We have your drone. (war against Iran)

[faceless]

[major.tom]

Options for Dealing with the Gulf States
March 3, 2006

As everyone knows Iran is determined to get nuclear weapons, and will likely have then before 2006 is out.

And as anyone who is at alll in touch with current events knows, this will lead to war. Whether the war starts just before they have something deliverable or not depends on luck and how good our intelligence is, but either way unless there's a miracle it's going to happen.

The only question is whether we'll be able to effectively take out the relevant sites in Iran.

While it would be foolhardy of me to attempt a complete answer to that question, I will look at one aspect of it.

And that is, where are we going to hit them from?

Let's take a look at a few maps of the region

First, an area-wide map,



Just from this we can see a few things

1) Iran is an awfully big country

2) Unless we control the Persian Gulf, the Iranians will easily wreck havoc on shipping there.

3) While some of Iran is certainly accessible by carrier-based aircraft in the Indian Ocean/Arabian Sea, it sure would be nice to get the carriers into the northern part of the gulf so the plans didn't have to fly so far without refueling etc

Ok, you knew this already, you say.

So let's get close up



Unfortunately this map does not have a scale, but it does give some idea of where we have military bases.

The point is this; we cannot fight a war with Iran without help from other countries in the Persian Gulf. And that includes the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

Now, I have been second to none in bringing you stories of Saudi Arabian perfidity. In my opinion George W Bush has been far too cozy with them, as was his father.

And yes, Iran's air force would not pose any real threat to our aircraft.

Taking out Iranian nuclear facilities will require more than planes on aircraft carriers.

It will require more than B-52s, B-1s, and B-2s, based on Diego Garcia, Guam, and Missouri.

It will take more than aircraft based in Iraq.

It will take aircraft based in the countries of the Persian Gulf.

GlobalSecurity gives some idea on the immense scale of operations needed to take down Iranian nuclear facilities

American air strikes on Iran would vastly exceed the scope of the 1981 Israeli attack on the Osiraq nuclear center in Iraq, and would more resemble the opening days of the 2003 air campaign against Iraq. Using the full force of operational B-2 stealth bombers, staging from Diego Garcia or flying direct from the United States, possibly supplemented by F-117 stealth fighters staging from al Udeid in Qatar or some other location in theater, the two-dozen suspect nuclear sites would be targeted.

Mansoor Ijaz, writing in National Review, elaborated on this a few months ago

A massive air campaign, which only the U.S. could launch, could require attacking as many as 100 sites, destroying a good part of Iran's air force before attacking its facilities, and causing a lot of collateral damage. Iran's retaliation could be to close the Straits of Hormuz and force a showdown with America's naval forces. Iran would probably manage to get a handful of ballistic missiles in the air. No Gulf country wants a nuclear Iran, but neither do they need another Gulf war.

His solution was to encourage an uprising that would overthrow the government. I agree that we should try this. But of course the probability of success is not high, and at any rate it is something we cannot count on. Therefore we must be prepared to strike.

Further, as Mansoor Ijaz points out, the gulf states will the the ones that might be hit in a war since they are right there. But if the US decides on airstrikes, the gulf states are targets no matter what. So their and our best security is for us to work with them on security matters. We can hit Iran fastest and hardest if we use bases located in their countries.

A complete order of battle for US forces in the gulf region can be found here on the Global Security website.

Military City also has a pretty good order of battle and includes forces in the Mediterranian.

Check them both out. There is simply no way we can hit Iran without the use of these bases, and have a a lot of them in the region.

Friends, Enemies, or Something Else?

Are the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf region our friends, our enemies, or something else entirely?

Today we have four options being promoted in the United States:

1) Zero Tolerance
They will remind us that every single Gulf region country is an autocracy, and while some are more oppressive than others, Liberty is a stranger in all of them. The governments of these countries falsely arrest and torture their own citizens and foreigners alike, they support radical clerics, and have been linked to most terrorist organizations at one time or another. I have posted many articles on Saudi Arabia, for example, documenting what they have done in this regard.

