U.S. cooperates with Terrorist Group... *shakes head*

[js83]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85454,00.html

U.S. Cuts Deal With Iraq-Based Iranian Terror Group
Tuesday, April 29, 2003


CAMP ASSAYLIYAH, Qatar — The U.S. cease-fire with an Iranian exile group it considers a terrorist organization allows the Mujahedeen Khalq to defend itself from Iranian-sponsored attacks and keep its artillery and other weapons, U.S. military officials said Tuesday.

The cease-fire signed April 15 appears to be a way for the United States to increase pressure on Iran, which Washington has accused of meddling in Iraq after the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime.

But it represents a conundrum of sorts for the United States, which has classified the Iraq-based group as a terrorist organization. The United States went to war against Iraq in part to dismantle what it said were terrorist networks supported by Saddam's regime.

U.S. officials had said they were working out a capitulation by the left-leaning group, also known as the People's Mujahedeen. But on Tuesday, a U.S. military official said the deal doesn't require the group's fighters to surrender to coalition forces — at least for now.

It allows the Mujahedeen Khalq to use military force against what the United States says are Iranian infiltrators entering Iraq, such as the Badr Brigade, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The Independent newspaper of Britain has reported that armed members of the Badr Brigade had crossed into Iraq from Iran and were holding sway in Baqubah, a town 25 miles northeast of Baghdad. The brigade is the military wing of the Iran-based anti-Saddam group the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq.

The U.S. official said the Mujahedeen Khalq also "reserves the right of self-defense against the Iranian regime's attacks."

The National Council of Resistance of Iran, an umbrella group that includes the Mujahedeen, says members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard have crossed into Iraq and fought Mujahedeen fighters in recent weeks.

A top official in the council, Mohammad Mohaddessin, praised the agreement and said anything short of allowing Mujahedeen fighters to defend themselves would have only benefited the Tehran regime.

"It would only be natural that the Mujahedeen ... would be able to keep their weapons against such a common enemy," he said in a telephone interview from Paris.

When asked how the United States could make deals with groups classified as terrorists, the U.S. military official said the cease-fire was a battlefield agreement that coalition commanders were entitled to negotiate.

"Like all other parties in Iraq we will use U.S. influence and power to establish and maintain a secure and stable environment," the official said.

Mohaddessin said the agreement showed that the Mujahedeen should not be considered a terrorist group. He said he expected the Mujahedeen would negotiate another "agreement of mutual understanding" with the United States about the eventual status of their forces in Iraq in the near future.

U.S. officials have charged that Shiite Muslim-controlled Iran was sending operatives into neighboring Iraq to destabilize the country further and promote an Iranian-style theocracy among Iraq's predominantly Shiite population.

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has ruled out a theocracy for Iraq. On Monday, in an interview with the Qatar-based satellite channel Al-Jazeera, he said Iran's meddling was problematic.

"That type of external influence I don't think is helpful," he said. "I don't know anyone who does think it's helpful except the few people from Iran that run that country, a small clique of clerics."

Shiites make up over 60 percent of Iraq's population, and there are concerns that free elections might produce an Islamic-oriented government with close ties to the historically anti-American Shiite clerics who have governed Iran since the 1979 revolution.

Iran has denied meddling in Iraq. On Monday, Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi said Tehran wants to see an Iraqi government that is chosen by the people.

"For us the most important thing is that the Iraqi people independently choose their leadership and that the new government depends on the will of all the ethnic strata of Iraq," Kharrazi said while visiting Azerbaijan.

The U.S. military official outlined the scope of the cease-fire deal, which he said was signed by a coalition forces commander and Mahdi Baraie of the Mujahedeen Khalq to "ensure a complete cessation of hostilities."

Under the agreement, the official said, the Mujahedeen agreed to "not fire upon or commit any hostile act toward any coalition forces; not destroy or damage any government or private property, for example public infrastructure, oil pumping, refining, storage, or transportation facilities, and ... place all towed artillery and air defense artillery in a passive travel mode."

In return, coalition forces agreed to not damage any of the group's vehicles or equipment and not fire upon or commit any hostile act toward its forces.

"Additionally the agreement does not surrender or capitulate troops under the command of the (Mujahedeen Khalq) commander," the official said.

During the 1970s, the Mujahedeen Khalq, or "People's Holy Warriors," which blends Islamism and Marxism, was accused in attacks that killed several U.S. military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Iran.

It reportedly backed the takeover of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in 1979, but later broke with Iran's government. The group has denied involvement in the killing of U.S. servicemen and says it didn't support the embassy takeover.



After reading this, it just shows bush is full of shit. The war on terrorism is a fucking joke, period. On one hand it's you're with or us you're against us, and now it's necessary to sometimes cooperate with terrorists. I think bush and the american government need to figure out what the fuck they really stand for...

[King Tech Quadafi]

The Mujahedin eh Khalq was the only terrorist group that recieved support from Saddam but they have been ignored because they are anti Iran. Let me tell u something bro, when you make posts like this containing information, you will get no response. Americans here are programmed to accept whatever their govt tells them. Its so disgustingly Sovietesque. You can tell them to their face that this war on terror is a joke, and they wont believe it. I mean, i got a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand, not one person will say anything.

[TheSheriff]

One question, LaZ1e: You're surprised by this?

[Twentytwofifty]

I mean, i got a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand, not one person will say anything.

What year was that taken?

[js83]

One question, LaZ1e: You're surprised by this?

nah...not really.

[King Tech Quadafi]

I mean, i got a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand, not one person will say anything.

What year was that taken?

84 I believe.

[pappy]

I mean, i got a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand, not one person will say anything.

What year was that taken?

84 I believe.

1984,  back than did saddam show any signs than of his tru intent or than did he try to come off like he was a good guy of some sorts

[TheSheriff]

Back then, Saddam had committed genocide in Iran, and had been developing nuclear weapons-before the Israelis, in one of their few positive actions of recent years, blew the reactors up.

[King Tech Quadafi]

Back then, Saddam had committed genocide in Iran, and had been developing nuclear weapons-before the Israelis, in one of their few positive actions of recent years, blew the reactors up.

[Doggystylin]

ha, whys everyone all shut up now?

[Maestro Minded]

ha, whys everyone all shut up now?

LOL... for real  

[Woodrow]

I mean, i got a picture of Rumsfeld shaking Saddams hand, not one person will say anything.

OH NO!!!!

STALIN FDR AND CHURCHILL MEETING TOGETHER!!!!!!!

How come nobody will talk about this?

You claim to be "knowledgeable" in politics, but you can't comprehend that sometimes allies become enemies and vice versa.

[King Tech Quadafi]

to the tune of supplying them with weapons, turning a blind eye to their atrocities, then using said actions as justification for war?

[TheSheriff]

to the tune of supplying them with weapons, turning a blind eye to their atrocities, then using said actions as justification for war?

a) Supplied them with weapons. Yes.

b) Turned a blind eye. Yes.

c) Using those massacres for political capital. Can anyone say Cold War?

[King Tech Quadafi]

You cannot compare US/Soviet relations with US/Iraq relations.

With the Cold War, there was a fundemental ideological difference between the two. They only came together for the sake of defeating the Nazis. The US didnt fund the rise of the Bolsheviks in Russia.Both ended up to be imperialistic empires.

With Iraq, the Americans funded the rise of the Baath. Helped them in the war with the Iranians, and even gave em the green light to enter Kuwait.

The Americans never used Soviet atrocities during the Stalin regime as a reason why they were at a point of hostility with them , there were fundemental differences between the two that rendered any coexistence useless.