|
A Ynetnews Exclusive
Ynetnews, the website run by the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth – "Israel’s most-read newspaper", comes up with an "Exclusive" currently at the top of its main-page. The Telegraph’s Con Coughlin will be certainly jealous of this scoop.
Next to the picture of a big explosion it is revealed that – Iranian scientists research fuel-gas bombs:
A document obtained by Ynetnews, jointly authored by three Iranian scientists, "seems to contain military applications for fuel-gas bombs," an expert on Iran said.
During a fuel-gas explosion, a cloud of fuel is set alight by a detonator to produce an explosion. The resulting wave flattens all objects close to the proximity of the epicenter, and produces widespread damage beyond the area of the cloud.
Sounds very dangerous to me – like some thermobaric weapon or fuel-air-explosives used in the Israeli Carpet system or the US BLU-73, BLU-95, BLU-96, CBU-55 or CBU-72 bombs.
How frightening if the Iranians would be researching such. But as the story goes, we learn that they are not really doing so:
The document is a thesis which examines the "injection-velocity effects" resulting from fuel vapor clouds, and was authored by three Iranian scientists from the Imam Hossein University, the Sharif University of Technology, and the Iran University of Science and Technology.
"The large number of vapor-cloud explosions in the past, which involve severe damages, clearly indicates the need to consider this problem," the thesis’s introduction said. "Preventing such events from happening requires a good knowledge of gas explosion and the way of reducing the frequency and consequence of its occurrence," it added.
Does not sound much like weapon research to me, rather like safety research to prevent accidents like the 1974 disaster in Flixborough or the BP refinery fire in Texas 2005. But Ynetnews has an expert on this:
Commenting on the thesis, Professor Raymond Tanter, who heads the Washington-based Iran Policy Committee (IPC), said: "Although seemingly innocent and only for scientific purposes, the document seems to contain military applications for fuel-gas bombs."
Tanter is by trade an expert, but on political science. He is also a member of the Committee on the Present Danger, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and various other neocon infested likudnik outlets. The Iran Policy Committee which he founded is shilling for regime change in Iran and promotes the anti-Iranian People’s Mujahedin Organization (MEK) terrorist cult.
There are also rumours that Tantler’s MEK friends have found proof for some very dangerous stink-bombs Iran is developing. His careful scientific interpretation of the Iranian veterinarian paper on "injection-velocity effects" of bovine flatulence will certainly be another worthy exclusive for Ynetnews.
Reading the comments to that article, unfortunately such propaganda – ridiculous as it may be – does what it is expected to do.
GI Special
“We Stand No Chance Against Our Enemy There, And Every Life Lost Fighting Them Is In Vain”
March 20, 2007 By Jason Lemieux, Iraq Veterans Against The War, http://www.ivaw.org
Hi.
My name is Jason Lemieux, and I am veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps infantry.
I served three tours in the Iraq occupation, and I have something important to tell you.
You see, there are a lot of members of Iraq Veterans Against the War who speak out on the immorality of the occupation. Tons. While I agree with them that the occupation is immoral and unjustified, I don’t think that you are all that moved by hearing it.
Don’t get me wrong; I’m not implying that you, the reader, are a bad or uncaring person.
It’s just that lots of things in this world are immoral, and for most of us they all blend together after a while.
What I want to tell you about the occupation of Iraq is something else entirely: Whether or not we are justified in occupying Iraq is irrelevant at a certain level, because we stand no chance against our enemy there, and every life lost fighting them is in vain… There are many reasons why, some of which will forever remain a mystery.
Let’s look at a couple of the ones we do know.
One reason is the plague that is the military-industrial complex. The methods we use depend on superexpensive technology produced by the defense industry.
The defense industry’s lobbyists ensure that Congress buys their equipment, which we are then forced to tailor our methods around.
In the Department of Defense (DOD), generals get promoted by maintaining the status quo, which amounts to forcing these methods upon their troops. If they are particularly good at it, they can look forward to a sweet deal from a defense company when they retire.
One tactic we use is combat patrols. What these boil down to is four to eight Humvees driving around, looking for enemy activity. The problem is that there isn’t any way to spot enemy activity, especially from inside an armored Humvee.
