Iran Ballistic Missile

Iran Missile Program is Heart of Sanctions Issue

December 3, 2018 by admin

A core reason for the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal was the rapid and alarming growth and development of the Iranian regime’s ballistic missile program, which got a significant bump from the massive infusion of cash received as a result of the deal.

The origins of the Iranian missile program are well documented with missile design supplied by North Korea and then aggressively expanded through a test launch program that became almost a nightly feature on state-controlled media outlets.

That missile program escalated from testing missiles limited in range to essentially being theater weapons, to growing until they achieved intercontinental ranges capable of striking Europe and Asia.

While the Iran lobby and the regime have vigorously contested the inclusion of ballistic missiles in any existing United Nations restrictions, the plain truth from the U.S. perspective is that Iran has moved far beyond “defensive” missiles and instead sought to create “offensive” weapons with the payload capacity to lift nuclear warheads and multiple payloads.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo emphasized this point in a tweet Saturday claiming Iran had test-fired a medium-range ballistic missile capable of carrying nuclear weapons. In condemning the act, Pompeo called on Iran to cease its missile testing and proliferation activities that threaten to destabilize an already unstable region.

The regime’s Foreign Ministry countered the tweet, describing the program as solely defensive, according to a statement carried by the official Islamic Republic News Agency. The statement didn’t confirm or deny whether a test-fire had taken place.

“Iran’s missile program is defensive in nature and is designed based on the country’s needs,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Ghasemi was quoted as saying.

But the regime’s continued development of longer-range missiles with heavier payload capacity can only be seen as offensive in nature and an effort to deploy its coercive influence far from its own borders.

In the history of arms control, no one would ever believe claims by the American or Russian governments that its own ballistic missiles were solely for “defensive” purposes, but the regime and Iran lobby seem intent on trying to make that silly notion fly.

Even after giving away the proverbial farm in approving a flawed nuclear deal in 2015, the Obama administration still imposed economic sanctions for Iran’s continued missile program development in a quixotic case of trying to have its cake and eat it too.

It is a reminder that the core issues with the nuclear deal went far beyond nuclear weapons and instead should have focused intensely on the regime’s actions including human rights violations and sponsorship of terrorism.

The nuclear deal’s fatal flaw was to try and rein in a specific weapon while leaving along a host of other weapons at the disposal of madmen in the mullahs.

The fact that the regime defiantly stated it would continue in its missile development, demonstrates why imposing stiff sanctions is ever more important. To relent and allow Iran unfettered freedom to develop its missile program would be place Europe under a nuclear sword of Damocles since the nuclear deal admittedly was never designed to stop Iran’s nuclear program, only slow it down.

Since the mullahs’ openly professed desire to become an Islamic nuclear power is almost inevitable, the key is to neuter their ability to drop a nuke on Paris, London or Berlin; all noteworthy since Islamic-inspired terrorism has already been visited on each of those cities since the nuclear deal was signed.

U.N. Security Council resolution 2231 enshrined Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States in which Tehran curbed its disputed uranium enrichment program in exchange for an end to international sanctions.

The resolution says Iran is “called upon” to refrain for up to eight years from work on ballistic missiles designed to deliver nuclear weapons.

British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt tweeted that he was deeply concerned by “Iran’s test-firing of a medium range ballistic missile. Provocative, threatening and inconsistent with UNSCR 2231”.

“Our support for (the Iran nuclear accord) in no way lessens our concern at Iran’s destabilizing missile program and determination that it should cease,” Hunt added.

The language of the U.N. Security Council Resolution “calls on” rather than “forbids” Iran from testing its missiles, according to Trita Parsi, the president of the National Iranian American Council.

It is this inconsistently that the Iran lobby and regime have sought to exploit in aggressively pushing for a missile program free from threat of sanctions. It’s interesting that Parsi resorts to verbal semantics when he should be calling on the Iranian regime from refraining from developing these potential weapons of mass destruction in the first place!

But then again, Parsi is less concerned about stopping the proliferation of weapons than he is in protecting his mullah patrons in Tehran from any further sanctions.

