Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 06/15/2004 View Mon 06/14/2004 View Sun 06/13/2004 View Sat 06/12/2004 View Fri 06/11/2004 View Thu 06/10/2004 View Wed 06/09/2004
1
2004-06-15 Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran mobilizes 4 battalions along the Iraqi border
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 Dan Darling 2004-06-15 10:28:29 AM|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 It's MOAB time!!!!!!
Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-15 10:51:38 AM||   2004-06-15 10:51:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 not too smart on the part of the iranians..if true they are really putting themselves in a corner..just placing a reason in Bush's lap..if it were not for the nov elections we would already be preparing forces...

Posted by Dan 2004-06-15 10:54:44 AM||   2004-06-15 10:54:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Hope you set a few battalions aside for a rainy day...
Posted by BH 2004-06-15 10:58:56 AM||   2004-06-15 10:58:56 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 One Brigade of soldiers? A US Brigade is about 5,000, but I imagine an Iranian Brigade would be about double that. It took almost that many US Marines to still a restive Fallujah.
It's not enough for defense, and it certainly isn't enough for offense. So I'm thinking "border patrol." The reason being that the Mullahs are scared stupid about being overthrown, and probably want to have a lot more control over pilgrims.
Posted by Anonymoose 2004-06-15 11:09:33 AM||   2004-06-15 11:09:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 My understanding is there has been a great deal of infiltration of both fighters and arms from Iran and Syria into Iraq. Almost no mention of this in the mainstream media ( Surprise! ).

My guess is the Iranian troops are a backstop to keep Coalition forces from coming too far in hot pursuit of wanna-be bad guys.
Posted by SteveS 2004-06-15 11:19:34 AM||   2004-06-15 11:19:34 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 Iran is kinda a study speciality with me. Iran has lot more than just four battations posited near the Iraqi frontier, from my last reading, there is about an army corps ( 3 divisons ) in the area immediately north of Shatt al Arab and three divisions more in the north near the Russian/Turkey/Iraqi frontiers.

And in war it is hard to mobilize four battatlions which already exist. That is not considered mobilization, it is called manuevering.

In order for Iran to be reasonably girding for war and mobilizing, the Pasdarans would have to be sweeping into western Iranian villages to 'recruit' canon fodder soldiers for their units to be formed in the area, and this paper doesnt mention that.

This story sounds like a plant, but it doesn't sound like one of ours.
Posted by Anonymous5224 2004-06-15 11:28:42 AM||   2004-06-15 11:28:42 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 The above post was mine btw. Posting from a different computer today
Posted by badanov  2004-06-15 11:34:06 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org]  2004-06-15 11:34:06 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 #4 you must remember that the although the combat in falluja was instense - we did not bring to bear our total combat power. it's the humane way of waging war. in the coming conflict in iran you will see the dogs of war released and they would need more that a corp..
Posted by Dan 2004-06-15 12:08:51 PM||   2004-06-15 12:08:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Dan, good point. And the Corps doesn't get to play with them until the Air Force has had their way with them. ;)
Posted by BH 2004-06-15 12:11:47 PM||   2004-06-15 12:11:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 this is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen - talk about a death wish
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-15 12:19:39 PM||   2004-06-15 12:19:39 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Way good badanov.
Posted by Shipman 2004-06-15 12:21:52 PM||   2004-06-15 12:21:52 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Iran mobilizing an army to enter Iraq is laughable on the face of it. They would be crushed and they know it. The sand is eroding under the Qom blackhats. And they know that too.
Posted by remote man 2004-06-15 1:56:15 PM||   2004-06-15 1:56:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 I find it no coincidence that Iran makes a move like this at the same time they proclaim to the world that they are a Nuclear Power and we all had just better live with it.
Posted by TomAnon 2004-06-15 2:56:20 PM||   2004-06-15 2:56:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 It's times like that that make democracy look bad ><

(If it weren't for the elections - if the leadership didn't have to worry about change until after the war on terror - then we could wage it without fear of political reprisal ...)
Posted by Edward Yee  2004-06-15 3:38:31 PM|| [http://edwardyee.fanworks.net]  2004-06-15 3:38:31 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 I find it no coincidence that Iran makes a move like this at the same time they proclaim to the world that they are a Nuclear Power and we all had just better live with it.

Pretty hard to disagree with this. It appears as thought the Iranian mullahs have been sucking their own butts breathing their own exhaust long enough to actually start believing the bellicose rhetoric that they spew.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-15 3:59:43 PM||   2004-06-15 3:59:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 Sounds more like a native Iraqi plant designed to get Sunnis to rally to the flag of the interim government. Scare 'em with the spectre of an Iranian intervention, you know?
Posted by Mitch H.  2004-06-15 4:27:06 PM|| [http://blogfonte.blogspot.com/]  2004-06-15 4:27:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 I dont know. Iran (And Saudi Arabia too but they are more sneaky about it) I think is terrified of a free and democratic Iraq with a free and open market and would do almost everything in its power to prevent it.

