IRAN: SUPREME LEADER GRAVELY ILL

Locked
Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

IRAN: SUPREME LEADER GRAVELY ILL

Post by Corlyss_D » Sat Jan 06, 2007 3:50 am

Wednesday, January 03, 2007
IRAN: SUPREME LEADER 'GRAVELY ILL'
Tehran, 3 Jan. (AKI) - Iran's top spiritual and political figure, Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei is seriously ill and will have to be replaced in the coming months as he is no longer capable of holding office, according to Assembly of Experts member Ayatollah Nasseri. The powerful clerical body appoints and oversees the country's supreme leader.

"Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei is gravely ill - he can no longer see very well, has difficulty hearing, and is no longer able to properly perform his duties," Nasseri told a women's group.

Iranians have speculated for sometime about Khamenei's health. But talk of the 67 year-old Khamenei's health is taboo and officials have denied he is seriously ill, although United States sources had previously said Khamenei had cancer. He is widely regarded as the figurehead of the country's conservative establishment. The survivor of an assassination attempt, his supporters call him a "living martyr."

The country's supreme leader since 1989, Khamenei succeeded the founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, as president in 1981 and served two terms. His death or removal from office by the Assembly of Experts will trigger a power struggle within Iran's clergy, according to observers.

The names of three possible successors to Khamenei are currently on the lips of Iranians: Khamenei's son, Mjtaba; Iran's former reformist president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; and Gholam Ali Mesbah Yazdi, the ultra-conservative ayatollah who is considered the spiritual father of Iran's current hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
http://intelligence-summit.blogspot.com ... y-ill.html
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Ralph
Dittersdorf Specialist & CMG NY Host
Posts: 20996
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Paradise on Earth, New York, NY

Post by Ralph » Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:57 am

Is this a CMG job posting?
Image

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Albert Einstein

Barry
Posts: 10344
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:50 pm

Re: IRAN: SUPREME LEADER GRAVELY ILL

Post by Barry » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:14 pm

Corlyss_D wrote: The names of three possible successors to Khamenei are currently on the lips of Iranians: Khamenei's son, Mjtaba; Iran's former reformist president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; and Gholam Ali Mesbah Yazdi, the ultra-conservative ayatollah who is considered the spiritual father of Iran's current hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
http://intelligence-summit.blogspot.com ... y-ill.html
Man would it be a disaster if Yazdi wins out. War in the coming years or even months would probably be unavoidable.
"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee." - Abraham Lincoln

"Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed." - Winston Churchill

"Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement." - Ronald Reagan

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pbp0hur ... re=related

Fugu

Re: IRAN: SUPREME LEADER GRAVELY ILL

Post by Fugu » Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:06 pm

Barry Z wrote:
Corlyss_D wrote: The names of three possible successors to Khamenei are currently on the lips of Iranians: Khamenei's son, Mjtaba; Iran's former reformist president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani; and Gholam Ali Mesbah Yazdi, the ultra-conservative ayatollah who is considered the spiritual father of Iran's current hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
http://intelligence-summit.blogspot.com ... y-ill.html
Man would it be a disaster if Yazdi wins out. War in the coming years or even months would probably be unavoidable.
Gee, Barry, I thought that is what you want so Bushy can go in and nuke them all.

Agnes Selby
Author of Constanze Mozart's biography
Posts: 5568
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:27 am
Location: Australia

Iran

Post by Agnes Selby » Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:39 pm

Dear Corlyss,

:lol: :D :lol: For a moment there I thought with great joy that
the sick leader was "whatshisname", the once upon a time prison guard.
But! No! He seems well and alive, ready to bring the world to its inevitable end.

Regards,
Agnes.
-----------------

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Re: Iran

Post by Corlyss_D » Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:17 pm

Agnes Selby wrote:Dear Corlyss,

:lol: :D :lol: For a moment there I thought with great joy that
the sick leader was "whatshisname", the once upon a time prison guard.
But! No! He seems well and alive, ready to bring the world to its inevitable end.

Regards,
Agnes.
-----------------
A common misperception. People think that Ahmadinejad is calling the shots because he's the face of the Islamic Revolution. He's a murderous sock-puppet for the very conservative mullahs, let by Khamenei. He will be a sock puppet of whoever succeeds Khamenei.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Re: IRAN: SUPREME LEADER GRAVELY ILL

Post by Corlyss_D » Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:18 pm

Fugu wrote:
Barry Z wrote:Man would it be a disaster if Yazdi wins out. War in the coming years or even months would probably be unavoidable.
Gee, Barry, I thought that is what you want so Bushy can go in and nuke them all.
That would be me, not Barry. 8)
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Agnes Selby
Author of Constanze Mozart's biography
Posts: 5568
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:27 am
Location: Australia

Iran.

