Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iran threatens oil crisis in nuclear standoff

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
ECH1969 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:26 PM
Original message
Iran threatens oil crisis in nuclear standoff
TEHRAN (AFP) - Iran warned of a world oil crisis if sanctions are imposed over its nuclear program even as the United States and Europe struggled to get support for UN Security Council action.

"In case of sanctions, other countries will suffer as well as Iran," Oil Minister Davoud Danesh-Jafari said, according to the official news agency, IRNA.

As the world powers appeared split, Iran secured backing from Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who pledged support for Iran's nuclear program and rejected pressure on Tehran.

Democratic Senator Evan Bayh, speaking on US television, said he plans to introduce his resolution Friday, calling for Iran to be excluded from international forums and events and asking the administration to urge other governments to sever economic relations with Tehran.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060119/wl_mideast_afp/irannuclearpolitics_060119190636
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. omg! who could have predicted???
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xray s Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. $100 oil, here we come
Upside, every 50 cent increase in gas prices = 5% drop in Bush poll numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. that really IS an upside, thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AndyTiedye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
17. And Several Billion More in Repub Coffers, Which More Than Makes Up For...
...any loss in actual public support.

They'll just buy more TV stations and more voting machinez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
23. A gallon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. What?
You mean if we impose sanctions they'll impose sanctions? Are they allowed to do that? That is just not fair!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Things are heating up -
and this is getting very interesting.

My humble prediction: the U.S. will start beating the war drums maniacally. They will SCOUR the globe to try and find friends (aka 'stooges') to back them up. They will go on an insane Telethon Phone calling Agenda and call world leaders up, 24/7 so they will go along with this.

Oh, they'll get some takers: like tiny Sri Lanka, maybe Cameroon and don't forget Borneo. Then they'll jump around like the lunatics they are and say "the world agrees with US!!!!!!!"

But the bottom line is, Russa and China will give us the cold shoulder. They have permanent veto rights in this matter.

It will come to nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. OR
Edited on Thu Jan-19-06 06:00 PM by leftchick
the US could try DIPLOMACY for a change instead of a preemptive war leading to WWIII. But chimpy doesn't do stinkin diplomacy. He prefers the neocon plan of eternal war and imperial ameriKKKa in the ME sitting on the OIL. It has been the PNAC Plan from the start....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #9
30. even Chris Matthews mentioned PNAC the other day. Starting to seep into
public conscience
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SnowGoose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. Which is the only country ever to nuke another?
You want to see someone who can't be trusted with nukes, buddy, look in the mirror.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacebird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
15. you would prefer that we preemptively "heat" up Iran with bombs I suppose?
The problem of pre-emptive strikes was pretty well taught with Iraq - perhaps you missed that class? No WMD. No threat to America.
And what have we gained? Ten thousand maimed soldiers. Over two thousand dead. Tens of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians. The loss of any right to claim American high moral ground with our torture in Abu GHRaib, Gitmo and undisclosed secret CIA outposts around the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillZBubb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. Oooh, the big bad threat!!!!!
What exactly is the threat? Iran has no nukes. Bush has no brains--that's the bigger threat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Deja Vu all over again .....
Edited on Thu Jan-19-06 06:26 PM by doublethink
"America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United Nations." -snip-

... "the United States and our allies have worked within the Security Council to enforce that council's longstanding demands. Yet some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced that they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve to meet it." -snip-

"The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so we will rise to ours." -snip-

Those quotes were taken from Bush's speech 48 hours before he invaded Iraq. Just replace the 'q' with 'n', he don't need no stinking U.N resolution! He's King of the World now, what with all his newly given powers, 'unitary executive' and such. :sarcasm: He didn't care what China and Russia had to say before, why should he start caring now? :shrug::crazy: Peace. :)

for history's sake link here .... http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/17/sprj.irq.bush.transcript/