Tater was a bust and they dont have any legitimate way of sneaking military into Iraq via Pilgrims. Perhaps they are getting desperate. They may be trying to do something to delay the June 30th transfer (when Iraq is no longer an 'occupied' country).
Posted by CrazyFool  2004-06-15 4:41:09 PM||   2004-06-15 4:41:09 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 This story sounds like a plant, but it doesn't sound like one of ours.

Considering it comes from a Saudi newspaper supposedly quoting Iraqi sources, it could've come from anywhere and planted for any number of reasons. The 'four battalions' aspect is interesting...
Posted by Pappy 2004-06-15 5:28:12 PM||   2004-06-15 5:28:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Tater had to be a sideshow. There is no way he was the best they have. The game continues. We have many cards to play on the other side of the border.
Posted by JAB 2004-06-15 5:48:25 PM||   2004-06-15 5:48:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 #19 - tater is the only hand they have to play at this stage..any overt moves will cause an immediate effect on world opinion and free Bush's hand to move overtly before the elections...
Posted by Dan 2004-06-15 6:15:12 PM||   2004-06-15 6:15:12 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 There is no question in my mind Tater's play was a paid for performance;a diversionary manuever. It appeared to have the purpose of drawing forces from elsewhere, but I don't know if it had the effect.

That why this story bothers me. A prudent theatre commander could have it confirmed within hours whether this was true. So if the foreign intel service thinking it can get our forces to redeploy plants this story, they would have to know this could be confirmed pretty quickly, so the story would also die as fast, unless there is an attempt to rile a political component either in Iraq or in the USA, or both.

Maybe there are some insightful folks lurking to weigh in on this.

Enquiring minds wanna know!
Posted by badanov  2004-06-15 6:16:40 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org]  2004-06-15 6:16:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 I wouldn't overanalyze this story and hopefully the theatre commander does not overreact to it even if true.

I am sure we are paying plenty of attention to the distribution of Iranian forces but 4 battalions pose a threat to us only if we react.

They would be suicidal to force a showdown by crossing the border, even if they are able to move unchecked for a bit and even if such action coincides with the detonation of a nuke. They should be able to afford to wait: we're withdrawing from Iraq eventually, their nuke program is proceeding unchecked and, despite the wishful thinking of some, their domestic situation is manageable.
Posted by JAB 2004-06-15 6:31:40 PM||   2004-06-15 6:31:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Cross the border? Why - they don't realize they've become in range heh heh
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-15 6:49:05 PM||   2004-06-15 6:49:05 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Assuming it's true, on a grand political scale I'd guess it's not much more than saber rattling in an attempt to keep the Iraqi interim government from getting too cozy. Then again it could certainly be aimed at cross-border traffic going both ways: assisting money, arms and fighters on their journey into Iraq as well as interfering with infiltration going the other way (you know that the alphabet-soup agencies worldwide are salivating at the operational freedom they almost certainly have in Afghan and Iraqi territory with the US at least nominally running the show).
Posted by AzCat 2004-06-15 6:50:40 PM||   2004-06-15 6:50:40 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Again,assuming report is true Iran deployed 4 battalions closer to border,I could easily see them as being security for training camps for Iraq-bound terrorist trainees.The bit about US leaving woud be cover story.The thinking in Tehran might be,US wouldn't hesitate to launch cruise missiles at terror camps,but would not do so if Iranian Army units were there,as that would be act of war.
Posted by Stephen 2004-06-15 7:55:30 PM||   2004-06-15 7:55:30 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Stephen, the problem with that logic is that IRan says it isn't protecting terrorists. If an army unit is attacked at a terrorist camp then that is not only confirming that they lied, but gives the US justification take out their Nuclear power plant for precautionary measures. They won't risk the plant.
Posted by Charles  2004-06-15 8:17:15 PM||   2004-06-15 8:17:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#27 Bush-Powell facilitate a globifada against America, and the sheepish masses support those short-sighted idiots:

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20040615.wirkky0615/BNStory/International

Washington and Lincoln are rolling in their graves. Reagan wouldn't have been party to this insanity. June 30, 2004: a day of American infamy.
Posted by Dog Bites Trolls 2004-06-15 9:28:57 PM||   2004-06-15 9:28:57 PM|| Front Page Top

