Here's an AP article today... "US General: No evidence Iran is arming Iraqis - Pace contradicts claims by other U.S. military, administration officials" Gen. Pace says that they are finding materials manufactured in Iran in the weaponry used in Iraq.
“That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this,” Pace told reporters in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. “What it does say is that things made in Iran are being used in Iraq to kill coalition soldiers.”
His remarks might raise questions on the credibility of the claims of high-level Iranian involvement, especially following the faulty U.S. intelligence that was used to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
If one believes Debka, Iran has been playing in Iraq as far back as August 2004... Read the line up of Debka reports in the link, and ask any sane person upon completion... is Iran (as well as Syria) heavily involved in defeating not only American coalition troops, but the elected Iraqi gov't as well? Does that include not only training and providing fighters, but also providing weaponry?
I guess we'll have to wait for a bomb package, tidily wrapped up with a pink bow, addressed to al Qaeda or Sunni Ba'athists, 123 Main Street, Baghdad, Iraq in order to believe. Heaven forbid we admit the obvious.
UPDATE FEB 15th, 2007 - Press not so skeptical anymore?
Elite Iranian Corps Enmersed in Iraq
Iran likely does not want a direct confrontation with American troops in Iraq but is backing militiamen to ensure Shiites win any future civil war with Iraqi Sunnis after the Americans leave, several experts said Thursday.
The Quds Force's role underlines how deeply enmeshed Iran is in its neighbor -- and how the U.S. could face resistance even from its allies in Iraq if it tries to uproot Iran's influence in the country.
The chief U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, said Iranian and Iraqi detainees in U.S. custody said in interrogations that "the Quds Force provides support to extremist groups here in Iraq both in the forms of money and in weaponry."
U.S. forces detained six Iranians in the northern Iraqi city of Irbil in January, one of whom military officials say is the Quds Forces' operational commander in Iraq, Mohsin Chizari.
"All of these efforts in which we have picked up these Quds Force officers are part of these efforts in which to disrupt these supply networks," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday at a Pentagon briefing.
U.S. military officials have said the Quds Force is supplying "rogue elements" of the Mahdi Army, a Shiite militia led by an anti-American cleric.
But the Quds Force's help appears to go beyond militiamen attacking U.S. troops. It supplies training and some weapons to the Badr Brigade -- a militia linked to Iraq's biggest Shiite political party -- and smaller Shiite factions in the south, an official with a Shiite political party in Iraq who has close knowledge of militia activity told The Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue's sensitivity.
In addition to supplying weapons to Iraqi militias, the Quds Force has been recruiting Iraqi Shiites, giving them up to $150 a month and sending some to Iran for training, the Shiite political party official told the AP.
Caldwell acknowledged that detainees had said, under interrogation, that Quds operatives were supplying weapons to factions in the U.S.-backed Iraqi government. He said U.S. officials had asked political parties and government officials about the material.
Yeah... that's right... "no evidence".
So why are the naesayers working so hard to deny the obvious? They are absolutely terrified that the admin is "making a case" for military action against Iran.
Consider the AP headline today, "Pelosi: Bush lacks power to invade Iran".
'scuse me, but who the heck in the WH administration has ever suggested invading Iran? Isn't this akin to screaming "fire" in a crowded theatre for no reason??
This is nothing but pure speculation and political guessing games with one goal in mind... to further enflame an already war-weary public. Which is a *very* interesting concept since, other than military families, the US "public" hasn't had to suffer or ration one thing out of our selfish little lives for the war effort.
These "no war with Iran" BS headlines and talking points from our Congressional members is a serious departure from truth, honesty and ethics. Ranting about avenues not even proposed merely for politican gain *should* be beneath our elected officials.
I have a difference thought as to why we are be advised to Iran's deep involvement here... aside from the "we just have to know everything" media attitudes permeating our times. Instead I believe the more Iran can be linked to Iraqi chaos, the better the chance to involve more of the hard-headed int'l community sluff-off's. It is one more case against Iran for the UN (worthless entity that they are) to consider. It's also another reason to continue our strong economic clampdown on those trading with Iran... which is working better than the Iranians like. It's part of the reason the country and clerics are getting disgruntled with the Iranian Presidential rhetorical antics, and asking him to tone it down.
Then again, despite Iran's efforts to muddy the Iraqi waters, the int'l community will continue to give them a pass. Afterall, they have always proven to be long on criticism, and way short on performance and honoring promises.