Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sergei Shoigu, in remarks carried by Russian news agencies, said Moscow wants to develop a "long-term and multifaceted" military relationship with Iran. He said that the new agreement includes expanded counter-terrorism cooperation, exchanges of military personnel for training purposes and an understanding for each country's navy to more frequently use the other's ports.
Iran's Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan urged greater cooperation as a means of opposing American ambitions in the region. Moscow and Tehran have staunchly supported Syrian President Bashar Assad throughout Syria's civil war, while Washington advocates regime change and supports rebel groups.
"Iran and Russia are able to confront the expansionist intervention and greed of the United States through cooperation, synergy and activating strategic potential capacities," Dehghan said. "As two neighbors, Iran and Russia have common viewpoints toward political, regional and global issues."
Russia has maintained friendly ties with Iran and has built its first nuclear power plant. Last fall, it signed a deal to build two more reactors in Iran.
Shoigu did not the mention ongoing controversy over a deal to deliver a sophisticated air defense missile system to Iran. In 2007, Russia signed a $800-million contract to sell Tehran the S-300 missile system, but the weaponry was never delivered amid strong objections by United States and Israel.
Iran has filed a lawsuit with a court in Geneva seeking $4 billion in damages over the breach of the contract, but the court hasn't yet made any ruling. Russia has insisted that its decision to freeze the S-300 delivery was based on the United Nations Security Council's sanctions against Iran
Jackie are you a female? who said go to war? Our mission should be no nukes for Iran. Even Democrats want more sanctions. We've got nothing for lifting much of them.. 0Jroc, honey: we are not going to war with Iran.
Fake Jake also called me 'honey' on another thread.Jackie are you a female?Jroc, honey: we are not going to war with Iran.
Jroc, honey: we are not going to war with Iran.
Come on, Rocko. Look at Sunni Man, who claims he is a rough and tumble supporters of bad ass Islam. Of course, we are not going to war with Islam. Why would we?
Iran and Hezbollah are planning 'imminent' joint invasion of Israel's northern Galilee region according to 'high level intelligence'
- Israel carried out airstrike on convoy in Syria on Sunday killing 11 people
- Among them were commanders from Iran and Lebanon's Hezbollah
- Today Israeli general warns they were likely planning attack on Galilee
- Israel moving troops to region after Tehran warned of 'crushing response'
Senior Iranian and Hezbollah figures killed in an airstrike in Syria this weekend were likely planning an 'imminent' attack on Israel, security sources have claimed.
Six Iranian army chiefs died alongside five Hezbollah militants after an Israeli helicopter fired rockets at a convoy in the Golan Heights region on Sunday.
Among those killed was Iranian General Mohammed Allahdadi, as well as commander Abu Ali Tabatabai, who is known to have worked with both Hezbollah and Iran.
Today Major General Eyal Ben Reuven, a former deputy head in the Israeli Defense Forces, accused the senior military figures of meeting to plot an attack on Israel.
Iran has also promised a 'crushing response' to the weekend strike, without laying out exactly what action will be taken.
General Mohammad Ali Jafari, head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, said: 'These martyrdoms proved the need to stick with jihad. The Zionists must await ruinous thunderbolts.
'The Revolutionary Guards will fight to the end of the Zionist regime... We will not rest easy until this epitome of vice is totally deleted from the region's geopolitics.'
Iranian support seen crucial for Yemen's Houthis
(Reuters) - Iran has supplied weapons, money and training to the Shi'ite Houthi militia that seized Yemen's capital in September, as Tehran steps up its regional power struggle withSaudi Arabia, Yemeni and Iranian officials say.
Exactly how much support Iran has given the Houthis, who share a Shi'ite ideology, has never been clear. Sunni countries in the Gulf accuse Iran of interference via Shi'ite proxies in the region, something Tehran denies.
but Reuters has details -- from Yemeni, Western and Iranian sources -- of Iranian military and financial support to the Houthis before and after their takeover of Sanaa on Sept. 21.
A senior Houthi official denied there had been material and financial support. But the assertions are still likely to reinforce Saudi, and Western, fears that Iran is exploiting turmoil between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain and now Yemen.
SANAA, Yemen (AP) -- Shiite rebels shelled the residence of Yemen's leader and swept into the nearby presidential palace Tuesday in what a top army commander said was an unfolding coup.
