board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web

Iran - the evitable conflict

Post Reply   Page 2 of 3  [ 55 posts ]
Jump to page « 1 2 3 »
Author Message
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 9:50 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Quote:
I always believed that we assumed Kim Jong-Il was bluffing.
I've never once heard that before.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 9:53 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
aulini wrote:
Dave_LF wrote:
In case anyone cares, the upcoming opening of the Iranian oil-for-Euros bourse I've mentioned a few times has been postponed indefinitely due to unspecified difficulties.
Dave_LF, where do you find reliable info on the Iranian oil bourse anyway? There seems to be a lot of hearsay and uncertainty around. I'm really on the fence when it comes to how great importance it actually has, if it's factual at all, and very curious about how much hard facts there really are behind the speculation.
Welcome back. Most of the information I get on current events comes to me via messageboards, newsbots and the like, so the sources are varied; I don't really have any one that I trust above all others (I do like the Asia Times). There are certainly well-informed economists who think the bourse wouldn't matter; however, what economists think, what politicians think, and what's true are three different things. Whether the dollar monopoly really is vital to the US economy or not, based on their past and (arguably) current actions, Washington and Wall Street seem intent on defending it. And when the opening of the bourse, the end of M3 data, and the deadline for dismantling the nuclear program all fall within 5 days of each other, it gets my attention; that's why I was relieved to hear it had been postponed. I'm still waiting for some solid information about why the opening was delayed and what future plans are.


Top
Profile Quote
aulini
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 16 Mar , 2006 10:07 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat 09 Jul , 2005 11:49 am
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
 
Dave_LF wrote:
aulini wrote:
Dave_LF wrote:
In case anyone cares, the upcoming opening of the Iranian oil-for-Euros bourse I've mentioned a few times has been postponed indefinitely due to unspecified difficulties.
Dave_LF, where do you find reliable info on the Iranian oil bourse anyway? There seems to be a lot of hearsay and uncertainty around. I'm really on the fence when it comes to how great importance it actually has, if it's factual at all, and very curious about how much hard facts there really are behind the speculation.
Welcome back. Most of the information I get on current events comes to me via messageboards, newsbots and the like, so the sources are varied; I don't really have any one that I trust above all others (I do like the Asia Times). There are certainly well-informed economists who think the bourse wouldn't matter; however, what economists think, what politicians think, and what's true are three different things. Whether the dollar monopoly really is vital to the US economy or not, based on their past and (arguably) current actions, Washington and Wall Street seem intent on defending it. And when the opening of the bourse, the end of M3 data, and the deadline for dismantling the nuclear program all fall within 5 days of each other, it gets my attention; that's why I was relieved to hear it had been postponed. I'm still waiting for some solid information about why the opening was delayed and what future plans are.
Well, that sounds pretty much like myself on all accounts. :)
What I haven't been able to figure out is where the idea that Iran is planning on opening a bourse comes from in the first place. Is there an official statement somewhere about it, does it come from intelligence, insider sources telling a journalist, or what?

_________________

Common sense isn't


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Mar , 2006 4:51 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
aulini wrote:
What I haven't been able to figure out is where the idea that Iran is planning on opening a bourse comes from in the first place. Is there an official statement somewhere about it, does it come from intelligence, insider sources telling a journalist, or what?
It has been officially announced; I don't have a charter to point you to, but the people working on it have made no attempt to keep the plans secret. The effects of the bourse on the world economy and the likely reaction from Washington are matters of speculation, but there's no doubt that the thing is being worked on. I mentioned the Asia Times earlier as a good source; they just did an article about it today:

http://atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/HC17Dj02.html

They don't think it would have much effect on the dollar relative to plain old national debt, but again, even if that is the case, reality and BA policy do not always correlate.

Edit: CG: When did the inevitable become evitable? Or have I been misreading the title this whole time?


Top
Profile Quote
Lord_Morningstar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Mar , 2006 10:03 am
Offline
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
 
Iavas_Saar wrote:
Quote:
I always believed that we assumed Kim Jong-Il was bluffing.
I've never once heard that before.
I’ve read up on it, and it’s inconclusive. The DPRK has a nuclear reactor, which we know they have extracted plutonium from. It is also quite possible that they have the equipment and know-how to turn plutonium into nuclear weapons. That being said, they’ve never actually tested a nuclear weapon, which they surely would if they wished to demonstrate their nuclear capability to the world. Besides, every other country with known nuclear weapons has done so. Also, they are very keen to demolish their program in exchange for concessions from the West, which suggests to me that it might not be working too well.

