Posts Tagged ‘military’

The deadly jihad attack on Camp Bastion: Two years later

by Michelle Malkin on Monday, September 15th, 2014

This is article 792 of 793 in the topic Terrorism

Today is the 2nd anniversary of the deadly attack on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan.

Regular readers of this website have been fully informed about the horrible jihad siege on the base, which occurred three days after the Benghazi attack. But for most Americans, Camp Bastion holds no significance.

Two years later, there has been little remembrance and scant justice for the families of the 2 fallen American hero Marines who died in the attack and the 17 servicemen who were wounded.

Please do not let their sacrifice go in vain.

Refresher:

Three days after the bloody 9/11 siege on our consulate in Benghazi, the Taliban waged an intricately coordinated, brutal attack on Camp Bastion in Afghanistan. The murderous jihadists released video exactly one month ago this week showing off their training exercises in preparation for the assault. Where are the questions?

Where’s the accountability? Where’s the Obama administration? Where’s the press? Where’s the outrage?

Two heroic U.S. Marines were killed in the battle. Their names — Lt. Col. Christopher Raible and Sgt. Bradley Atwell – have not been uttered publicly by the commander in chief. Their arrival back in the U.S., in flag-draped coffins, was not broadcast on network TV. But their brothers-in-arms did not and will not forget. And neither must we.

On September 20, John Gresham of the Defense Media Network wrote a scathing detailed breakdown of this little-noticed terrorist attack on our troops. He called it “arguably the worst day in USMC aviation history since the Tet Offensive of 1968.” Eight irreplaceable aircraft were destroyed or put out of action by Taliban warriors dressed in U.S. combat fatigues — amounting to “approximately 7 percent of the total flying USMC Harrier fleet,” Gresham reported.

His summary is bone chilling: “A Harrier squadron commander is dead, along with another Marine. Another nine personnel have been wounded, and the nearby Marines at Camp Freedom are now without effective fixed-wing air support. The USMC’s response to this disaster will be a telling report card on its leadership and organizational agility.”

On September 21, the left-leaning magazine The Atlantic published an article on the Camp Bastion attack titled “The U.S. Suffered Its Worst Airpower Loss Since Vietnam Last Week and No One Really Noticed.” A few right-leaning blogs raised troubling questions about preparedness and security.

“How did this band of radicals even manage to approach a highly advanced multi-national military base without being detected, much less force their way inside en masse?” asked Kim Zigfeld of the American Thinker. “How were they able to attack so quickly and efficiently that, even though nearly every one of them was killed in the effort, they were able to harm the mighty leathernecks more than they had been in half a century?”

National Review’s Jonathan Foreman wondered whether Pakistan was behind the attack. “It seems likely that the special forces of a professional army planned the raid, and trained, advised and led the raiders — that is if they did not actually take part in it. Those special forces would, of course, be those of Pakistan,” Foreman posited.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

The War Neither Obama, Nor Any Other Nation Wants to Fight

by Alan Caruba on Sunday, September 14th, 2014

This is article 1241 of 1241 in the topic International

By Alan Caruba

Two trends have emerged since President Obama’s September 10 speech regarding his intention to “degrade and destroy” the Islamic State.
One is the understanding that he will not commit U.S. troops as “boots on the ground” to fight a force estimated variously between 10,000 and 30,000 depending on intelligence guesswork.
The other trend is the reluctance of any other nation to engage in the warfare that would be necessary to defeat the terrorist army occupying northern Iraq and a swath of Syria.
This was initially signaled at the NATO meeting in Wales and, according to a September 12 page one report in The Wall Street Journal, “A day after President Barack Obama outlined a strategy to combat Islamic State militants, Washington’s international allies didn’t make clear how far they would go to join military operations even as they pledged support.”
Who would support a President who said he had no intention of being “dragged back into a war in Iraq”?
That is not a “strategy.” It’s surrender. It is an admission of a lack of intent to confront what will surely emerge as a major threat to the Middle East and the West.
Word Games
The Obama administration was initially reluctant to even call it a war. It was a “counter-intelligence operation” according to Secretary of State Kerry.  The President and his administration have spent six and a half years labeling terrorist attacks as anything other than acts of war. But 9/11 was an act of war.
The killing of soldiers at Fort Hood was called “workplace violence” when it was clearly a terrorist act. Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told us that the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed our ambassador and three security personnel was just a bunch of militants angered by a video no one ever saw.
In Iraq—a nation now in name only—its military fled from combat with ISIS. The result has been a demonstration of the barbarity of ISIS, killing Muslims and “infidels” alike in large numbers. The videos of the beheadings of two American journalists sent the U.S. a message that dramatically altered the simmering reluctance of Americans to make war on the Islamic State. The beheading of a British citizen will no doubt echo the U.S. population’s desire for revenge and a full-scale war on ISIS.