President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi - an important U.S. ally in the fight against the highly lethal Yemeni branch of al-Qaida that claimed responsibility for the newspaper-office attack in Paris - was unharmed, authorities said. But his grip on power appeared increasingly precarious.
The Shiite rebels, known as Houthis, took over the capital Sanaa in September as part of a long power struggle with Hadi and effectively govern several other cities as well.
It was unclear whether they intend to seize power altogether or allow the internationally backed president to remain in office.
In a lengthy speech aired by the group's TV network, rebel leader Abdel-Malek al-Houthi said that "all options are open" and that the escalation "has no ceiling" if Hadi does not speed up implementation of a U.N.-brokered peace deal.
look at the idiot John Kerry, the only person smiling is the Iranian nutjob
VIENNA—Iran’s foreign minister and lead negotiator in nuclear talks is known to frequently scream and shout at Western diplomats, including Secretary of State John Kerry, a practice that has caused alarm among bodyguards stationed outside the negotiating room, according to a member of the Iranian diplomatic team who spoke to the Farsi-language press.
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif—who is scheduled to hold one-on-one talks with Kerry this evening in Vienna—”frequently shouts at Western diplomats” in such a forceful manner that bodyguards have hurriedly entered the negotiation room on occasion worried that an incident might occur, according to one Iranian diplomat involved in negotiations who spoke anonymously with the Iranian press earlier this week.
President Obama and Senator Robert Menendez traded sharp words on Thursday over whether Congress should vote to impose new sanctions on Iran while the administration is negotiating with Tehran about its nuclear program, according to two people who witnessed the exchange.
According to one of the senators and another person who was present, the president urged lawmakers to stop pursuing sanctions, saying such a move would undermine his authority and could derail the talks. Mr. Obama also said that such a provocative action could lead international observers to blame the Americans, rather than the Iranians, if the talks collapsed before the June 30 deadline.
The president said he understood the pressures that senators face from donors and others, but he urged the lawmakers to take the long view rather than make a move for short-term political gain, according to the senator. Mr. Menendez, who was seated at a table in front of the podium, stood up and said he took “personal offense.”
Mr. Menendez told the president that he had worked for more than 20 years to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions and had always been focused on the long-term implications. Mr. Menendez also warned the president that sanctions could not be imposed quickly if Congress waited to act and the talks failed, according to two people who were present.
“It was a forceful exchange between two strong personalities,” the senator, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations, said. “It was not an angry exchange. It was clear, forceful, vigorous.”
As a journalist who’s covered Iran and Congress for many years, I’ve seen the frustration in those lawmakers who are trying to effect real action against the Islamic Republic, who know the roster of human rights abuses committed by the regime, who comprehended the gravity of the mullahs acquiring nuclear capability. I can only imagine the feeling of offense at the president suggesting that you’re not doing it for moral conviction but for some sort of monetary or political gain.
As for Obama’s veto threat, the likelihood of a veto-proof majority in the 113th is why the White House heaped pressure on then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to not bring it to the floor. Now Republicans have the majority in both chambers of Congress and even larger numbers. Democrats who rarely side with the GOP, such as Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) in the House and Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) in the Senate, will be rallying their colleagues to the sanctions cause. Repeated extensions of the negotiations deadlines and scant progress updates to Congress as Tehran benefits from sanctions relief have wiped away much of any optimism lawmakers may have felt about the administration’s strategy.
Maybe you should read through the thread and learn somethingThis might be a surprise, had the Iranians and the Ruskies not done this previously....But wow! It just happened for the first time according to some people...
The Obama administration on Wednesday paid $490 million in cash assets to Iran and will have released a total of $11.9 billion to the Islamic Republic by the time nuclear talks are scheduled to end in June, according to figures provided by the State Department.
Today’s $490 million release, the third such payment of this amount since Dec. 10, was agreed to by the Obama administration under the parameters of another extension in negotiations over Tehran’s contested nuclear program that was inked in November.
Iran will receive a total of $4.9 billion in unfrozen cash assets via 10 separate payments by the United States through June 22, when talks with Iran are scheduled to end with a final agreement aimed at curbing the country’s nuclear work, according to a State Department official.
Iran received $4.2 billion in similar payments under the 2013 interim agreement with the United States and was then given another $2.8 billion by the Obama administration last year in a bid to keep Iran committed to the talks through November, when negotiators parted ways without reaching an agreement.
