Iran 'paid Iraq insurgents to kill

[Tony-DarkGrave]

Iran has secretly funded insurgent attacks on British soldiers stationed in southern Iraq, a British newspaper reported Sunday.

According to a leaked British government document obtained by London's Daily Telegraph, Jaish al-Mahdi (JAM) - also known as the Mahdi Army - used hundreds of thousands of dollars funneled from Iran to pay fighters to carry out strikes against U.K. forces in Basra.

The report, "Life Under Fire in the Old State Building", details how "Iranian finance teams" worked in the area to recruit and pay unemployed men up to $300 a month to becoming insurgent fighters, the Telegraph reported.

According to the report, discovery of Iran's involvement came from a network of 25 local sources, including a former Iraqi army general, prominent businessmen and local sheikhs.

A senior British officer said that, although officially denied, the existence of Iran's influence in Basra was widely known by the British military, the Telegraph reported.

British forces withdrew from the city in September 2007, but the leak is the latest evidence that Iran continues to send money and weapons into Iraq to fund insurgent activity, and comes amid rising tension between Iran and the international community over its denial that Tehran is developing a nuclear weapons program.

Source

[Idiot-Finder]

Not surprised, there's always been suspicions concerning Iran's involvement for a while now.

[Sajberhippien]

I don't get it. America pays americans to kill, how is that better?

[Sajberhippien]

Replace "america" with "america, UK, and other countries".

[ByronicHero]

Iran 'paid Iraq insurgents to kill

Okay, and...?

Even America (and many other countries) does this. Are you familiar with the term 'mercenary'?

[Proteas]

... fucking duh?

Hasn't the supposed "secret" of Iran paying for Insurgents in Iraq to fight been the scuttlebut of conservative talk show hosts for months now? You seriously needed the BBC to come forward and validate those views?

[SolInvictus]

you can put a little more effort into creating topics beyond copy/paste.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 6/7/08 04:40 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: Replace "america" with "america, UK, and other countries".

Maybe it would matter more if the united states was fighting a war against itself, and not... er... insurgents.

[homor]

At 6/7/08 04:37 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: I don't get it. America pays americans to kill, how is that better?

you're a fucking idiot.

[dySWN]

At 6/7/08 05:12 PM, ByronicHero wrote:

Iran 'paid Iraq insurgents to kill

Okay, and...?

Even America (and many other countries) does this. Are you familiar with the term 'mercenary'?

There's a difference between just hiring mercenaries and starting a proxy war. This is the latter.

[ByronicHero]

At 6/7/08 05:59 PM, dySWN wrote:

At 6/7/08 05:12 PM, ByronicHero wrote:

Iran 'paid Iraq insurgents to kill

Okay, and...?

Even America (and many other countries) does this. Are you familiar with the term 'mercenary'?

There's a difference between just hiring mercenaries and starting a proxy war. This is the latter.

proxy war:
a war instigated by a major power that does not itself participate

mercenary:
1. working or acting merely for money or other reward; venal.
2. hired to serve in a foreign army, guerrilla organization, etc.

(Source: Dictionary.com)

I don't see much difference, if any.

[bcdemon]

A lot of countries are guilty of proxy war, it's just Iran's turn.

[Sajberhippien]

At 6/7/08 05:59 PM, homor wrote:

At 6/7/08 04:37 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: I don't get it. America pays americans to kill, how is that better?

you're a fucking idiot.

Explain why.
I seriously don't get the big difference. I mean, how is it better that the US pays people to kill enemy forces than Iran doing it?
Iran hires mercenaries to kill your soldiers, you kill the mercenaries. Same shit to me, but if there is a major difference, I'd be happy to learn.
It's a serious question, not a rethorical one.

[homor]

At 6/8/08 04:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 6/7/08 05:59 PM, homor wrote:

At 6/7/08 04:37 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: I don't get it. America pays americans to kill, how is that better?

you're a fucking idiot.

Explain why.

BECAUSE THEY AREN'T PAID YOU FUCKING DOLT.

[homor]

At 6/8/08 04:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote: I seriously don't get the big difference. I mean, how is it better that the US pays people to kill enemy forces than Iran doing it?

because we don't pay our troops to kill people we aren't at war with or pay them to attack civilians, hell, we BEARLY, (sorry for the exaggeration erailer.) pay them at all.