Middle East expert, Walid Phares, says ISIS’s message is that it has concluded that neither the U.S. nor Great Britain will engage it with troops, preferring only air strikes. No military expert believes that will be sufficient to defeat ISIS.

Turkey, that shares a border with Syria, Iraq and Iran, is fearful for the lives of nearly fifty of its diplomats taken hostage in Mosul when it was captured in June. They have cause, but Turkey has been increasingly Islamic in its outlook for nearly a decade, shedding its secular approach to governance. It has refused to allow the U.S. to use bases there to fight ISIS.
In Europe, Germany said it would not take part in any airstrikes against ISIS. Other EU nations will likely follow its lead. In a similar fashion, Arab nations have not indicated any intention to actively—militarily—participate in what appears to be a “coalition” in name only.
A post by Steve Eichler, CEO of Tea Party, Inc.

Click to continue reading “The War Neither Obama, Nor Any Other Nation Wants to Fight”
Go straight to Post

Islam is the Face of Evil

by Alan Caruba on Thursday, September 11th, 2014

This is article 3 of 3 in the topic Islam

By Alan Caruba

“ISIS is not Islamic”, said  Barack Obama as he gave yet another vapid speech to say what he will or will not do next about the threat of Islam. What he said is both idiotic and a lie. ISIS calls itself the Islamic State.

Obama used the word “war” only once, but ISIS is all about war—an Islamic holy war that has been waged since 632 AD.

The one person neither named, nor blamed is the so-called prophet, Mohammad, yet everything being done by the jihadists today is being done in his name.

In his memoir, “Dreams from my Father”, Obama, in the preface to its second edition, wrote: “Nor do I pretend to understand the stark nihilism that drove the terrorists that day (9/11) and that drives their brethren still. My powers of empathy, my ability to reach into another’s heart, cannot penetrate the blank stares of those who would murder innocents with abstract, serene satisfaction.” And therein is the problem that he, as President, and we as citizens must address.
Political correctness is so dominant in the Obama White House that no one in the U.S. government dares say anything that might be deemed critical of a so-called “religion” that sanctions beheadings, amputations, stoning, kidnapping hostages, ransoms, polygamy, and slavery. To anyone deemed an infidel or unbeliever or a Muslim who questions anything about Islam, death is the only option other than dhimmitude, a second-class citizenship.
The pure evil of Islam was seen most recently in the two videos of American hostages being beheaded by the Islamic State, but despite decades of attacks on U.S. embassies, the taking of U.S. hostages in Beirut and Tehran, attacks in Bali, Madrid and London, and the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and on the Pentagon, Americans have been slow to realize the intensity and size of the threat that the Middle Eastern and North African nations represent along with wherever else a large Muslim population exists.
As the U.S. and threatened Middle Eastern nations hurtle toward a military confrontation with the Islamic State, the name it has given to territory it has seized from northern Syria and into Iraq, a new book, Fault Lines: The Layman’s Guide to Understanding America’s Role in the Ever-Changing Middle East, ($00.00, Elevate, Boise, Idaho, softcover) provides one of the best, short histories on U.S. involvement and why, at this point, its influence has reached a low point.
Liebich writes of the way the U.S. policy regarding the Middle East changed over the years, particularly in the wake of World War II and the Cold War that followed as the Soviet Union challenged us for the implementation of communism worldwide. Dependent on the flow of oil from the Middle East, much of our strategic interest in the region was based on exercising our influence, often bringing about the removal of leaders whom we regarded as a threat to that necessity. After 9/11 that went into overdrive.
Liebich notes that our concept of nation-building proved costly, not just in the lives of our troops, but which included $50 billion in Iraq “and it didn’t work.

