PDA

View Full Version : What's going on in Iran...???


AirScrew
20th Dec 2007, 09:41
Iran nuclear plant may not start before end-2008

Whats going on here?
If you'll allow me to try to paraphrase the last few years. (All from yahoo news)

Everybody seems aware/worried that Iran wants the bomb
The US is reported making noises about looking beyond the Iraqi conflict, towards Iran
Bush says dont give them Nuclear Power
US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report says Iran stopped its nuclear weapsons program in 2003 (does that sound like deja vu)
Bush still says they want nuclear weapons and 'are dangerous'
Bush and some of the UN push for sanctions
Russia says they will assist
Russia signs 1Bn nuclear deal with Iran
Bush then agrees this is OK
Now Iran accelerates its Nuclear power plan, planned commision in roughly 12 months
Russia says Russia says Bushehr is being built under the supervision of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, ruling out any military use for the fuel or technology., so thats OK then..

I offer no comment here. I am bemused.
I rather suspect that all the major players here dont really know what they are doing. The data-point on that is the flip-flopping of foreign policies.

And as an added spin to this thread...
Iran is the 4th largest Oil producer.
Are they going Green, moving towards nuclear power, or positioning themselves for a longer period as an Oil exporter, or do they just want the bomb??

AirScrew
20th Dec 2007, 11:56
so none of you has a clue either??? :ugh::ugh:

ORAC
26th Feb 2008, 08:01
BBC: Iran weapons project 'continued'

The UN's nuclear watchdog has been told Iran may have continued secret work on nuclear weapons after 2003, the date US intelligence suggested the work ceased.

A US National Intelligence Estimate released last December said Tehran had frozen its atomic programme in 2003. But documents presented to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) suggest the work continued.

Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the IAEA, angrily dismissed the documentats as "forgeries".

Simon Smith, Britain's ambassador to the IAEA, said material presented to the IAEA in Vienna came from multiple sources and included designs for a nuclear warhead, plus information on how it would perform and how it would fit onto a missile. "Certainly some of the dates that we were talking about... went beyond 2003," he said.

The material was presented to the agency's 35-nation board by the IAEA's head of safeguards, Olli Heinonen, in a closed-door meeting on Monday.

The permanent members of the UN Security Council - the US, UK, China, France and Russia - are meeting in Washington to discuss the possibility of imposing further sanctions on Iran over its disputed atomic programme.

The IAEA released a report on Friday which said Iran was being more transparent, but had not given "credible assurances" that it was not building a bomb...........

BlueWolf
26th Feb 2008, 08:21
Iran has committed the cardinal sin of replacing the Greenback with the Euro as their petroleum currency, as did Saddam before them.

The coming Iran conflict has nothing to do with nukes, just as the Iraq invasion had nothing to do with terrorists or WMD.

Likewise, it isn't about oil. It's about the currency in which that oil is traded, and about the petrodollar remaining the world's reserve currency.

chuks
26th Feb 2008, 11:39
Just how do you expect the U.S.A. to force someone else to use the U.S. dollar by going to war with them? I don't understand that one at all.

I would have thought that market forces determine the exchange rate of the dollar to other freely traded currencies. What is the difference if we have to pay $100 U.S. per barrel or just 72? Politically, the smaller number would be an easier sell to the American booboisie.

I wonder if this is something for domestic consumption, given that the U.S.A. seems to be hitting a "whoop-ass" shortage. Our military is already fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan with nothing left for another fight with the mad mullahs of Iran, so that perhaps Bush & Co. want to sell this as "no problem found." It is an election year, so that the idea that Bush has a problem he cannot sort out might be a bad one for the Republican party in general.

Or perhaps it is some attempt at diplomacy, backing off on the pressure to see if the Iranians quietly back off on their nuclear program.

Whatever it is, no, I do not think they have given up on the idea of becoming a nuclear power. Just look at the amount of money they have spent so far, according to many reports.

I think the only thing that will stop them is some sort of Israeli air strike on multiple sites at the same time, much like the way they spoiled things for Saddam Hussein by wiping out that Osirak reactor, built by the French "for peaceful purposes."

Sallyann1234
26th Feb 2008, 11:56
I think the only thing that will stop them is some sort of Israeli air strike on multiple sites at the same time, much like the way they spoiled things for Saddam Hussein by wiping out that Osirak reactor, built by the French "for peaceful purposes."

