Starting pistol fired for tony's next war.

[air pig]

Our wonderful Foreign Sec has just declared on Channel 4 news that " Iran has a history of " concealment and dishonesty". Did I just hear a starting pistol being fired.
Unfortunately Mr Bliar and his group of exceedingly poor colleagues may have just started something the we may not be able stop.
I fear for the future, following the words spoken tonight and for the people that I know still serving in HM Forces.

[CBA_caption]

I really hope you are wrong, Air Pig. However...

[BN Boy]

I don't know, you might be able to get persian carpets at a bargain. And Iranian women always feature high up on FHM's international babe list.

Oh, I can't back up that last one.

[KPax]

As someone said on TV recently. Countries to the eass and west of them are occupied with American and other forces. Israel, Pakistan and India have 'Nasties' should they not be worried.

[The Gorilla]

Yes, it's a sad story...:rolleyes:

[Onan the Clumsy]

Just so long as you don't hear a well known president say "They have weapons of mass destruction and we know where they are"

[Showtime100]

For the last 18 months or so I have been selling Futures Contracts on a possible US/Israeli Airstrike on Iran. However, having enjoyed my run I have now reversed my position and have started buying contracts.

I can not see the Israelis letting Iran produce their own weapon. I suspect had Sharon not suffered his medical emergency then (with subtle US blessing)they would have been on their way to Tehran within the next few months.

What interests me is what will Tony do? Will he stand-aside or will he jump on the US/Israeli band-wagon? To me it appears that we have already started a media push to 'demonise' the Iranians as part of a move to prepare for possible conflict. Time will tell.

[ukatco_535]

I am going to throw a spanner in the works here but before I do, let me get things straight. I am Ex Mil aircrew, I have many friends still in the forces. I support our Armed Forces unequivocally.

I do not however believe that our AF should be made to got to war to salve the conscience or carry out the fickle whims of politicians (yes I know that war was never declared with the Iraqi invasion - that is a pedantic statement made by people who do not have to put their lives on the line).

My spanner is this - Why should Iran not be allowed to pursue other types of power production, rather than relying on fossil fuels? What gives us and the Septics the right to dictate this??

Yes Iran is not the squeakiest clean of countries - but then again neither is Israel without fault - but that is of course a different matter as it suits the UK and USA to overlook those infringments.

America refuses to sign up to the Kyoto (global warming) treaty - now there is a reasoned response from the worlds richest country - yet they won't allow other countries to develop clean fuel.

If our intelligence capabilities are as good as Bush and Blair claim when they are happy to take us to war, then surely they are good enough to know the difference between aggresive nuclear development and peaceful??

If the answer to that is "no, the intelligence is not geood enough to delineate between the two", then surely they cannot take us to war as they will be admitting the intelligence is dodgy, and that any war would be on a 'suspicion' not proof, which is below what is required in a common court of law.

The posturing started a long time ago with Bush making statements eerily similar to those he made about Iraq.

With the greatest respect to our European cousins (just throwing this in as a talking point) - there are certain countries at the heart of Europe who do not have the most exemplary record in fairly recent history, but we allow them to have nuclear options....

Now in no way do I think Iran shoud be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. So how do we get round this?? Do the UK and the US give Iran shed loads of money so that they can continue to use fossil fuels and not more efficient clean nuclear fuel - well I can't see that happening!!

[ORAC]

Extract from Stratfor (http://www.stratfor.com/products/premium/read_article.php?id=260879) forecast for 2006:

Iran is a country that has also learned lessons from North Korea -- and from other great powers. Approaching the United States with a smile and handshake works, but not nearly as well as approaching it with a smile, handshake and a possible nuclear weapon. Iraq remains the Iranian obsession. Events are not going poorly for Iran there, but not nearly as well as Tehran had hoped. The United States appears to have created a dynamic that will prevent Iraq from becoming an Iranian satellite. The Iranians want to have leverage in Iraq and, in the worst case, want something with which to threaten the United States.

Iran understands that it will not be able to develop a deliverable nuclear weapon -- as opposed to a nuclear device too large or fragile to deploy -- without the United States or Israel taking it out. Israel does not want to carry out the strike. Indeed, no effective strike might be possible on Iranian weapons facilities except nuclear attack. Israel wants two things. First, that Iran stop at a line before it has a deployable weapon. Second, that if it does not do so, that the United States, or NATO, carry the burden. That may or may not happen, but one geopolitical constant must be taken seriously: Israel will not permit Iran to deploy nuclear weapons.

Iran knows this. It has three possible strategies. First, hope that Israeli or American intelligence misses the development of weapons until after they are deployed, giving Iran a deterrent. Second, hope for an Israeli attack in order to position themselves in the Islamic world as the real leader and victim of the anti-Zionist struggle. Third, carefully approach the line of deployability without crossing it.

We suspect that the third option is the Iranian strategy. The problem with the strategy is it assumes that the United States and Israel are both seeing the same thing as the Iranians, which assumes that they have not only excellent intelligence but trust its excellence. The United States will have trouble with that assumption, while the Israelis have so much at stake that they will have a much lower trigger point. In short, the possibilities of miscalculation in the Iranian situation are substantial. The unintended rather than the intended consequence is the most dangerous......

[Blakey875]

Guys, this topic alarms me and I can't see any happy outcome. I think that as time progresses and the situation worsens there could be a nuclear accident at the main site of production. This was actually caused by an unadmitted missile delivery or nuke tipped Tomahawk.... Drastic means

[ORAC]

Getting Ready for a Nuclear-Ready Iran (http://www.npec-web.org/Books/Book051109GettingReadyIran.pdf)

[Regie Mental]

Mmmmm - Iranian F-14s -v- RAF Tornado F.3s.......

[Proman]

Or, given this may be a long race, if peaceful means don't work (and let's hope they do) Iranian F-14's - versus - Typhoon?

[Confucius]

Do they have F14s, plural, or is it down to just one yet?!

I think it more likely they'll use some of those ex-iraqi 'gifts' from a few years back, MiG 29s and Su 27s?

[cazatou]

I guess we could pencil in 25th August as a start date - that being the 65th anniversary of the last time we invaded Iran (Persia)to force a regime change.

[air pig]

Afetr listening to Colin Powell on Newsnight last night the fear factor has risen just a little further.
The idea put forward on this thread of a joint US/Israeli strike on Iran fills me with horror. This could trigger a crisis on a level or greater than 1973 oil crisis.
The Russian's have said they are against military action, and have enough of their own trouble's in the southern republic's. China would veto any action in the UN as it would stop their dash for growth in their economy.
We have ask the question have the UK been briefed on intelligence about Iran, we all know how dodgy the Iraq intell was using a 10 yr old PhD theseis as its basis. Was the opposition parties breifed then under Priviy Council rules. ( For non UK people, this is a procedure when selected members of opposition parties are given a no holds barred briefing under conditions of strict secrecy. This enables them, to then state to their respective parties that they have seen the evidence and concur with the findings. This is usually enough to reach a cross party consencus about action to be taken)
The CDS did state that it would taken until late 2006 for UK forces to ready to undertake another large operation.
Iran has made its position clear that they will develop nuclear technology, just as North Korea, India, Pakistan, and other states have done. Maybe just maybe if Iran was offered light water technology, there maybe a way forward.
At the rate this is developing I hope and pray to my God that this is resolved in a manner that all sides can back away from without losing face or we will suffer from the inevitable conflict.
Politicians :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[FJJP]

There is no doubt that the States have the capability to conduct simultaneous pre-emptive air strike/attack against Iran's facilities; the capability is good enough to assure complete destruction.

However, at what subsequent cost? There would be little or no loss of life or hardware since there would be no requirement to put men on the ground - the aim would be to destroy the nuclear weapon capability. But then, Iran has the capability to push oil prices through the roof, with the potential to seriously damage western economies.

So what's the likely way ahead? The sheer arrogance of the American political scene makes the war strike a distinct possibility, and if limited to air drop alone, I don't see us involved. However, there is the Israeli dimension...

I have often said that the next big nasty would flare up in the ME - Air Pig could well be correct in his reference to the starting pistol.

[ORAC]

The point Air Pig is that every one is happy for them to have as many reactors as they like. The sole thing asked is that they should not have the ability to produce weapons grade enriched uranium on their own (which is practically useless as a fuel). They won´t co-operate, which is what is p*ssing off the Russians, who are bending over backwards to guarantee the production of as much fuel as they would require. They insist on being able to produce their own enriched uranium.

They are also refusing to allow the IAEA access to their sites. They have incensed Mohamed ElBaradei, the DG, so much that he has set a deadline and threatened the use of force (Transcript (http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2006/newsweek12012006.html)) - something even Saddam didn´t manage to provoke them to do. (The IAEA reported in 2003 that Iran had hidden a uranium enrichment programme for 18 years, and the current dispute dates back to then.)

The present negotiations have been lead by Europe. If this is slowly going to hell in a handbag, it´s not being carried by George Bush...

[air pig]

I doubt that the US would act unilatterally, in concert with the Israeli's is possible but given the political fallout not likely, but her come's Tone, always glad to help.

As I have said before I hope not !!!!!!!!

[Excommunicator]

One of the guys posted a quote from an Israeli general on the banter thread a few weeks ago.
Reporter: "how far would Israel go to stop Iran developing a nuclear capability"
General:"About 2000 miles..."
Good one liner, but you have to fear it has more than a grain of truth.
The only hope I can see is the Iranians agreeing to Putin's offer to process nuclear material for them. That way they get the nuclear power without the nuclear weapon capability.

[airsound]