Click to continue reading “Islam is the Face of Evil”
Go straight to Post

President Obama’s Credibility Is in Short Supply

by Roger Aronoff on Wednesday, September 10th, 2014

This is article 1004 of 1004 in the topic Obama

President Barack Obama has consistently deceived the American people when called out on statements that he’s made in the past, but the media have not consistently reported on these often farcical inconsistencies. However, the President’s recent “evolution” regarding the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), a Sunni militant group active in those countries that has been beheading kidnapped American journalists, has been so obvious that it could not fail to spark some media criticism. So, too, are the President’s contradictory comments on the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And much, much more.

Back in January of this year, President Obama referred to ISIS as the junior varsity team and said, “I think there is a distinction between the capacity and reach of a bin Laden and a network that is actively planning major terrorist plots against the homeland versus jihadists who are engaged in various local power struggles and disputes, often sectarian.” Now that ISIS is terrorizing Americans, not just Iraqis, the danger seems more imminent to the average citizen, and President Obama finds it politically necessary to deny ever downplaying the threat.

To that end, he recently sent out Press Secretary Josh Earnest, who contended in a press conference that “…the President was not singling out [ISIS], he was talking about the very different threat that is posed by a range of extremists around the globe.” One of those groups is Ansar al Sharia (AAS). State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki argued, also in January, that AAS is not an “official affiliate” of al Qaeda, despite the fact that its leadership has ties to al Qaeda and formerly to Osama bin Laden himself.

How useful are these distinctions, really, when all of these terrorist organizations are intent on killing Americans?

Earnest earned four Pinocchios from The Washington Post’s Fact Checker Glenn Kessler for “Spinning Obama’s reference to Islamic State as a ‘JV’ team.” It is clear from the exchange that the question posed was specifically about ISIS. David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker magazine conducted several interviews with the President, but this one was just days after ISIS took control of Fallujah in Iraq. Obama made the JV (Junior Varsity) reference (“…if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant.”), and then Remnick said, “But that JV team just took over Fallujah.” Obama replied, “I understand. But when you say took over Fallujah…let’s just keep in mind, Fallujah is a profoundly Sunni city…”

Yet again on Meet the Press on Sunday, September 7th, Chuck Todd raised the JV issue, asking the President if his use of the term JV to describe ISIS was “bad intelligence or your misjudgment?” Obama replied, “Keep, keep, keep in mind that I wasn’t specifically referring to ISIL.”

But the President’s and Earnest’s dissembling doesn’t end there. In early August, Josh Earnest said, “There are no military solutions to the very difficult problems that exist in Iraq now.” Then, on August 28, President Obama admitted on camera that he doesn’t “want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet.”

America’s strategy against ISIS is clearly not transparent to President Obama himself.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Nigeria’s Boko Haram following ISIS’s modus operandi in caliphate building

by Jim Kouri on Wednesday, September 10th, 2014

This is article 788 of 793 in the topic Terrorism

Most of the town’s populace reportedly fled as Boko Haram changed its MO (modus operandi). While it once conducted attacks on villages and towns and would retreat after killing and plundering, it is now leaving occupation forces to maintain control.

Meanwhile, Nigerian security forces killed 50 jihadists during a raid on their stronghold in the town of Kawuri over the weekend, according to George Lesner, a former military intelligence operative and civilian law enforcement official.

“Boko Haram has expanded its Islamic state in northeastern Nigeria in cities and towns such as Marte, Ngala, Banki, Bama, Gulak and a number of others. It’s using similar tactics to those used by the Islamic State in its Iraq and Syria in terrorist operations,” said Lesner.

Thousands of refugees from towns and villages occupied by Boko Haram jihadists are taking refuge in the city of Maiduguri , which already has a population of two million Nigerians.

In April, Boko Haram shocked the world when its jihadists abducted close to 300 Nigerian schoolgirls from a town in Borno state. The abduction gained the attention of U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama who posted a photo on the Internet asking Boko Haram to release the children, according to an Examiner news story in July.

Several nations, including the United States, Britain, China and France gave their military assistance to help locate and save the girls but their efforts “have met with negative results,” said Lesner.