Post by Agnes Selby » Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:57 pm

YEP! The sooner the better.
:twisted:
-----------------------------

Ted

Post by Ted » Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:22 am

I’m sure Barry and Corlyss are strong proponents of any fanatical Iranian mullah that will be in “our best interest” to rid the world of :roll:

Agnes Selby
Author of Constanze Mozart's biography
Posts: 5568
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2005 3:27 am
Location: Australia

Iran

Post by Agnes Selby » Sun Jan 07, 2007 12:55 am

Ted wrote:I’m sure Barry and Corlyss are strong proponents of any fanatical Iranian mullah that will be in “our best interest” to rid the world of :roll:
---------------

Dear Ted,

Just out of interest in your opinion, why do you think Iran is
so interested in having a nuclear bomb? They do not lack energy,
the bomb is not a decoration nor will it feed starving multitudes.

Iran and North Korea are the greatest threat the world faces today.

Regards,
Agnes.
------------------

pizza
Posts: 5094
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 4:03 am

Re: Iran

Post by pizza » Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:56 am

Agnes Selby wrote:
Ted wrote:I’m sure Barry and Corlyss are strong proponents of any fanatical Iranian mullah that will be in “our best interest” to rid the world of :roll:
---------------

Dear Ted,

Just out of interest in your opinion, why do you think Iran is
so interested in having a nuclear bomb? They do not lack energy,
the bomb is not a decoration nor will it feed starving multitudes.

Iran and North Korea are the greatest threat the world faces today.

Regards,
Agnes.
------------------
Sorry to disagree, but the greatest threat facing the world today is its apathy. Both Iran and North Korea can be stared down, and if necessary put down, but it will require resolute leaders who don't give a flip about their media ratings to do it.

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Re: Iran

Post by Corlyss_D » Sun Jan 07, 2007 3:24 am

pizza wrote:Sorry to disagree, but the greatest threat facing the world today is its apathy. Both Iran and North Korea can be stared down, and if necessary put down, but it will require resolute leaders who don't give a flip about their media ratings to do it.
Damn! I wish I'd said that. You are absolutely right. Between the apathy and the fear, nothing gets done about either rogue state.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Barry
Posts: 10344
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:50 pm

Post by Barry » Sun Jan 07, 2007 2:42 pm

After it was announced that the next chief of Centcom would be a naval admiral, I read an editorial saying that that was a crazy decision by Bush because most of the fighting that region is on the ground. After thinking it over, I came to the conclusion that the Navy has been discussed for possible future use against Iran. So perhaps Fallon's appointment is a sign that there are, in fact, plans in that regard. We'll see:

EYEING IRAN
By RALPH PETERS

January 6, 2007 -- WORD that Adm. William Fallon will move laterally from our Pacific Command to take charge of Central Command - responsible for the Middle East - while two ground wars rage in the region baffled the media.

Why put a swabbie in charge of grunt operations?

There's a one-word answer: Iran.

ASSIGNING a Navy avia tor and combat veteran to oversee our military operations in the Persian Gulf makes perfect sense when seen as a preparatory step for striking Iran's nuclear-weapons facilities - if that becomes necessary.

While the Air Force would deliver the heaviest tonnage of ordnance in a campaign to frustrate Tehran's quest for nukes, the toughest strategic missions would fall to our Navy. Iran would seek to retaliate asymmetrically by attacking oil platforms and tankers, closing the Strait of Hormuz - and trying to hit oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates.

Only the U.S. Navy - hopefully, with Royal Navy and Aussie vessels underway beside us - could keep the oil flowing to a thirsty world.

In short, the toughest side of an offensive operation against Iran would be the defensive aspects - requiring virtually every air and sea capability we could muster. (Incidentally, an additional U.S. carrier battle group is now headed for the Gulf; Britain and Australia are also strengthening their naval forces in the region.)

Not only did Adm. Fallon command a carrier air wing during Operation Desert Storm, he also did shore duty at a joint headquarters in Saudi Arabia. He knows the complexity and treacherousness of the Middle East first-hand.

STRENGTHENING his qualifications, numer ous blue-water assignments and his duties at PACOM schooled him on the intricacies of the greater Indian Ocean - the key strategic region for the 21st-century and the one that would be affected immediately by a U.S. conflict with Iran.

The admiral also understands China's junkie-frantic oil dependency and its consequent taste for geopolitical street-crime: During a U.S. operation against Iran, Beijing would need its fix guaranteed.