edit: to insert 'sarcasm' for our new members benifit. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. See post #8 .
And welcome to DU. :hi: uhhhh enjoy your stay .... for how long that is up to you. Hang out and learn something if you must. But get off the terror terror terror, fear fear fear mantra, it doesn't fly in a truthful discourse. Peace. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
doublethink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. uhhhhhhh...... I quote you ......
"Not sure how long this world has before these unstable leaders start acting up. ..... you must be refering to Bush? :shrug: Cause if you are .... well too late. Peace again. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacebird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. the single biggest threat to world peace today is George W. Bush
I wonder how long the world will wait before dealing with him? Frankly I think he should be impeached for treason against the United States and then taken to the Hague on war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BillZBubb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #10
20. Simple observations, simplistic comments.
Your hero is a much bigger threat to the world than Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftchick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
21. Do you mean like the unstable leader of the USA?
can not get anymore unstable than the chimperor**
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
megatherium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
27. Our allies the Israelis are already beating the war drums.
They have claimed to have direct evidence that the terrorist attack that happened a few days ago in Israel was an operation conducted by Syria and Iran. If they are right, that would be a casus belli.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #27
31. Israel isn't stupid. It knows its surrounded by Arab enemies and doesn't
want to commit suicide. Israel preferes a wall to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
entanglement Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Of course the Israelis want us to do their dirty work for them
And why not? They consider Iran as big a threat as Saddam's Iraq and they'd only be too happy to see the job done without firing a shot of their own
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stillcool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
5. Why?
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/petrov/petrov011706.html
Krassimir Petrov, Ph. D.
January 17, 2006

Abstract: the proposed Iranian Oil Bourse will accelerate the fall of the American Empire

II. Iranian Oil Bourse

The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate "nuclear" weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire. That weapon is the Iranian Oil Bourse slated to open in March 2006. It will be based on a euro-oil-trading mechanism that naturally implies payment for oil in Euro. In economic terms, this represents a much greater threat to the hegemony of the dollar than Saddam's, because it will allow anyone willing either to buy or to sell oil for Euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing the U.S. dollar altogether. If so, then it is likely that almost everyone will eagerly adopt this euro oil system:


The Real Reasons Why Iran is the Next Target:
The Emerging Euro-denominated International Oil Marker
by William Clark
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CLA410A.html

The Iranians are about to commit an "offense" far greater than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro of Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Numerous articles have revealed Pentagon planning for operations against Iran as early as 2005. While the publicly stated reasons will be over Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are unspoken macroeconomic drivers explaining the Real Reasons regarding the 2nd stage of petrodollar warfare - Iran's upcoming euro-based oil Bourse.
In 2005-2006, The Tehran government has a developed a plan to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades - using a euro-denominated international oil-trading mechanism. This means that without some form of US intervention, the euro is going to establish a firm foothold in the international oil trade. Given U.S. debt levels and the stated neoconservative project for U.S. global domination, Tehran's objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on U.S. dollar supremacy in the international oil market

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #5
32. thanks, here is something I didn't know re: US v. euro $$ and oil trade
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anakie Donating Member (935 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
11. America should begin sanctions against Iran
unilaterally and stop buying their oil. But Iran has already labelled the US hypocrites in this matter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #11
28. We don't buy any Iranian oil. It's illegal to do so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
22. Well, if there were sanctions against Iran
Wouldn't anyone buying their oil be in violation of sanctions? And if nobody can buy their oil, wouldn't that restrict world supply? And if world supply is restricted, wouldn't prices go up? So, this isn't a threat so much as a simple statement of economic fact.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wordpix2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #22
34. we saw how well sanctions worked in Iraq, with the oil for food program
Saddam & Co. profited while the people went hungry.

Now it's BushCo-KBR profiting while the people go hungry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-19-06 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
24. if we do sanctions get ready for high gas prices...
Is Americans ready for that???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solve_et_Coagula Donating Member (42 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
25. Iranian Oil Bourse will accelerate the fall of the American Empire
Abstract: the proposed Iranian Oil Bourse will accelerate the fall of the American Empire
 
Krassimir Petrov, Ph. D. January 17, 2006
 
I. Economics of Empires
 
A nation-state taxes its own citizens, while an empire taxes other nation-states. The history of empires, from Greek and Roman, to Ottoman and British, teaches that the economic foundation of every single empire is the taxation of other nations. The imperial ability to tax has always rested on a better and stronger economy, and as a consequence, a better and stronger military. One part of the subject taxes went to improve the living standards of the empire; the other part went to strengthen the military dominance necessary to enforce the collection of those taxes.
 