I doubt that the US would act unilatterally, in concert with the Israeli's is possible but given the political fallout not likely, but her come's Tone, always glad to help.
As I have said before I hope not !!!!!!!!
Not sure of the full source of this, but it surely worries me.
Airsound
January 4, 2006 - On November 10th 2005, a Report was published that described one of the unspoken reasons why the United States had to invade Iraq; to liberate the U.S. dollar in Iraq so that Iraqi oil could once again be purchased with the petrodollar.
In November 2000, Iraq stopped accepting U.S. dollars for their oil. Counted as a purely political move, Saddam Hussein switched the currency required to purchase Iraqi oil to the euro. Selling oil through the U.N. Oil for Food Program, Iraq converted all of its U.S. dollars in its U.N. account to the euro. Shortly thereafter, Iraq converted $10 billion in their U.N. reserve fund to the euro. By the end of 2000, Iraq had abandoned the U.S. dollar completely.
Two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was ended, the country's accounts were switch back to dollars, and oil began to be sold once again for U.S. dollars. No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with the euro. Universal global dollar supremacy was restored. It is interesting to note that the latest recession that the United States endured began and ended within the same timeframe as when Iraq was trading oil for euros. Whether this is a coincidence or related, the American people may never know.
In March 2006, Iran will take Iraq's switch to the petroeuro to new heights by launching a third oil exchange. The Iranians have developed a petroeuro system for oil trade, which when enacted, will once again threaten U.S. dollar supremacy far greater than Iraq's euro conversion. Called the Iran Oil Bourse, an exchange that only accepts the euro for oil sales would mean that the entire world could begin purchasing oil from any oil-producing nation with euros instead of dollars. The Iranian plan isn't limited to purchasing one oil-producing country's oil with euros. Their plan will create a global alternative to the U.S. dollar. Come March 2006, the Iran Oil Bourse will further the momentum of OPEC to create an alternate currency for oil purchases worldwide. China, Russia, and the European Union are evaluating the Iranian plan to exchange oil for euros, and giving the plan serious consideration.
If you are skeptical regarding the meaning of oil being purchased with euros versus dollars, and the devastating impact it will have on the economy of the United States, consider the historic move by the Federal Reserve to begin hiding information pertaining to the U.S. dollar money supply, starting in March 2006. Since 1913, the year the abomination known as the Federal Reserve came to power, the supply of U.S. dollars was measured and publicly revealed through an index referred to as M-3. M-3 has been the main stable of money supply measurement and transparent disclosure since the Fed was founded back in 1913. According to Robert McHugh, in his report (What's the Fed up to with the money supply?), McHugh writes, "On November 10, 2005, shortly after appointing Bernanke to replace Greenbackspan, the Fed mysteriously announced with little comment and no palatable justification that they will hide M-3 effective March 2006." (To learn more about Robert McHugh's work, please visit https://www.technicalindicatorindex.com/Default.asp)
Is it mere coincidence that the Fed will begin hiding M-3 the same month that Iran will launch its Iran Oil Bourse, or is there a direct threat to the stability of the U.S. dollar, the U.S. economy, and the U.S. standard of living? Are Americans being set up for a collapse in our economy that will make the Great Depression of the 1930's look like a bounced check? If you cannot or will not make the value and stability of the U.S. currency of personal importance, if you are unwilling to demand from your elected officials, an immediate abolishment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the fiat money scheme that the banking cartel has used for nearly a century now to keep our government and our people in a state of perpetual debt, than you are faced with but two alternatives, abject poverty, or invading Iran.
The plans to invade Iran are unspoken, but unfolding before our very eyes. The media has been reporting on Iran more often, and increasingly harshly. For the U.S. government to justify invading Iran, it must first begin to phase out the War in Iraq, which it is already doing. Next, it must portray the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as a threat to the region and the world. Finally, once naive American people are convinced the "weapons of mass destruction" that were to be found in Iraq are actually in Iran, coupled with the almost daily media coverage of Iran's nuclear power / weapons program aspirations, and what we will soon have on our hands is another fabricated war that will result in tens of thousands of civilian lives being lost, all because the political elected pawns in Washington DC lack the discipline to return our currency to a gold or silver standard, end the relationship with the foreign banking cartel called the Federal Reserve, and limit the activities of the U.S. government to those articulated in Article I Section 8 of the Constitution for the United States of America.
When a wayward and corrupt fiscal policy and fiat currency, coupled with runaway government spending, forces a nation to only be able to sustain the value of its currency with bullets, the citizenry of the country involved in wars primarily to sustain its currency have historically first became slaves to their government, and then to the nations that finally conquer them. If you question the validity of such a premise, or whether it could happen to the United States of America, study the fall of the Roman Empire. If you read the right books on the subject, you'll quickly discover that towards the end of the Roman reign, the Roman Empire was doing exactly what America is doing today; attempting to sustain a failed fiat money system with bullets.
Understanding fiat money is not an easy task, and the Federal Reserve, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund have purposely made it that way. They do not want the American people to realize that the money in their wallet loses its value with each new dollar that they print. They do not want people to understand that our money does not become money until it is borrowed. When the Federal Reserve has money printed, when it is in uncut sheets of paper, it is not yet money. After it is cut, bundled, and placed into the Federal Reserve vaults, it still is not money. It only becomes money once it is borrowed. Consequently, if all debt were to be paid, if the United States didn't have an $8 trillion national debt and the American people were debt free, and if all loans of U.S. dollars made to foreigners were paid in full, there would be exactly zero U.S. dollars in circulation because it will have all been returned to the vaults of the Federal Reserve. This might seem hard to fathom, but it is the gospel of fiat money.
The major news media in the United States, fed by Washington DC which in turn is fed by the Federal Reserve, literally, has already begun conditioning the American people for invading Iran. Media accounts of Iran's nuclear ambitions along with amplification of the potential instability and core evilness of Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, is setting the stage to spring the invasion of Iran on the American people. There does appear to be a direct correlation between the winding down effort underway in Iraq and the increase of anti-Iran rhetoric. How American soldiers ultimately arrive in Tehran is uncertain at this time, but it is reasonable to expect that if the Iran Oil Bourse opens for business in March 2006 as planned, it will only be a matter of time before the United States will have to blow it up.
If the United States invades Iran, or if Israel starts military actions by launches missiles at Iran's nuclear power facilities, which then opens the door for the United States to intervene, most Americans will believe that our military actions in Iran will be to defend freedom and liberty while spreading democracy, when the truth is that we'll be fighting a war in Iran because of our nation's relationship with the Federal Reserve, a so-called bank that is not owned by the federal government, maintains no reserve, and isn't a bank at all, but a cartel. Just like our war in Iraq, Americans and foreigners will die in battle so that the historical power bankers and brokers; cartel members such as Rothschild, Morgan, Lehman, Lizard, Schrader, Lobe, Kuhn, and Rockefeller to name a few, can continue collecting interest on every single U.S. coin and dollar bill in circulation, while controlling the U.S. Congress to the extent that the U.S. taxpayer becomes the collateral and lender of last resort to cover bad loans and unpaid debts that these institutions create by loaning money to third world countries, some of which are devout enemies of the United States. Remember the $400 billion savings & loan bailout approved by the U.S. Congress during the Reagan Administration? America is still paying for it - you and me, and so will our children and grandchildren.
It is well overdue for Americans, every American, to do whatever it takes to fully understand the relationship between the United States and the Federal Reserve, along with the grave consequences of our current fiat money system; for even if the United States wanted to continue to sustain the supremacy of the U.S. dollar with bullets, it is historically, impossible. When bullets become the commodity to secure a currency, it is a clear sign of devastating calamity looming. To ignore the warning signs, is to suffer like you have never suffered before, or to die. Harsh words, but true.

[steamchicken]

cartel members such as Rothschild, Morgan, Lehman, Lizard, Schrader, Lobe, Kuhn, and Rockefeller to name a few, can continue collecting interest on every single U.S. coin and dollar bill in circulation, while controlling the U.S. Congress to the extent that the U.S. taxpayer becomes the collateral and lender of last resort to cover bad loans and unpaid debts that these institutions create by loaning money to third world countries, some of which are devout enemies of the United States.

A tad Jewish Conspiracy for my liking...

[tablet_eraser]

WARNING - HISTORY AND CONJECTURE!

Iran is my favourite country for study... a very interesting nation indeed. A little history can shed light on the present.

When the Shah fell in 1979 there were many different factors that enabled the Ayatolla to proclaim an Islamic republic. Perhaps the most impotant factor was, unsurprisingly, oil.

Back in the early C20th the British Persian Oil Company held the Shah under an effective stranglehold, a condition considered necessary for the British Empire to assert its authority in the Middle East over Russia. The Great Game of the 1800s, when Britain and Russia duelled across the Middle East to achieve dominance, in truth never had a definite outcome other than the fact that Persia became intensely suspicious of imperialist Russia and Britain, and the USA which had duplicitously - and skilfully - played one side off against another in order to avoid any one nation having a de facto monopoly over oil. This battle intensified when the RN and USN switched to oil-fired engines.

Persia was able to maintain its independence due to the enormous difficulties its topography posed to any hostile power. A dispirate land of deserts and mountains, it wasn't until Reza Shah embarked on his ambitious programme of reforms that it was truly governable as a single nation. However, his attempts to westernise the nation alienated the powerful religious leaders, leading the Grand Ayatolla Khomeini to lead an uprising that exiled the Shah.
After the fall of the Shah in 1979 the people of Iran found a new nationalist direction under the religious leadership of the Ayatollah - and that nationalism was fundamentally fuelled by hatred of the USA due to its shady dealings in the country over the last century, and also intense rivalry with the neighbouring Iraq. Nationalism has formed the basis of Iranian politics ever since, with politicians vying to seem the most anti-American. The election of President Ahmedinejad last year saw the return of fervent anti-Western sentiments to the fore, and poses an increased risk that Iran will attempt to meddle in Iraqi affairs (several pro-Iranian presidential candidates were defeated in the Iraqi elections last year). With Saddam gone there is no effective strong-man in the middle east, enabling ancient tribal and religious feuds to fester. Only the occupying forces in Iraq are able to prevent it from tumbling into utter chaos; the consequences of failure would be dire.

How does this reflect on the present? Well, Iran is actually a pretty stable democracy, albeit one dominated by a single unelected figure (the Ayatollah). When the people of Iran selected Ahmedinejad as their president, it was a clear indication of the genuine ascendent distrust and, indeed, hatred of the West since its invasion of Iraq. While the USA and UK - the two powers most effectively able to wage war in the ME while Russia is tied down with Chechnya and China is modernising its forces - are bogged down in Iraq, Iran sees a great opportunity to modernise, regroup and rearm its forces in preparation for any power vacuum that develops when the Coalition eventually withdraws from Iraq. The simple fact is that Iran has a national ideology of utter hatred of the USA. The Army would find no shortage of recruits to fend off an invasion, and would probably run out of weapons before it ran out of soldiers.

Now for the opinion bit... I think that the USA will soon find itself having to balance two unpleasent scenarios. One where it has to leave Iraq early to intervene in Iran, which would plunge the ME into catastrophe, and another where it has to stay in Iraq while Iran develops its capabilities.

The worst case scenario is that a pre-emptive strike on Iranian facilities would result in a rapid and massive retaliation, with Iran likely to push forces across the Iraqi border to launch an assault on the Coalition. The UK would find itself in a politically unacceptable situation, and Parliament would likely demand the withdrawal of troops from the conflict within the first few weeks. The US's coalition would dwindle while Iraqi insurgents find themselves better able to mount effective attacks on the increasingly stretched US forces. As all of this goes on, Iran would restrict or stop oil exports, sending oil inflation through the roof to a point where escalation of hostilities would become necessary for the US to restore balance to the global economy. It is at this point that the horrific possibility arises that even Russia and China may find themselves embroiled in the war, although it is hard to predict what their actions would be. The ABSOLUTE worst case is that in the midst of this chaos, North Korea rears its ugly head... I doubt that the worst of these possibilities will occur, though. China and Russia have no will to clash with American forces, the question will be what their actions are in the face of hyperinflated oil prices. What is clear is that if the USA tries to insert land forces into Iran it will be confronting its most capable enemy since WWII, and it would have to consider the possibility that it would be stuck in Iraq and Iran for a decade or more with a massively reduced capability to fight other battles in the meantime.

Best case scenario... diplomacy triumphs. Iran assesses that it cannot fend off an assault from US and coalition forces, and backs down. Ahmedinejad, having lost face over the debacle, loses his power base and is deposed at the next presidential elections by a more insular president. Israel realises that the anti-Zionist threat from the ME has (for now) receded, and its new PM makes greater moves to secure the Israeli homeland. I think it unlikely that the USA would tolerate Israeli strikes on Iran due to the turmoil this would cause in the region.

One hellish, one utopian, both personal (maybe irresponsible?) opinions. Anyone else with other predictions?

Airsound - What is the current monetary difference between the total fiduciary issue of US Dollars versus the reserve of gold and silver (I'm looking into this at the moment)? How is the US supposed to return to the gold standard? The reason the gold standard was abandoned is that there is a finite amount of gold, silver, palladium, etc in the world, but an infinite potential for economic activity. The truth is that when banks establised their cash ratios and people started to create money through loans and overdrafts to an ever-increasing level, fiduciary issue of money became an absolute necessity. If you try to restore the gold standard, you have to cut back on the circulation of literally trillions of dollars, and that would devastate the global economy beyond repair. Either that, or gold would have to be devalued so massively that it becomes effectively worthless and other standards of currency guarantee would start, both legally and illicitly.