Go straight to Post

Those 9/11 Terror Attack Predictions

by Alan Caruba on Wednesday, September 10th, 2014

This is article 787 of 793 in the topic Terrorism
By Alan Caruba
As we close in on the 13th anniversary of the infamous 9/11 attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon, the media is full of predictions about attacks that will occur.
A September 2nd Debka File, an Israeli news agency, reported “Credible information has reached Saudi, British and Australian agencies that two al Qaeda branches—ISIS in Iraq and Syria and AQAP at its base in Yemen—have wrapped up plans to roll out coordinated terrorist spectaculars around the 13thanniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington. According to Debka File’s counterterrorism sources, they are preparing to strike simultaneously in the Middle East and a West European city. Next, they will go for U.S. targets in the Middle East and Europe.”
This report and other factors incline me to believe there will not be a major attack somewhere in the U.S. on what is now officially called “Patriot Day.”  There could be a lone wolf attack along the lines of Major Hassan’s 2009 “workplace violence” at Fort Hood or the Boston Marathon bombing, but the threats being made by the Islamic State and other elements of al Qaeda, while intended to raise fears in America, are likely to be manifested in the Middle East. American outlets there will be on full alert for sure.
The Islamic State, while now wealthy, well equipped militarily, and attracting every lunatic Islamist and wannabe terrorist, is facing an increasingly united group of Middle East nations that have put old enemies like Iran and Saudi Arabia on the same page together. Iran has dispatched troops to Iraq to support the Kurds. When other Middle Eastern nations finally screw up enough courage to actually do something they will wage a war on ISIS in the interest of self-defense, a powerful motive.
As for al Qaeda’s war on America, it was declared in 1996 by the late, unlamented Osama bin Laden and, other than 9/11, it has done little to follow up on that dramatic sneak attack except for a few failed efforts. The U.S. responded by bombing the hell out of Afghanistan and our troops there have been attacking the Taliban ever since. Obama says he will pull them out in 2015. Given events in Iraq, that is a very bad idea.
The Department of Homeland Security has been on alert ever since it was created shortly after 9/11. This is not to say that the U.S. doesn’t need more on-the-ground intelligence penetration of al Qaeda and its affiliates. Indeed, DHS and other government agencies don’t know the whereabouts of several thousand foreign students who are supposed to be at our colleges and universities. They likely do not know who else among those with easy access to the nation is a potential terrorist.
So, yes, that could mean I am very wrong and that 9/11 would be a day for a whole series of attacks for much the same reason our consulate in Libya was attacked that day in 2012. The Benghazi cover-up has been falling apart ever since. The lie that it was caused by a video grows more absurd and obscene very day.
The Israelis have made a far greater and more successful effort than us to infiltrate their enemy’s organizations.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

Obama and Arabs Find a Common Enemy–the Islamic State

by Alan Caruba on Tuesday, September 9th, 2014

This is article 1238 of 1241 in the topic International
By Alan Caruba
Given all the mutations that the Middle East has gone through thanks to the emergence of al Qaeda during the resistance to the Soviet takeover of Afghanistan, watching what is occurring now with an even more fanatical group calling itself the Islamic State (ISIS) and proclaiming itself the new caliphate has proven even more lethal and more feared.
The closest thing to a caliphate has been the assertion of al Saud, the royal family that runs Saudi Arabia who has long claimed to be the protector of Islam’s two most holy sites, Mecca and Medina, and of the true form of its expression, the strict Wahhabi interpretation. Were it not for its oil, the royals would have had to live off the earnings from the hajj, the visit to Mecca that all Muslims are required to make at least once in their lifetime.
Royal Saudi Air Force

The Saudis, despite having at least 250 U.S. and British advanced fighter aircraft, have typically avoided engaging in combat; the type that will be required to destroy ISIS. Instead, it gave $100 million to the United Nations Counter-Terrorism Center, but the latest news is that al Qaeda linked Syrian rebels from the Nusra Front battled U.N. military peacekeepers encamped on the Golan Heights on August 30, forcing some to escape to Israel. The UN’s peacekeeping role and its ability to deter wars are hardly notable.

