U.S., Israel Actively Preparing Air Strikes Against Iran

[Nbadan]

...and so it begins...


The White House says there is growing international support for action by the U.N. Security Council on Iran's nuclear program.

The Bush administration says Tehran is showing it cannot be trusted to abide by its international obligations.

Iran says it is resuming nuclear fuel research. The Bush administration warns it could face serious consequences.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan says the issue is a matter of trust.
snip...
But Russia and China have indicated they are reluctant to take Iran before the Security Council, where they have permanent seats and veto power. During a briefing for reporters, McClellan said only that discussions with Beijing and Moscow are ongoing.

more: Big News Network (http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=8a979dd0c9275adf)

From Israel:

[QUOTE]AN BRUCE, Defence Correspondent January 10 2006

Israel is updating plans for a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities which could be launched as soon as the end of March, according to military and intelligence sources.

The news comes as Germany yesterday warned Tehran's regime that it would face "consequences" if it removes UN seals from portions of its atomic programme and resumes enrichment of fuel which could be diverted for military use in breach of international agreements.

The Israeli raids would be carried out by long-range F-15E bombers and cruise missiles against a dozen key sites and are designed to set Tehran's weapons programme back by up to two years.

Pilots at the Israeli air force's elite 69 squadron have been briefed on the plan and have conducted rehearsals for their missions.

The Hearld (http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/53948.html)

Are you ready for WW3? Do you think that Russia and China are going to just sit ideally by while Big Oil uses American fire-power to take growing control of ME oil under the guise of forcing Iran to capitulate its national sovereignty over nuclear weapons development? Keep in mind that both countries have made substantial investments in Iran's oil and nuclear power projects.

[Nbadan]

Great article that highlights my points about the U.S. versus China-Russian energy battle and why we may have already lost...

The Kremlin and the world energy war
By W Joseph Stroupe


Why did the Kremlin intentionally prompt the recent gas crisis with Ukraine at virtually the same time as it takes leadership of the Group of Eight, and after announcing that its chairmanship of the G-8 would focus on global energy security? The answer is multi-faceted and illustrates the new reality as respects Russia's global position with regard to energy.

First and foremost, Russian self-confidence, self-reliance and assertiveness, especially with regard to foreign policy, have all been steadily growing since before the US invasion of Iraq when Russia and its partners stood up to oppose the US. Russia refuses to be pushed around, preferring to take a course of its own choice regardless of US and Western opposition and lecturing, but at the same time also preferring to avoid a direct conflict or heavy-handedness where possible. It makes alliances with whomever it pleases regardless of US and European complaints. It isn't deterred by threats. Russian assertiveness at home and abroad will continue to increase as it sees its national security at risk as a result of US/European moves within its traditional sphere of influence.

Second, Russia has had enough of the incursion by the US in particular into its sphere of influence. It has to deal with troublesome US-sponsored regimes in Ukraine and Georgia, and it has determined there will be no further incursions. Russia's new domestic law severely limiting the operations of non-governmental organizations is an example of its determination to resist US efforts at instigating "regime change" within its own borders.

The Kremlin's moves on Ukraine in the field of energy constitute a determined pushback against the US and against the European regimes cooperating with the US in that effort. Energy-dependent Ukraine simply cannot win the strategic rivalry with Russia - it can only hold out for a short time at best. The message from Moscow is clear: the Kremlin will not hesitate to use its profoundly effective energy weapon against anyone threatening Russian interests. In the recent dispute with Ukraine, the Kremlin pressed the issue until it mostly got its way, and in the lead-up to elections in March, Moscow wants a "regime change" in Ukraine, either by means of the upcoming parliamentary elections themselves or by corralling the current Ukraine regime into obedience.

Soon, Europe will begin to realize that as virtual US patsies in a drive against Russia the price is too high, and its wiser members will cease to lend support to short-sighted US policies respecting Russia, thus severely marginalizing Europe's smaller members who seem to enjoy antagonizing Russia against their own vital interests.

Third, the Kremlin is now working to drive the final wedge between the US and Europe as it forces Europe to think about the terribly high price of aligning with the US and cooperating with it against Russian interests. Moscow is sending the signal that it is willing and able to be a reliable energy and political and economic partner, only so long as its own legitimate interests and security are also fully respected in return. It will not stand any longer for European duplicity. Energy security is not free. The price is respect for Russia and a guarantee of its legitimate interests.

Fourth, the Kremlin has correctly determined that it already occupies the key global position as respects energy and that it cannot be shifted out of that position, no matter how vigorously the US and its allies may try. Middle East instability is on the rise with no relief in sight. That solidifies Russia's new position. Oil-rich Central Asia is moving firmly into alignment with both Russia and China. Canada and Latin America are incrementally doing likewise.

Neither Europe nor the US has viable energy alternatives in the foreseeable future, making Russia the key. The West's threats of diversification away from reliance on Russian energy are wishful thinking, empty threats that cannot be fulfilled any time soon. Russia isn't fooled by such threats and rhetoric.

Europe is absolutely obliged to rely on Russia as respects energy. So is Asia. There is no way out in the near term, for at least a decade or two. Anywhere in that space of time Russia easily could, if it were obliged by US unilateralism, apply tremendous economic and political pressure to severely damage, or credibly threaten to do such damage, to the economies of the West.

The US and British economies in particular are artificial bubble disasters just waiting to happen, tremendously burdened with enormous debt loads. The dollar definitely appears to have reversed its temporary 2005 gain, now resuming its strategic decline. China has signaled that it will steadily diversify its huge reserves out of dollars.

Russia and its key strategic allies could fight and win an economic war with the West because the energy-dependent, bubble-ridden US and British economies would be forced to "blink" first, before they were crashed. Deeply energy-dependent Europe would be forced to "blink" long before the US and Britain. Most of Asia, the Middle East, Latin America and Canada already show no fondness for US foreign policy and could be expected, at a minimum, to refrain from allying with the US in any warfare (economic, political or military) against Russia and its allies.

The US isolation over its invasion of Iraq provides a suitable illustration of what it would face on a global scale if it prompts a new global crisis by continuing to seek the demise of Russian power and influence in its own sphere by the spread of more democratic "regime changes", as the US State Department has just recently said it intends to do. The same is true if the US or Israel take the enormously destabilizing step of attacking Iran - the global repercussions of such a course would be enormous, with the US suffering most badly.

Asia Times Online (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/HA10Ag01.html)

[MannyIsGod]

Yeah, I can't imagine those 2 countries would go along with anything of that sort. Hopefully the Dems take back a good amount of seats in congress. God knows the republicans have tried their best to set the stage for their return.

[Nbadan]

China lays down gauntlet in energy war
By F William Engdahl

Beijing-Tehran-Moscow


At the end of 2004, Beijing signed a $70 billion energy agreement with Tehran, China's largest Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries energy deal to date. China's state Sinopec agreed to buy 250 million tons of LNG over 30 years from Iran, as well as to develop the giant Yadavaran field. That agreement covered the comprehensive development by Sinopec of the giant Yadavaran gas field, construction of a related petrochemical and gas industry including pipelines.

As part of the huge Iran-China economic cooperation agreement, China's state-run military construction company, NORINCO, will expand the Tehran Metro underground.

A second phase in the Iran-China strategic energy cooperation will involve constructing a pipeline in Iran to take oil some 386 kilometers to the Caspian Sea, there to link up with the planned pipeline from China into Kazakhstan.

On signing the deal, Iran's Petroleum Minister announced that Tehran would like to see China replace Japan as Iran's largest oil importer. As well, Iran has what are estimated to be the world's second largest reserves of natural gas after Russia. Iran is a place of enormous strategic importance to China, to Japan, to Russia, to the European Union, and for all these reasons, to Washington as well.

Iran supplies about 14% of China's oil. Along with Russia, China has been involved since the late 1990s in supplying nuclear technology to Tehran. In 1997, Beijing, under Washington pressure, nominally agreed to stop nuclear-related shipments to Iran, but the flows are believed continuing as the Iran relation is strategic and critical to China's energy security.

China, a veto member of the UN Security Council, has repeatedly called for the issue of Iranian nuclear development to be dealt with by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA's chief, Nobel Peace Prize awardee, Mohamed ElBaradei, has earned the enmity of Washington war hawks for his open declarations of lack of evidence in both Iraq and now of Iranian atomic bomb capability.

Given the nature of the Bush administration's rush to war in Iraq in 2003, where China had a major stake in oil development, and the subsequent US blocking of other Chinese attempts at securing energy independence, including Unocal, it is not surprising that Beijing is taking extraordinary measures to secure its long-term oil and gas supply.

Energy is the Achilles' heel of China's economic growth. Beijing knows that only too well. So does Washington. A decision by Washington to take military action against Iran now would pull a far larger cast of actors into the fray than Iraq.

Asia Times Online (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GL21Ad01.html)

[Vashner]

Yeah, I can't imagine those 2 countries would go along with anything of that sort. Hopefully the Dems take back a good amount of seats in congress. God knows the republicans have tried their best to set the stage for their return.

Don't be so blinded by the media....

Everything the Democrats have throw has bounced off...

Now if you want to suck the Iran dick be my guest you fucking pussy...

Otherwise let men and women that know how to fight do there job...

Worry about global warming or something.. cause you fucking suck at defense... fucking whimp.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Don't be so blinded by the media....

Everything the Democrats have throw has bounced off...

Now if you want to suck the Iran dick be my guest you fucking pussy...

Otherwise let men and women that know how to fight do there job...

Worry about global warming or something.. cause you fucking suck at defense... fucking whimp.


are you now or were you ever in the military? did you ever serve in a war? why aren't you in Iraq if you're so gung ho about "defending" the US?

[Phenomanul]

This is pretty scary.....

[RobinsontoDuncan]

Don't be so blinded by the media....

Everything the Democrats have throw has bounced off...

Now if you want to suck the Iran dick be my guest you fucking pussy...

Otherwise let men and women that know how to fight do there job...

Worry about global warming or something.. cause you fucking suck at defense... fucking whimp.


are you in middle school or 9th grade young man?

[xrayzebra]

Yeah, I can't imagine those 2 countries would go along with anything of that sort. Hopefully the Dems take back a good amount of seats in congress. God knows the republicans have tried their best to set the stage for their return.

That is all you have is a hope. They demonstrate their competence in
the SC hearings the last two days. :elephant

[gtownspur]

Wait, wasn't russia tied to Iraq and the same bs was predicted if we were to launch airstrikes?

[Ocotillo]

Don't be so blinded by the media....

Everything the Democrats have throw has bounced off...

Now if you want to suck the Iran dick be my guest you fucking pussy...

Otherwise let men and women that know how to fight do there job...

Worry about global warming or something.. cause you fucking suck at defense... fucking whimp.

I once referred to gtown as an idiot. Gtown comes across as William F. Buckley compared to this boob.

[gtownspur]

^Wow, i seem surprised to see that you're claiming you have never engaged in any banter on this forum.

[Ocotillo]

^^ Banter yes, pointless swearing and name calling, not really. I have on rare occasion when I am in a bad mood did some name calling like when I referred to you as an idiot and I do regret that I did that.

I disagree with just about everything you type but I don't need to resort to name calling or obsenity. I would think even you agree the passage I quoted is in particular bad taste.

[gtownspur]

Well, there are times when we suspect that the other side is no longer debating but engaging in taunting and denial, which causes us to lose respect for them, and consequently ourselves.

[Oh, Gee!!]

are we seeing a newer, more introspective Gtown?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Great point Dan, we should all sit back and wait until Iran nukes Israel. Great fucking call there dumbass.

Russia won't do shit, neither will China. Typical idiotic left rambling.

"America and Israel should sit back and wait for Jerusalem and Tel Aviv to glow under the atomic fire of Iran, then we'll worry about it."

Signed, the Democratic Party

[hendrix]

Great point Dan, we should all sit back and wait until Iran nukes Israel. Great fucking call there dumbass.


I guess you are going to war, right?
Do you flight one of those new F-22s?

[xrayzebra]

I guess you are going to war, right?
Do you flight one of those new F-22s?

This person has got to quit smoking those funny cigs so early in the
AM. He makes no sense :lol

[boutons_]

MAD kept US and Russian warlessly eyeball-to-eyeball for 40+ years until Russia blinked.

M.A.D. should work also with Iran.

ie, Iran should expect that a nuclear attack on Israel would mean nuclear destruction of Tehran, Qom, and why not Damascus?, etc.

Any asshole who trusts dubya/dickhead, after their total fuckup in Iraq, to intitiate another war on another Muslim country deserves to have his own ass nuked.

[xrayzebra]

MAD kept US and Russian warlessly eyeball-to-eyeball for 40+ years until Russia blinked.

M.A.D. should work also with Iran.

ie, Iran should expect that a nuclear attack on Israel would mean nuclear destruction of Tehran, Qom, and why not Damascus?, etc.

Any asshole who trusts dubya/dickhead, after their total fuckup in Iraq, to intitiate another war on another Muslim country deserves to have his own ass nuked.

You mean like the homicide bombers. Go to paradise and get all those
virgins. You are MAD in your mind. You are not dealing with rational
people. You are dealing with fanatics.

[velik_m]

Russia won't do shit, neither will China. Typical idiotic left rambling.


exactly, they'll just watch USA getting deeper and deeper into shit...



You mean like the homicide bombers.


homicide bombers... :lol (are there any other kind?)

[Marklar MM]

I believe anyone who uses a bomb with intent to kill is a homicide bomber. :)

[Nbadan]

Great point Dan, we should all sit back and wait until Iran nukes Israel. Great fucking call there dumbass.

Russia won't do shit, neither will China. Typical idiotic left rambling.

America and Israel should sit back and wait for Jerusalem and Tel Aviv to glow under the atomic fire of Iran, then we'll worry about it."

Signed, the Democratic Party

:rolleyes

Yeah, because if Iran nuked Israel that would solve all it's problems.

You have consistently shown in your posts that you know nothing about the current political, social and economic situation in the 'greater ME' and Central Asia, but then again, you don't have to because it's much easier to just fall-back on the old standard fear tactics, right?

911!!

911!!

911!!

[gtownspur]

Maybe dan, because we all wish 911 never happened, but you on the other hand wished it never happened for your selfish political reasons. YOu hate the fact that it was third worlders who perpetrated the attack. And that patriotism was at an all time high. Although you're probably the type who figures as the saying goes "Patriotism is the last refuge for scoundrels" but then do a 180 when it suits you and say " Skepticism, and Dissent is Patriotism".

But that's not the real problem. You're the one that although having a good understanding of ME politics, act like we are going against a socialist country who would easily adhere to a MAD policy rather than do a "kill em all no matter if it destroys you "strategy that would be employed by a radical theocratic regime.

Having Israel Nuked would have Iran take the "MOst powerful Nation" status in the middle east. Not only that but they'd be respected by all the other muslim nations who see Israel as anathema in the holy land.

Another thing you chose to ignore is the sentiment in "arab street.", one in which even the European Leftist have acknowledge as supporting sucide bombings and terrorism. This time it is you and the american left that is entrenchen in denial. You try to paint this whole struggle as a socioeconomic struggle, but that isn't so. This is a religous insurrection and not a bolshevik one. Maybe it would do you good to actually read the 911 commision because although it did anything but try discredit war intelligence, it acknowledged that the problem to be theological. Osamas mission has less to do with oil and more to do with global domination. Their reason to attack for oil is only an excuse to lure those who are not so impassioned by theological reasons to enlist in the cause for socioeconomic reasons. Alqueda was in Sudan, they were fighting the poorer christian minorities in hopes to exterminate them, and the christian minority in Sudan had no oil ambitions or were a threat.

YOu need to step out of your David Corn glasses and have perspective on the world.

[ChumpDumper]

Alqueda was in Sudan, they were fighting the poorer christian minorities in hopes to exterminate them, and the christian minority in Sudan had no oil ambitions or were a threat.Which is why we invaded Dafur.

Oh....

[gtownspur]

Never mind the rest of the post, not that i was even arguing about our inaction in Sudan, but that has been going long before the bush years and we fucked up in the neighboring country of Somalia.

But even at that chump, your all bout racking debate points and winning points for the good team, damn real discussion cuz " i want that exit strategy, even if i was the president i wouldnt issue my war strategies to a doof on a sports forum and trust that he keep it classified."

Yeah, your king when it comes to reasonable debate.

[ChumpDumper]

His exit strategy will be known soon enough. Around primary time.

Tell me how AQ was behind Dafur.

[Nbadan]

But that's not the real problem. You're the one that although having a good understanding of ME politics, act like we are going against a socialist country who would easily adhere to a MAD policy rather than do a "kill em all no matter if it destroys you "strategy that would be employed by a radical theocratic regime.

Eh, the Iranians know that the U.S. would need a ground invasion to halt all their work on enriching uranium, unless, the U.S. used tactical nuclear-tipped bunker-buster missiles, and that would radicalize any even larger portion of moderate Muslims and make a pariah of the U.S..

We simply don't have the necessary troops to invade and hold Iran, a country of 70 million people, and the WH has not shown it has the courage to make the choices it needed to make long ago to strengthen present troop levels. This is why the U.S. needs the U.N., but neither China nor Russia, who hold veto power, are likely to let Iran be referred to the security council.

[gtownspur]

His exit strategy will be known soon enough. Around primary time.

Tell me how AQ was behind Dafur.


Alqueda was putting in resources into the muslims to fight the christians. AQ was in sudan before it went to afghanistan.

Please read the 911 commission report before asking 4th grade questions.

[gtownspur]

Eh, the Iranians know that the U.S. would need a ground invasion to halt all their work on enriching uranium, unless, the U.S. used tactical nuclear-tipped bunker-buster missiles, and that would radicalize any even larger portion of moderate Muslims and make a pariah of the U.S..

We simply don't have the necessary troops to invade and hold Iran, a country of 70 million people, and the WH has not shown it has the courage to make the choices it needed to make long ago to strengthen present troop levels. This is why the U.S. needs the U.N., but neither China nor Russia, who hold veto power, are likely to let Iran be referred to the security council.


And this is all coming from the great logistical armchair general known as NBAdan.....right.

[Gerryatrics]

Are you ready for WW3? Do you think that Russia and China are going to just sit ideally by while Big Oil uses American fire-power to take growing control of ME oil under the guise of forcing Iran to capitulate its national sovereignty over nuclear weapons development? Keep in mind that both countries have made substantial investments in Iran's oil and nuclear power projects.

World War 3? That sucks, I guess I'll have to build a fall out shelter when I move to Canada to escape the imminent military draft you've warned us repeatedly about. I'll have to leave soon though, once gas reaches the $4.00 per gallon that you predicted, I wont be driving for a while.

[Nbadan]

My Predictions of events never change, but the timelines are dynamic to account for human unpredictability.

Red Lines in the Iranian Sand--surprise nuke attack on Iran??

RED LINES IN THE IRANIAN SAND
By Praful Bidwai


<snip>
All this might only frustrate US efforts to diplomatically isolate Iran," said Qamar Agha, a Middle East expert at the Center for West and Central Asian Studies at the Jamia Millia Islamia university in New Delhi. "Western Europe is far too dependent upon Iran's oil and gas to go to extreme lengths in sustaining sanctions that cripple Iran's energy generation. Therefore, the US might be tempted to use military force, jointly with Israel, to bomb select facilities in Iran."

In recent weeks, US Central Intelligence Agency director Porter Goss visited Turkey and briefed a number of other states in Iran's neighborhood on US plans for attacking Iran. Israel has already declared that Iran's nuclear program "can be destroyed".

The German magazine Der Spiegel wrote that Goss had asked Turkey to provide unfettered exchange of intelligence that could help with a mission to attack Iran. It also reported that the governments of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Pakistan had been informed in recent weeks of Washington's military plans.

And Israel's Likud Party leader Benjamin Netanyahu has nostalgically invoked his country's 1981 attack on Iraq's experimental nuclear reactor under construction.



<SNIP>

A former Indian intelligence officer, Vikram Sood, said that such an attack might use nuclear weapons. "A conventional attack on Iran would be expensive and not quite cost-effective. It would allow Iranian retaliation." To preempt retaliation, the US might use tactical nuclear weapons against Iran's underground facilities.

"The tragedy unfolding," said Sood, "is that if the US believes that its adversary possesses or has the intention to possess WMD , then it is justified to consider this a threat to itself and to US forces in the region. It must, therefore, act preemptively. The fear also is that unlike in the case of Iraq when considerable time was spent in building the case, this time the attack will be sudden and actual justifications will be given later."

Any such attack would break the 60-year-old, very welcome, taboo against the use of nuclear weapons - with extraordinarily negative consequences for global peace and security.

Such an outcome can only be prevented if the West moves away from coercive diplomacy to isolate Iran and opens serious talks with it, and if the nuclear weapons states rethink their own policies.

As the West accuses Iran of nursing nuclear ambitions, it has itself no intention of reducing nuclear arms. The US has embarked on a plan to expand its nuclear capability both upward, through "Star Wars", and downward, through bunker-buster bombs. Similarly, Britain has announced a $40 billion replacement project for the Trident missile.

ATimes (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HA13Ak02.html)

[boutons_]

Meanwhile, in Afghanistan:

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/logoprinter.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/printerfriendly.gifhttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/ads/fox/IMAY_NYTIMES_88X31_2k.jpg (http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/printer-friendly&pos=Position1&camp=foxsearch2006-emailtools06-nyt5&ad=printer-IMAY88x31&goto=http://www2.foxsearchlight.com/imaginemeandyou/)



January 13, 2006
Pakistan Says U.S. Planes Crossed Border and Killed 18

By MOHAMMAD KHAN
PESHAWAR, Pakistan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/pakistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo), Jan. 13 - American planes crossed from Afghanistan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/afghanistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) into Pakistan's Bajaur tribal region and fired on residential compounds in a Pakistani village early this morning, killing 18 people and wounding 6 others, Pakistani officials and eyewitnesses said.

Villagers and security officials said that four American aircraft entered the Pakistani tribal region that borders Afghanistan's eastern Kunar province at about 3.15 a.m. Pakistan Time. The planes targeted residential buildings in the Berkandi area of Damadola, about 25 miles from the border inside Pakistan, they said.

The mountainous province of Kunar is frequently the site of clashes between United States-led coalition forces and armed militants who are believed to use Pakistan as a sanctuary. In June last year, 19 American servicemen were killed in Kunar in the heaviest single combat loss in the four years of fighting in Afghanistan.

American military officials have said that their forces in Afghanistan do not have the right to cross the border into Pakistan, even in pursuit of militants. The issue is particularly sensitive for Pakistan, since the inhabitants of the border areas are strongly anti-American and pro-Taliban.

Witnesses from the village said that 14 of the dead belonged to one family. Sahibzada Haroon Rashid, a tribal parliamentarian from the region, whose village, Gung, is next to Damadola, claimed to have seen a drone surveying the area some hours before the attack.

"The drone has been flying over the area for the last three, four days and I had a feeling that something nasty was going to happen," Mr. Rashid said in a telephone interview from Bajaur.

"I was awakened from deep slumber by the noise of the drone and then, together with thousands others who, too, had been woken up by the plane's noise, saw jets targeting the area," Mr. Rashid said. "One plane circled the area and dropped illuminating flares and the other planes fired missiles. There were loud explosions." He said that the planes had targeted three houses, all belonging to jewelry dealers in a nearby town.

"The houses have been razed to the ground. There is nothing left," Mr. Rashid said after visiting the scene. "Pieces of the missiles are scattered all around. The impact of the explosions have been huge, everything has been blackened in a 100 meter radius." United States military spokesmen in Afghanistan and at the Pentagon said they had no reports of American aircraft active in the area at the time of the reported explosions.

Asked if a pilotless Predator Drone was operating in the area, Maj. Todd Vicion, a public affairs officer at the Pentagon, said he did not know. "Those are operational details that we don't track," he said. Predator Drones are operated by the Central Intelligence Agency, not the United States military.

Among the dead are 6 women and 6 children under 10 years of age, villagers said.

A military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan, said he did not know the cause of the blasts. "People heard explosions and, as a result, there were a number of casualties. My information is that 11 to 14 people have been killed."

This is the second alleged United States attack in a Pakistani tribal region that has killed civilians in recent days. Eight people, including women and children, were reported killed when an American helicopter fired at the house of a local cleric in North Waziristan close to the Afghan border on Jan. 7.

Pakistan lodged a strong protest with coalition forces on Jan. 9, but said it was still investigating whether the two helicopters crossed the border or fired missiles from Afghan territory. Assadullah Wafa, the provincial governor of Kunar, which adjoins Pakistan's Bajaur region, said that there had been no activity in the border area involving Afghan military or police or American troops. He suggested the explosion was an internal Pakistani affair. But Mr. Wafa said Taliban and Al Qaeda militants were using Pakistan as a base for their operations.

"We don't have any problems with the people of Bajaur," the governor said, "but everyone knows that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are staying in Pakistan."

Villagers in Damadola said some of the bodies were badly mutilated and could not be identified. They were all buried in a mass grave.

Officials and residents in Damadola said there were no reports of any foreign militants being killed or being present in the three houses at the time of the attack.

"There are no foreign militants here. It is a peaceful area," Mr Rashid said. "It is a big question mark: why were innocent men, women and children killed?"

"





Copyright 2006 (http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/copyright.html)The New York Times Company (http://www.nytco.com/)