U.S. troops raid Iranian consulate

[Rogue 9]

BBC News

US north Iraqi raid angers Iran

US forces have stormed a building in the northern Iraqi town of Irbil and seized six people said to be Iranians, prompting a diplomatic incident.

Iranian and Iraqi officials said the building was an Iranian consulate and the detainees its employees.

The US military said it was still investigating, but that the building did not have diplomatic status.

The troops raided the building at about 0300 (0001GMT), taking away computers and papers, according to local media.

AFP news agency quoted Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman as saying he did not know the nationality of the six but said they were "suspected of being closely tied to activities targeting Iraq and coalition forces".

"I can confirm for you through our forces there that this is not a consulate or a government building," he said.

However, Tehran said the attack violated all international conventions. It has summoned ambassadors from Switzerland, representing US interests, and Iraq.

A spokesman for Iran's foreign ministry described the raid as an attempt to sabotage Tehran's relations with Iraq. One Iranian MP said it showed America's cruelty and meanness.

The raid comes amid high Iran-US tension.

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

The US also accuses Iran of seeking nuclear arms. Iran denies both charges.

Tehran counters that US military involvement in the Middle East endangers the whole region.

Pressure

A local TV station said Kurdish security forces had taken over the building after the Americans had left.

Irbil lies in Iraq's Kurdish-controlled north, about 350km (220 miles) from the capital Baghdad. Reports say the Iranian consulate there was set up last year under an agreement with the Kurdish regional government to facilitate cross-border visits.

One Iranian news agency with a correspondent in Irbil says five US helicopters were used to land troops on the roof of the Iranian consulate.

It reports that a number of vehicles cordoned off the streets around the building, while US soldiers warned the occupants in three different languages that they should surrender or be killed.

In December, US troops detained a number of Iranians in Iraq, including two with diplomatic immunity who were later released.

Thursday's raid came as US President George W Bush unveiled his new strategy in Iraq, which included increasing troop numbers and a commitment to stop Iranian support for "our enemies in Iraq".

BBC Diplomatic Correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the raid could signal a ratcheting-up of pressure on the Iranians, in line with the rhetorical thrust of his speech.

Meanwhile in the Iraqi capital, the five off-duty policemen were killed in an ambush in the western al-Khadra neighbourhood, hospital officials said

Security sources said another man was killed wounded in an attack on a money changer in downtown Baghdad.

In the restive Anbar province, the US military said that one of its troops was killed on Tuesday by a roadside bombing.

Other violence was reported in Mosul, where gunmen killed a professor driving home from work, and Samarra where a suicide truck bomber attacked the mayor's house, killing three people and wounding 33, including the mayor.

Well, as bad as this may sound, there's some small part of me that wants us to tell the Iranians that we'll give it back in 443 days...

[LadyTevar]

Well, as bad as this may sound, there's some small part of me that wants us to tell the Iranians that we'll give it back in 443 days...

Did we ever get those responsible for that? I can't recall...

[frigidmagi]

No one was ever punished for taking the Embassy Staff hostage in Iran. There are some claims by a few of the former hostages that the current President was involved in their capitivity.

[SirNitram]

Now we get to find out how much of their posturing is show. If they really want a brawl, they'll go to war over this. However, I suspect the posturing will just go into overdrive to keep the Iranian regime in power.

[Mayabird]

Follow up:

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.

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.

"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.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6252567.stm

[frigidmagi]

Seems the speech weren't all talk. Well fuck we might actually try to win this thing after all. Hope it ain't to little to late.

[Batman]

Seems the speech weren't all talk. Well fuck we might actually try to win this thing after all. Hope it ain't to little to late.

It was too little too late from the outset. The US never had the resources necessary for this to work even if the entire thing had been executed flawlessly.
And sorry, I can't help it

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

A case could be made the greatest destabilising influence in Iraq is the US...

[frigidmagi]

*roll eyes* Yes because the low level civil war in the north and random mass killings under the dictitor who started two wars of conquest he was to inept to win is sooooo much better!

As for the rest we'll see.

[Batman]

*roll eyes* Yes because the low level civil war in the north and random mass killings under the dictator who started two wars of conquest he was to inept to win is sooooo much better!

Who seems to have gotten less people killed over his entire career than the US did since the start of their pointless invasion.

As for the rest we'll see.

We most certainly will.

[LadyTevar]

Bats, the current tally is approx 60k Iraqis killed during the US invasion/occupation. It's unclear how many of those were due to secular violence.

The approx tally for Saddam's reign is 900k, a far larger number.

Of course, Saddam had a couple decades to rack up that score, and we've only had two years.

[frigidmagi]

Who seems to have gotten less people killed over his entire career than the US did since the start of their pointless invasion.

Saddam's kill tally approaches almost 2 million according to More or Less Even the New York Times before the war place the death of over half a million people at his feet. Honestly I think 2 million is high but we could likely go over 1 million. Who were these people? Let's review.

100,000 kurds due to civil war
500,000 dead Iraqi's from the Iranian war
Over 300,000 Iranians from the war
1,000 Kuwaits
300,000 Iraqis, "peace" time executions

That's about 1.2 million dead. You'll note I don't count deaths from Sanctions or US servicemembers killed in Gulf War I. This is all easily found information.

Iraqibodycount.net which was qouted in Time Magazine October 23, 2006 has of today the minimum estimate of 53,281 and a maxium of 58,886. You'll note that doesn't really match up to Saddam's known kills. The Brooking institution has gone higher over 60,000.

In other words you're dead wrong and full of shit.

[Batman]

BBC disagrees and so do most sources OUTSIDE US media. At best you have managed to get half as many people killed in a fraction of the time. Yeah, that was certainly an improvement for the locals.

[frigidmagi]

Your BBC article is qouting the Lanclet survey which is disputed for several reasons, one of which is their declarations of how many should have died doesn't match the number of bodies and missing persons report in Iraq. Two if you ever actually bothered to read the damn survey itself rather then a blurb on it, you would find the actual survey states deaths from 120,000 to over 600,000, not very fucking presice is that? But hey it makes a nice headline so fucking what right?

Another note, in order to figure out what the baseline of deaths should be in a normal Iraq (good luck defining that by the way) they gave them a murder rate that was lower then Hungrays and the US and never explained why. In other words, you're basing it off one survey that isn't very widely accepted anywhere expect rabid anti-war circles and reporters looking for a headline. Fail.

[LadyTevar]

I will simply quote Mark Twain on this matter:
"There are Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics"

What I do know of Statistics is that the 'cluster method' is used by the CDC and various state governments to get information on the health and health practices of their citizens, and thus we get the X% of Y State is overweight/diabetic/etc.

Whether this would work to determine an exact number of deaths is questionable. I refer to once again to the fuckup of Vietnam, where it is *still* unclear how many Vietnamese were killed during the US occupation.

[Hotfoot]

As an added note, Bats, you went from "more than" to "maybe half or a quarter" without skipping a beat. Consider that. Maybe next time you post something, you will research it just a little before making some sort of statement of fact.

[Batman]

You know what, have it your way.

[SirNitram]

You know what, have it your way.

You know what? Don't post in my forum if you're gonna be an idiot.

Because really? This is pathetic. And this little tantrum of an exit doesn't improve matters. So. Either learn how to act maturely, or get the fuck out.