In 1956, the UK and France wanted to invade Egypt to seize control of the Suez Canal. To create a pretext for this, Israel was invited to invade Egypt so that UK and France could step in 'to separate them'. It all went wrong and the Egyptians won.

What you are suggesting is that the same procedure is adopted against Iran, but with nuclear weapons. And unfortunately, it all seems entirely credible.

In the Suez case it was the USA who stepped in with a big stick and broke it up. In the Iran case it will be Russia.

Be very afraid.

ORAC
26th Feb 2008, 13:25
So, let me see, the IAEA's head of safeguards gives a presentation to the SC of information the IAEA has uncovered - and it's an American conspiracy....

I thought the IAEA was known to be incredibily sceptical of anything alleged by the USA, maybe they've been seduced by Bush's winning ways.....

BenThere
26th Feb 2008, 13:48
As the story has played out, the NIE report was structured so as to embarrass the Bush administration, which it did.

But when the dust settled, Bush made no attempt to refute it, or even point out that elements of Iran's program more key to nuclear weapons were ongoing and that Iran was continuing to violate the Non-proliferation Treaty.

I think the administration decided US spearheading of the effort to prevent Iran's accession was not working, either in stopping Iran or in terms of international diplomacy, and it was forcing the US toward a military engagement it didn't want. Suddenly, Brits, French, Germans, and others came out of the woodwork saying, "Wait a minute, we know the program is still a threat. Whaddaya mean they've stopped?"

What we're seeing is a US reverting to a more isolationist approach brought about by domestic political trends along with frustration at the tendency of key allies and world opinion to fail to support and be critical of our efforts to contain Iran.

After all, the US isn't directly threatened by Iranian crazies with a bomb, but Europe, the Middle East and Russia are. They should not only be supporting the effort, but leading it and demanding results, not the United States. Will they? I'd like to think so, but I have my doubts.

Anyone who thinks the US cares whether Iran trades oil in dollars or euros enough to make war over it, or even mention it in public, are laughable in their naivety.

Wiley
26th Feb 2008, 14:12
Anyone who thinks the US cares whether Iran trades oil in dollars or euros enough to make war over it, or even mention it in public, are laughable in their naivety.As I watch my USD holdings look more and more like Pesos, mark me down as the fist to admit to being incredibly naive.

Once various - and many - national treasuries no longer have to hold massive stocks of the greenback to cover their oil trading, the USD could slip to values considerably lower than they are now.

Naive, that's me.

BenThere
26th Feb 2008, 14:49
Two different issues, Wiley.

Your dollar holdings' values have been declining because the Fed and Treasury have been driving them down. They want to stave off recession and boost exports. They will take the dollar as low as they can, to the point where inflation is the bigger risk. Right now, 'as low as they can' seems to be around the dollar index 75 mark, which has been tested and held for some time, not to say it can't go lower. They're trying to figure that out right now.

As any cognizant economist will tell you, whether oil is traded in dollars, euros, yen, or rupees has little impact on its exchange rate.

Reserve currencies are not held to facilitate oil trades, which are done as electronic trades in and out of dollars very quickly, but to store wealth. What really impacts the use of the dollar, euro, gold or any other medium as a treasury reserve is its liquidity and the expected, risk-adjusted rate of return calculated by financial establisments and governments every minute around the world.

It's the risk and reward calculations that matter, not Iranian clerics or conspiracy theorists.

Track Coastal
26th Feb 2008, 14:54
Spot on Wiley.

You are a realist not naive (I know you were being sarcastic).

Dubai's rampant inflation? Oil at $100/barrel? Gold thru the roof? etc etc

Its the falling (cascading?) greenback, the ME wants profit on real world terms and the Euro is the stable currency globally ($1.10USD in 03 now $1.48USD)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CLA20060210&articleId=1937

If the US invades Iran the Chinese are not going to be happy Jan!

http://english.gov.cn/2005-07/05/content_19948.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3970855.stm

Pax Romana lasted a couple of centuries, Pax Americana will be lucky to last 75.

BenThere
26th Feb 2008, 15:11
Pax Romana lasted a couple of centuries, Pax Americana will be lucky to last 75.

You could be right. I would be happy to see it over now, and I think it's quite possible that we're in the early stages of the event.