Oil made the Middle East’s despots and monarchs wealthy, but former despots have been removed in Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia, while Syria’s has been engaged in what started as a civil war and became a magnet for the group that broke away from al Qaeda, espousing an even more fanatical interpretation of Islam.
Now Middle Eastern nations that have been enemies, like Saudi Arabia and Iran—one Arab, the other Persian, one Sunni, the other Shiite—have found themselves equally threatened.
This common enemy has caused other relationships to alter. Turkey which has been in conflict with the Kurds remained silent when Syrian Kurdish militias helped rescue the Yazidis who were driven from their homes by ISIS. Al Qaeda’s Syrian component, the Nustra Front, now finds itself at war with ISIS.
Even the Egyptians found themselves on the same side of the Israeli battle with Hamas, destroying many of the tunnels built from their nation into Gaza. They now both share a distrust of the United States.
Indeed, the United States is virtually without any friends left in the Middle East, at least at the level that previously existed. This is entirely the result of Barack Obama’s astonishing talent for picking the wrong side in events there.
His criticism of Israel defending itself against thousands of rockets from Hamas in Gaza has eroded what friendship existed after his criticism of its settlements and rude treatment of its Prime Minister. The Egyptians were offended by his support for the Muslim Brotherhood that took over after Mubarak was deposed.

Click to continue reading “Obama and Arabs Find a Common Enemy–the Islamic State”
Go straight to Post

U.S. No Longer has Influence in the Middle East

by Alan Caruba on Wednesday, September 3rd, 2014

This is article 1233 of 1241 in the topic International

By Alan Caruba

The rise of the Sunni Islamic State (ISIS) and its barbarity may be news to the West, but it is a very old story in the Middle East.
Briefly stated, the Arabs have been at war with one another for some 1,400 years before and since the emergence of Islam and the schism that occurred between its Sunni and Shiite components.
Dr, Daniel Pipes, a noted Middle East scholar, writing in an August 24 Turkish newspaper regarding the announcement of the Islamic State caliphate noted that “The classic concept of the caliphate—of a single successor to Muhammad ruling a unified Muslim state—lasted just over a century and expired with the emergence of two caliphs in 750 CE. The power of the caliphate collapsed in about the year 940 CE.”  Arabs could not unite following the death of Muhammad, resulting in the two caliphs who claimed his mantle.
Apparently anyone can declare themselves a caliph as did ISIS’s Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi on June 29, 2014. There is some question, for example, whether Abubakar Shakau, the leader of Boko Haram, has acknowledged al-Baghdadi or whether he was declaring his own separate caliphate in Nigeria where his group controls a large swath of the northern part of that nation.
Dr. Pipes predicts that the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria will not survive due to “the hostility both from neighbors and its subject population, it will not last long.” As demonstrated in Nigeria, “other ambitious Islamists will act more boldly by declaring themselves caliph” and this could occur “from Nigeria to Somalia to Afghanistan to Indonesia, and beyond.”
When not fighting with each other as Sunnis and Shiites, Arabs and other Muslim nationalities have been united by their disdain of the West which resisted Islam and which manifested its power via the colonization that occurred as the West reached out with its naval capabilities and military superiority wherever it could gain control.
When the Middle East’s decaying Ottoman Empire sided with Germany in World War I, it was dissected by France and Great Britain whose diplomats literally created new “nations” such as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Trans-Jordan by drawing lines on a map. Using local sheiks as their flunkies, they governed through them. In time, military coups by local despots replaced them.
The Islamic State is only the latest manifestation of the ancient desire to not only control the whole of the Middle East, but to reach out and through terror to exert domination over the entire world in the name of Islam. Anyone familiar with the Koran knows this is a demand that is to be fulfilled with jihad or holy war.
In the real world, however, nations deal with threats to their sovereignty and economic interests. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Bush41 put together a coalition to drive him back into Iraq. The U.S. did nothing, however, when he had previously waged war with Iran for eight years after Iran had taken diplomats as hostages in 1979, releasing them in 1981. When al Qaeda attacked the U.S. on September 11, 2001, Bush43 launched an attack on al Qaeda’s stronghold in Afghanistan, driving them into Pakistan.

