Toilet Duck would be more of a threat to national security. The administration got it wrong, and totally wrong at that. Grasping at decade old rusted rockets of sarin as if it's the end of the world as we know it is weak. Meanwhile, over in the Far East, The Great Leader is working on refining his first A-bomb.
User avatar
Plekhanov
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3991
Joined: 2004-04-01 11:09pm
Location: Mercia

Post by Plekhanov »

Molyneux wrote:1) Does the mustard gas and sarin residue we found count as WMD? I'm not being snippy, I really don't know if they fall under that classification.
In the past tense maybe, so far as I'm aware 'mustard gas and sarin residue' isn't that much use as a weapon. We went to war because what Sadam supposedly had now and was in the process of acquiring not because of what he had a decade ago .
User avatar
Edi
Dragonlord
Dragonlord
Posts: 12461
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:27am
Location: Helsinki, Finland

Post by Edi »

So, Gates is acting like a true Bush toady and talking out of his arse about Iranian involvement. And the best he can come up with is "we have some fragmentary serial numbers RAR!". What a fucking moron. The whole goddamn country is awash in the litter of Saddam's disbanded army and the Bush Administration, this time with Gates as its mouthpiece, is still trying to convince everyone that Iran is somehow behind it all. Who the fuck do they think is going to believe them, outside of the rabid republitard lot?

Edi
Warwolf Urban Combat Specialist

Why is it so goddamned hard to get little assholes like you to admit it when you fuck up? Is it pride? What gives you the right to have any pride?
–Darth Wong to vivftp

GOP message? Why don't they just come out of the closet: FASCISTS R' US –Patrick Degan

The GOP has a problem with anyone coming out of the closet. –18-till-I-die
User avatar
Wanderer
Jedi Master
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-21 07:02pm
Location: Freedom
Contact:

Post by Wanderer »

Molyneux wrote:1) Does the mustard gas and sarin residue we found count as WMD? I'm not being snippy, I really don't know if they fall under that classification.
Useless shit past its shelf life given to Saddam by Rumsfeld (oops I'm not suspose to remind people about that). Its not safe to drink, but alot of things aren't safe to drink.

Also a lot of unexploded bombs keep being uncovered around Basra from the Iran Iraq war. Considering how fought over that area was, its not surprising that old Iranian equipment and ordinance is being used.
Amateurs study Logistics, Professionals study Economics.
Dale Cozort (slightly out of context quote)
User avatar
Lost Soal
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2625
Joined: 2002-10-22 06:25am
Location: Back in Newcastle.

Post by Lost Soal »

I'm curious, how much of the weapons being used against the US forces do you think could be traced back to the US?
"May God stand between you and harm in all the empty places where you must walk." - Ancient Egyptian Blessing

Ivanova is always right.
I will listen to Ivanova.
I will not ignore Ivanova's recommendations. Ivanova is God.
AND, if this ever happens again, Ivanova will personally rip your lungs out! - Babylon 5 Mantra

There is no "I" in TEAM. There is a ME however.
User avatar
Wanderer
Jedi Master
Posts: 1195
Joined: 2006-02-21 07:02pm
Location: Freedom
Contact:

Post by Wanderer »

Lost Soal wrote:I'm curious, how much of the weapons being used against the US forces do you think could be traced back to the US?
By using clusterbombs all the time, we have given the IED Factories enough ordinance to last 3 more years. 4 year supply from MRLS munitions. 2 week supply from unexploded 500lb bombs.

I don't know about 2,000lb bombs, but a few Abrahms have been litterally tossed into the air by IEDs. Only one lucky tank so far as I can see landed safely and sped away, firing a HEAT round into a machine gun nest that fired on it along the way. (Now where did I put that video?)

I'm not even going to go through unexploded Artillery and Mortar rounds.
Amateurs study Logistics, Professionals study Economics.
Dale Cozort (slightly out of context quote)
User avatar
Jadeite
Racist Pig Fucker
Posts: 2999
Joined: 2002-08-04 02:13pm
Location: Cardona, People's Republic of Vernii
Contact:

Post by Jadeite »

As many trustworthiness issues as the administration has, it's pretty much common sense that Iran provides a lot of support for insurgent and militia groups in Iraq. Don't pretend for a moment that their government is made up of angels and does nothing but cuddle kittens, and that the US government is picking a fight that doesn't exist. Iran is run by the same type of crazy sociopathic fucks that run our government, and a brief glance at forums like http://www.irandefence.net/ show that they have just as many retarded cheerleaders of their government as the US does of Bush.