Their position is, roughly speaking, that we should have no military or political alliances with these countries at all. We can buy their oil, but security in this regard is their problem.

2) The Realists
They say you've got to accept the world as it is. These people can't be changed, at least not in our lifetimes, so don't bother trying. Besides, if you upset the apple cart you're liable to make things worse. Remember what happened to the Shah of Iran?

This attitude is typified by people such as former former General Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor in the Carter Administration. Their mantra is "stablity uber alles".

3) The Alternative Energy Advocates
They believe that we can end our "oil addiction" and thus not need petroleum from this region. Perhaps so, at some point far into the future. I believe this to be dangerously misguided and unrealistic thinking. Given our level of technology, it will be a long time before we can significantly cut down on oil consumption. Pursuit of "alternative energy sources" may alleviate the problem somewhat, but anything to the degree that would make a serious difference would require far too much government coercion for me.

4) The Bush Doctrine
Then there's the new approach that George W Bush and his team are trying out. Although I have a few quibbles on the details, it is the one to which I subscribe.

The Bush Doctrine can be summarizsed as having four parts:

1) Pre-emption of security threats
2) Unilateralism when multilateralism fails
3) Strength beyond challenge
4) Extending Democracy, Liberty, and Security to All Regions

As a practical matter this means pushing the gulf countries to change their ways while working with them to counter threats such as Iraq and Iran. Unlike the old days, promotion of liberty will not be made with empty words. At the same time, we're not going to take the Carteresque approach whereby autocracies were turned into something worse; such as Iran going from the Shah to Khomeini.

It is my contention, that all things considered, the Bush Doctrine is the best option available. We ought to pursue it.

=======================

The article is dated, but the background facts form an interesting and (quite likely) still valid picture of the situation. I can't agree, however, with the author's conclusion.

Just for comparison, here's a better quality map of the Strait of Hormuz.

[faceless]

[kaya]

Former hostage says Iran war not inevitable
By Barry Rosen
Editor's note: Barry Rosen was the last U.S. press attaché to Iran. He was one of the 52 Americans held hostage by Iran for 444 days from November 4, 1979, to January 20, 1981. He is currently the spokesman for the Borough of Manhattan Community College/CUNY.

(CNN) -- For most of my life, I've had a relationship with Iran, mostly good, but which included a long period in which Iran hurt me and other foreign service officers greatly. I was the press attaché at the United States Embassy in Teheran in 1979, and one of 52 Americans held hostage for 444 days during the Iranian Revolution. I cannot forgive the youthful Iranians who imprisoned us and the regime that legitimized their cruelty, but I try to be as objective as possible as an observer of Iran's situation today.

Let's be frank. Iran's intransigence with its nuclear intentions and the West's efforts, led by the United States, to undermine Iran's economy and, perhaps, its legitimacy, are moving both sides further from a war of words and closer to a hot war.

This war would easily draw in Israel, and perhaps even some of the Arab nations that are showing their Islamist side since the "Arab Spring." It could well close the Strait of Hormuz and the drive the price of oil to impossible highs, prolonging a worldwide economic funk. And it would once again put the United States front and center in a third protracted war since 2001.

But, let's not jump to conclusions that war is inevitable or react reflexively to Iran's saber-rattling, the way some of the Republican presidential candidates have been doing to score points on the campaign trail. They seem to think that this war would be surgical and quick. That's the same bad thinking that got us into Iraq. I'd rather step back a moment and focus on Iran's strained domestic political situation as the real reason for its confrontation with the U.S. and the West. While I don't want to sound like an apologist for the authoritarian Islamic Republic, I also don't want us to be naïve about what's driving Iranian intentions.

First, Iran's "civilian" nuclear program reaches back to the pre-revolutionary days of the Shah of Iran, and there is no proof, whether from the International Atomic Energy Agency or the U.S., that Iran is actually building a bomb. Second, it's widely reported that Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are in open conflict today, not only politically but also theologically.

While this rift is esoteric to Westerners, Tehran takes it very seriously. It comes down to Ahmadinejad trying to change the entire foundation of Iran's theological-political infrastructure by asserting that he, not Khamenei, has a direct relationship with the Shi'ite Mahdi, or messiah. Khamenei has responded by condemning Ahmadinejad and his followers as the "deviant stream."

Since May 2011, this domestic conflict has shaken the regime's stability. It may have much to do with Tehran's flailing foreign policy as the sanctions do. The regime also has its hands full with upcoming parliamentary elections in March. It likes to say that the elections are both a model and inspiration for the new surge of democracy in the Arab world. It also sees these elections as a test of legitimacy. Remember, only two years ago, Iran was convulsed with a popular uprising that opposed the outcome of presidential elections. The reform movement was brutally crushed by the regime thugs. Major reformist leaders are still under house arrest.

Whether the regime is able to market itself to its neighbors as a legitimate source of a Middle East revival is rather doubtful. More importantly, reformists have loudly and clearly stated that they are not going to participate in a rigged election. This will be the first time since the beginning of the Islamic Republic that any part of the electorate has bolted from the system. Khamenei must see this reformist move as a profound crack in his authority and to the regime's legitimacy.

Finally, there are more domestic disasters. While Iranians of all political stripes see a nuclear program as a national status symbol, they are paying a dear price for it. The sanctions are truly hurting the average Iranian. The hardships include high unemployment, inflation and commodity shortages. Last week, Iran's currency fell to a new low against the dollar. This situation is not going to endear the regime to the electorate.

Can we move away from the precipice of war? I think so. Congress members should get out of the public relations business and stop making pronouncements about Iran that are simplistic and belligerent. It makes any chance of a negotiated settlement even more difficult.

The U.S. Navy's rescue of 13 Iranian fishermen from pirates in the North Arabian Sea was a surprising and awkward moment, and a chance for both sides to step back and breathe a little. But the startling news that Iran's Revolutionary Court had sentenced an American, Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, to death, charging him with spying for the Central Intelligence Agency, says that Iran, once again, is up to the task of seeking revenge against the U.S.

We need to find a real structure for diplomacy to calm these new levels of tension. Just as Qatar is hosting a political office for the Taliban in an attempt to open direct talks to an end the Afghan war, a regional approach to Iran may help. Qatar has become the dynamic center within the Arab League and has been a respected go-between. Yes, it has close relations with the United States and hosts the headquarters of the U.S. Central Command, but its prime minister, Al-Thani, was not timid when he said in 2006, "Qatar talks to Iran as an equal, and this is important."

The Gulf Cooperation Council could play a greater role in softening Iran's relationship with the Sunni Arab world by drawing it closer to its regional neighbors, as well as serving as a liaison between Iran and the West

[kaya]

A nuclear scientist was killed in a blast in Tehran Wednesday morning, an Iranian news agency reported, the latest in a string of attacks that Iran has blamed on Israel.

A motorcyclist placed a magnetic bomb under Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan's Peugeot 405, the state-run IRNA news agency said. The blast also wounded two others, IRNA said.

State television channel Press TV reported later Wednesday that Roshan's driver, named as Reza Qashqaei, had died in a hospital from his injuries.

Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani condemned the attack and said it would not undermine Iran's resolve. "This is not the first time that arrogant powers adopt such futile measures," he said, according to Press TV.

Roshan, 32, was a deputy director for commercial affairs at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in Isfahan province and a graduate of Iran's Oil Industry University, according to the semi-official news agency Fars.

Natanz, which is said to have 8,000 centrifuges in operation, is one of two facilities that are enriching uranium in the country. This week, the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency identified the second in the mountains of Qom province.

The latest attack comes as Iran is under increasing pressure from the West to halt its enrichment activities.

Officials in the United States and other Western nations have ratcheted up sanctions against Tehran since a November report by the International Atomic Energy Agency said the Iranian government was developing the technology needed to build a nuclear weapon. Last month, U.S. President Barack Obama announced sanctions against Iran's central bank.

Tehran maintains its nuclear program is for civilian energy purposes, disputing allegations by the United States and other countries that it is trying to develop a weapons program.

But the IAEA has said it cannot verify whether the intent of Tehran's nuclear program remains peaceful.

Lawmaker Kazem Jalali blamed the intelligence agencies of the United States and Israel for the latest attack, saying the IAEA also bore responsibility for passing on information about Iran's nuclear scientists to other countries, IRNA reports.

Israel does not normally comment on such claims. However, Brig. Gen. Yoav Mordechai, a spokesman for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), said on his Facebook page Wednesday: "I have no idea who targeted the Iranian scientist but I certainly don't shed a tear."

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the United States had seen the reports of "an apparent bombing" and that it condemned "any assassination or attack on an innocent person."

Asked about reported Iranian claims that Israel and the United States were involved in the alleged assassination, Nuland told reporters, "I don't have any information to share one way or the other on that."

In a later statement from the State Department, Nuland said: "The United States strongly condemns this act of violence and categorically denies any involvement in the killing."

The attack comes at a time when relations between Iran and the United States have rarely been as strained.

Iran sentenced Iranian-American and former Marine Amir Hekmati to death Tuesday for alleged espionage, prompting strong condemnation from the U.S. State Department.

Iran also has aggravated tensions in the past month with its threat to close the strategically important Strait of Hormuz if Western nations carry through with sanctions on its oil industry to punish Tehran's lack of cooperation on its nuclear program. In comments Wednesday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov urged Western nations and Iran to avoid escalating the situation further, Russia's official Itar-Tass news agency reported.

Responding to Wednesday's bombing, Iran's First Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi said the attacks against scientists would not stop the country from achieving its goals, IRNA reported.

"Iranian scientists become more determined to take steps in line with the aspirations of the Islamic Republic in spite of terrorist operations," Rahimi told the news agency.

The attack followed a similar mode of operation as others that have killed nuclear scientists in Iran's capital city.

Iranian nuclear physicist Daryoush Rezaie, 35, was killed last July in front of his Tehran home by assailants on a motorcycle, Iranian media reported.

And on January 12, 2010, Iranian university professor and nuclear scientist Massoud Ali Mohammadi died in a blast when an assailant stuck a bomb under his car. Majid Jamali Fashi, an Iranian, reportedly confessed to the bombing and was sentenced to death in August, IRNA reported at the time.

Prosecutors accused him of working for Israel's spy agency Mossad and said he was paid $120,000 by Israel to carry out the hit, Fars news agency reported. Israel does not comment on such claims.

In November 2010, nuclear scientist Majid Shahriari was killed in a blast where, again, a bomb was stuck under a car by someone on a motorcycle. Another nuclear scientist, Prof. Fereydoun Abbasi Davani, and his wife were injured in a similar attack. Abbasi is now director of the Iran Atomic Energy Organization.

"The bomb used in the (Wednesday) explosion was a magnetic bomb, the same kind that were used in previous assassinations of Iranian scientists. And the fact is that this is the work of the Zionists," Fars news agency quoted Tehran's Deputy Gov. Safarali Baratloo as saying.

Iran uses the term "Zionist" to refer to Israel. The nation has been engaged in a war of words with Israel, whom it accuses of trying to destabilize the republic.

Mickey Segal, a former director of the Iranian department in the IDF Intelligence Branch, told Israel Army Radio that Wednesday's attack was part of broader pressure being brought to bear on President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's regime.

"Many bad things have been happening to Iran in the recent period. Iran is in a situation where pressure on it is mounting, and the latest assassination joins the pressure that the Iranian regime is facing," Segal said.

The Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday that the Israeli military chief of staff Benny Gantz, speaking at a Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee meeting, warned that "2012 will be a critical year in the connection between Iran gaining nuclear power, changes in leadership, continuing pressure from the international community and events that happen unnaturally."

Ali Ansari, a professor at the Institute for Iranian Studies at Scotland's University of St. Andrews, said more information is needed about the victims to help determine who's perpetrating the attacks.

Some have speculated that the victims were members of the opposition movement and could have been targeted by internal forces, Ansari said.

"But if it is true that Israel is behind it, Iran should make a formal complaint to the U.N. so they can get an answer from Israel," Ansari said. "Because if they really think some other country is killing their nuclear experts, why are they not giving them more protection?"

Attacks on nuclear scientists are not the only obstacle encountered by Iran's nuclear program.

A mysterious computer virus known as Stuxnet effectively set back Iran's nuclear program in 2009 and 2010 by launching a malware program that went undetected until damage to an Iranian nuclear facility had already been done.

Nonetheless, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said in a statement Wednesday that its path was "irreversible and the useless actions of the U.S. and the criminal Israel will not cause the slightest disruption," according to Fars news agency.

The IAEA reported Monday that Iran was enriching uranium to 20% at the Fordo nuclear enrichment plant in the mountains of Qom province, described by IRNA as "a reinforced facility sunk deep under a mountain" 90 miles southwest of Tehran.

Iran says it has 3,000 centrifuges in operation at the Fordo plant and that its program has a medical purpose.

Enriched uranium at low concentrations can be used to fuel power plants, but in extremely high concentrations it can be used to produce a nuclear bomb. Uranium enriched to between 3% and 5% is necessary to make fuel for reactors. Weapons-grade uranium is enriched to about 90%.

[faceless]

I wonder why they'd target a commercial director?

[luke]

Iran to return US secret drone... as a toy

Reports say the US is to get its top secret surveillance drone back from Iran. The catch is, the device, intercepted in December, has been reduced to 1:80 of its original size and is being marketed as a popular toy.

Iranian state radio was quoted by Associated Press as saying on Tuesday that the US RQ-170 Sentinel stealth drone toy models would soon be on sale in Tehran.

They are expected to sell for 70,000 rials – around US$4.

One of the models will even make it to the White House in response to a formal request from Washington last month asking Iran to return the top-secret device.

State radio reports that the model will be of the original aircraft, but one eightieth of the actual size.

The top secret US drone was intercepted over the Iranian town of Kashmar, some 225 kilometers from Iran’s border with Afghanistan, in early December.

Engineers with the Iranian military confirmed they had managed to hijack the system inside the craft with ease and bring it to a safe landing without incident.

Since then, the Obama administration has asked Iran to return the drone, but Tehran has refused, claiming that its incursion into Iranian airspace had rendered it Iran’s property.

Reports also suggest the trophy might be put on public display after a thorough examination, and in a year or two it may be put up for auction.

http://rt.com/news/iran-us-drone-toy-965/

[faceless]

haha, excellent

[Brown Sauce]

best news of the day ..

[major.tom]

Hilarious! I hope they also install a spy-cam. That would be the icing on the cake.

[major.tom]

The latest zionist nutcase to express his world view. Hopefully, he'll be given a padded cell for the remainder of his days.

[luke]

i missed this story, but the israeli intelligence must be talking shit because i've heard the republican candidates say that iran IS pursuing nuclear weapons, so we'd better attack now before they get the same weapons we've already got.

Israel: Iran still mulling whether to build nuclear bomb
Israel also believes the Iranian regime now faces an unprecedented threat to its stability, with pressures both home and abroad.

Iran has not yet decided whether to make a nuclear bomb, according to the intelligence assessment Israeli officials will present later this week to Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Dempsey will be arriving on his first visit here since being appointed chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September. He will meet with various senior defense officials, including Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Benny Gantz

The Israeli view is that while Iran continues to improve its nuclear capabilities, it has not yet decided whether to translate these capabilities into a nuclear weapon - or, more specifically, a nuclear warhead mounted atop a missile. Nor is it clear when Iran might make such a decision.

Israel also believes the Iranian regime now faces an unprecedented threat to its stability, which for the first time combines both external and internal pressure: from abroad, increasingly harsh sanctions and threats of military action, and at home, economic distress and worries about the results of the parliamentary election scheduled for March.

Israeli intelligence sees signs that the regime in Tehran is genuinely worried about the possibility of an opposition victory in March. Should that happen, the regime will have to choose between conceding the loss or falsifying results - as it apparently did in the 2009 presidential election - which could incite anti-regime protests thanks to the tailwind provided by the Arab Spring, which toppled the regimes in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya.

Moreover, the country's economic woes are already hitting ordinary Iranians in their pockets. Tighter sanctions have caused the Iranian currency to depreciate by dozens of percent; the regime is having trouble amassing as much foreign currency as it needs; and now, it faces the prospect of new sanctions by the United States and the European Union against its central bank and its oil industry.

The regime is also being confronted by two distinct ideological challenges. On one hand, a growing camp that includes supporters of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is challenging the authority of the ruling clerics, and especially that of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. On the other, the Iranian model of a strict Islamic regime run by clerics is being called into question by Islamist ruling parties in Turkey, Tunisia and perhaps also Egypt, which either are or will soon be offering more democratic, modern and moderate models of Islamic governance.

Lastly, Tehran's chief ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad, is in real danger of being toppled as well.

Altogether, therefore, "2011 was a very bad year for the regime in Tehran," a senior defense official told Haaretz. Israeli analysts believe 2012 will promise more of the same: more pressure, including the tougher public line now being taken by U.S. President Barack Obama, and also more uncertainty and instability, in both the region as a whole and Iran in particular.

All this makes it increasingly hard to predict what Iran will do. Recently, for instance, it threatened to shut down the Straits of Hormuz, and thereby choke off a major portion of the world's oil supply. And under certain circumstances, it could also decide to make a sprint for a nuclear weapon.

The Iranian issue will presumably be the major focus of Dempsey's talks here. Over the weekend, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Obama administration recently warned Israel not to attack Iran's nuclear facilities, and Dempsey is apparently here in part to make sure that Israel has no such plans.

In addition, the U.S. State Department publicly criticized the assassination of a nuclear scientist in Tehran last week and denied any connection to it. Iran has blamed Israel for the attack, though it later accused the United States and Britain of being involved as well.

Israeli officials have made contradictory statements in recent days about the effectiveness of the sanctions imposed on Iran. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the sanctions in an interview with an Australian paper, but later told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that they were insufficient.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/israel-iran-still-mulling-whether-to-build-nuclear-bomb-1.407866

[gordonrussell]

Is there such a thing as ' a neutral source' ?

This is from an American source about Amir Mirzaei Hekmati :

American’s Unusual Résumé May Have Attracted Iran’s Suspicion
By RICK GLADSTONE and STEVEN YACCINO
Published: January 10, 2012



A Pentagon language-training contract won in 2009 by Kuma Games, a New York-based company that develops reality-based war games — including one called “Assault on Iran” — lists as a main contact Amir Mirzaei Hekmati, the former Marine from Flint, Mich., now on death row in an Iranian prison, convicted of spying for the C.I.A.


That $95,920 contract, and Mr. Hekmati’s military background, his Iranian heritage and some linguistics work he did for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, help explain why the authorities in Iran, increasingly paranoid and belligerent about perceived American threats, had him arrested last August while he was visiting Iran for the first time.

His family, traumatized by the news, has asserted Mr. Hekmati’s innocence, saying he was visiting relatives, and has characterized the prosecution as a grave misunderstanding. But the conviction and death sentence announced Monday for Mr. Hekmati, 28, has escalated into an extension of Iran’s tense relationship with the United States.

Mr. Hekmati’s family — his father, Ali, is a professor of microbiology and his mother, Behnaz, is a tax professional — has not responded to interview requests and referred all inquiries to a public relations firm. His three siblings — an older sister, twin sister and younger brother, also have not commented.

“They don’t want to say anything that might have negative repercussions,” said Michael Kelly, a spokesman for Mott Community College in Flint, where the father teaches. “Something that appears harmless here could be interpreted differently there.”

The family may also be acting on the advice of its lawyer, Pierre-Richard Prosper, a former diplomat who successfully negotiated the release of another American of Iranian descent from an Iran prison in 2010.

But records of Mr. Hekmati’s military service and entrepreneurial work — and the Iranian media’s portrayal of his prosecution and televised confession — offer insights into how he became enmeshed in the Iran crisis.

“He may have been this innocent naïve guy who wanted to visit Iran and got assurances that he would be fine,” said Hadi Ghaemi, the executive director of the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, an advocacy group. “It’s quite possible that they were just looking for the next person whom they could arrest.”

While the C.I.A. has declined to comment on Mr. Hekmati’s arrest, people knowledgeable about its recruiting practices say it is highly unlikely that the agency would have engaged someone with such a visible military résumé. Mr. Hekmati served in the Marines for four years, spent five months in Iraq and did linguistics training in Arabic at the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, Calif. He was also carrying his former military identification with him when arrested in Iran — atypical behavior for a spy.

Nonetheless, Iranian investigators may have been intrigued by his post-military linguistics work. In 2006 he started his own company, Lucid Linguistics, doing document translation that specialized in Arabic, Persian and “military-related matters,” according its Web site. “Our main goal is to assist organizations whose focus is on the current Global War on Terrorism and who are working to bridge the language barrier for our armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan,” the site said.

Possibly more intriguing to the Iranians was work done a few years later by Mr. Hekmati while working for Kuma Games, which specializes in recreating military confrontations that enable players to participate in games based on real events. The company’s chief executive, Keith Halper, did not respond to requests for comment.

According to a small-business grant document posted online, Mr. Hekmati was responsible for Kuma’s winning a contract with the Defense Department to develop “an effective, cost-efficient, rapidly deployable and easily updatable language retention toolset for trainers and soldiers deployed around the world.”

Kuma is well known in Iran because of its 2005 game of an imagined American military attack on Iran. The company’s Web site, describing what it said was a huge demand for that game, “Assault on Iran,” called it an exercise “simulating a U.S. attack on a key Iranian nuclear installation.” Iran’s own video game developers countered with their own version.

While Mr. Hekmati had nothing to do with “Assault on Iran,” Iranian news accounts of his supposed confession included a passage in which he was quoted as saying in Persian that he had been recruited by Kuma, “a computer games company which received money from C.I.A. to design and make specific films and computer games to change the public opinion’s mind-set in the Middle East and distribute them among Middle East residents free of charge.”

“The goal of Kuma Games was to convince the people of the world and Iraq that what the U.S. does in Iraq and other countries is good and acceptable.”

Rick Gladstone reported from New York, and Steven Yaccino from Flint, Mich. Robert Mackey contributed reporting from New York. Jack Begg contributed research from New York.
A version of this article appeared in print on January 11, 2012, on page A4 of the New York edition with the headline: An American’s Unusual Résumé May Have Attracted Iran’s Suspicion.


From 10 Jan 2012 nytimes (which refuses to let me post a link to or even view myself anymore)

[major.tom]

(I noticed another short thread that touches on this. Possible to merge them? http://www.couchtripper.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?t=13065)

[faceless]

Iran sent pink drone to Obama
9 February, 2012
An Iranian man shows a miniature toy model of the US drone RQ-170 with a slogan quoted by Iran’s late founder of Islamic Republic