Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 05/09/2006 View Mon 05/08/2006 View Sun 05/07/2006 View Sat 05/06/2006 View Fri 05/05/2006 View Thu 05/04/2006 View Wed 05/03/2006
1
2006-05-09 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Bomb explodes in governor’s office in western Iran
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve White 2006-05-09 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11126 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 may they rest in pieces
Posted by Captain America 2006-05-09 00:56||   2006-05-09 00:56|| Front Page Top

#2 The first reaction I had was good. Then I think about if this was London, Dublin, Sacremento in Bagdad or Tel Aviv. Then I say to myself another gutless bomb.

Bombs like this are the work of cowards. They are more apt to kill the inocent than the guilty. It's terrorism even if it's against those who I foster ill will. I foster ill will towards Iran. I Hate the M²s But when someone is killed by a cannon or gravity bomb it's not random and not more apt to kill someones mother or child and those guilty of only life and being at the terrorists target at the wrong time.
Posted by SPoD 2006-05-09 02:02|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]  2006-05-09 02:02|| Front Page Top

#3 Sock...I hear you, and I agree. My only caveat would be bombs disrupting Iranian infrastructure that do not directly harm innocent life. I think the oil terminals are fair game.
Posted by anymouse">anymouse  2006-05-09 02:10||   2006-05-09 02:10|| Front Page Top

#4 Industrial sabotage and disruption is a whole different story. Blowing up the highway, taking out bridges in the middle of the night, cutting the phone lines, blowing power distribution infrastructure. Taking ouiut TV and Radio transmission instlations Thats a whole different story. Just don't foul the water or the food.
Posted by SPoD 2006-05-09 02:31|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]  2006-05-09 02:31|| Front Page Top

#5 What goes around
Posted by gromgoru 2006-05-09 05:41||   2006-05-09 05:41|| Front Page Top

#6 Gotta disagree. This is a war. When the history books are written, what they will record is who won and who lost. And you better hope your children and grandchildren are allowed to read those histories. If they are, you should thank a soldier.
Posted by phil_b">phil_b  2006-05-09 06:37|| http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]">[http://autonomousoperation.blogspot.com/]  2006-05-09 06:37|| Front Page Top

#7 Attacking civies is off limits. attacking armed military guys is the essence of war. Is it terrorism to attack, say, a group of military officers who are commanding forces, but not actually carrying guns? The USAF certainly does that, from Belgrade to Baghdad. How about a civilian governor? Does the governor of Kermanshah have security responsibities?

At some level the MSM is right - NOT all insurgents are terrorists. Note well - that does NOT mean that insurgents who are NOT terrorists are "right" or "just like the minutement" etc. If an Iraqi insurgent kills an Iraqi general, or even an Iraqi prov governor, the insurgent may not have committed an act of terror. But he HAS attempted to overthrow, by force, the elected govt of the country, and reduce it to chaos. The same act against a totalitarian regime might be justified.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2006-05-09 09:22||   2006-05-09 09:22|| Front Page Top

#8 But if they're not wearing uniforms themselves and relying mainly on blending with the civilian populace for their protection, they're still unlawful combatants.

And besides, in order to get away with doing that, they wind up having to practice extorsion and terrorism against the civilian population.
Posted by Phil 2006-05-09 09:45||   2006-05-09 09:45|| Front Page Top

#9 We don't know what the governor has been up to. He could be the biggest bastard on earth.
I agree with phil_b.
Then again, this is the world of Islam, where people go boom in the night, day, weekend, anytime, anywhere.
Posted by wxjames 2006-05-09 09:53||   2006-05-09 09:53|| Front Page Top

#10 phil is correct. Not all unlawful combatants are terrorists, though all terrorists are unlawful combatants.

But i was thinking in the context of Spods posts. Suppose the guys who bombed the govs office in Kermanshah are unlawful combatants. What follows from that? If the Iranians catch them, and fail to treat them as EPWs under the laws of war, then the Iran govt has commited no war crime. I can buy that. You become an unlawful combatant, you do so at your own risk. Doesnt mean we cant root for them to succeed in their attack on the Iranian authorities.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2006-05-09 10:48||   2006-05-09 10:48|| Front Page Top

#11 I'm not sure.

Can you tell me where that attack had any military significance whatsoever? Did it _accomplish_ anything?
Posted by Phil 2006-05-09 11:30||   2006-05-09 11:30|| Front Page Top

#12 Can you tell me where that attack had any military significance whatsoever? Did it _accomplish_ anything?
Well, I'd bet the governor of the province is sweating in his knickers after this attack, and a few others may also feel just a tad insecure. Sometimes it's not what's done but how it's percieved that is the real accomplishment. I'm all for making the MMs and their cohorts feel VERY uncomfortable and unsafe.
Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot  2006-05-09 13:49|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]  2006-05-09 13:49|| Front Page Top

#13 Any military significance? Accomplish anything? Yes sir. It's called command and control disruption. Basic military tactic.
Posted by mcsegeek1 2006-05-09 15:15||   2006-05-09 15:15|| Front Page Top

#14 Like blowing up an electrical power line?
Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2006-05-09 15:29||   2006-05-09 15:29|| Front Page Top

#15 "Can you tell me where that attack had any military significance whatsoever? Did it _accomplish_ anything?"

Well not as much as it would have if theyd GOTTEN the governor, d'uh.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2006-05-09 16:38||   2006-05-09 16:38|| Front Page Top

#16 is Bob Mugabe offlimits, LH? Kimmy?
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-05-09 16:41||   2006-05-09 16:41|| Front Page Top

#17 IIUC theres been considerable debate about the issue of killing a head of state. I havent followed it. I dont think the Zimbabwe opposition is doing violence, YET. And I dont think there IS a serious NKOR opposition.
Posted by Liberalhawk 2006-05-09 16:44||   2006-05-09 16:44|| Front Page Top

#18 Not what I meant.

The governor may have just been a figurehead, and not had much to do with military or police command and control.
Posted by Phil 2006-05-09 17:05||   2006-05-09 17:05|| Front Page Top

#19 re: the debate - I was asking for YOUR position, you condemned SPOD, I'd like to know where YOUR line is. Would Hitler have been a valid target? Sure he wore a uniform, but how about '38? Would he have beeen a valid taget? Don't weasel on me....
Posted by Frank G">Frank G  2006-05-09 17:24||   2006-05-09 17:24|| Front Page Top

#20 Are you sure, Frank? I thought he agreed with SPoD.
Posted by trailing wife 2006-05-09 19:02||   2006-05-09 19:02|| Front Page Top

23:36 Dorf
23:27 DMFD
23:22 DMFD
23:17 Rambler
22:56 RWV
22:47 SPoD
22:40 Frank G
22:38 JosephMendiola
22:35  Barbara Skolaut
22:35 trailing wife
22:30 Frank G
22:21 Manolo
22:20 ed
22:19 JosephMendiola
22:15 Manolo
22:11 ed
22:08 ed
22:08 JosephMendiola
22:08 tu3031
22:06 SPoD
22:06 Oldspook
22:06 Anonymoose
22:02 Oldspook
22:00 Frank G









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com