Registered: Jul 2005
Location: Captain's Chair, CA
"Senior Obama administration officials said the U.S. currently does not have any information indicating that either Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei or President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad necessarily knew about the assassination plot and said the U.S. will pursue a path of response that would not include the possibility of an armed conflict with Iran."
Some dude (probably multiple) that was smart said that we would eventually have wars in the middle east due to energy needs and religion. (Sounds silly due wars already existing, but he was talking about a world war on par with WW I).
Iran isn't suicidal enough to risk full military conflict with SA, especially given their standing as an American ally. In terms of international justification for conflict and regime change, attacking SA would pretty much ensure the Ayatollahs would no longer rule in Iran, conversely, SA really can't afford to be seen as the aggressors, given their own already upset Shia population. Its not MAD in the traditional sense, but neither nation would end up very well if they instigated military conflict with the other, imho
However, I don't see this as being something they will mutually brush under the rug IF they can bring the attempt to at least mid-level government from Iran.
That fact that it did not succeed may make a world of difference.
unfortunately, if it had succeeded, it almost certainly wouldn't be traceable to the Iranians. An actual Zeta killer would have not only escaped, but even if caught, would not have spilled the beans on the operation (let me throw this out there, however: the Zeta leaders would probably not have agreed to something like this, they have a lot on their plate atm). There may have been accusations or suspicions that Iran was involved given the target, but damn, if they hadn't almost lucked out into the plan, it would have been a cluster**** trying to figure it out (actually, one of the things that strikes me as odd is that it was such a lucky shot that the guys approached an informant... I'd really like to know more about that, like how many people he approached before the informant, or if he tried going to other cartels first)
my thoughts are they were trying to strain US-SA relations, as given SA's "not-to-be-spoken-of" ties to terrorism and the like, a little stress there might begin to push the two apart, or at least weaken the position of the Saudi royals, who rule SA only due to continuing military support from the Americans. If the royals fall, Iran is essentially free to dominate Bahrain and some of the Shia oil rich parts of Eastern SA, not to mention the GCC would probably fall, breaking up a bloc that exists almost primarily as ananti-Iranian entity (ok, exaggeration... but not much).
The way intelligence operations work, however, I don't think mid level government agents even need have been involved. It would be like suggesting that mid level government officials in America would have known the day to day activities of Ollie North. Even the highest levels of government only knew bits and pieces of what was going on. You might see it linked to like, the head of the Quds brigade or something, which is a pretty major part of government, but nobody on the planet thinks military/intelligence leaders in Iran are doves; they have made attempts at Iranian dissidents on American soil in the past. It would be like America finding out a leader of the KGB had planned an operation against them during the Cold War.
__________________ yes, a million times yes
Last edited by tsilamini on Oct 12th, 2011 at 02:40 AM
I assumed, in my "it would be worse if the assassination attempt succeeded" that the assassins were caught OR the intelligence community DID gather intelligence on what they were doing but did not know enough to know when they would strike (happens both ways in places other than the US).
And, I thought Iran's (at least the lower level military personnel tied to this) goal was to strain the US-SA's relations, as well. Except have SA alienate the US for an assassination having been successful upon one of their diplomats. It would be highly embarrassing to the US if such an attempt succeeded considering how "hard" we are supposed to be cracking down on global terrorism. It would cause SA to lose a bit of trust, no matter how many ways the US explained or justified it, in the US's position as "supporting partner" with SA.
And, I cannot comment on how far up orders, like "assassinate the Ambassador of SA while he is in the US", come in Iran.
However, an order like that is definitely not going to come from ONLY low-level players. In fact, I think it would be naive to assume something that big would come from low-level government/military personnel in Iran. This is mostly why this assassination attempt is considered a big deal: it's a bit much to try and brush aside as just the "rogue activities of dissenting military personnel".
But you may be right (actually, you will be) that it would be impossible to trace to something beyond mid-level involvement and for good reason. Unless, of course, the US Cyber Security military teams can break into and retrieve information such as orders.
But, I see this as something that PROBABLY came directly from General Ataollah Salehi. It's just waaaaaaay too big to not have come from someone like that.
If not Salehi, then Gen. Abdolrahim Mousavi.
But, that begs the question: would not this strategic direction have from the government rather than independently from the military? Most likely. Iran is not a "militocracy": government and military running closely together and it seems to be "top-down" from Government to Military (meaning, the military is ultimately subordinate to the government).
Oct 11th, 2011 07:05 PM