1 2 3
Go straight to Post

War as a Fact of Life

by Alan Caruba on Tuesday, September 2nd, 2014

This is article 139 of 141 in the topic History

By Alan Caruba

Younger generations can be forgiven if all they know of war is what they have learned in school or seen dramatized on film and television. For most Americans, the Civil War, the two World Wars, and the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam are events that occurred “a long time ago.” For my generation, born just prior to or during World War Two, wars have been a constant element of our lives.
Anyone with an interest in U.S. history knows that America was born out of a long war (1775-1783) with Great Britain which eventually led to the writing of the Constitution in 1787 whose ratification became official in June 1788. A year later George Washington, the wartime general, became the first President and, thereafter, nearly every President has had to dispatch U.S. naval, land and air forces in combat. This is why the Founders concluded that the President also had to be Commander-in-Chief in order to respond to threats to the nation whether near or far.
Not all Americans were eager to engage in various conflicts and most of the larger ones have had to address a fair measure of opposition. Even the Revolution was resisted by those who felt being a colony was a wiser choice than being independent.
In the greater world, wars have been constant somewhere, a shaper of history, and, according to Benjamin Ginsberg, a prolific historian and director of the Center for Advanced Governmental Studies at Johns Hopkins University, it has some beneficial aspects. His latest book, “The Worth of War”, explores this aspect of history.
“Organized warfare is among the most common and persistent of human activities,” says Prof. Ginsberg. “As terrible as it is, war and the possibility of war exert considerable pressure upon societies to think and plan logistically in order to protect their security interests and, sometimes, their very existence.”
“In the decades since World War II, of course, the United States has been at war on a continual basis. The nation has fought large engagements in Korea, Indo-China, and the Middle East, as well as numerous smaller conflicts throughout the world.” Americans are now debating having to return to the Middle East a third time since the Persian Gulf War 1990-1991 to undertake the vital mission of destroying the newly declared Islamic State that threatens the region and, should it grow more powerful, the West.
It may strike the reader as odd to think of war as a good thing, but Prof. Ginsberg points out that “Bureaucracies developed from war. Once built, they expanded the scope of their operations to handle purely civilian tasks as well. War also required societies to learn the rudiments of fiscal policy” because “armies and war are expensive.”
Much of the technology we take for granted emerged from the need to succeed in warfare. “Europe’s lead in military technology widened sharply with the European industrial revolution of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries (and) with their weapons, their ships, and their tactics, European armies conquered the Americans, Africa, portions of Asia, and the Indian subcontinent.” In the process, the Europeans exported their technological advances to those they conquered, spreading knowledge.
The concept of being a “citizen soldier” developed out of war.

Click to continue reading “War as a Fact of Life”
Go straight to Post

Iran promises weapons and military equipment to West Bank terrorists

by Jim Kouri on Thursday, August 28th, 2014

This is article 1231 of 1241 in the topic International

While the world’s eyes are on the continuing armed conflict between Israel and Islamist groups in Gaza, on Monday a top Iranian commander of their so-called elite Islamic Revolution Guards Corps told the nation that they are committed to arming “Palestinian resistance groups” in the West Bank in retaliation for the alleged Israeli penetration into Iran’s airspace.

The IRGC had claimed Monday morning that it’s surface-to-air missile shot down an Israeli unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), commonly called a drone. Iran alleges that the UAV was a state-of-the-art, stealth drone which attempted to enter Iranian airspace over its Natanz nuclear zone. The intruding drone was intercepted and brought down by a missile, the Iranian claimed.

“We will speed up arming the West Bank and retain the right for any response,” Commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh told Iranian news outlets in Tehran in reaction questions about the Israeli aircraft.

The issue of arming the Palestinians with more deadly and destructive weapons gained momentum after Iran’s Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said that the Muslims living in the West Bank must be in a position to repel the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) especially since the Israelis launched an offensive against Palestinians living on the Gaza Strip on July 8.

On July 29, in a sermon on the occasion of Eid al-Fitr — the last day of Ramadan when Muslims break their fasts — Imam Khamenei noted Iran’s support for the “Palestinian resistance groups in their fight with the Israeli regime.” He also accused the United States of seeking to disarm Palestinian fighters in order to assist the Israeli’s in suppressing Hamas and other organizations such as the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

“Unlike the view and effort of supporters of ‘the child-murderer Zionist regime’, the whole world and the Islamic world in particular, have an obligation to arm the Palestinian nation as much as possible,” the nation’s spiritual leader said, according to Iran’s state-run news media.

Meanwhile on Monday, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Afkham said, “Iran will sue Israel legally over its alleged violation of Iran’s air space here on Monday following reports that Iran had downed an Israeli stealth drone in its airspace.”

“We will take a proper defensive measure over the clear violation of our country’s integrity, and we preserve the right to follow up the issue in the legal and international bodies,” Afkham was quoted as saying by the official IRNA news agency.

Go straight to Post

Featuring YD Feedwordpress Content Filter Plugin