Thread: US general says Iran helping stop Iraq bloodshed

US general says Iran helping stop Iraq bloodshed
Wed Nov 21, 9:51 AM ET

A US general on Wednesday acknowledged Iran's role in helping quell the bloodshed in Iraq, saying Tehran had contributed to stopping the flow of arms across the border into the country.

Lieutenant General James Dubik, who is in charge of training Iraqi security forces, said Tehran was keeping to its pledge of stopping the smuggling of weapons to Iraqi extremists.

"We are all thankfull for the commitment Iran has made to reduce the flow in weapons, explosives and training (of extremists) in Iraq," Dubik told reporters in Baghdad's Green Zone.

"As a result of that, it has made some contribution to the reduction of violence" in Iraq, he said.

US commanders claim violence in Iraq has dropped by 55 percent since the military's surge became fully operational in June.

Dubik said it was still early to assess the exact contribution of Iran but "we hope that the commitment stays in effect."

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates earlier this month said Tehran had assured Baghdad it would help stop the inflow of Iranian weapons into Iraq.
The US military has charged that Iranian-made bombs were being smuggled into Iraq to Shiite extremists and used to kill coalition forces.

Another US commander, Major General Kevin Bergner, expressed optimism that the decision to hold fresh talks between Tehran, Washington and Baghdad over the turmoil in Iraq would further help boost this commitment of Iran.

"It is important here that the commitments that have been made start to see progress that is strategically measurable and sustains over time," he told reporters in the conference with Dubik.

On Tuesday, Tehran announced it was ready for talks with Washington over the Iraq's security and stability.

The talks would be held in Baghdad but the final date is yet to be fixed.

US general says Iran helping stop Iraq bloodshed - Yahoo! News

Yeah, come on you Iranian haters, what say you about this news article?

What makes this very bitter sweet is the fact that after the invasion, when things started to get out of hand, Iran wanted to get America to the table and talk about the very same things we are getting ready to talk about now, a few hundred thousand bodies and hundreds of billions of $ later, having Iran help with security, specifically of all the eastern borders, as well as sharing some costs and so on.

At the time though "We don't talk to terrorists". Remember officially the US government does not recognize Iran's government, and has had no official communication with them for 28 years. Evidently they felt supremely confident in not having to enlist help by using what is called diplomacy (in this case sharing spoils and talking about sanctions.

It's about damn time, it's too little too late, but at least through this move and others like it recently, the white house is finally utilizing diplomacy and budging a little bit in their hardline stances.

It's a well-known fact that high-ranking officers in the US Military have a liberal bias.

Originally Posted by Al Creed

It's a well-known fact that high-ranking officers in the US Military have a liberal bias.

Right. Especially when they turn out to be "pussies."

Anytime a military person speaks counter to the party line, they're disparaged by the righties.

Originally Posted by Al Creed

It's a well-known fact that high-ranking officers in the US Military have a liberal bias.

Translation;

"well known fact" = my subjective opinion
which I want to sound authoritative
since I know it lacks any credibility since I
have no idea who the high ranking officers are
let alone their names and
not to mention they would have never expressed
any political opinions to the public making by
assumptions as to their political opinions and
my claim they are well known absurd

"liberal bias" = any statement I disagree with

"high ranking officers" =
Gomer Pyle USMC
Sgt. Carter
Sgt. Bilko
Priv. Beatle Bailey
Sgt. Rock
Col. Hogan

If you were in fact being sarcastic then never mind except for the last comment about officers.

If you were being serious, please stay away from guns.

:waving:

Originally Posted by Vortex

Yeah, come on you Iranian haters, what say you about this news article?

Con, JOM, Coolio, Bert Spivey Bert Spivey, Six.... ???????????

Originally Posted by Inkslinger

Con, JOM, Coolio, Bert Spivey Bert Spivey, Six.... ???????????

Iran leader vows no concessions on nukes.
Iran leader vows no concessions on nukes - Yahoo! News

Well this is good. It appears that the naval fleet waiting outside of Iranian waters may finally be having an affect. If Iran opens up to nuclear inspections, stops sending in IEDs to Iraq, limits arms crossing their border, and takes a proactive diplomatic approach to the region, it will drastically increase Iraq's progress and quicken a full US departure.

Originally Posted by Coolio43

Iran leader vows no concessions on nukes.
Iran leader vows no concessions on nukes - Yahoo! News

So, when will the US give up our nukes?

Please tell me why we can have nukes to defend our shores but we don't expect other nations to want them for the same reason.

Have we used our nukes to attack for the sake of attack?

Did the USSR?

Has any other nation used their nukes to attack for the sake of attack?

Your post failed to respond to the facts in the article, do you have any wise comments about those nasty Iranians?

Oh, and by the way, the USA is the invading and occupying military, kinda like when Hitler invaded other nations and Iraq invaded Kuwait.

Originally Posted by Burning Giraffe

Well this is good. It appears that the naval fleet waiting outside of Iranian waters may finally be having an affect. If Iran opens up to nuclear inspections, stops sending in IEDs to Iraq, limits arms crossing their border, and takes a proactive diplomatic approach to the region, it will drastically increase Iraq's progress and quicken a full US departure.

Please BG, go out and do some fucking research for a change. Iran has been working with the Iraqi government for some time and as pointed out by Luigi above, has offered to assist the Iraqis with security and to quell the violence. It was the USA that refused to use diplomacy.

I am sick of the spin put on things by some here.

Might does not make right and our military has not been that successful in Iraq other than doing a hell of a job at shocking, awing, blowing shit up and fucking up a nation that WAS NO THREAT TO US, just like Iran.

Iran is only a threat because WE ARE IN FUCKING IRAQ and we invaded their neighbor.