How does your source tally his desire for the gold standard (and the attendant drop in money supply) with the economic tenet MV=PT? What does he think will happen to firms and households if the price level is forcibly suppressed or reduced, transactions limited, or velocity of circulation deliberately increased to make up for the shortfall in money supply? How can we have economic growth if money supply cannot increase?

I wouldn't be worried - it sounds like conspiracy theory claptrap, some poor chap who needs something in his life and can find nothing better than the irrational fear that "they" are out to get him. You'd find more truth in a book by David Icke.

[JessTheDog]

The politicians will not put two and two together. That job is for their military advisors.

So, when Dubya and Bliar are told of the troop requirements necessary to hold the line against an Iranian invasion of Iraq - even a limited punitive raid - their resolve will falter.

[FFP]

(Iran + Oil + Euros) + (American dollar + Economy) = Mil action

I think airsound has hit the nail on the head personally.

[Grimweasel]

China needs Iranian fuel and Russia has been a long term partner with huge military sales etc. These two countries WILL use their Veto at any attempt for sanctions against Iran. It's in their interests to! China is developing at such a rate that to have the same standard of living as America they would need at least another Globe's worth of resources (oil, metals etc)
I would not be surprised to see a China perusing a more active foreign policy to procure the resources that it needs for its expansion onto the world stage. Empires and their powers have swung from east to west for centuries. The USA is an empire and its demise will soon begin due to economic factors and the decreasing value of the dollar. The $ is propped up by Asian debt in the form of trillions of US Treasury notes. China has said today that it wishes to obtain better returns on its investments than it gets from the dollar. They will become sellers of $ and the US economy will falter.
In the mean time China/Russia will not allow sanctions and definitely no military action.
I believe the EU3 and USA are powerless to stop this happening without dire apocalyptic consequences.

[airsound]

WARNING - HISTORY AND CONJECTURE!
Airsound - What is the current monetary difference between the total fiduciary issue of US Dollars versus the reserve of gold and silver (I'm looking into this at the moment)? How is the US supposed to return to the gold standard? The reason the gold standard was abandoned is that there is a finite amount of gold, silver, palladium, etc in the world, but an infinite potential for economic activity. The truth is that when banks establised their cash ratios and people started to create money through loans and overdrafts to an ever-increasing level, fiduciary issue of money became an absolute necessity. If you try to restore the gold standard, you have to cut back on the circulation of literally trillions of dollars, and that would devastate the global economy beyond repair. Either that, or gold would have to be devalued so massively that it becomes effectively worthless and other standards of currency guarantee would start, both legally and illicitly.
How does your source tally his desire for the gold standard (and the attendant drop in money supply) with the economic tenet MV=PT? What does he think will happen to firms and households if the price level is forcibly suppressed or reduced, transactions limited, or velocity of circulation deliberately increased to make up for the shortfall in money supply? How can we have economic growth if money supply cannot increase?
I wouldn't be worried - it sounds like conspiracy theory claptrap, some poor chap who needs something in his life and can find nothing better than the irrational fear that "they" are out to get him. You'd find more truth in a book by David Icke.
I'm afraid I can't answer! I merely passed the comments on - as I tried to suggest, I don't even know where the piece came from. It was passed to me anonymously - but to the fiduciarily uninitiated (me), it looks at least interesting. Time will tell - maybe.
Whatever - it's food for thought......

[movadinkampa747]

‘US planning to strike Iran’s nuke facilities:’ report

The United States is mulling a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities this year and has informed NATO member states to make similar preparations, a report claimed today.

Military action against Teheran to foil its nuclear ambitions is one among several options being considered by NATO members, military Intelligence officials familiar with the Iran file told German daily ‘Der Spiegel’.

Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Oman are also being updated with the plan, with American officials saying a military operation is “a possible option”, without giving a timetable, ‘Ynetnews’ reported citing the report.

Der Spiegel reported that CIA head Porter Goss asked Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan during his latest visit that Ankara allow the US to use its military bases in the country for an air strike on Iran planned for 2006.

“What’s new about these reports is that the United States seems to be sending top envoys to ally countries in preparation for an attack. It is no longer a matter of hints we heard over 2005,” the German daily was quoted as saying.

The daily also quoted a New York Times report last year saying that US commando units have already infiltrated Iran to mark nuclear facilities for a possible strike.

[Kim Il Jong]

I think that Mil action is inevitable.

Iranian nukes are unnacceptable to Israel and the US and most european leaders, even France and germany are onside on this one, even if they will never agree to mil action publicly.

Israel WILL act alone if the US do nothing and the US know this. (Nuke capable missiles on parade in Iran with 'we will wipe Israel from the face of the earth' or words to that effect on banners stung from the missiles.)

Sanctions will hurt everyone.

So mil action it is.

The only way out i can see is if china russia and USA can all sing from the same sheet and force Iran to negotiate away the weapons part of it's programme. Unlikely unless the US can pull off a triumph for chinese relations. (maybe the promise of free trade with China)

[tablet_eraser]

Airsound,

I know you were only passing it on - had to edit it to point the finger at your source. Whoever that deluded fellow might be! ;)

[air pig]

Should heaven forbid the US lead an assault into Iran, will that give the Chinese a chance to take over its rebel province as it likes to call Taiwan. Could the USA actually afford to have conflict on three fronts namely Iraq, Iran and China.

The use of a Euro based oil trading system may make or more possibly break the Euro as a currency, with all the devestating effects in Europe. Twenty five nations cannot have the same interest rates as method of fiscal control for such dispariate economies, we ahve ready seen the effects in Italy and Portugal on one hand and Germany and France on the other.

The more serious point is that the war drums are being slowly beaten and the tempo is rising in the media both through written, spoken and web based areas. I fear that this is an attempt to slowly condition the population of the nations of the world to acceptance of a war footing, in the not too distant future.