Iran hires mercenaries to kill your soldiers, you kill the mercenaries. Same shit to me, but if there is a major difference, I'd be happy to learn.

its because not only do we not make NEARLY enough money to do this as a career, we also don't kill innocents.

It's a serious question, not a rethorical one.

and i just anserwed it.

[D2Kvirus]

At 6/7/08 02:20 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:
Source

Fox News is your source? Yeesh, you'll be citing urbandictionary next...

[Sajberhippien]

At 6/8/08 08:29 AM, homor wrote:

At 6/8/08 04:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

At 6/7/08 05:59 PM, homor wrote:

At 6/7/08 04:37 PM, Sajberhippien wrote: I don't get it. America pays americans to kill, how is that better?

you're a fucking idiot.

Explain why.

BECAUSE THEY AREN'T PAID YOU FUCKING DOLT.

You don't get paid for being in the army? The US doesn't pay mercenaries like Blackwater?

At 6/8/08 08:33 AM, homor wrote:

At 6/8/08 04:59 AM, Sajberhippien wrote: I seriously don't get the big difference. I mean, how is it better that the US pays people to kill enemy forces than Iran doing it?

because we don't pay our troops to kill people we aren't at war with or pay them to attack civilians, hell, we BEARLY, (sorry for the exaggeration erailer.) pay them at all.

You shoot iraqis, isn't the war in Iraq over? I thought you had claimed victory in Iraq already... Like, in 2003 or whenever it was.

Iran hires mercenaries to kill your soldiers, you kill the mercenaries. Same shit to me, but if there is a major difference, I'd be happy to learn.

its because not only do we not make NEARLY enough money to do this as a career, we also don't kill innocents.

Were Iran paying them to attack civilians? From the Fox text it seemed as if they were paid to attack brittish targets in Iraq... Don't know if Iraq is big on the tourism side, but I doubt it.

It's a serious question, not a rethorical one.

and i just anserwed it.

Still, the answer is unfortunately a bit lacking...

[Memorize]

At 6/8/08 09:12 AM, D2Kvirus wrote:

At 6/7/08 02:20 PM, Dante-Son-Of-Sparda wrote:
Source

Fox News is your source? Yeesh, you'll be citing urbandictionary next...

So it's still 'ok' to use NBC, CBS, ABC, and CNN as sources... but not FOX, which currently rated most 'balanced' and 'trustworthy' of the major news media outlets?

Yeah. Fuck you.

[uhnoesanoob]

At 6/8/08 02:37 AM, bcdemon wrote: A lot of countries are guilty of proxy war, it's just Iran's turn.

Yup, but if it is killing my fellow countrymen then it is a problem. We should be doing more against Iran.

[Memorize]

At 6/8/08 10:15 AM, Sajberhippien wrote:

You shoot iraqis, isn't the war in Iraq over? I thought you had claimed victory in Iraq already... Like,

in 2003 or whenever it was.

Do you love playing the total idiot? Or are you really a total idiot?

Still, the answer is unfortunately a bit lacking...

The answer is obvious, and you should be shot in the foot for even asking.

[Coherent]

Remember when the CIA toppled a legitimate Iranian democracy, and then replaced it with a US sponsored dictatorship so we could stop them from nationalizing their oil?

Hah, good times.

[homor]

At 6/8/08 10:15 AM, Sajberhippien wrote: You don't get paid for being in the army?

no.

and if sonot very much.

The US doesn't pay mercenaries like Blackwater?

if times wearen't so despreate we wouldn't.

You shoot iraqis, isn't the war in Iraq over? I thought you had claimed victory in Iraq already... Like, in 2003 or whenever it was.

no, the INVASOIN is over you mis-informed, guy.

see? no personal attack.

Were Iran paying them to attack civilians?

thats what they do.

Still, the answer is unfortunately a bit lacking...

the anserw is fine.

[SmilezRoyale]

At 6/8/08 12:10 PM, Coherent wrote: Remember when the CIA toppled a legitimate Iranian democracy, and then replaced it with a US sponsored dictatorship so we could stop them from nationalizing their oil?

Hah, good times.

Well good thing iraq wasn't a legitimate democracy Eh?

i suppose it's only fair we keep ourselfs from nationalizing our oil as well.