Monday, July 31, 2006

Hezbollah missiles can hit all Israel: Iran's cleric

LONDON, August 3 (IranMania) - According to an AFP report, one of the Iranian founders of Lebanon's Hezbollah said in remarks published on Thursday that the Shiite militia group had missiles which "leave no spot in Israel unreachable".

"Hezbollah's arsenal not only includes Katyusha missiles, but also Zelzal-2 missiles, which could hit targets as far as 250 kilometres (155 miles), leaving no spot in Israel unreachable," Ali Akbar Mohtashami-Pour, a cleric, told the centrist Shargh newspaper.

Mohtshami-Pour, a former ambassador of the Islamic republic's to Syria during the early 1980s, did not say where the missiles were made.

"Hezbollah managed to equip itself in the past five years," he noted, implicitly referring to Israel's pullout from southern Lebanon in 2000.

His comments were backed by the Hezbollah representative in Iran, Abdullah Safeyodin.
"The reason we have aimed at Haifa is because it is a vital target .... but if it is deemed necessary we will target Tel Aviv," Safeyodin was quoted as saying by Iranian papers.

The Iranian cleric also shrugged off any direct Iranian military involvement in the conflict between Hezbollah and the Israeli military.

"In order to cover up their defeats, I am constantly hearing that the Americans and the Israelis claim that the fighters are Iran's military group of Sepah, but it is not true," he said.

Sepah is the elite Revolutionary Guards under the direct command of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

"They are Lebanese Hezbollah fighters, who have become better than their instructors."
Iran is one of the main backers of Hezbollah, which captured two Israeli soldiers on July 12 to try to secure the release of Lebanese held by Israel, and triggered a massive Israeli onslaught on Lebanon.

The Islamic republic has always maintained that it is only 'morally" supporting Hezbollah.


Jaws of Defeat-America and Israel
Are going to lose the war in Lebanon

By David Horowitz
July 31, 2006

America and Israel are going to lose the war in Lebanon, and the American Left will have a lot to answer for.

The United States and Israel and every sentient being in the path of the Islamist crusade are teetering on the brink of a massive defeat in Lebanon and thus in the war on terror. Lest it be forgotten, this is a war that began with the Ayatollahs’ revolution in Iran in 1979 which established the first radical Islamic state whose masters’ war cry was “Death to America” and the establishment of a global Islamic empire. Nearly thirty years later, Iran is on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons and its imperial war is now being waged on Iran’s Lebanese frontier by its Hezbollah proxy. One month into the fighting which began with the attacks by Hamas and Hezbollah on the state of Israel, the scenario for the West’s defeat in this phase of the war is quite obvious and quite simple.

The appeasers of Islamofascism, who have been calling for a ceasefire and bewailing “civilian casualties” in Lebanon and Gaza, will succeed. Hezbollah will agree to turn over its arms to the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese army. The pro-Hezbollah UN will establish a security zone on Lebanon’s southern border to keep the area clear of non-government militias, of which the Hezbollah “militia” is the only one. The credulous in the Western camp will greet this as a victory for the peacemakers. But exactly the opposite will be the case.

According to a recent poll in Lebanon eighty percent of the Lebanese Arabs support Hezbollah. In other words, just as Hamas, which was created by the same Muslim Brotherhood that spawned al-Qaeda, is now the Palestinian government, so Hezbollah will emerge as the government of Lebanon. The Lebanese army will become the new Hezbollah “militia.” Only it won’t be a militia. It will be the terrorist army of a sovereign power, with the right to openly negotiate its arms deals with Syria and Iran. The next battle with Iran, in other words, will be World War III.

In fact, the next battleground in the spread of Shi’ia fascism is already in progress and aflame. It is Iraq, where Iran’s Shi’ia armies are already in the field under the command of the sheik of Sadr City, the America-hating cleric Moqtadar al-Sadr. Al-Sadr, it should be noted, is alive and in the field because the appeasers in this country, beginning with the Democratic Party but extending into the Bush State Department, stymied the first battle of Fallujah when al-Sadr was trapped and could have been killed and his militia destroyed. The Bush administration had to delay the attack until after Kerry’s defeat in the November 2004 elections in order to avoid the political complications that would have attended the battle in the midst of an election campaign.

But the first battle of Fallujah is only one of many defeats inflicted by the appeasers and abettors of Islamic imperialism in the West. The aid to the enemy within the Western camp has taken many forms, beginning with the hysterical and reckless attacks on the commander-in-chief of America’s forces as a liar and murderer, and the source of the terror that the Islamists create. Are there terrorists in Iraq? There were none there before George Bush created them. Is Hezbollah a Nazi army? It’s because the Jews “occupied” Palestinian lands. Of course, this is two lies in one.