If tony Bliar and George Bush thought the were protests over Iraq, just watch this one. The UK armed forces have lost people by not re-enlisting, new recruit numbers have fallen, infantry cuts have been stopped, and many have left the reserve forces, leaving many units undermanned, and under-resourced in particular the medical units.

Over 4000 have been brought back from Iraq in three years both as battle trauma casualties including those who have been evacuated due to illness. Still the MoD refuses to release true figures to the media. We do not know how many have died following evacuation, how many are psychiatric casualties, who will require extensive care following their experiences, unfortunately I believe that they will not receive the care they deserve.

I go to bed tonight praying we are not moving headlong into a bloodbath that will condem thousands to a terrible future.

Politicians:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

[ORAC]

JERUSALEM (CNN) -- As Israeli diplomats departed for Russia on Tuesday to discuss deep concerns about Iran's nuclear facilities, acting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said the Jewish state cannot allow Tehran to acquire nuclear weapons under any circumstances.

Iran's Islamic government recently broke seals on its nuclear facilities and said it will resume research for civilian nuclear power purposes. International leaders fear Iran will use its nuclear technology to develop weapons.

"Under no circumstances, and at no point, can Israel allow anyone with these kinds of malicious designs against us [to] have control of weapons of destruction that can threaten our existence," Olmert said at a Tuesday news conference.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad sparked widespread international condemnation in October when he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map."

Israeli officials have said they hope to use diplomacy to diffuse any possible nuclear crisis with Iran, and only to use military force as a last resort.......

[Washington_Irving]

China needs Iranian fuel and Russia has been a long term partner with huge military sales etc. These two countries WILL use their Veto at any attempt for sanctions against Iran. It's in their interests to! China is developing at such a rate that to have the same standard of living as America they would need at least another Globe's worth of resources (oil, metals etc)
I would not be surprised to see a China perusing a more active foreign policy to procure the resources that it needs for its expansion onto the world stage. Empires and their powers have swung from east to west for centuries. The USA is an empire and its demise will soon begin due to economic factors and the decreasing value of the dollar. The $ is propped up by Asian debt in the form of trillions of US Treasury notes. China has said today that it wishes to obtain better returns on its investments than it gets from the dollar. They will become sellers of $ and the US economy will falter.
In the mean time China/Russia will not allow sanctions and definitely no military action.
I believe the EU3 and USA are powerless to stop this happening without dire apocalyptic consequences.

Some additional facts of the case:

1. US is having to borrow $1.5-$2bn per day to cover existing budget defecits.

2. The biggest buyers of US debt are China, Japan and SE Asia- all of whom are reliant upon Persian Gulf oil and are not too keen on something kicking off that might interrupt the supply.

3. It is estimated that the US already owes China alone $250bn, this amount is increasing daily and the US would have to borrow even more to finance any little jaunt East of Shatt al Arab.

4. Do you think China, Japan et al would be in a rush to lend it to them? What do you think would happen to US borrowing potential (and the US economy as a whole) if the Chinese and Japanese, in order to get the point across, were to start selling US Treasury Bills?

[BEagle]

Ironic that Calder Hall, whose chief product was weapons grade fissile material for the UK V-force's thermonuclear weapons, is being decommissioned today.

[LunchMonitor]

Airsounds article appears to have been written by a freelance writer named Ed Haas and was published here:

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/01/331429.shtml
on the 5th Jan.

It would appear to have then been copied onto various bulletin boards around the world. As shown by this search:
http://uk.search.yahoo.com/search?p=%22Iran+will+take+Iraq%27s+switch+to+the+petroeuro+ %22&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF-8&fr=fp-tab-web-t-1&fl=0&vc=&x=wrt&meta=vc%3D

[ORAC]

Hmmm, ex airframe mechanic. Obviously a wealth of professional knowledge of the subject....

Edward F. Haas CV: "I served in the United States Marine Corps from 1983-1993. My military occupation specialty was as an aviation structural mechanic. I performed aircraft maintenance on the AV8B Harrier, and A-4 Skyhawk. I trained in composite structural repair at McDonnell Aircraft Company in St. Louis. I also served as a Marine Corps Drill Instructor on Parris Island, SC..... I write letters, press releases, and articles for the Charleston County Libertarian Party. I also write and edit for the Muckraker Report and Team Liberty."

[BEagle]

One wonders why the Iranians don't just make the self-appointed gung-ho world policeman look even more stupid than he normally makes himself sound, by saying:

"Although it's none of your damn business, send who the hell you like to watch us diversify our national energy sources. Send Bush, Powell, the whole of the CIA if you like - all we're doing is reducing our dependency on oil and making more available for the international market".

[tablet_eraser]

ORAC - True. Mr Haas's credentials up to the point where he admits to being a writer for the Libertarian Party seemed impressive enough. However, the Libs are an American equivalent of the Respect Coalition, screeching about perceived conspiracy and the evils of capitalism and globalism instead of concentrating on issues that are of genuine, direct concern to the American people (their faltering economy, whether Bush's tax-cuts are commensurate with his pledged support for education and health reforms, the privatisation of Social Security, the GOP's supposed "strangling" of opposition on Capitol Hill, etc).

One of the first things you learn in economics is the necessity of avoiding value judgments in order to maintain your credibility.

all because the political elected pawns in Washington DC lack the discipline to return our currency to a gold or silver standard...

Pure value judgments. Let him make his case with the impassioned concern of the worried citizen; accept his fear of an impending disaster in Iran; but pity his flawed understanding of economics and his paranoid fear of the Fed.

[Pontius Navigator]

<<By the end of 2000, Iraq had abandoned the U.S. dollar completely.>>

Not quite true as the pictures of US troops with pallet loads of US dollars that had been removed by SH from the bank just before the fall of BD showed that the ba'athists still retained their faith in the mighty $

[air pig]

Remember in most parts of the world the US Dollar is almost a reserve currency, with most retailers accepting in lieu of local currency as payment for goods and services. In some places it is far better than the local currency, try that with the Euro, Yen or pounds Sterling and see how far you get.

[Grimweasel]

Dollar Shmollar!!
The ultimate store of value for centuries has been Gold. Its nice to see, with Gold trading at 25 yr highs, that G Brown Esq sold half of the Uk's reserves at its lowest point of $240ish an ounce. It now sits at $540 an ounce some three years later. Nice one Gordon! That little sale has cost the UK some £2.6 Billion alone!! I for one am 'long' gold at the moment.

On the US debt, reading 'Empire of Debt' by Bill Bonner (star US investor) he eqautes it as being $100,000 per US Citizen.
The US has debts of $36 Trillion and at 5% interest the annual debt servive payment would be $1.8 Trillion.
For now, the political prowess of the debt holding nations has been limited. Their time will come.They will sell dollar and watch the demise of the USA. Then enter the new player on the world stage. China

[tablet_eraser]

Grimweasel,

The "ultimate store" of currency value IS NOT gold, and hasn't been since the 1930s.

True, the gold standard guaranteed currency for centuries. But as people started trading on the stock exchanges of the world a new standard of currency value was developed - shares and futures.

The reason for this is that after the Industrial Revolution, as society developed ever-increasingly sophisticated forms of economic activity, the finite quantity of gold in the world was not capable of sustaining a guarantee of currency. More commodities = lower prices = more demand = more debt = greater money supply. I can enter into the specifics of how debt creates money with you via PMs if you wish.

The boom in money supply after people started trading in shares and taking out loans with greater frequency meant that the gold standard was failing. Fiduciary issue was a reality for decades before the gold standard was abandoned by the de facto leading economic power - Britain - at the behest of the Bank of England in 1931. The massive expansion in fiduciary issue in the 1930s by the German Weimar Republic (a failed attempt to increase economic activity) led to a fatal combination of hyperinflation and a massive loss of value in the Reichsmark. However, it also demonstrated the fact that "fiat money" enables a government to manage its money supply - we hope responsibly - in order to prevent economic collapse.

Consider this - gold is a constant. Setting a currency against gold means that the currency can only ever be exploited to a finite amount. Setting a currency against a stock exhange or international markets opens up the potential for infinite economic activity.

As an example, the last time Britain tried to set its currency against a finite quantity led to hyperinflation and interest rates that fluctuated daily and peaked at 15%. The occasion? The exchange rate mechanism, when we set Sterling against an artificially imposed limit and ended up victim to currency speculators.

So let's not waste any more time considering a return to the gold standard. It won't happen because it is, fundamentally, an unworkable form of economic management.

[slim_slag]

Excellent debate. How about these.

Only the British will find themselves between a rock and a hard place. They have had a strategic partnership with the U.S. forever, but have also had their natural pull from Europe. So far, they have had many reasons to stick with the winner. However, when they see their century-old partner falling, will they firmly stand behind him or will they deliver the coup de grace? Still, we should not forget that currently the two leading oil exchanges are the New York’s NYMEX and the London’s International Petroleum Exchange (IPE), even though both of them are effectively owned by the Americans. It seems more likely that the British will have to go down with the sinking ship, for otherwise they will be shooting themselves in the foot by hurting their own London IPE interests. It is here noteworthy that for all the rhetoric about the reasons for the surviving British Pound, the British most likely did not adopt the Euro namely because the Americans must have pressured them not to: otherwise the London IPE would have had to switch to Euros, thus mortally wounding the dollar and their strategic partner.



http://www.energybulletin.net/7707.html

http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html

[ORAC]

It is here noteworthy that for all the rhetoric about the reasons for the surviving British Pound, the British most likely did not adopt the Euro namely because the Americans must have pressured them not to

Which is the biggest load of bollocks I've read in a long time. If that's typical of the rest of his ramblings you can keep it.

[ORAC]

Early Warning (http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2006/01/attack_iran_wer.html). CONPLAN 8022 - U.S. Nuclear First Strike Doctrine (http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2005/3221conplan_8022.html)

[Compressorstall]

That should make the world a much safer place then...

The problem is that war used to be fought at terrible cost, and nuclear weapons only accentuated this terrible cost. Now we fight wars almost as a political expedient with compartively few casualties, and so the nuclear option must seem viable to those with short memories or lack of access to history books. Fair enough that deeply buried bunkers represent a pretty challenging target set, but to go down this route takes nuclear weapons out of the 'deterrent' category.

The Global War on Terror is a daunting task, but it should not be used as an excuse to justify nuclear weapons. Perhaps investing the money in equipping and supporting the Armed Forces might be a better route. All stuff like this does is rile countries like the Iran.

[BEagle]

"Shall we play a game?"

"Love to. How about Global Thermonuclear War?"

"Wouldn't you prefer a good game of chess?"

"Later. Let's play Global Thermonuclear War"

"Fine...."

******************************************************

"Greetings Professor Falken"

"Hello"

"A strange game. The only winning move is not to play."

An excellent moral from the movie "War Games". Which also featured the 21 year old Ally Sheedy...:E

[RayDarr]

Interesting point from ORAC that because a guy was an ex US Marine Airframe Fitter he obviously knows little about anything. I can hear his Grandad saying "That bloke Hitler, ex Cpl infantier, what does he know about.....

Also, even more frighteningL:
Tony Blair :" Whats the Intell on Iran then?
Sir Humphry:" Well PM, I've got some very good info from a web site called PPrune"


AAArrrggg. Declare war at once!!!
Just as well I'm too old to fight.

[BEagle]

The phone rings in Number Ten.....

“Yo Tiny - it’s your buddy G Dubya. How’ya doin’?”

“George. Nice to talk to you. Absolutely”

“Hell, Tiny, what we gonna’ do ‘bout these Iranis an’ their nucularity? Seems we need to kick us some butt!”

“George. First we need clear evidence of any Iranian.....”

“Hell, Tiny. My good buddies of the CBI been gatherin’ plenty of intellectualisatory photographicals. We know what they’m been up to...”

“Ah yes. Now George. Intelligence. Have your people got any better at that? You told us that there were dozens of Al-Quaeda and Taliban forces still holed up in Afghanistan. That’s not what we’ve found....”

“Afghanistralia? You don’t say? Hell, when I pulled my boys back ‘n sent ‘em to the mountains of Kansas to get more training, why we expected your Marine Corps to go do some serious fightin’. So waddya tellin’ me?”

“George. We found nothing. Apart from a few goats with sore bottoms and some posters with rude comments about Queen Victoria..... ”

“Queen Victoria? Is she the new Queen of Englishland?”

“No. When we were last in the North West Frontier, she was the Queen. Actually she was the Empress of India.”

“Really? You don’ say. Was that a while back?”

“Yes. In fact Queen Elizabeth the Second is the daughter of the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. She, as Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, married the great grand-son of Queen Victoria, George”

“Yes, Tiny?”

“No - his name was George, George. So was his father’s, George the Fifth, George......”

“Hell, Tiny - ma pappy had thuh same idea! But how come ya didn’t find no Arabistanis? Thought they’d be ten-a-penny over there...”

“Ye-es. Quite. But what proof do you have about Iran”

“Hell - proof? What’s that? Ma generals say there’s a threat, we go nuke ‘em. Period. Who needs proof?”

“The United Nations?”

“Who?”

[tablet_eraser]

Beags, old boy, that is the funniest thing I've read on PPRuNe since an RAF copper tried to defend his dirty breed! Keep 'em coming!

[Grimweasel]

Tablet Eraser.

I understand your view and thanks for the correction. I am merely stating what quite a few economists say weekly in money week. Shares are only as good as the share certificate and the currency they are aligned too. When stock markets wobble many investors seeks a safe haven. That haven is usually Gold. The Gold price has rocketed since early September last year and seems to be in a bull market. This is driven by uncertainty in the world, due to oil supply, inflation, Asian demand safety. If a currency becomes worthless due to governments printing more cash to prop it up, then Gold will still be valued due to it being a physical commodity.

Further to the Bunker Buster, what happened to daring raids by Special Forces etc? Due to the CNN factor, governments are scared to commit troops to actions that endanger their lives. Imagine this thought process during WWII? We'd have lost if this was the case in the first years. Wars inevitably mean deaths. We have become so sanitised to the thought of the death of our soldiers that it seems to stagnate thinking and flexibility.
The current dithering of NATO nations concerning the forthcoming deployment to Afghanistan is disgusting. France, Germany etc will send troops but only if they are posted to the North where the danger is less.
China et al must have cottoned on to this and know we can't stomach casualties and would overwhelm us with its huge Army. They realise our dependence on GPS and have made moves to deny us its use.
We need to radically change our thinking or peril under the Flag of China

[Conan the Librarian]

BEagle, you need to get out more. That was wonderful.


Conan

[Out Of Trim]

BEagle

Thanks for that; I really enjoyed it! More please! It seemed so real!

[ORAC]

Iranian Revolutionary Guard Official in Tehran University Lecture - We Plan To Target US Nuclear Warheads on US Soil; Should Take Over England. (http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=252) (Hasan Abassi heads the Center of External Security Doctrinal Analysis of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.)

We have established a department that will take care of England. England's demise is on our agenda....... :hmm:

[ORAC]

DebkaFile: January 22, 2006, 9:30 AM (GMT+02:00)

Tehran plans a nuclear weapons test before March 20, 2006 – the Iranian New Year, moves Shahab-3 missiles within striking range of Israel.

Reporting this, the dissident Foundation for Democracy in Iran, a US-based watch group, cites sources in the US and Iran. The FDI adds from Iran: on Jan 16, the high command of the Revolutionary Guards Air Force ordered Shahab-3 missile units to move mobile launchers every 24 hours instead of weekly. This is in view of a potential pre-emptive strike by the US or Israel. Advance Shahab-3 units have been positioned in Kermanshah and Hamad within striking distance of Israel, reserve launchers moved to Esfahan and Fars. The missile units were told to change positions “in a radius of 30-35 kilometers” and only at night.

DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources add: FDI reporting has a reputation for credibility. Western and Israeli intelligence have known for more than six months that Iran’s nuclear program has reached the capability of being able to carry out a nuclear explosion, albeit underground. It would probably be staged in a desert or mountain region and activated by a distant control center. Tehran would aim at confronting the Americans, Europeans and Israelis with an irreversible situation.

At the same time, an explosion of this sort would indicate that Iran is not yet able to produce a nuclear bomb that can be delivered by airplane or a warhead adapted to a missile. The stage Iran has reached is comparable to Pakistan’s when it conducted its first nuclear tests in the nineties and North Korea’s in 2001. All the same, an Iranian underground nuclear blast, which will most probably be attempted on March 22, would turn around the strategic position of all the parties concerned and the Middle East as whole.

The question now is: will the United States, Israel or both deliver a pre-emptive strike ahead of the Iranian underground test - or later? Or will Washington alternatively use the event to bring the UN Security Council round to economic sanctions? Tehran is already organizing to withstand economic penalties. For Israel, the timing is getting tight in view of its general election on March 28.

Acting prime minister Ehud Olmert must take into account that a ruling party which allows an Iranian nuclear explosion to take place six days before the poll would draw painful punishment from the voter.

[danke]

People are wondering what the alternative to the Federal Reserve; here is a good video on its history and at the end the author’s ideas to fix our situation.

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/multimedia/Money_Masters_Tape1_Part1_all.wmv

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/multimedia/Money_Masters_Tape2_128KBps.wmv


tablet_eraser,

When you say "Libs" I understand it to mean Libertarians, not Liberals. If that is the case, you know little of what the Libertarian Party. They are very much for free markets.