Actually, I imagine the Iranians are worse than Bush. Bitch about the US human rights record or war crimes as much as you want, but we don't use children as minesweepers, or hang rape victims (by slow strangulation). So I guess I have a correction to the statement that they're the same type of crazy nutcases as Bush: They are the same type of crazy nutters, but with an added medieval and barbaric culture.
Image
User avatar
Fiji_Fury
Padawan Learner
Posts: 348
Joined: 2006-09-11 12:42am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Post by Fiji_Fury »

Jadeite wrote:As many trustworthiness issues as the administration has, it's pretty much common sense that Iran provides a lot of support for insurgent and militia groups in Iraq. Don't pretend for a moment that their government is made up of angels and does nothing but cuddle kittens, and that the US government is picking a fight that doesn't exist.
No. The Bush Administration is long past its "best before" date on credibility for issues of any kind. I don't think it's unreasonable even when somebody is viewed as a moral, upstanding and truthful person to ask them to support their claims with verifiable evidence. The Bush Administration has not been upstanding and truthful. Demanding evidence other than talking points from administration officials and cronies is sensible after the disasters they have orchestrated using spin, misdirection and half-truths.

I don't think it's an unwarranted suspicion that Iran would be involved in supporting Iraqi insurgents against the US Armed Forces. BUT I do reject any claims that this possiblity is fact becuase of "common sense" or the say so of the same assholes who lied about WMD's, Saddam's ties to terrorists and have been so accomplished at avoiding direct questions and accountability.
User avatar
CmdrWilkens
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9093
Joined: 2002-07-06 01:24am
Location: Land of the Crabcake
Contact:

Post by CmdrWilkens »

All I will add to this discussion is that if you have ever been within 5 miles of any border crossing in Iraq there will never be a doubt in your mind that government agencies of surrounding states are providing means to the insurgents in Iraq.
Image
SDNet World Nation: Wilkonia
Armourer of the WARWOLVES
ASVS Vet's Association (Class of 2000)
Former C.S. Strowbridge Gold Ego Award Winner
MEMBER of the Anti-PETA Anti-Facist LEAGUE

"I put no stock in religion. By the word religion I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called the will of god. I have seen too much religion in the eyes of too many murderers. Holiness is in right action, and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves, and goodness. "
-Kingdom of Heaven
User avatar
kheegster
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2397
Joined: 2002-09-14 02:29am
Location: An oasis in the wastelands of NJ

Post by kheegster »

I am curious about a historical parallel: what did the Soviets do when it became obvious that the US was supplying weapons to the Mujahideen?
Articles, opinions and rants from an astrophysicist: Cosmic Journeys
User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20814
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Post by K. A. Pital »

I am curious about a historical parallel: what did the Soviets do when it became obvious that the US was supplying weapons to the Mujahideen?
Send a force to assist the government?
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali
Medic
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2632
Joined: 2004-12-31 01:51pm
Location: Deep South

Post by Medic »

Stas Bush wrote:
I am curious about a historical parallel: what did the Soviets do when it became obvious that the US was supplying weapons to the Mujahideen?
Send a force to assist the government?
Well, Richard Clarke pointed out in his book that after the Soviet pullout, an arms depot of sorts was blown the fuck up in Pakistan. They never could link it to Moscow though.
User avatar
Vympel
Spetsnaz
Spetsnaz
Posts: 29312
Joined: 2002-07-19 01:08am
Location: Sydney Australia

Post by Vympel »

The IED claims about Iran are incoherent bullshit.
Over all, only a fourth of US troops had been killed [in] Baghdad (713 or 23.7 percent of about 3000) through the end of 2006. But US troops aren’t fighting Shiites anyplace else– Ninevah, Diyala, Salahuddin–these are all Sunni areas. For a fourth of US troops to be being killed or wounded by Shiite EFPs, all of the Baghdad deaths would have to be at the hands of Shiites!

The US military often does not announce exactly where in Baghdad a GI is killed and so I found it impossible to do a count of Sunni versus Shiite neighborhoods. But we know that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki was running interference for the Mahdi Army last fall, and it seems unlikely to me that very many US troops died fighting Shiites in Baghdad. The math of Gordon’s article does not add up at all if this were Shiite uses of Iran-provided EFPs.

So the unnamed sources at the Pentagon are reduced to implying that Iran is giving sophisticated bombs to its sworn enemies and the very groups that are killing its Shiite Iraqi allies every day. Get real!