The US can't afford to continue the Pax largely on our own, and surprisingly (to us), few in the world seem to want us to. The coming US election could be the harbinger of our bailout. I hope it (our bailout) turns out to be as graceful and painless as Great Britain's, and that the new world order/hegemon will be benign, but there are worries.

Good luck with it!

Track Coastal
26th Feb 2008, 15:20
Yes sirree Ben There. Interesting times....

A wealthy (and growing rampantly) and powerful China, Russia wishing to piss on a few trees to show the neighbourhood dogs that they still around, A nuclear Pakistan with some fundamentalists having more and more influence amongst civil unrest, A lame duck on Pennsylvania Ave etc.

I hope 2008 is quiet one!

con-pilot
26th Feb 2008, 16:39
A wealthy (and growing rampantly) and powerful China, Russia wishing to piss on a few trees to show the neighbourhood dogs that they still around, A nuclear Pakistan with some fundamentalists having more and more influence amongst civil unrest,

Interesting times ahead indeed. If what you have posted above is true, and I have no reason to dispute that, coupled with the fact that the US, no matter who is elected President, will become much more isolationist starting next year it will be very interesting to see just how long peace in Europe will last. Let alone peace between Pakistan and India.

Now as for this old, worn out, endlessly repeated comment:

A lame duck on Pennsylvania Ave etc.

What on earth are you lot going to do for a bogey man eight months from now? :p

Don't worry about 2008, you need to worry much more about what is going to happen starting in the year 2010 in Europe. You lot make Russia mad and they cut off the gas and oil. Please just don't come crying to the US for the third time, for this time we may just say No. :ooh:

Hum, the new Axis Powers, Russia, Iran and China perhaps? On second thought probably not China. China will sit this one out and then pick up the pieces.

The kick off for the next war in Europe will be when Russia helps Serbia invade and destroy Kosovo.

chuks
26th Feb 2008, 16:52
What, exactly? Russia has something good going here, given that cutting off the supply of some commodity or other is not quite the same as straight military aggression.

Last time I checked the U.S.A. was not exactly prepared for losing some of its energy supply either.

Might it be that we just did not take the lesson of 1973 on board? A few "55 miles per hour" speed limit signs was about all we could come up with, since none of our politicians was ready to grasp the nettle.

Yeah, it should be, "May you live in interesting times," for certain! This is not something I am looking forward to, actually!

Track Coastal
26th Feb 2008, 17:06
Con you normally post some sense.

If Dubya is not the the classical lame duck who rivals? Carter?

This president has achieved f*** all except a mis-managed budget deficit, a cascading US $, a property market melt down and a stale mate in Iraq.

The USA is a vibrant nation but (I'm talking to you because of the techno smarts at MS and Apple developed in the USA) it has to stop and take stock and look inwards if the great in USA is still to prevail.

Hint: STOP voting Wall Street Sycophants to the White House (big bucks to them - the rest be stuffed if it goes wrong).

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:JU3DZZeUSuI6XM:http://grannygeek.us/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/lame-duck-bush1.jpg

con-pilot
26th Feb 2008, 17:16
No really, President Bush is a true 'lame duck'. He is not going to do nothing about Iran. Hell we don't have the military sources available in any case thanks to Iraq. Nope, he is going to leave the Iran mess to whoever becomes President this year. Best bet on that is that it will be Obama, unless by some miracle Hillary gets the nomination.

I stand by my statement that starting in the year 2010 things will really start to get interesting. Not this year, 2008.

Unlike some here I really hope and pray that I am wrong. Except for the US becoming more and more isolationist no matter who is elected, the average citizen in the US is starting to trend that way more and more.

Track Coastal
26th Feb 2008, 17:28
Aw hell, Con, I'm agreeing with you at 3.30AM Aussie eastern time. My roster has me awake but now I may have to crack a single malt to salute you on the way to bed.

con-pilot
26th Feb 2008, 17:34
I may have to crack a single malt to salute you on the way to bed.

Be my guest, I'll be having one myself in about, oh six hours or so. :ok:

Dan D'air
26th Feb 2008, 19:50
Whats going on in Iran...???

Simple really, The feckers are building nuclear weapons.

Iran nuclear plant may not start before end-2008

Fantastic. I get to make at least another 10 mortgage payments before I die.

If Dubya is not the the classical lame duck who rivals?

Someone should tell him that Dr. Strangelove isn't a documentary.