Evidence Mounts of Iranian Transgressions Making Action Necessary

December 2, 2018 by admin

The reason why the U.S. pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal two years after its passage was because the track record of compliance by the Iranian regime was littered with failure and the inherent flaw in the agreement of not restraining Iranian regime’s aggression in other areas such as terrorism became problematic.

The inherent flaws in the regime lie at the heart of its style of government: a religious theocracy.

There is no checks or balance system in Iran. The ultimate authority is vested in the supreme religious leader who rules with the near-autonomy of monarchs of old. An interesting irony considering the Islamic revolution in the first place deposed the Shah.

But because of the lack of accountability within the regime to only a select elite few, the future of successful implementation of the nuclear deal was dead on signing.

When the Obama administration and rest of the European Union withdraw demands that Iran comply in areas such as sponsorship of terrorism, destabilization of its neighbors and improvements in human rights at home, all the leverage the world had on Iran evaporated.

The Iran lobby, specifically the National Iranian American Council, have contended that to include such restrictions would have doomed the deal to failure. The reverse has prophetically come true: by not including those provisions, the deal was indeed doomed to fail, and it has.

The bloody trail of Iranian extremism has been well documented, and the Iran lobby has never spoken harshly against that record, only excusing the regime with faint calls for reform and blaming every misstep by the mullahs as being provoked by the U.S. from withdrawing from the nuclear deal.

The harsh truth the Iran lobby has vigorously sought to cover up is the strategic plan the mullahs have to build its own Islamic version of the Warsaw Pact by converting or controlling its neighbors to its brand of extremism and using proxies to institute insurrections and wars.

That plan was worked to some degree with the Iranian regime using Hezbollah and Afghan mercenaries to stem the civil war in Syria, Shiite militias in Iraq to control that government and Houthi rebels to overthrow Yemen and threaten regional adversary Saudi Arabia.

But those conflicts haven’t been enough for Iran, even as the mullahs direct the Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force to supply more arms, weapons and cash to other militants further afield.

Evidence for these efforts was put on display when Brian Hook, special representative for Iran and senior policy advisor to the U.S. secretary of state, released information that the Iranian regime was violating the United Nations arms export ban by supplying militants across the Middle East and continuing to build out its ballistic missile program unabated.

At a military hangar in Washington, Hook showed reporters a display of seized Iranian weapons that he said is much larger than it was a year ago. He then elaborated on each weapon on display and where it was found, including a collection of guns, rockets, drones and other gear.

“We need to get serious about going after this stuff,” Hook told reporters.

Some of the weapons had been intercepted in the Strait of Hormuz en route to Shia fighters in the region while others had been seized by the Saudis in Yemen, the Pentagon said.

The centerpiece of the display was what Hook said is a Sayyad-2 surface-to-air missile system that the Saudis had intercepted in Yemen this year.

Farsi writing along the white rocket’s side helped prove it was Iranian made, Hook added.

“The conspicuous Farsi markings is Iran’s way of saying they don’t mind being caught violating UN resolutions,” Hook told reporters, adding the missile was destined to Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Hook said the seized weapons are “clear and tangible evidence” that Iran is fueling instability in the Middle East.

Iran has the largest ballistic force in the region, Hook said, with 10 ballistic missile systems in its inventory or under development. Missile development and testing has increased in recent years, he added.

Last year, Iran launched a medium-range missile believed to be the Khorramshahr, he said. It can carry a payload of more than a half ton and could be used to carry nuclear warheads. Its suspected range is 1,200 miles, which puts Europe in range.

Fajr rockets intended for the Taliban were recovered by the Afghan National Army in Afghanistan’s Helmand province near Kandahar Airfield, Hook said.

Bahrain provided captured Iranian small-arms weaponry found on their territory, which were given to Shiite militant groups to carry out attacks against the government. They include sniper rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, AK-47 assault rifle variants and hand grenades, Hook said.

Since 2006, the Iranian regime has supplied Hezbollah in Lebanon with thousands of precision rockets, missiles and small arms, Hook said. It now has more than 100,000 rockets or missiles in its stockpile.

The scope and size of the munitions being produced by the Iranian regime and smuggled throughout the Middle East puts to rest any concept floated by the Iran lobby of Iranian “moderation” following the nuclear deal.

In fact, it has been a year since U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley was at a similar event to highlight the dangers posed by Iran’s proliferation of missiles and other weapons across the Middle East, only to see this year’s display of captured Iranian weaponry dwarf last year’s display.

Laura Carnahan

Iran Lobby Attacks on John Bolton Hide Fear of Regime Change

March 30, 2018 by admin

Iran Lobby Attacks on John Bolton Hide Fear of Regime Change

The Iran lobby, especially the National Iranian American Council, have been busy hurling attacks and invectives at John Bolton, President Donald Trump’s nominee to be the new national security advisor, calling him everything from being crazy to a war monger to an extremist or child of Satan.

The accusations have seemed to take on a life of their own as Iranian regime loyalists such as NIAC’s Trita Parsi empty out the thesaurus in an effort to try and find something that will stick and either derail his nomination or throw cold water on the administration’s plans to revisit the Iran nuclear deal.

In either case, it seems apparent the trains have already left the stations and on Capitol Hill, it appears Democrats are only pondering going after President Trump’s CIA director nominee, Gina Haspel, for past involvement in the interrogation of terror suspects, with Bolton and secretary of state nominee, Mike Pompeo, looking like solid confirmations.

This new troika of national security, intelligence and diplomatic heads represents a significant shift in the president’s thinking as it relates to the challenges of Iran, North Korea and Islamic extremist terrorism.

Far from trying to swat individual terror suspects like so many mosquitos, it appears the administration maybe looking for a more strategic approach in draining the swamp so-to-speak by dealing directly with the sources of terrorism; more specifically nation states.

The terror attacks of 9/11 served as a reminder that safe harbors such as a Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, provide training, security, funding and logistical support for terrorists to plan and execute their attacks.

The rise of ISIS out of the wreckage of a Syrian civil war and Iraqi sectarian conflict borne out of Iranian regime’s meddling carved out a caliphate which provided ISIS with everything from oil to sell and ready recruits to satellite broadcasts and a news magazine.

The Iranian regime set the template when it built Hezbollah to a formidable terrorist operation and shock troops for proxy wars. Iran mullahs utilized Hezbollah and a safe harbor in Lebanon.

But now the mullahs in Tehran are confronted with a rapid flurry of problems that have escalated nearly out of their normally iron-fisted control.

The explosion of U.S. fracking for oil turned it into the top oil producer in the world and forced prices to plummet on the open market, crushing revenues the mullahs were expecting from the lifting economic sanctions following the Iran nuclear deal. Coupled with the drain on cash reserves for propping up the Assad regime in Syria and spending heavily on military equipment, including building a ballistic missile program, Iran soon became a pauper nation;
A free-falling economy gave ordinary Iranians a gut-punch with stagnant wages, limited job opportunities and a deeply corrupt government that controlled almost all facets of the economy. Couple that with deep dissatisfaction over the increasing divide of haves vs. have-nots as those with ties to the Revolutionary Guard Corps and Quds Force or the ruling mullahs profited handsomely; and
Massive protests swept the nation as the combination of punishing economic conditions and dissatisfaction with oppressive rule, including morality laws specifically targeting Iranian women, drove ordinary Iranians to extraordinary acts of defiance unheard of in Iran. This included women launch the hijab movement with the mullahs responding by passing laws criminalizing it on the basis it promoted “prostitution” and calling for 10 years imprisonment.

These trends are unmistakable and more importantly, unassailable by the Iran lobby, which for the most part has stayed silent on these domestic protests; choosing only to blame the economic conditions on the U.S. not fully complying with the terms of the nuclear deal.

Apparently Parsi and his friends think we should empty out Ft. Knox on behalf of the mullahs.

What is apparent though is that the accusations being flung by the Iran lobby at Bolton’s nomination miss an inescapable truth which is Bolton is not setting the stage for war when Tehran has already been at war with the West ever since it supplied explosives to kill Marines in Beirut or U.S. troops in Iraq.

Ivan Sascha Sheehan, incoming executive director of the School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Baltimore, makes that point in a strongly worded editorial in The Hill.

“Those who are concerned about the potential for war with Iran should embrace Bolton’s appointment and support the administration’s efforts to confront Tehran’s destabilizing regional influence by taking its theocratic regime to task. The regime’s misbehavior only worsened in the run-up to Trump’s ascension to the Oval Office, and particularly under the prior administration’s cooperative policies that engendered an even greater sense of impunity than the Islamic Republic was used to,” Sheehan writes.

“Trump’s assertiveness during his first year in office is paying small dividends. U.S. Navy officials recently reported that close encounters between their vessels and those of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which were commonplace over the previous two years, halted abruptly in August,” he added.

But what the Iran lobby is most fearful of is not a simple knee-jerk tearing up of the nuclear deal by President Trump, but rather a consensus among U.S. allies to rework the deal, toughening provisions on terror support, ballistic missile development and human rights improvement, in an effort to save it.

Using the deal as a leverage against the Iranian regime is fair turnabout since the regime and Iran lobby have used its continued existence as a blunt instrument against any calls to rein in the regime’s excesses.

The Economist outlined some of the intense deal-making going on now from Great Britain, France and Germany to compel the Iranians to accept new restrictions; restrictions that should have been included in the original deal in the first place.

“Sir Simon Gass, a former British ambassador to Tehran who led the British team negotiating the deal, says that it might be possible to get an agreement from Iran not to develop an intercontinental-range ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of hitting America. An ICBM, he points out, only makes sense if it carries a nuclear warhead, so testing one should prompt broad economic sanctions. Patricia Lewis of Chatham House, another London think-tank, believes that the Europeans may already be talking to the Iranians about a future regional missile-deal that would ban long- and intermediate-range nuclear missiles,” the Economist editorial said.

Ultimately the real rub for Parsi and his fellow travelers is that new restrictions, coupled with worsening economic conditions will once again rollback Tehran back to 2009 when massive street protests nearly toppled the regime.

As the president’s new team take their place, it’s clear the era of appeasing the mullahs is dead.

Michael Tomlinson

Hassan Rouhani Cabinet Picks Reveal Campaign Lies

August 9, 2017 by admin

Hassan Rouhani Cabinet Picks Reveal Campaign Lies

One of the hallmarks of the Iranian regime is to do whatever it takes to mollify the anger of the Iranian people and then go ahead and do what is in the best interests of the mullahs and the Revolutionary Guard Corps that backs their rule.

A large dose of that is promising everything under the sun during an election and then promptly ignore every one of those promises. The repercussions of those lies largely goes unnoticed because the regime uses harsh methods to punish dissent and keep protests at a minimum.

During the most recent presidential election, Hassan Rouhani, aided by the Iran lobby abroad, touted promises to advance the cause of Iranian women by addressing extreme gender imbalances that exist between men and women in Iranian society.

The idea was to continue promoting the idea that Rouhani was some enlightened moderate fighting hardline forces and promising a more open and inclusive society. Why anyone would believe him after the past four years of brutal crackdowns on almost every sector of Iranian society is beyond normal thinking.

But when faced with unremitting cruelty, in an environment of rampant corruption, under constant threat of death and imprisonment, hope is a challenging thing to keep alive and shows why many Iranians might be willing to even believe in lies because the alternative can be soul-crushing.

So, after Rouhani was sworn in for his second term, he released a list of cabinet appointments and unsurprisingly, not a single woman was named to a senior position.

Rouhani nominated men to fill 17 of 18 ministerial slots in his new government, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency, with no one yet put forward for science minister. He appointed three women among a dozen vice presidents in his previous administration.

“Right now, many members are expressing their opposition,” Tayyebeh Siavashi, a reformist lawmaker who was among the 17 women elected last year to represent pro-Rouhani factions, said by phone to Bloomberg from inside parliament after the ministerial list was submitted. “It’s a big question for us: Why after all our efforts and hard work do we have no women at all?”

Most Western media attempted to frame the omission as an effort by Rouhani to appease hardliners within the government who oppose his “reformist” efforts, including the nuclear agreement and opening dialogue with the West.

Pardon us while we cough.

The truth of the matter is simple: This is who Rouhani is; a loyal, dedicated and faithful member of the regime going back to his earliest days.

Rouhani never had any intention of advancing a moderate agenda. He always has been a product of the regime and was constructed with a mythology that served the interests of the regime. The mullahs needed the nuclear deal to lift crippling economic sanctions to help fund their wars and keep the IRGC afloat.

Rouhani did not disappoint while he also actually stepped up the repression of the Iranian people; nearly tripling the rate of public executions from the much-reviled Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s tenure; no small feat.

Not all Iranians were fooled as many took to social media to express their frustration at the lack of advancement for women on this significant social issue.

“Up until the last moment, serious efforts were underway to make sure there would be names on there,” said Amene Shirafkan, a journalist who campaigns on women’s issues and stood as a candidate in Tehran’s city council elections, referring to the list. “It’s a rather conservative cabinet, much like Rouhani himself.”

In many ways, with the nuclear deal behind him and the prospect of a Trump administration seeing through the false moderate façade and taking direct action against the regime, Rouhani and his fellow mullahs have figured out there may no longer be any need to continue with the fantasy of playing at moderation.

This may explain the rapid escalation in tensions between the Iranian regime and U.S. Navy as an Iranian drone buzzed a F/A-18E Super Hornet fighter as it prepared to land on the USS Nimitz in the Persian Gulf.

“Despite repeated radio calls to stay clear of active fixed-wing flight operations within the vicinity of USS Nimitz, the QOM-1 executed unsafe and unprofessional altitude changes in the close vicinity of an F/A-18E in a holding pattern preparing to land on the aircraft carrier,” said Commander Bill Urban, a spokesman for U.S. Naval Forces Central Command.

The Navy F/A-18E had to execute a quick maneuver to avoid contact with the drone, which at one point was roughly 200 feet away horizontally and about 100 feet vertically, according to the Washington Examiner.

According to the U.S. Navy, this is the thirteenth time this year there has been an unsafe or unprofessional interaction between U.S. and Iranian maritime forces.

This hasn’t been the only confrontation with an Iranian drone. Last June, U.S. forces shot down two Iranian-made drones that approached U.S.-backed troops in Syria.

It is important to note that all of these actions, plus the abduction of additional American hostages occurred well before President Trump ever took office, bringing out the untruth of the Iran lobby who claim his policies in confronting the regime are responsible for the escalation in tensions.

Most worrisome are reports that North Korea is deepening its ties to the Iranian regime with Kim Yong Nam, head of the rogue regime’s parliament attending Rouhani’s swearing in ceremony.

Kim’s trip though is expected to stretch to 10 days in Tehran, permitting a more detailed series of meetings about the military alliance the two nations share, as well as Western intelligence reports that say North Korea has constructed a nuclear warhead small enough to fit on one of its ballistic missiles.

It is reasonable to think since North Korea licensed its missile technology to Iran that it is also willing to share its nuclear technology in exchange for much-needed cash which Iran has thanks to the nuclear agreement.

Michael Tomlinson

Iran Regime on Twin Tracks of Aggression with Missiles and Human Rights

August 4, 2017 by admin

The Iranian regime has invested heavily—much of it from funding derived by the lifting of economic sanctions by the nuclear deal—in its ballistic missile program. It has become as integral to the long-term plans of the mullahs as oil policy has been for economic planning.

Iran’s ballistic missile program gives it the ability to project force far beyond its borders. For most superpowers and nuclear-capable nations, force projection otherwise known as “over-the-horizon” capability distinguishes them from any other nation on Earth.

The U.S., Russia, China, France and Great Britain have long been the pillars of the ability to project force around the world. Historically speaking, Britannia ruled its empire because of its navy, while after World War II, the U.S. established supremacy with carrier battle groups and air power.

In today’s world though, ballistic missiles have become to the tool du jour of force projection for despotic regimes such as North Korea and Iran. They can—on the cheap—threaten neighbors and nations far away as a means of extorting concessions.

Missiles alone though cannot guarantee internal security for these regimes. Missiles are a tool of external terror, but for internal suppression of dissent, both North Korea and Iran rely heavily on cults of personality for their respective leaders and use execution, imprisonment and ample torture as means of population control.

It is striking how similar both regimes are in action and planning. Their respective ideologies, one devout atheist, the other devoutly sectarian, both focus absolute allegiance to the state.

Their use of hostages as negotiating pawns and crackdown of any open dissent makes them more sister-states than one might imagine. In fact, both earn heavy and regular condemnation by human rights groups.

In the case of Iran, Amnesty International has paid special attention to tracking the regime’s efforts to vilify human rights defenders as “enemies of the state” in putting out an updated report on Iran’s brutal human rights crackdown.

“It is a bitter irony that as the Iranian authorities boast about their increased engagement with the UN and the EU, particularly in the aftermath of the nuclear deal, human rights defenders who have made contact with these same institutions are being treated as criminals,” said Philip Luther, Amnesty International’s Research and Advocacy Director for the Middle East and North Africa.

“Rather than propagating the dangerous myth that human rights defenders pose a threat to national security, the Iranian authorities should focus on addressing the legitimate concerns they raise. These are people who have risked everything to build a more humane and just society – it is appalling that they are so viciously punished for their bravery,” he added.

The organization is calling on the EU, which announced plans to relaunch a bilateral human rights dialogue with Iran in 2016, to speak out in the strongest terms against the persecution of human rights defenders in the country.

“The international community, and in particular the EU, must not stay silent over the outrageous treatment of human rights defenders in Iran,” said Philip Luther.

“Instead of appeasing Iranian officials, the EU should forcefully call for the immediate and unconditional release of all those jailed for their peaceful human rights activism and for an end to the misuse of the justice system to silence activists.”

The timing of Amnesty International’s report is auspicious in light of new sanctions signed into law by President Donald Trump against Iran and North Korea’s ballistic missile program and a new diplomatic initiative aimed at the United Nations to curb Iran’s “destabilizing effect in the region.”

U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley, in a letter to the UN Security Council on August 2, said the launch of a missile carrying a satellite into space “represents a threatening and provocative step by Iran.”

Her letter, written on behalf of the United States, France, Germany, and Britain, called on the Council to “discuss appropriate responses” against Tehran for its “provocative action.”

U.S. officials said that type of technology is inherently designed to carry a nuclear payload, and the Pentagon said the technology can be used to develop intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM).

Predictably the Iran lobby’s chief advocate, the National Iranian American Council, condemned the sanctions move by the U.S. and warned of a march to war with these moves, but even the NIAC had to acknowledge the overwhelming bipartisan support sanctions against Iran have in Congress right now.

“The alarm bells should be ringing but instead of restraining Trump’s reckless inclinations on Iran, Congress appears to be actively encouraging him,” said the statement by Jamal Abdi, executive director for NIAC Action, the lobbying arm of the NIAC.

In the letter to the UN though, the four nations called on Iran “to immediately cease all activities related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology.” They said Iran’s “long-standing program to develop ballistic missiles continues to be inconsistent with” the UN resolution and has a destabilizing effect in the region, according to Bloomberg.

This new diplomatic effort represents a watershed moment of sorts because it unites the Western partners in the Iran nuclear deal into a unified front to stop Iran’s missile program before it becomes the kind of full-blown headache the world is now experiencing with North Korea.

In many ways, North Korea serves as the clearest warning sign of where Iran will inevitably reach in a short time and represents a defining moment in the close collaboration between the two regimes.

Finally, the world is waking up to the dual threats posed by them.

Laura Carnahan

Iran Regime Begins Threatening with Ballistic Missiles

July 28, 2017 by admin

Iran Regime Begins Threatening with Ballistic Missiles

Just as the world saw North Korea ramp up its production of ballistic missiles and begin launching them with greater regularity, we have seen a similar scenario begin to play out with the Iranian regime’s own missile fleet.

For the mullahs in Tehran, their ballistic missile fleet represents their ace in the hole; a weapon platform that can reach faraway enemies, threaten its neighbors and provide the ultimate leverage by carrying nuclear or chemical warheads.

You don’t build a weapon system unless you are prepared to use it and the mullahs are prepared.

What distinguishes the Iranian regime from North Korea is that Iran has fired its missiles in anger, unleashing a salvo of missiles at targets in Syria that it claimed were ISIS strongholds.

With one action, the mullahs served notice they were more than willing to push the proverbial red button; a disturbing thought when one considers the regime’s extensive list of enemies which seems to grow longer by the day.

Besides its nemesis in the U.S., the regime has added Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Pakistan to its list, not to mention anyone following the Sunni, Christian, Jewish and any other faith you can think of.

Add to that the increasing range of its missile fleet and you can see how Iran is able to drop missiles on virtually anyone it thinks is a threat to the regime.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Iran possesses the “largest and most diverse missile arsenal in the Middle East” with literally thousands of short- and medium-range missiles stockpiled on mobile launchers and underground bunkers.

Maps overlaid with the range of its missiles, shows that Iran can strike targets as far away as India, China and Russia to the east and most of Europe and North Africa to the west.

It’s Shahab-3 missile has a range of over 2,000 km with a payload capacity heavy enough to accommodate a nuclear or chemical warhead of over 2,000 lb.

The Iranian regime has used this weapon system to hint strongly at the U.S. that its military bases in the Middle East are subject to being destroyed by Iran’s missiles; a not too subtle threat that raises the level of tensions in the region despite the reassurances of the Iran lobby.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps Commander Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari demanded Wednesday the U.S. withdraw all its military bases within 1,000 kilometers of Iran’s borders, a distance that encompasses most of the U.S.’s operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan, including massive bases in Bahrain, Qatar and Kuwait.

The U.S. bases in the Persian Gulf are especially problematic for the Iranian regime since they present a direct challenge to the regime’s authority in what it considers its territorial waters and has often acted to threaten and imped international shipping through the Gulf; recently culminating in the detention of two American navy patrol boats and their crews.

Jafari made his threats because he is worried, as are all the mullahs, that the Trump administration is incrementally acting on its campaign promises to get tough on the Iranian regime and actively encourage regime change.

While the Obama administration, with the not so subtle direction and guidance of the Iran lobby, sought to keep various issues separate from the nuclear deal it negotiated including Iran’s missile fleet, the Trump administration is acting aggressively on those other fronts much to the consternation of the mullahs.

By levying new sanctions on Iran this week, as well as openly contemplating designating the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organization, President Trump is setting up a slow, methodical and thorough constricting of the regime’s finances and ability to export its brand of terrorism.

Trump is resetting the playing board to the conditions prior to the nuclear deal negotiations in which sanctions had crippled Iran and threatened to topple its regime leadership. The president is undoubtedly taking a course of action that can only lead to one goal which is regime change.

It is logical to assume that the U.S. would react violently and unilaterally should the Iranian regime use any of its missiles against U.S. personnel directly, which makes much of the threats by Jafari and other regime leaders empty and hollow.

On the border between Syria and Iraq, the U.S. already flexed its muscle when Navy jets attacked a convoy of Iranian-backed Shiite militia that were approaching a Syrian rebel base occupied with U.S. advisors. We can only imagine what would happen if Jafari were to lob a Shahab missile at a U.S. base in Afghanistan for example.

The mullahs in Tehran are reactionary, bellicose and even blood thirsty, but they are not crazy. They understand that their options are shrinking and Trump is only a few steps away from not certifying Iran in compliance with the nuclear agreement and triggering the 60-day review period for open debate in a Congress that has already shown bipartisan hostility to the regime.

From that point, it’s only a proforma matter before President Trump nullifies the Boeing deal, cuts off Iran’s access to U.S. currency markets and begins to penalize foreign businesses for investing in Iran.

In short order, the mullahs could find themselves back in 2009 where the economy was in shambles and an unpopular president was being met with massive street protests that rocked Tehran for days.

The recipe for regime change is well known and the mullahs are doing everything they can to avoid a repeat which is why they are so eager—or desperate—to threaten everyone with a rain of ballistic missiles.

Michael Tomlinson

Iranian Regime Doubles Down on Missile Violations

March 29, 2016 by admin

The Iranian regime announced its intent to continue pursuing development of its illegal ballistic missiles despite the U.S. blacklisting of more Iranian companies linked to the program, according to multiple news sources.

The regime’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) test-fired several ballistic missiles this month, drawing condemnation from Western leaders who believe the tests violate a United Nations resolution.

The U.S. Treasury Department blacklisted on Thursday two Iranian companies, cutting them off from international finance over their connection to the missile program. Washington had imposed similar sanctions on 11 businesses and individuals in January over a missile test carried out by the IRGC in October 2015.

“Even if they build a wall around Iran, our missile program will not stop,” Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of the IRGC’s aerospace arm, was quoted as saying by Tasnim news agency. “They are trying to frighten our officials with sanctions and invasion. This fear is our biggest threat.”

Hassan Rouhani, the regime president touted by the Iran lobby as a pragmatic conservative, said on Sunday that boosting Iran’s defense capabilities is a “strategic policy.”

“We will pursue any measure to boost our defense might and this is a strategic policy,” Rouhani was quoted as saying by Press TV in the first cabinet meeting in the new Persian year.

The fact that the regime fought hard to separate its ballistic missile program from the nuclear agreement reached last year created the kind of yawning loophole which now allows it to develop longer range missiles without fear of jeopardizing the flood of billions in cash now streaming into the regime as a result of the deal.

Hajizadeh downplayed the recent sanctions describing them as futile efforts to curb the regime’s missile program and he is correct in large measure because the deal struck by the Obama administration essentially only allows for pinprick sanctions in response to missile violations.

It also ignores the fact that the nuclear deal does not prevent the Iranian regime from using its new generation of missiles to use chemical or biological weapons payloads, increasing the lethality of what the mullahs can order up.

Another demonstration of the futility of patchwork sanctions was a visit to Iran by North Korean executives of the Korea Mining Development Trading Corp., which is under both UN Security Council and U.S. sanctions for exporting equipment related to ballistic missiles and other weapon systems.

The North Koreans met with the regime’s Shahid Hemat Industrial Group to sell valves, electronic components and measurement devices that are used in liquid-fueled ballistic missiles and space launch vehicles.

The continued commerce between North Korea and the Iranian regime shows how much things have not changed since the deal was signed and demonstrates the fundamental untruth pushed by regime allies such as the National Iranian American Council that the nuclear accord would dramatically alter Iran’s relationship with the world.

Nothing has changed and if anything the past few months have shown how much worse things have gotten with appalling terrorist attacks mounted by Islamic extremists in Paris, Brussels and San Bernardino and a refugee crisis that shows no sign of slowing down as Iran continues to send fighters to battlefields throughout the Middle East.

Ali Safavi, a member of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, a leading Iranian dissident group, wrote in the New York Daily News about the disconnect between the perception of reformers within the regime and the reality of their hardline practices.

“The leaders of this round’s so-called reformist faction include former President Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and current President Hassan Rouhani. The former was famously embraced in the early 1990s by the West as a pragmatist willing to do business, before he we went on to preside over the worst period of the Iranian regime’s terrorist attacks and assassinations of dissidents and foreign nationals abroad,” he said.

Indeed, during his “moderate” presidency, Rafsanjani’s Iran was regarded by the U.S. State Department as the world’s number one state sponsor of terrorism, a dubious distinction maintained by the current president,” Safavi added. “When will Washington wake up and learn that perhaps the Iranian regime is fundamentally incapable of reform? When will it learn that it should invest in the Iranian people and the real opposition instead of the phony moderates?”

He poses the central problem with policymakers and elected officials dealing with the Iranian regime: failure to learn from past mistakes dooms us to keep repeating them.

Until the world stands firm against Iranian subterfuge, these types of sneaky acts will only continue.

By Michael Tomlinson