Either way, I’m not too worried about North Korea provided that China remains friendly with the West. It is currently hemmed in by other powers and has a lot of internal problems and little to gain from aggression.

I’m more concerned with the possibility of the Governments of either Pakistan or Saudi Arabia falling. Pakistan does have nuclear weapons, and Arabia controls a lot of the world’s oil supply and definitely has the potential to develop them.

_________________

[Space for Rent]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Mar , 2006 10:26 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
I also suspect that NK is bluffing. There was some talk a while back about doing a test in March, but that seems to have fizzled out. The long years of sanctions and isolation have left the country in horrible shape; I'm amazed that it holds together at all.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Mar , 2006 11:52 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
It doesn't change my point.. there are nukes in the world right now where a scenario could occur leading to a madman getting access to the button (has already happened in the US). If Iran intends to build a nuke (which there is zero evidence for) it is still years away and the Iranian leaders have made zero nuclear threats. It's simply absurd that it's such a big issue.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Lord_Morningstar
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 17 Mar , 2006 8:02 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 2420
Joined: Thu 03 Mar , 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia
 
I wouldn't call it 'absurd', but I am, on the whole, less worried about Iran than many others. I'm sure democratic change will come there, the only question is when - five years? Ten? Fifty?

_________________

[Space for Rent]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 20 Mar , 2006 12:23 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
I like this. Quoting the whole thing because it's short:
Ahmadinejad`s logic
Quote:
WASHINGTON, DC, United States (UPI) -- With the Bush administration`s increasing focus on the Iranian nuclear issue, it would seem prudent for Tehran to ratchet down its fiery rhetoric and act like it is willing to reach a compromise solution -- even if it is not. But this is not what Iranian President Ahmadinejad and his government are doing. They seem determined instead to escalate the crisis, even though this risks a military confrontation with the U.S. Why?

The answer appears to be that Ahmadinejad does not think that there is a serious risk of a confrontation, or that his regime will suffer unduly if there is one. Indeed, he seems to think that Iran will come out the winner if the crisis escalates.

This is because Ahmadinejad`s thinking about the present crisis appears based on the following premises:

1) Although the Iranian nuclear issue has now reached the U.N. Security Council, Russia and China are likely to use their veto power to delay even minor sanctions against Iran and to prevent any major ones -- especially the use of force.

2) If the U.S. insists on using force against Iran without U.N. Security Council approval, no other important state -- not even America`s most reliable ally, Britain--will go along with Washington.

3) Because the U.S. is so bogged down militarily in Iraq, it will not attempt to occupy Iran and thereby risk having to wage another endless counterinsurgency campaign.

4) An American military attack against Iran is likely to be focused on the atomic energy reactor which the Russians are building in Bushehr as well as other sites where the U.S. government believes nuclear activity is taking place. Any such attack, then, will leave the Islamic Republic intact -- and even free to eventually resume its nuclear program.

5) An American military attack against Iran, especially if it results in significant casualties, will transform the positive image of the U.S. that many Iranians now have into anti-American hatred -- thus benefiting the Islamic Republic.

6) Finally, strident Bush administration diplomacy on this issue -- especially if it leads to a unilateral American attack -- will serve to weaken America`s relations with other countries even more than its intervention in Iraq has done. This will provide Iran with far more opportunities than it has now to isolate the U.S. instead of being isolated by it.

If these premises do indeed represent Ahmadinejad`s logic, it is not surprising that he thinks he will not just be able to survive this crisis, but even to benefit from it. What is especially worrisome, though, is that each of these premises is probably valid.

In light of this, Ahmadinejad`s effort to escalate the Iranian nuclear crisis is not an example of irrational behavior, but a deliberate attempt to bait a trap for the U.S. The Bush administration, unfortunately, does not seem to recognize this and so try to avoid the trap. Indeed, the Bush administration seems intent on rushing headlong into it.

Mark N. Katz is a professor of government and politics at George Mason University.

Copyright 2006 by United Press International


Top
Profile Quote
aulini
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 21 Mar , 2006 12:25 pm
Offline
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Sat 09 Jul , 2005 11:49 am
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
 
Another possibility is that Ahmadinejad is a proud, zealous Islamist nutjob who will not step back at any cost and who is intent that if Iran is hurt, the West will be in severe agony.
Iran readies plan to close off Strait of Hormuz
Regime MP: "We'll close off the strait of Hormuz"

_________________

Common sense isn't


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Fri 12 May , 2006 5:40 pm
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
Looks like the bourse is still on the table. Last week Iran registered and licensed it, and the plan is to have it open on Kish within two months. Swiftboater Jerome Corsi says Iran has "signed its own death warrant": "The Iranian oil bourse may never be mentioned by U.S. policymakers as a official reason the United States decides to go to war with Iran, but it may end up being the straw that broke the camel's back."

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.as ... ueID=29047
http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.a ... E_ID=50100


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Sat 13 May , 2006 1:16 am
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Cenedril_Gildinaur
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 15 May , 2006 2:33 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 3348
Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Location: Planet Earth
 
What a stupid move to make. Just in time for it to backfire on the mid-term elections.

_________________

It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
Profile Quote
eborr
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 15 May , 2006 10:56 am
User avatar
Offline
 
Posts: 1105
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 7:07 pm
Location: Member barely active
 
just read the quote in IAvas post, it say's very little that's either new or surprising.

From the security perspective it makes sense to seal the borders, ther is evidence that insurgents are crossing the border- secondly the US are continually trying to persuade the Turks to let them base more troops over there.

Currently the Turks are not quite so aquiescent as they were in past times. to me that's am uch biggers new's story than this flannel.


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Sun 18 Jun , 2006 3:51 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
Ahmadinejad did NOT call for Israel to be "wiped off the map"

A more accurate translation is "wiped from the page of time". But of course the mis-translation, that evokes images of nukes wiping Israel "off the map", has been spun for all it's worth in the build-up to the Iran conflict. And we can expect more of this in the coming months:

Telling Lies about Ahmadinejad
Quote:
In the weeks ahead, we can expect the freshly cobbled together Iranian Directorate, a refurbished Office of Special Plans, to issue all manner of absurd propaganda against Iran in preparation for an attack.

Question is, will the American people buy into the lies and disinformation?

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Mon 19 Jun , 2006 12:48 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
Crosspost:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HF17Ak01.html

The atimes consistently manages to collect and publish some of the most insightful, in-depth columns out there.


Top
Profile Quote
Lidless
Post subject:
Posted: Thu 22 Jun , 2006 12:31 am
Als u het leven te ernstig neemt, mist u de betekenis.
Offline
 
Posts: 8261
Joined: Wed 27 Oct , 2004 8:21 pm
Location: London
 
I need to see the internal Whitehouse memo about "oil resources for the West" before deciding on anything. This was the same post I gave as for three years ago.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 20 Dec , 2006 8:14 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
The last time the U.S. was being especially aggressive toward Iran was when they were about to open their oil-for-Euros bourse. The plans were quietly dropped, and aggression returned to background levels. Two weeks ago, Iran announced a new plan to replace dollars with Euros in foreign trade and voila! the aggression is back. There's a connection here; I just know it:

Iran to replace dollar with Euro
Iran may reduce use of dollar
U.S. plans naval buildup in gulf to counter Iran
Bush announces plan to increase size of military
Blair to urge Middle-East states to reign in Iran


Top
Profile Quote
Iavas_Saar
Post subject:
Posted: Wed 20 Dec , 2006 1:41 pm
His Rosyness
Offline
 
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon 31 Jan , 2005 7:02 pm
Location: Salisbury, England
 
I have been wondering if the talk of sending more troops to Iraq has anything to do with a planned conflict with Iran next year.

_________________

[ img ]


Top
Profile Quote
Dave_LF
Post subject:
Posted: Tue 23 Jan , 2007 6:58 am
You are hearing me talk
Offline
 
Posts: 2950
Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 8:14 am
Location: Great Lakes
 
atimes again with an article on the financial war being waged vs. Iran:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA23Ak01.html


Top
Profile Quote
Display: Sort by: Direction:
Post Reply   Page 2 of 3  [ 55 posts ]
Return to “The Symposium” | Jump to page « 1 2 3 »
Jump to: