Russia Says Would Be Threatened By Iran Military Action

[Purveyor]

BRUSSELS | Fri Jan 13, 2012 10:36am EST

(Reuters) - Russia would regard any military intervention linked to Iran's nuclear program as a threat to its own security, Moscow's departing ambassador to NATO warned on Friday.

"Iran is our neighbor," Dmitry Rogozin told reporters in Brussels. "And if Iran is involved in any military action, it's a direct threat to our security."

Rogozin was speaking two days after the killing of a nuclear scientist in Tehran by a hitman on a motorcycle.

Kremlin Security Council head Nikolai Patrushev, who is close to Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, said Israel was pushing the United States towards war with Iran, according to the Interfax news agency.

MORE...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/13/us-iran-russia-nato-idUSTRE80C1BI20120113

[Purveyor]

1. RELATED: Russia Takes Hard Line On Iran, Syria Crises

PTI | 06:01 PM,Jan 13,2012

Moscow, Jan 13 (AFP) Russia presented a hard line to the West over the twin Middle East crises today by slamming a proposed oil embargo on Iran and rebuffing any stronger action against Syria.

A top foreign ministry official called both sets of proposed measures a flagrant attempt to impose "regime change" in nations that in recent history have had poor relations with Europe and the United States.

The comments threatened to deepen the Kremlin's diplomatic isolation in advance of an expected return to the presidency by Vladimir Putin -- an ex-KGB agent who often infuriated the West while head of state between 2000 and 2008.

Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said the proposed oil embargo on Iran over its nuclear programme "will unquestionably be perceived by the international community as an attempt at changing the regime in Iran."

MORE...

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/russia-takes-hard-line-on-iran-syria-crises/950279.html

[The Stranger]

2. I wondered why there was an anti-Russian subtext recently in the corporate mass media.

Now I know.

[David__77]

3. Russia could play an important role in keeping the peace.

Paradoxically, it could do so by simply establishing mutual assistance and non-aggression treaties with states like Iran. Russia would be legally allowed and obliged to counter any foreign aggression. Notwithstanding the hubris from the West, Russia has plenty of deterrent capability, should its leaders decide to wield it effectively.

[AverageJoe90]

6. I'll have to strongly disagree with that.

'Foreign aggression'? Iran is a rogue state.......

[Purveyor]

13. And with the illegal invasion of iraq and the thousands of civilian deaths the USA is not "rogue'?

Really.

[leveymg]

4. Israeli intel appears to playing the role of the Right-wing plotters in "Sum of All Fears"

provoking war between the US and Iran with a real danger of igniting a wider war involving Russia, China, the Europeans, the Saudis, and others. This is also reminiscent of the "Guns of August", 1914. This is truly dangerous, deadly territory - we're moving over a line.

Put a stop to this shit, now, Mr. Obama, even if you have to step down hard on Netanyahu and his terrorist proxies.

[AverageJoe90]

7. I don't want any war with Iran either(unless they started something).....

But now is NOT the time for WWIII fearmongering. Don't you see? This kind of thing plays right into the very hands of T.P.T.B.; just look at the fact that the neo-cons have been screaming about an imminent WWIII since 9/11 happened, that should clearly tell you something right there.

There may be a lot of damn fools in the Kremlin(as there are in D.C.), but do you think they would really risk the lives of 100+ million people over a country which never really had any respect for them in the first place(and is still funding terrorists in the Caucasus region to this day!)?

[hang a left]

8. Appears to me that Iran is not the aggressor here.Nt

[AverageJoe90]

9. A couple of years ago, I would have completely agreed with this. But now, I see things differently.

The Israeli government has it's own warhawks, but Tehran is far from innocent here.

[Strelnikov_]

18. "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme."

Been thinking the same thing for a while now, 2012 ~ 1912.

[marasinghe]

5. good. about time someone stood up to the bullies - even if it is another of the same ilk.

humanity is getting sick of the arrogance, hubris & mass killings, of the biggest warmonger of our time.

[DCBob]

10. It sure sounds like Israel is about to do something.

I hope they dont but from all the "chatter" it seems something is about to happen.

[AverageJoe90]

11. We've been hearing this for years.

I'll only believe it when I actually see it.

[DCBob]

12. Israel has done it before.. bombing both Syria and Iraq.

I would not be surprised given recent events.

[AverageJoe90]

14. The Israelis invaded Syria in '73 and bombed Osirak in '81.....

The threat of a full-scale traditional nuclear WWIII was a very real possibility up until about only 20 years ago but it didn't happen over any Mideastern conflict even then. Why would it happen now?

[DCBob]

22. They also bombed Syria nuke facility in 2007.

My point is they arent shy about doing things like this. Bombing an Iran nuke facility wouldnt be out of their SOP. The main thing stopping them I believe is pressure from the US. But they might do it anyway.

[AverageJoe90]

23. True. But Russia didn't do anything then, either.

And that was under Putin, who may not even win another term in office. Fact is, I just get tired of the constant WW3 fearmongering, that's all.

[tabasco]

15. Yeah, that's what they gotta say.

But they would love to see somebody go in and blow that shit up.

[Strelnikov_]

16. Follow the money - Gulf War breaks out, Russia makes a fortune

on oil sales.

Things spin out of control resulting in damage to KSA facilities, they become the worlds top exporter of petroleum.

They are playing both sides.

It is in their, and to a lesser degree China's, interest if the US steps in it in another limited Gulf war.

And that is the problem, every one is banking on a 'limited' war. One where everyone will be "home before the leaves fall".

Shades of 1914.

[amandabeech]

17. Oil goes up, Russian economy goes up, protestors go home.

I think that Putin would probably like that scenario.

[AverageJoe90]

19. Neither of you are correct, it seems

@Strelnikov: If you were talking about the possibility of a more regional war, that might actually be plausible, but somehow I get the feeling you had nuclear conflict in mind. And, also, 'shades of 1914'? I don't think so. Also, have you heard that there are a large number of Russians who are beginning to feel disillusioned with Putin, particularly in recent weeks due to the election controversies over there(unfortunately, the MSM doesn't seem to be covering this too much, at least not here in America, anyway.)?

[Strelnikov_]

20. Yes, seems in your opinion I am incorrect.

Region wide conflict in the Gulf will probably result in worldwide economic collapse. Don't need nukes when the highly centralized petroleum facilities in the Gulf can be knocked out by 5 lb. of Semtex on a camel.

As for Russia, so what? As I stated in my opinion they are playing both sides and will stand back once things get started and run the cash register at their petroleum station. How does this strategy do other than help their domestic problems? Unless they get trapped by their intrigues, therefore 'shades of 1914'.

[yurbud]

21. this is why our military hasn't been so hot on this--a real world war is not so winnable