While Congress obsesses on Iraq and Iraq alone, the administration's thinking about the future. And it looks as if the White House is preparing options to mitigate a failure in Iraq and contain Iran. Bush continues to have a much-underrated strategic vision - the administration's consistent problems have been in the abysmal execution of its policies, not in the over-arching purpose.

Now, pressed by strategic dilemmas and humiliating reverses, Bush is doing what FDR had to do in the dark, early months of 1942: He's turning to the Navy.

AS a retired Army officer, I remain proud of and loyal to my service. I realize that the Army's leaders are disappointed to see the CentCom slot go to an admiral in the midst of multiple ground wars. But, beyond the need for a Navy man at the helm should we have to take on Iran, there's yet another reason for sending Fallon to his new assignment: The Army's leadership has failed us at the strategic level.

After Gen. Eric Shinseki was sidelined for insisting on a professional approach to Iraq, Army generals did plenty of fine tactical and operational work - but they never produced a strategic vision for the greater Middle East.

Our Army is deployed globally, but our generals never seem to acquire the knack of thinking beyond the threat hypnotizing them at the moment (the Marines, with their step-brother ties to the Navy, do a better job of acting locally while thinking globally). Perhaps the Army's Gen. Dave Petraeus will emerge as an incisive strategic thinker after he takes command in Baghdad, but his predecessors routinely got mired in tactical details and relied - fatally - on other arms of government to do the strategic thinking.

The reasons are complex, ranging from service culture to educational traditions, but it's incontestable that the Navy long has produced our military's best strategic thinkers - captains and admirals able to transcend parochial interests to see the global security environment as a whole. Adm. Fallon's job is to avoid the tyranny of the moment, to see past the jumble of operational pieces and visualize how those pieces ultimately might fit together.

NOR is the Iran problem the only Navy-first issue facing CENTCOM. As you read this, our ships are patrolling the coast of Somalia to intercept fleeing terrorists - and have been hunting pirates in the same waters for years. China's future development (and internal peace) is tied to dependable supplies of Middle-Eastern and African oil transiting Indian-Ocean sea lanes, as well as to shipping goods along the same routes. In a future confrontation with China, our ability to shut down the very routes we're now challenged to protect would be vital.

Not least because of the botch-up in Iraq, there's a growing sense of the limitations of U.S. ground-force involvement in the Middle East. That doesn't mean we won't see further necessity-driven interventions and even other occupations, only that our strategic planners have begun to grasp that positive change in the region - if it comes at all - is going to take far longer than many of us hoped and won't always be amenable to boots-on-the-ground prodding.

If we can't determine everything that happens in the Big Sandbox, we need to be able to control access to and from the playground - a classic Navy mission.

And in the end the United States remains primarily a maritime power. As Sir Walter Raleigh pointed out 400 years ago, he who controls the waters controls the world.

Gen. Petraeus is going to Baghdad to deal with our present problems. Adm. Fallon is going to the U.S. Central Command to deal with the future.

Ralph Peters' latest book is "Never Quit the Fight."
"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee." - Abraham Lincoln

"Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed." - Winston Churchill

"Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement." - Ronald Reagan

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pbp0hur ... re=related

Ted

Post by Ted » Sun Jan 07, 2007 6:42 pm

Agnes Wrote:
Dear Ted,

Just out of interest in your opinion, why do you think Iran is
so interested in having a nuclear bomb? They do not lack energy,
the bomb is not a decoration nor will it feed starving multitudes.

Iran and North Korea are the greatest threat the world faces today.

Regards,
Agnes.
Hi Agnes
I can’t argue with Pizza/Corlyss nor do I think we should turn a blind’s eye to Iran or NK
Unprovoked military against either is another matter
Of course Pizza, CD and Barry will no doubt disagree with me.
But then they have actual claws a sharp pointed beak and circle over their intended prey just like the famous bird from the Hammerstein lyric
Cheers
t

Ralph
Dittersdorf Specialist & CMG NY Host
Posts: 20996
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 6:54 am
Location: Paradise on Earth, New York, NY

Post by Ralph » Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:29 pm

With regard to Barry's comment about ADM Fallon, the American policy over the past decade or so has been increasingly to spread top commands among the services rather than by basing them on a service-specific mission. That's why GEN Peter Pace is chair of the Joint Chiefs.

Even during Vietnam, while the ground commander was always a four-star Army general, the overall theater commander was Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet.

GEN Petraeus will report to ADM Fallon and I think the working relationship will be excellent.
Image

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."

