| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran | |||
| Top cleric: US within Iran's 'firing range' | |||
| 2007-02-09 | |||
Tehran - A top Iranian cleric said on Friday the United States was within Iran's "firing range", a day after supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed to hit back at US interests worldwide if attacked.
"Would you dare to violate Iranian borders? See what harm will be done to you then," said Jananti, who heads the hardline electoral watchdog the Guardians Council. Khamenei on Thursday warned that Iran would hit back at American interests worldwide if the United States attacked the Islamic republic to thwart its nuclear programme. In response to Khamenei's comments the White House said it has no plans to invade Iran, and downplayed the significance of reinforcing the US military presence in the Gulf region.
Iran, which is under UN sanctions for its repeated defiance of the West over its nuclear programme, has repeatedly vowed it will not cave in to the key demand that it freeze uranium enrichment. Washington believes Tehran wants the bomb, an allegation firmly denied by the Islamic republic. | |||
| Posted by:Steve |
| #30 General Custer had the same advantage They've got us right where we want us! |
| Posted by: Free Radical 2007-02-09 23:42 |
| #29 I still like the idea of bombing Mecca (as per Tancredo). To get that threat out to these jokers if they ever attack us. And follow through! Any other sites that need to be leveled as well. |
| Posted by: Jan from work 2007-02-09 22:41 |
| #28 The Desolation. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-02-09 19:27 |
| #27 Mare America |
| Posted by: Shipman 2007-02-09 17:49 |
| #26 After the protest about naming it after Rumsfled, a living person, I suggest we back down and name it the Gulf of Infidels or the Gulf of Oil. Perhaps the Gulf of Dubai? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-02-09 17:07 |
| #25 A top Iranian cleric said on Friday the United States was within Iran's "firing range" Go ahead, you black-hat pussy. Man up and pull the trigger. You or anyone in your family will never live to use the money in the Swiss bank accounts. |
| Posted by: anymouse 2007-02-09 16:42 |
| #24 WHere I come from when someone gives you the phrase "hit me" or "I'm gonna kick your @ss" You are cleared hot to let them have it. Iran has dared us, pushed us, hit us, threatened us, and are frantically building the capability to deliver a thermonuclear device and detonate on us. Time is up for posturing, talking, and failed politics. We are at the time when we need to remove their nuclear weapons program and enter an era where they understand our capability at the personal level. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2007-02-09 14:19 |
| #23 Feb 11 is this coming Sunday and dammit if these A@@holes don't decide to do something that interferes with NASCAR. Now THAT is gonna piss off a whole sh!tload of rednecks (and other auto nuts). |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2007-02-09 14:14 |
| #22 that it would be a good time to rename the Persian Gulf to the alternate Arabian Gulf. I dunno, the proposed "Gulf of Rumsfeld" had a certain ring about it. I mean, he's gone, but his legacy lives on, so, why not? |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2007-02-09 14:09 |
| #21 Danielle, it's a mater of credibility. Since USA (Israel = same to Muzzies) insists on not harming civilians and even punishes its own soldiers for what Muslims consider normal perks of soldering, they just don't believe USA is capable of mass retaliation. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-02-09 14:02 |
| #20 They are within our firing range in the east, west and elsewhere,....He was referring to the US military presence in neighbouring Iraq and Afghanistan as well as in the Gulf waters off southern Iran. What if he is not referring to the Middle Eastern theater? They know fullwell what the US military is capable of but then suicidal nuts just think they will get the last laugh. By having terrorists in key locations, they could easily hit the mainland US and our interests worldwide. Iranian missile technology could have been shipped piecemeal sometime ago and be sitting in South America and elsewhere ready to go. That is the kind of terrorism that is extremely difficult to prevent and worries me most. |
| Posted by: Danielle 2007-02-09 13:32 |
| #19 Works both ways, Ali Actually, even if we removed our troops from the entire hemisphere, all of Iran would still be within our firing range. ICBMs, anyone? But given how accurate their equipment appears to be, the desert bits of Iraq appear to me to be more at risk than Coalition camps. But y'all keep talking big, and make the Arab world and Europe more and more nervous. Despite the contrary drive of anti-Americanism, they'll up taking our side out of reasonable self-interest. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-02-09 13:22 |
| #18 Right now this joker is all diaper and no camel. Until he gets his nuke. |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2007-02-09 12:57 |
| #17 As far as self-deceiving goes, I met an educated Lebanese, who asked (rhetorically, I guess), why the US spent most of its defense budget on Israel. I assured him that the US spent maybe 1/10th of 1% of what it spends on the military, on Israel. He refused to believe me. He *couldn't* believe me. He had seen what to him was the immense and powerful military of Israel and the destruction they could levy. For that to be just the tiniest fraction of what the US could do, was more than he could imagine. It is essential to them that they imagine Israel as an artificial creation, impossible if not for vast sums pouring into it from the US. And *therefore*, everything that Israel does is directly the fault of the US. Were it not for the US, the Israelis would be as dirt poor as the Palestinians, scraping a meager existence from the desert. They have to believe. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2007-02-09 12:54 |
| #16 Interesting point, rjshwarz. Way back in the dark ages when I held a paying job, one of the lab technicians I worked with was from Iran. One day we were were talking about the '79 Revolution that had led to his staying on in the US, and I kept referring to him as Persian, which was how the Jews I knew who'd fled there after '48 called themselves. I finally noticed that each time I said "Persian" he would say "Iranian" (I can be awfully slow, sometimes). So I asked, and he explained that Persia was ancient history, and they were all Iranians now. But of course that isn't completely true, as you so deftly point out. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2007-02-09 12:18 |
| #15 Go ahead. Hit me. I double dog dare ya. What are ya? Chicken? |
| Posted by: Ayatolla Assaholla 2007-02-09 12:02 |
| #14 I thought we decided it was the "Gulf of Rumsfeld"??? |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2007-02-09 11:52 |
| #13 It would only take one ARCLIGHT strike - anywhere - to tone down this rhetoric. I'd recommend a flight of 12 (in three-ship cells), armed with 1000lb dumb bombs, dropped on a single target. Let the Iranians know exactly how much damage we can do WITHOUT nuking them back to the stone age. That's a lesson we consistently fail to bring home to these a$$holes, and it's biting us, badly. They have little fear of us. That needs to change, immediately. It's far better to be feared than to be treated with contempt. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2007-02-09 11:43 |
| #12 I think the US should suggest to every mapmaker in the world as well as news agencies that it would be a good time to rename the Persian Gulf to the alternate Arabian Gulf. This would torque the Persians and uplift everyone else in the region (including non-persian Iranians) at very little cost. I think the Administration should be very careful about using the term Iran, and instead should use Persian Dictators, or Persian occupiers and such that highlights the racial issues in Iran itself. Sad that many who fled the Ayotollah call themselves Persians and the term would become a negative by this policy, but they'll get over it somehow. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-02-09 11:42 |
| #11 Old saying, "If the enemy is in range, SO ARE YOU. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-02-09 11:34 |
| #10 The thing is the brain washed locals think they are as powerful if not more so than the Americans!!!! |
| Posted by: Ebbolump Glomotle9608 2007-02-09 11:31 |
| #9 It doesn't sound like he's interested in saving souls. When was the last time a Islamic holy man was interested in saving souls? Just give the Iranians a shit eating grin and go back to stuffing as many and as much troops and equipment you can into the persian gulf. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-02-09 10:13 |
| #8 Is this little fu*cker naturally crazy or does he have to work hard at it? |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2007-02-09 08:57 |
| #7 Why is holy man Ali talking about the U.S. being in a "firing range"? It doesn't sound like he's interested in saving souls. He just wants to debate an empty chair. An empty soul debating with an empty chair. |
| Posted by: whatadeal 2007-02-09 08:48 |
| #6 Keep the squeeze on , the itchy trigger finger of the MM are just getting ever so more itchy . The only real question is , how much heat can they take before they panic and initiate first strike. |
| Posted by: MacNails 2007-02-09 08:41 |
| #5 They were promising something 'big' on Feb. 11 /we'll see |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2007-02-09 08:41 |
| #4 Good for you, Ali. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-02-09 08:40 |
| #3 #1 Where is plenty of Persians (ones who didn't accept worship of a dead Arab) in India. |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2007-02-09 08:38 |
| #2 I wonder how many thousands of tons of bombs the US can drop daily on Iranian cities? |
| Posted by: ed 2007-02-09 08:33 |
| #1 The possibility of Persians losing the use of Persia forever is way higher than the possibility of the rest of the world losing the use of the Persian Gulf. |
| Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418 2007-02-09 08:28 |