All Israeli “occupation” is the product of four aggressive Arab wars against Israel. When Israel withdraws – as in Lebanon – it is attacked. The source of the terror in Lebanon, as in Iraq, is to be found in the Koran and in the despotisms of the Arab Middle East. But the appeasement camp cannot face the reality that its enemy is implacable and its hatred uncaused by anything its targets – Jews, Christians, “infidels” – have done.

The division of America is the greatest threat to our ability to prevail in the War on Terror – and the Left knows this and is incited by it. America is not divided enough for the American Left, which is now in full purge mode in Connecticut, where it is attempting to bring down the one statesman in the Democratic Party who might re-unite this country in the face of its enemies.

Those who in the midst of these wars clamor for ceasefires with an implacable foe, those who call for withdrawals that would leave sovereign states in the hands of the terrorist forces, those who decry civilian casualties caused by the only forces in this war who do not target civilians, those Blame-America-Firsters who exploit the Abu Ghraibs on our side and not their atrocities, those whose hysterical fear of the conflict we face takes the form of pathological denial and projects the rabid hatred of the enemy for us onto our own commander in the war, are destined to have a lot to answer for before this conflict is over.

Army diverts funds to war

By Rowan Scarborough
July 31, 2006
The Washington Times

The Army is showing the wear and tear of constant battle after nearly five years of war, cutting resources to nondeployed forces to make sure front-line troops stay at the highest combat readiness.

The daily assault of improvised explosive devices and a harsh environment of grinding sand and searing heat have sidelined scores of armored vehicles and combat aircraft. The Army is scrambling to "reset" the force -- an effort to repair or replace disabled equipment -- but it lacks the needed cash.

Although the situation is not a crisis for troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military is worried.

"I remain concerned about the serious demands we face," Gen. Peter Schoomaker, the Army chief of staff, said in response to critics who say the Army's readiness is slipping. Gen. Schoomaker has asked Congress for $17 billion in an emergency appropriation and then nearly $40 billion to be spent in three years, once hostilities end.

The shortfall is giving President Bush's critics a new opening to attack his conduct of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, much as they did two years ago over a lack of armored vehicles to protect troops from roadside bombs. For a president who campaigned in 2000 on restoring readiness to the armed forces, anecdotal reports of shortfalls of basic equipment is embarrassing as Iraq consumes more than $5 billion a month in Pentagon funds.

Gen. Schoomaker told Congress last month that the war is putting a tremendous stress on equipment. The M1A-1 battle tank, planned at an annual usage rate of 800 miles a year, goes in excess of 4,000 miles in Iraq. Trucks run at up to six times their programmed mileage.

Rep. John P. Murtha, Pennsylvania Democrat and vocal critic of the president on Iraq, said front-line units remain combat-ready, but nondeployed brigades back in the States are suffering.

"It's these units that are critically short of equipment, personnel, causing the vast majority of them to be rated at the lowest readiness level," said Mr. Murtha, who has announced plans to seek a Democratic leadership post next year.

Mr. Murtha contends that Army units at Fort Hood, Texas, home to the 4th Infantry and 1st Cavalry divisions, lack sufficient equipment with which to prepare for deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan. Bases have had to cut operations, such as shorter mess-hall hours, to save money. Army repair depots do not have enough money to fix broken weapons systems, and the congressman said the Marines are suffering a similar plight.

Retired Gen. John Keane, Army vice chief of staff in the early days of the Bush administration, has recently visited Fort Hood and Fort Bragg, N.C. He has viewed firsthand the shortfalls, but says that the Army overall is in good shape and can recover when more money hits the pipeline.

"The readiness of their equipment is being degraded by the lack of a supplemental [appropriation] to return equipment as soon as possible, and it also affects the training money you have to do -- all the training they would like to do," Gen. Keane said in an interview. "They are not broken units, but their state of readiness is not as high as the commanders want them to be."

With a good portion of the Army's 10 active divisions and the Marine Corps' two divisions either deployed or preparing to go back overseas, it is increasingly important that other units stay ready to fight another war, such as a conflict with North Korea.

Mr. Murtha said it would "be impossible to sustain a second front, almost impossible to deploy to a second front." The congressman, a Marine Vietnam combat veteran, has said in the past that the Army is broken.

Gen. Keane, however, "totally and completely disagrees."

"The quality of troops is high. Morale is high. Retention is what it should be. You look these guys in the eyeballs. They are committed as anybody I've seen. The junior officers, sergeants, officers at the battalion and brigade levels are much better than when I was at their level of responsibility."

He pointed out that the retention rates of the two Army divisions now in Iraq are well over 100 percent of their goals.