#28 do the rest of you smell something? I do... and it smells bad
Posted by Frank G  2004-06-15 9:42:43 PM||   2004-06-15 9:42:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#29 Its fairly clear that these troops are to keep Iraqi Infiltrators out of the Arab majority areas inside Iran.
Posted by Phil B  2004-06-15 9:50:46 PM||   2004-06-15 9:50:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#30 This article reflects the general ignorance of matters military that permeates the media. Iran was fought to a draw by Saddam in eight years of WWI style trench warfare in spite of being three times the size of Iraq. Four battalions don't amount to much of anything but a target of opportunity for a cell of B-52s with cluster bombs. I think this is just an attempt by the press to stir up trouble and support their contention that President Bush hosed up Iraq.
Posted by RWV 2004-06-15 9:56:55 PM||   2004-06-15 9:56:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#31 Has anyone ever noticed lately that all the people who thought Reagan was a retarded warmongering idiot out to end the world back when he was alive and in his right mind are now talking about what a reasonable cautious liberal he was now that he's dead and unable to defend himself?
Posted by Phil Fraering 2004-06-15 10:28:01 PM|| [http://newsfromthefridge.typepad.com]  2004-06-15 10:28:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#32 Phil - That's cuz they can claim his successes if they make him a liberal and he can't defend himself.
Posted by Laurence of the Rats  2004-06-15 10:45:23 PM|| [http://www.punictreachery.com/]  2004-06-15 10:45:23 PM|| Front Page Top

#33 Tater had to be a sideshow. There is no way he was the best they have.

I disagree. Consider that Sadr is accused (to at least some degree) of complicity in murdering the extremely popular Ayatollah Abdul Majid al-Khoei, it would seem that he was making a desperate ploy to polarize Iraqi Shiites against a pro-liberation element:

Blood and vengeance was what many experts were forecasting in the long, deliberative months leading to the war in Iraq. And the shocking brutality of the killing of one of Shiite Islam's most respected leaders — a descendant of an illustrious line of clerics — in one of Shiism's holiest sites sent a chill down the international community's collective spine. Al-Khoei was the son of the Grand Ayatollah Abul Qasim al-Khoei, the Shiite world's supreme spiritual leader until his death under house arrest in Iraq in 1992. The younger al-Khoei fled to London following the brutal suppression of the Shiite uprising in Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War. As the son of a supreme religious leader who courageously attempted to lead his father's followers during the doomed 1991 revolt — when Washington abandoned the Shiites of southern Iraq after encouraging them to revolt against Saddam — his credentials were impeccable.

What's more, the charismatic 41-year-old leader had arrived on Iraqi soil under the protection of U.S. forces. It was the U.S. military that flew al-Khoei in from Kuwait barely two weeks into the war. And U.S. military officials held meetings with the influential cleric in their attempt to stabilize the situation in politically charged southern Iraq. For his part, al-Khoei, a fervent opponent of Saddam who stayed in helpless exile while his father perished under the Iraqi dictator's watchful eyes, apparently played his part admirably. Between issuing calls for peace to his followers on local radio and meeting with various community leaders, al-Khoei told journalists who interviewed him that he was in Iraq merely to attend to his followers, not to pursue political power.
Posted by Zenster 2004-06-15 11:42:22 PM||   2004-06-15 11:42:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#34 Not just the liberals, Phil. The Cato Institute has been slobbering all over this meme as well.
Posted by Pappy 2004-06-15 11:42:32 PM||   2004-06-15 11:42:32 PM|| Front Page Top

#35 Bad news...the wire services got it wrong. Four divisions, not four battalions.

This is DARPA's translation of the article:

"London: Al-Sharq al-Awsat (Internet Version-WWW) in Arabic 15 Jun 04 [Unattributed Report: "Iran Deploys Four Military Divisions Near [Iraqi] Border"]

London, Al-Sharq al-Awsat -- Reliable Iraqi sources have revealed that Iran moved part of its regular military forces toward the Iraqi border in the southern sector and also
infiltrated numerous military intelligence elements into Iraqi territory.

The source told Al-Sharq al-Awsat that four Iranian Army divisions, including the Golden Division [al-firqah al-Dhahabiyah], are currently stationed near the Iraqi border in the
Al-Amarah and Al-Basrah sector and in the vicinity of Dezful in the Maysan sector and Shalamcheh in the Al-Basrah sector."

The source pointed out that the Iranians might plan to enter Iraqi territory if the US forces withdraw [from Iraq] in order to exploit the security vacuum that could occur there,
relying on their intelligence elements that have been infiltrated into Iraq since the overthrow of the former regime over a year ago."


Recalculate, and please carry on with the discussion. Especially useful would be Iranian TOE and OOB, including coordinates, as recent as possible to augment what CSIS and Global Security have to offer.

Posted by jeffers 2004-06-17 3:38:43 PM||   2004-06-17 3:38:43 PM|| Front Page Top

20:54 thom
15:01 Anonymous5403
20:06 Shipman
19:53 .com
19:52 .com
19:44 Anonymous5327
16:09 remote man
16:01 Anonymous5327
11:33 Mark Espinola
11:17 Anonymous5309
15:38 jeffers
07:03 Shipman
04:23 Howard UK
01:59 Alaska Paul
00:41 mojo
00:37 someone
00:35 Zenster
00:27 badanov
00:13 OldSpook
23:54 Anonymous4617
23:53 Pappy
23:53 Lucky
23:51 Anonymous4617
23:46 Zenster









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com