Moreover, there is no evidence of Iranian intentions to kill US troops. If Iran was giving EFPs to anyone, it was to the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and its Badr Corps paramilitary, for future use. SCIRI is the main US ally in Iraq aside from the Kurds. I don’t know of US troops killed by Badr, certainly not any time recently.
Like Legend of Galactic Heroes? Please contribute to http://gineipaedia.com/
User avatar
mingo
Jedi Knight
Posts: 730
Joined: 2005-10-15 08:05am
Location: San Francisco of Michigan
Contact:

Are we going to trust ANYTHING Bush says

Post by mingo »

Ok, first of all, given the Bush administrations record, why in the name of the Great Green Goddess would I believe ANYTHING they say? Secondly, even if they ARE right, so what? Iran is providing weapons to a neighbor to get the great Satan out of there, any surprize there? What does this change? Not a damn thing. We still have to leave, Iraq is still a clustterfuck, both now and after we leave and it's our fault. I don't know who the 28% of people polled are that are still buying all this "victory" crap, but it's over and we lost, deal with it.
User avatar
Fiji_Fury
Padawan Learner
Posts: 348
Joined: 2006-09-11 12:42am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Post by Fiji_Fury »

As far as I can tell, attempts to identify Iran as providing bombs and weapons for militant Iraqis have one of three goals:
1) Deflect public attention from the lies of the past onto an interfering "evil"
2) Cast blame for the problems in Iraq not on terribly executed military and reconstruction policy but upon those "evil" Iranian bastards
3) Possibly agitate for aggression with Iran directly in some twisted game of chicken with the Democrats, hoping that the Dems will buckle under enough pressure and tow the "support the troops" line or look bad.

If you disagree, that okay. If you think Iran is responsible for providing weapons and materials, please demonstrate proof of it. Statements from Bush's administration are not proof. Saying "if you were there you could see" is not proof. Ante up or let it go.
User avatar
Jadeite
Racist Pig Fucker
Posts: 2999
Joined: 2002-08-04 02:13pm
Location: Cardona, People's Republic of Vernii
Contact:

Post by Jadeite »

Image
User avatar
SirNitram
Rest in Peace, Black Mage
Posts: 28367
Joined: 2002-07-03 04:48pm
Location: Somewhere between nowhere and everywhere

Post by SirNitram »

Jadeite, you're not a fucking newbie. If you post a story, you post the whole story. Christ, you're a pathetic waste of bandwidth, and you never, ever change.


On topic, there's a few questions that no one's actually asking about Iran.

1) Does this whole shebang tell us anything new about the clerics ruling Iran? No. Of course the fuck not. They're the same assholes they were beforehand, fomenting trouble because they dream of being a dominant power in the region.

2) Does agitating for war hurt Iran? No, not in the sense people want. Sure, it fucks up life for the little guy there; his food prices are skyrocketing, his nation's economy is nosediving, and the population is collapsing. But for the clerics ruling it, life's still just fine. Hell, it's getting better for those that are in good with the President. He's getting loads of power and influence.. More than the Supreme Leader wants, by some of the news coming from there.. Simply because the US is dancing to their fucking tune.

3) Does going into Iran solve the Iraq problem? If you think it does, you are so godsdamned stupid I don't know how you type. The problems in Iraq are because of a myriad of fuckups, but you need a truly pathetic level of grey matter to think vanquishing Iran will actually counter any of them. The problems in Iraq are American-made, not Iranian. Sure, they supply weapons. Guess what? America's been handing the Iraqi's weapons. Some are official, in the form of Army gear that's going to the militias, because, SURPRISE, the militias are infiltrating the army. Some of it is shit like clusterbombs and other unexploded munitions. Then of course there's that stuff stolen because, Gee Whiz, It's Just A Little Looting.

So why the fuck go to war with Iran? Solves nothing at all. Oh. Except for penis-compensation issues some of the agitators have, I guess.
Manic Progressive: A liberal who violently swings from anger at politicos to despondency over them.

Out Of Context theatre: Ron Paul has repeatedly said he's not a racist. - Destructinator XIII on why Ron Paul isn't racist.

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter
User avatar
Jadeite
Racist Pig Fucker
Posts: 2999
Joined: 2002-08-04 02:13pm
Location: Cardona, People's Republic of Vernii
Contact:

Post by Jadeite »

Alright, quoting the article then.
Britain warns Tehran about weapons smuggling

Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor
Thursday August 11, 2005
The Guardian

Britain yesterday described as "unacceptable" the smuggling of weapons from Iran into Iraq after revealing that a consignment was intercepted at the border between the two countries.
While complaints have been made in the past, it is relatively rare to have concrete evidence of such smuggling.

