• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report Claims Iran Arms Taliban

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Report Claims Iran Arms Taliban - The Lede Blog - NYTimes.com

Afghan officials and a man who claims to be a Taliban commander told Britain’s Channel 4 News that Iran was supplying weapons to Taliban insurgents. The Channel 4 News report, embedded below, shows arms, including mortars and mines, Afghan officials in the western province of Herat say they intercepted en route from Iran to the Taliban.

Reporting for Channel 4 News, Nima Elbagir said that she had been shown documents and video by Afghan officials to back up their claims that weapons made in Iran were being smuggled across the border into Afghanistan.

The report notes that while the Iranian government strongly denies supplying any arms to the Taliban, Britain’s Foreign Office told Channel 4 News: “at the same time as supporting the legitimate Afghan government, [Iran] is undermining it by providing weapons and training for the Taliban.”

Interesting if true. Can't say it would be a surprise given Iran's history, but that's a pretty bold move on their part.
 
it's highly unlikely, since they are on opposite wings of Islamic ideology and they surely hate each other too. although, nothing can be said for sure, since Iranian government would do anything to avoid a downfall.

Most interactions in the ME seem to operate on an "enemy of my enemy" basis, so that alone doesn't really make me question this.
 
Most interactions in the ME seem to operate on an "enemy of my enemy" basis, so that alone doesn't really make me question this.

Same thing they were doing in Iraq..... no surprise here.
 
Other then the fact that Iran was fighting against the taliban before the US was, that Iran took in 800 000 Afgani refugee who fled from the Taliban, that Iran has been building up Herat, ( a shia dominated city)

Of course we should ignore all that, and that Pakistan has been supporting the taliban for the last 20 years or so. That the ISI most likely still is. The sheeple must believe that Iran is the problem, whether or not it is
 
I hope Iran screws up and gives us a good excuse to regime change them again.

That is what it is looking. People complained that Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq, and now Obamayourmomma is doing the same thing with Iran and how they are "supplying" the Taliban. Things don't change.
 
That is what it is looking. People complained that Bush lied about WMDs in Iraq, and now Obamayourmomma is doing the same thing with Iran and how they are "supplying" the Taliban. Things don't change.

This is not the first report that Iran has been supplying the Taliban, nothing came from the first one, nothing will come from this

It is bunk designed to influence US public opinion.
 
Other then the fact that Iran was fighting against the taliban before the US was, that Iran took in 800 000 Afgani refugee who fled from the Taliban, that Iran has been building up Herat, ( a shia dominated city)

Of course we should ignore all that, and that Pakistan has been supporting the taliban for the last 20 years or so. That the ISI most likely still is. The sheeple must believe that Iran is the problem, whether or not it is

This is not the first report that Iran has been supplying the Taliban, nothing came from the first one, nothing will come from this

It is bunk designed to influence US public opinion.

Rather than just labeling everyone who doesn't agree with you as sheeple, why don't you try to explain exactly why this is false and how you've managed to figure out what the reporters and officials in question are too dumb to understand? Who is the evil mastermind behind this propaganda?
 
Rather than just labeling everyone who doesn't agree with you as sheeple, why don't you try to explain exactly why this is false and how you've managed to figure out what the reporters and officials in question are too dumb to understand? Who is the evil mastermind behind this propaganda?

What proof has been offered that can be verified by independant sources?

Please recall the fake nuclear trigger documents published by the Times of London.



IRAN: New Revelations Tear Holes in Nuclear Trigger Story - IPS ipsnews.net

New revelations about two documents leaked to The Times of London to show that Iran is working on a "nuclear trigger" mechanism have further undermined the credibility of the document the newspaper had presented as evidence of a continuing Iranian nuclear weapons programme.

A columnist for the Times has acknowledged that the two-page Persian language document published by The Times last month was not a photocopy of the original document but an expurgated and retyped version of the original.

A translation of a second Persian language document also published by The Times, moreover, contradicts the claim by The Times that it shows the "nuclear trigger" document was written within an organisation run by an Iranian military scientist.


snip

On Dec. 14, The Times published what it explicitly represented as a photocopy of a complete Persian language document showing Iranian plans for testing a neutron initiator, a triggering device for a nuclear weapon, along with an English language translation.

But in response to a reader who noted the absence of crucial information from the document, including security markings, Oliver Kamm, an online columnist for The Times, admitted Jan. 3 that the Persian language document published by The Times was "a retyped version of the relevant parts of that original document".

Kamm wrote that the original document had "contained a lot of classified information" and was not published "because of the danger that it would alert Iranian authorities to the source of the leak".

In offering the explanation of the intelligence agency that leaked the document to The Times, Kamm was also damaging the credibility of the document. A document that had been both edited and retyped could obviously have been doctored by adding material on a neutron initiator.

The reason for such editing could not have been to excise "classified information", because, if the document were genuine, the Iranian government would already have the information

Lets just say the media have not been all that independant of the US and UK government during the last 10 years (ie NYT supporting idiotic claims of Iraqi WMD, various falsifications regarding Iran without contraction when proven false)
 
Rather than just labeling everyone who doesn't agree with you as sheeple, why don't you try to explain exactly why this is false and how you've managed to figure out what the reporters and officials in question are too dumb to understand? Who is the evil mastermind behind this propaganda?

As for calling the people who fall for this crap sheeple

Why not take a look at the morons who still believe Iraq had WMD programs in 2003, that it had vast stockpiles of WMD in 2003, that somehow some magical WMD fairy made them all dissappear like a tooth fairy does childerns teeth.

If they are not sheeple, what are they?
 
As for calling the people who fall for this crap sheeple

Why not take a look at the morons who still believe Iraq had WMD programs in 2003, that it had vast stockpiles of WMD in 2003, that somehow some magical WMD fairy made them all dissappear like a tooth fairy does childerns teeth.

If they are not sheeple, what are they?

Nobody who unironically uses the term "sheeple" is worth talking to.
 
What proof has been offered that can be verified by independant sources?

Please recall the fake nuclear trigger documents published by the Times of London.

So your argument is that some things have been proven false before, so this one is false too?

I'm not saying that past incidents can't make one leery of automatically believing every word of this, which is why I said "interesting if true." Dismissing it out of hand is just ridiculous.

As for calling the people who fall for this crap sheeple

Why not take a look at the morons who still believe Iraq had WMD programs in 2003, that it had vast stockpiles of WMD in 2003, that somehow some magical WMD fairy made them all dissappear like a tooth fairy does childerns teeth.

If they are not sheeple, what are they?

Not sure how many people actually believe that, and not sure how that's relevant to your overbroad generalization.
 
Back
Top Bottom