The main weapon of the resistance is the roadside bomb. Planting roadside bombs takes only a minute or two and can be easily concealed with normal activity you’d expect to see happening in a city, like dumping out the trash or digging a new sewer line.
Once the bomb is in place, the bomber can detonate it from any building up to a mile away. The result is that a bunch of guys ride around in loud trucks with machine guns until a roadside bomb hits them, then they evacuate the wounded.
To understand the inward focus and zero-defect mentality of our military, consider the following: When a small-unit (30 soldiers or less) commander debriefs his soldiers after a roadside bomb attacks their patrol, he stands in front of them and says things like “you guys were on the ball getting that medevac called in” or “you did a good job of posting security quickly” instead of saying “I admit that I made us an easy target for our enemy.
“I guess driving four loud diesel trucks in single file down a main thoroughfare in broad daylight was not the best patrolling technique.”
…if you kill one person for any reason, his entire tribe is considered justified in getting revenge by killing everyone in your tribe. Since our military doesn’t have identifiable tribes, every soldier becomes a justified target. Any warfighting philosophy that depends on killing is a sure way to failure in Iraq.
Quick example: An intelligence report I read explained how a member of the local police force (the report is classified, so I won’t mention the city), whose tribe was pro-American, was killed one day in a crossfire between resistance fighters and a U.S. Army unit.
His family was well aware that his death was a complete accident. The same day that he died, two of his brothers and one of his cousins joined the resistance. In the accidental death of one Iraqi citizen that was on our side, we instantly turned three of his relatives to our enemy’s side.
In the months that followed, I read version after version of the same story.
When X is killed or captured by American forces, W, Y and Z all make America their sworn enemy on the same day.
Winning by killing is a mathematical impossibility.
“I Am Going To Baghdad To Kill Americans”
Reg Keys, who ran as an Independent candidate against Tony Blair, in the 2005 UK election and father of Tom, one of the six UK military police killed in Al Majar, in south eastern Iraq, in June 2003, told me of one of the last conversations with his young son.
The Americans had bombed a small group of homes. The MP’s went to see what help could be given. They found a man digging with his hands in the rubble of his house, trying to find his wife and children.
The MPs helped and when they brought out the bodies, helped him bury them in waste-land near by, since travel to the cemetary and customary, proper burial was too dangerous under ‘liberation’s’ strafing from the liberators.
Then they asked him if they could take him anywhere. He looked around at the devastation and said: ‘I have no where to go.’ Then, suddenly, he said : ‘Yes, please take me to my home.’
They took him back to the rubble where his life had been based and his children born and he started to dig again.
Eventually he unearthed an ancient Kalashnikov. Then he thanked them and said goodbye.
Where was he going? They asked.
He looked up at the sky, shook his fist towards it and replied: ‘I am going to Baghdad, to kill Americans.’
And Tom Keys? His father, Reg, says quite simply of Tony Blair and George Bush’s invasion: ‘Tom and his friends died for a lie.’
Across Iraq and Afghanistan, those on all sides are dying for the lies of the millennium.
“The Democrats Are Dancing On The Graves Of Iraqi Citizens And U.S. Soldiers With Their Crass Political Calculations”
With the Democrats back in power, Congress will provide “oversight” to this war while tens of thousands of Iraqis and hundreds of U.S. soldiers continue to be killed.
What this maneuvering by Pelosi, Obey and their minions really comes down to is crass political calculations.
Conveniently, September 8, 2008 — the date set for the withdrawal from Iraq to be completed — is the first Saturday following Labor Day. Labor Day traditionally marks the start of the fall election season.
The Democrats are dancing on the graves of Iraqi citizens and U.S. soldiers with their crass political calculations.
Fund the war this year.
Fund the war with another $142 billion next year.
Make false promises of a withdrawal by the start of the election season in 2008.
Run as antiwar candidates.
And tap dance your way to the electoral season — no matter how many lives are lost along the way.
Posted by: John Francis Lee | Mar 26 2007 10:16 utc | 11
|