The British embassy in Tehran raised the issue at a meeting with the Iranian foreign ministry. Officials relayed the government's concern and pressed Iran to acknowledge that there was a problem that should be dealt with.

Donald Rumsfeld, the US secretary of defence, warned Iran this week about the extent of smuggling. The US has been protesting for the past two years over alleged Iranian meddling in Iraq. Mr Rumsfeld told a Pentagon briefing that the smuggling was "a problem" for the Iraqi government. "It's a problem for the coalition forces. It's a problem for the international community, and ultimately, it's a problem for Iran," he said.
Disclosure of the smuggling came hours after four American soldiers were killed and six were wounded as a patrol was attacked near Baiji, 112 miles north of Baghdad, late on Tuesday. A bomb wrecked two Humvees and a bigger armoured vehicle.

Iran has repeatedly denied any involvement in the insurgency or party politics in Iraq.

A senior British official disclosed yesterday details of the incident two weeks ago when a group crossing from Iran was intercepted near Maysan, which is in the British controlled sector of Iraq. Iraqi security forces opened fire and the smugglers fled back to Iran leaving their cache of timers, detonators and other bomb-making equipment.

The British official said he did not know the identity of the group or those behind it but said it had the "fingerprints" of either Iran's Revolutionary Guard, controlled by the supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or the Lebanese based Hizbullah which Tehran backs. The incident came against a backdrop of tension between Iran and the west over allegations that Tehran is intent on securing a nuclear-weapons capability.

The US has had no diplomatic relationship with Iran since 1980 and has branded it part of the "axis of evil". But Britain usually opts for a less confrontational approach than the US. The British official said he thought such smuggling from Iran was infrequent and trivial compared with the weapons going into Iraq from Syria.

Bayan Jabr, Iraq's interior minister, also played down the incident, saying it "was very much exaggerated".

Ibrahim al-Jaafari, Iraq's prime minister who spent years in exile in Iran, dodged questions yesterday about the alleged use of Iranian weapons by insurgents.

Iran has a vested interest in maintaining a degree of instability in Iraq to ensure the US and Britain leave but it does not want anarchy threatening its own security. Events in Iraq are going in the direction Tehran would have wished with its Shia co-religionists dominant and an increased Islamisation in the British sector.

Iran can exert influence through the many prominent Iraqis who were exiled in Tehran and via the Badr brigades, the Iraqi Shia militia that was based in Iran.

The British claim the Badr brigades have been disbanded but although they have swapped their uniforms for Iraqi police or army gear many of the men retain their original allegiances.
Image
User avatar
Fiji_Fury
Padawan Learner
Posts: 348
Joined: 2006-09-11 12:42am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Post by Fiji_Fury »

Thank you for posting some evidence for the claim that Iran is providing weapons to Iraqi insurgents. I'm curious if there's anything else like this, particularly in light of what both British and Iraqi officials had to say about the incident in the example above:
But Britain usually opts for a less confrontational approach than the US. The British official said he thought such smuggling from Iran was infrequent and trivial compared with the weapons going into Iraq from Syria.

Bayan Jabr, Iraq's interior minister, also played down the incident, saying it "was very much exaggerated".
Furthermore, I have to admit that SirNitram is right. Building a conflict with Iran does what to help the Iraq situation?
User avatar
Pablo Sanchez
Commissar
Posts: 6998
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:41pm
Location: The Wasteland

Post by Pablo Sanchez »

The weapons Iran is shipping to the Shi'a militias are probably only coincidentally intended for use against US troops. Obviously the Ayatollahs are not big fans of the US and won't shed any tears if American servicemen end up dead thanks to the munitions they're dumping in Iraq. But more pertinentlyt is very much in Iranian interests that the Shi'ites should win the Iraqi Civil War, thus they will want to supply whatever aid they can. And given the confused situation in Iraqi it's not certain that Iranian weapons used to attack US forces had a direct line from the Iranians to the "end user."

Let's say an Iraqi courier runs the weapons across the frontier to Baghdad and hands them off to a militia leader, Faruq. Faruq remembers a Toyota he saw for sale or something, so he hocks his mines to some local arms dealer. The local arms dealer then passes the mines along to some third party, who uses them to blow up an American. This sequence isn't implausible.
Image
"I am gravely disappointed. Again you have made me unleash my dogs of war."
--The Lord Humungus
Post Reply