Albert Einstein

jbuck919
Military Band Specialist
Posts: 26867
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Stony Creek, New York

Post by jbuck919 » Sun Jan 07, 2007 9:46 pm

Ralph wrote:With regard to Barry's comment about ADM Fallon, the American policy over the past decade or so has been increasingly to spread top commands among the services rather than by basing them on a service-specific mission. That's why GEN Peter Pace is chair of the Joint Chiefs.

Even during Vietnam, while the ground commander was always a four-star Army general, the overall theater commander was Commander-in-Chief, Pacific Fleet.

GEN Petraeus will report to ADM Fallon and I think the working relationship will be excellent.
Just as it was when Dave Petraeus was my fellow NHS member at Cornwall (NY) Central High School. (He would not and should not remember me, but he would remember my surname, since my mother was the high school secretary.) Ironically, I found out about Dave not from keeping in touch with anyone, but because he happened to get his Ph.D. from Princeton and was written up in the alumni weekly (they find me wherever I move to).

Interesting how these things work. Cornwall, the school "on the other side of" West Point, with a graduating class typically of 150, always sent two or three men (they were all men in those days) to West Point. In Dave's year, one left before the end of Beast Barracks (this was considered a humiliation), one went on, I cannot know, but suppose, to an ordinary career, and then look at what has happened to Dave. In my class (one year after Petraeus), one dropped out intentionally the day before graduation, allowing him the claim of a college education, permitting him to avoid the responsibilities of an officer in the Army, and obligating him to several years of service as an enlisted man. Another graduated from West Point in the "last row," then known as "the goats," because cadets were seated and graduated by class ranking. The third, who was my friend throughout college, graduated in the middle of his class and had an undistinguished career, retiring mandatorily with the rank of Lt. Colonel.

Go figure.

There's nothing remarkable about it. All one has to do is hit the right keys at the right time and the instrument plays itself.
-- Johann Sebastian Bach

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Post by Corlyss_D » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:00 pm

Ted wrote:I can’t argue with Pizza/Corlyss nor do I think we should turn a blind’s eye to Iran or NK
Unprovoked military against either is another matter
So basically in other words, there has to be a sacrifice of American civilians before we do what we know has to be done eventually. Should that sacrifice be you and Ralph and John? How about Madame and me? Who would you volunteer for the role? It's ridiculous and immoral to wait until Americans die to do something.

Just seeking information here, but when was the last US military action you supported?

If the US is going to be relied on to be the world's policeman patroling the international order, then it must be allowed to behave like same. The damn world seems to want the US to run in the military only when the world can't agree to do it themselves. And then we get the daylights flayed out of us becase we do it. The mere existence of nuclear programs in both nations is enough provocation.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Ted

Post by Ted » Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:48 pm

CD Wrote :
Just seeking information here, but when was the last US military action you supported?
I thought Regan did a good job in Grenada and Clinton did a good job in Kosovo…. Oh and Bush did some good at the time in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban . Of course they still remain as do the War Lord poppy growers who we still subsidize

He who dares not offend cannot be honest.” -Thomas Paine

burnitdown
Posts: 229
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 1:15 am
Contact:

Re: Iran

Post by burnitdown » Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:07 pm

Agnes Selby wrote:He seems well and alive, ready to bring the world to its inevitable end.
Better that than it endures in its present state.

Barry
Posts: 10344
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 3:50 pm

Post by Barry » Mon Jan 08, 2007 12:19 am

Ralph wrote:With regard to Barry's comment about ADM Fallon, the American policy over the past decade or so has been increasingly to spread top commands among the services rather than by basing them on a service-specific mission. That's why GEN Peter Pace is chair of the Joint Chiefs.
True, but if I'm not mistaken, Fallon is the first naval officer to be in charge of Centcom. And since that's such a hot spot at the moment, it seems unlikely that a random move just to get an officer from a different branch of the service in there would be made at this juncture.
"If this is coffee, please bring me some tea; but if this is tea, please bring me some coffee." - Abraham Lincoln

"Although prepared for martyrdom, I preferred that it be postponed." - Winston Churchill

"Before I refuse to take your questions, I have an opening statement." - Ronald Reagan

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pbp0hur ... re=related

Corlyss_D
Site Administrator
Posts: 27663
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 2:25 am
Location: The Great State of Utah
Contact:

Re: Iran

Post by Corlyss_D » Mon Jan 08, 2007 2:59 am

burnitdown wrote:
Agnes Selby wrote:He seems well and alive, ready to bring the world to its inevitable end.
Better that than it endures in its present state.
See, that's why I am wary of nihilism as a philosophy. The world in its present state is infinitely better than anything that would replace it if Ahmadinejad got his way.
Corlyss
Contessa d'EM, a carbon-based life form

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests