At least 12 people were killed and 42 others wounded Wednesday morning in a pair of devastating attacks on two of Iran’s most potent symbols: the national Parliament and the mausoleum of the Islamic Republic’s founder, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.
The Islamic State immediately claimed responsibility; if that is found to be true, the attacks would be the terrorist group’s first major assault within Iran’s borders. Suspicions in Tehran were also directed at Saudi Arabia, Iran’s nemesis in the region, which has been newly emboldened by a supportive visit from President Trump last month.
In the view of many in Iran, the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, is inextricably linked to Saudi Arabia. Hamidreza Taraghi, a hard-line analyst with ties to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said, “ISIS ideologically, financially and logistically is fully supported and sponsored by Saudi Arabia. They are one and the same,” he added.
June 7, 2017
ISIS attacks Iran.
The NYT reports.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
47 comments:
The most common victim of Islamic terrorists are Muslims.
Trump said as much in his Saudi Arabia speech.
And thanks to President Obama Iran can develop nukes in order to protect itself from KSA.
Adding nuke weapons to the insane and eternal war between Sunni and Shia will be Obama's legacy. But, hey, great smile and sharp creases in his pants.
If I had the least amount of compassion, I might feel sad about this. But - ha ha ha. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.
Its like lefty students attacking lefty professors at Evergreen or St Olaf.
Oso Negro, surely innocent lives were lost or injured in this attack. Maybe even children. You, as demonstrated by your words, have more in common with the attackers than those harmed by them.
Oops. There goes another oil prices rise. The Saudis keep do their eyes on the prize, and peace is not the prize.
But Qatar is caught between the big boys. And Israel's ally, the USA, is suddenly the sine qua non for the Saudis and Qatar.
That stupid Trump fellow just got lucky again.
Damn! What'll those ISIS bad boys get up to next?
Can't they both lose?
Like a return to the old days when Iran and Iraq fought all the time.
I am unclear why Althouse put 'Iran' in italics.
The enemy of my enemy.....
The Mausoleum would not be a spot attractive to "innocent civilians."
Once is again virtue signaling.
@ Michael K
Agree to disagree. OWT is not clever or signalling virtue. OWT only wishes to talk about "the other" in a bad light. OWT wishes only to harm.
It's a sad online existence and almost completely without value or virtue.
AReasonableMan said...
I am unclear why Althouse put 'Iran' in italics.
I would assume for emphasis.
It is not unusual for ISIS to attack someone.
It is not unusual for what ISIS is doing to be attacking someone.
It is unusual for that someone to be Iran.
You're welcome.
More like India and Pakistan - another situation that may explode at any moment regardless of what their governments may wish.
Of course the Sunni Muslims [ISIS, Saudi Arabia, etc.] are a more serious threat than Shiite Iran and Syria. But hey! Russia!
I say, get the hell out of the ME and let them fight it out. Pakistan has had nukes since the 70's and now we're arming the Saudi's 'bigly' so it seems only fair for Iran to get supplied. What a mess. A mess that we helped to create.
But there has never been any question that Iran opposes ISIS. So why would it be unexpected that ISIS might attack them?
ISIS says, "Praise God. Do you think that we will leave? We will survive, with the permission of God,” said an unidentified voice in the video. “ISIS will stay here until doomsday.”
ISIS must be destroyed. Obama's JV keeps it up.
AReasonableMan said...
So why would it be unexpected that ISIS might attack them?
It is not unexpected that they might.
It is unusual that they did.
Because they hadn't done that before.
But that is because it was logistically very difficult for ISIS to attack Iran. There are almost no ISIS supporters in Iran. There was an existing, straightforward explanation for the absence of prior attacks. So why the surprise given ISIS's avowed animosity towards Iran?
"But that is because it was logistically very difficult for ISIS to attack Iran"
So the attack was unexpected.
Why you want to nitpick this thing to death, ARM?
It's also clear that the journalist has a strong understanding of what really happened. You see, Trump visited Suadi Arabia. This then 'emboldened' the Saudis because Trump. The Saudis then did something because of Trump, and bingo ISIS attack in Iran. Thanks Trump.
But it wasn't unexpected, just difficult. Iran is strongly opposed to ISIS, just like the US, so an attack was always on the cards.
AReasonableMan said...
So why the surprise given ISIS's avowed animosity towards Iran?
Because they just did something that was logistically very difficult in a place where there are almost no ISIS supporters.
But they are avowed enemies, just as ISIS and the US are avowed enemies. Would an ISIS attack in the US require italics?
AReasonableMan said...
But it wasn't unexpected, just difficult.
And a MLB player hitting four home runs in a game is also not unexpected, just difficult. After all, we know they are trying to hit home runs.
It's still newsworthy when they actually do hit four home runs in a game.
ISIS isn't Saudi Arabia. But it's true Saudis finance them and give them support.
The King can't do anything about it, because he serves at the pleasure of the tribal leaders.
Ibn Saud ruled with an iron fist until all the tribes fell in line. Then he promised the tribal leaders equal wealth and privileges.
Today, the King is sheltered and almost never appears in public. He keeps the infrastructure updated, and the peasants happy. The rest belongs to the tribal leaders.
These are the ISIS backers. They are stateless. They answer to no one. To them, a Shiite is worse than a skunk.
AReasonableMan said...
Would an ISIS attack in the US require italics?
Of course it would not require italics, just as this did not require italics. But I wouldn't see anything odd about the use of italics, assuming this was a significant attack planned and carried out by foreign ISIS members, not just ISIS inspired locals.
The analysts are climbing over each other explaining why Iran and Saudi Arabia hate each other, how Iranians view ISIS as Saudi-based, how Qatar seems to be a double-agent playa, etc.
Way too much inside baseball, and we non-middle-Easterners should view these analyses skeptically. "They are one and the same," that Iranian wacko added. Rightists say the same of the DNC and the MSM; leftists say the same of the GOP and the KKK.
Stupid analyses often come from the people in the center of the action. We should be focused primarily on American success, as Trump seems to be.
ARF is trolling you, dude, because he's distraught that his Islamist buddies are at each other. He was similarly distressed during the China/Vietnam border conflict.
Ann Althouse said...
Like a return to the old days when Iran and Iraq fought all the time.
No need for this since Bush Jr conveniently converted Iraq into Iran's client state.
The Cracker Emcee said...
because
Troll-like comment, attacking the person and their character rather than addressing the content of the posts.
Newly emboldened?!
ISIS attacking Iran is an interesting development since Iran is a police state. Just as von Stauffenberg was an insider and was able to plant a bomb in Hitler's head quarters (on the wrong side of the table leg), it is interesting if we find out how this was done. These were more public places but still not that public, I suspect.
OK, OK, I get it. But Muslims eating their own: what else is new? Isn't this how the whole Shiite thing got started?
I wish this were a crafty CIA op. But the absence of an NYT betrayal suggests that it really was ISIS.
Proving once again that all countries/locales are vulnerable to guerrilla action. I have no love for the Saudis and wish we could be out of the ME, but that can't happen. There is no hope of influencing the Iranians, there is some hope of influencing the Saudis, particularly to lessen their financing of the spread of Wahhabism. Energy independence for the USA is the best hope of minimizing our involvement in the ME. Thanks to fracking that day is not far off.
Note that only ARM and Once seem to be having a problem with this.
Why is that? I think its because, like Obama, they view Iran as their natural ally. After all, Obama gave them 150 billion US dollars and a pile of uranium plus illustrated instructions on how to build a bomb to kill westerners, and as far as I can tell, every progressive in the world loves that idea. And so they are having the sadz because people they support who love to put women in Burkhas and kill gays got attacked.
I for one cheer this action, because I'd much, much, much rather ISIS and Iran, both evil, rotten to the core governments/ideologies, focus on killing each other rather than the rest of us.
Just as the Soviets and the Nazi's spent most of their resources killing each other instead of, say, moving 3 armies to France to oppose Patton. I'd love to see Hamas and Fatah start up their attacks on each other again instead of attacking Israel too.
--Vance
Pox on both their houses. Pass the popcorn.
@Once Written - You are having a mistake about me, I think. I assume the ISIS people have some compassion for people they don't care about, but are trying to convert. I am not trying to convert anyone to anything and utterly lack compassion for late sections of the human race. The entire population of Pakistan drops dead tomorrow - I don't give a fuck. Really. Not in the least. And that is just one example. There are billions of people that I do not care about at all! But I am not trying to kill them or convert them.
ISIS attacking Iran is about as surprising as Pope Leo X attacking Martin Luther.
Thinking all Islam is the same is as ridiculous as thinking all Christianity is the same.
Blue pn blue or red on red. Lolololol.
I guess what they do have in common are Mecca and Medina. Both in Saudi Arabia, of course. I wonder at what point ISIS will try to prevent Shiites from taking the annual hajj.
I'm thinking back to 30 Seconds over Tokyo.
Yes black turbans, you seem to be touchable.
The people may not be find if you. That doesn't mean they support ISIS, but it doesn't mean they won't just go about their biz, anyway.
May not be fond of you.
But that is because it was logistically very difficult for ISIS to attack Iran. There are almost no ISIS supporters in Iran. There was an existing, straightforward explanation for the absence of prior attacks. So why the surprise given ISIS's avowed animosity towards Iran?
Agreed. ISIS has been fighting an existential struggle against Iranian stooge Assad and Iranian stooge army Hezbollah for years now. The shock would be if they didn't hate Iran.
Islam eats itself.
Post a Comment