Saturday, August 25, 2012

Iran Has ‘Responsibility’ to Support Assad – IRGC Intel Chief

IRGC intelligence chief Hossein Taeb said today in Tehran that Iran has “a responsibility” to support government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad as it fights an armed uprising.

“We all have a responsibility to support Syria and not allow the line of resistance to be broken,” Taeb said. (Fars News Agency, 24 August)

Iran considers Assad’s Syria as part of an anti-Western front in the region that also includes Lebanon’s Hezbollah and Palestine’s Hamas, although increasingly considering the latter as an unreliable partner.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

Of course they have responsibility to support their fellow terrorist partners in crime.
Anything else would be against the principles of their terrorist doctrine.
But they must understand that the days of the Assad regime is coming to an end very soon.And the blood lust regime in Tehran line of resistance will be broken.

mat said...

If the U.S. supports its master,Israel, China supports North Korea and so does Iran too. This is called democracy. Isn't it fair and square?

Anonymous said...

It is logical that Iran, under the threats and the anticipated possibility of war, should do everything to thwart those possibilities.

There is a formula that the best form of a defense is an attack...
Of course not attack in a specific meanings in present situation, but by taking opportunity to delay an aggression and involving friends to Iran's defence...

The current stalemate in Syria, blocks israel from launching airstrikes through the Syrian airspace and in the case of attack against Iran, Syria military will unavoidable be involved ... rendering a help to Iran.

So Iran have had to render "non lethal" and other assistance to a friend too.

Jabbar Fazeli, MD said...

It actually makes perfect sense for a military man to say that.

From a military prospective Iran can not withdraw support from Syria, iran's only ally in the 8 year war with Iraq, and a an Iranian ally against Israel and the west.
To withdraw support takes the supremacy of politicians over the military in Iran and this case shows that that is nonexistent.

A similar military vs political diversion of opinion happened in iraq. If it was up to the US generals, we would still be in Iraq, because the Iraqi army was not yet ready and the insurgency was not completely destroyed. It took politicians (who command the military) to override this idea and decide that it wasn't worth it, politically, for the US to keep its troops in iraq.

Iran will end up on the losing side in the Syrian conflict because it's politicians are powerless to override the military for the greater good of the country.

Anonymous said...

Iran is committed to the Assad dictatorship because Syria is the only secure transship point for supplying weapons to Lebanese Hezbollah.

Should the Assads fall, the weaponry which Hezbollah uses to subvert Lebanon will no longer be replaceable and control of Lebanon will wither.

Sanford said...

Anon 10:39

Looks like a twofer... package deal. Assad and Nasrallah go within close temporal proximity Tehran then is isolated for management upgrade. If however, Assad/Tehran prevail... Israel will be forced to consider a near future conflict potentially including the Sampson option, under the same rationale as cited by U.S. wrt WW2 Japan.

(wandered above my pay grade and they shutdown the "archipelago" blogspot)

Carter/D > Reagan/R > Iran event
Obama/D > Romney/R > Iran .....

Be ready for events.

Anonymous said...

Be ready for events that Russia will sooner depart embargoes against Iran than if would not be problems with Syria like know.

Russia has vested so much its credibility in defending Syria that it cannot quit as a loser.

All Russia's actions in support of Syria benefit Iran presently and in the long run too.

Syria has became and provided "a buletproof vest" for the Islamic Republic of Iran in the fight against the West.

Thanks to Syria the IRI can see israeli airspace in respect to provide an early warning of possibility for an aggression and air attack...