Historically, taxing the subject state has been in various forms - usually gold and silver, where those were considered money, but also slaves, soldiers, crops, cattle, or other agricultural and natural resources, whatever economic goods the empire demanded and the subject-state could deliver. Historically, imperial taxation has always been direct: the subject state handed over the economic goods directly to the empire.
For the first time in history, in the twentieth century, America was able to tax the world indirectly, through inflation. It did not enforce the direct payment of taxes like all of its predecessor empires did, but distributed instead its own fiat currency, the U.S. Dollar, to other nations in exchange for goods with the intended consequence of inflating and devaluing those dollars and paying back later each dollar with less economic goods - the difference capturing the U.S. imperial tax. Here is how this happened.
 
Early in the 20th century, the U.S. economy began to dominate the world economy. The U.S. dollar was tied to gold, so that the value of the dollar neither increased, nor decreased, but remained the same amount of gold. The Great Depression, with its preceding inflation from 1921 to 1929 and its subsequent ballooning government deficits, had substantially increased the amount of currency in circulation, and thus rendered the backing of U.S. dollars by gold impossible. This led Roosevelt to decouple the dollar from gold in 1932. Up to this point, the U.S. may have well dominated the world economy, but from an economic point of view, it was not an empire. The fixed value of the dollar did not allow the Americans to extract economic benefits from other countries by supplying them with dollars convertible to gold.
 
Economically, the American Empire was born with Bretton Woods in 1945. The U.S. dollar was not fully convertible to gold, but was made convertible to gold only to foreign governments. This established the dollar as the reserve currency of the world. It was possible, because during WWII, the United States had supplied its allies with provisions, demanding gold as payment, thus accumulating significant portion of the world's gold. An Empire would not have been possible if, following the Bretton Woods arrangement, the dollar supply was kept limited and within the availability of gold, so as to fully exchange back dollars for gold. However, the guns-and-butter policy of the 1960's was an imperial one: the dollar supply was relentlessly increased to finance Vietnam and LBJ's Great Society. Most of those dollars were handed over to foreigners in exchange for economic goods, without the prospect of buying them back at the same value. The increase in dollar holdings of foreigners via persistent U.S. trade deficits was tantamount to a tax - the classical inflation tax that a country imposes on its own citizens, this time around an inflation tax that U.S. imposed on rest of the world.
 
When in 1970-1971 foreigners demanded payment for their dollars in gold, The U.S. Government defaulted on its payment on August 15, 1971. While the popular spin told the story of "severing the link between the dollar and gold", in reality the denial to pay back in gold was an act of bankruptcy by the U.S. Government. Essentially, the U.S. declared itself an Empire. It had extracted an enormous amount of economic goods from the rest of the world, with no intention or ability to return those goods, and the world was powerless to respond - the world was taxed and it could not do anything about it.
 
From that point on, to sustain the American Empire and to continue to tax the rest of the world, the United States had to force the world to continue to accept ever-depreciating dollars in exchange for economic goods and to have the world hold more and more of those depreciating dollars. It had to give the world an economic reason to hold them, and that reason was oil.
 
In 1971, as it became clearer and clearer that the U.S Government would not be able to buy back its dollars in gold, it made in 1972-73 an iron-clad arrangement with Saudi Arabia to support the power of the House of Saud in exchange for accepting only U.S. dollars for its oil. The rest of OPEC was to follow suit and also accept only dollars. Because the world had to buy oil from the Arab oil countries, it had the reason to hold dollars as payment for oil. Because the world needed ever increasing quantities of oil at ever increasing oil prices, the world's demand for dollars could only increase. Even though dollars could no longer be exchanged for gold, they were now exchangeable for oil.
 
The economic essence of this arrangement was that the dollar was now backed by oil. As long as that was the case, the world had to accumulate increasing amounts of dollars, because they needed those dollars to buy oil. As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. It also dictated that oil reserves were spread around various sovereign states that weren't strong enough, politically or militarily, to demand payment for oil in something else. If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind.
 
The man that actually did demand Euro for his oil was Saddam Hussein in 2000. At first, his demand was met with ridicule, later with neglect, but as it became clearer that he meant business, political pressure was exerted to change his mind. When other countries, like Iran, wanted payment in other currencies, most notably Euro and Yen, the danger to the dollar was clear and present, and a punitive action was in order. Bush's Shock-and-Awe in Iraq was not about Saddam's nuclear capabilities, about defending human rights, about spreading democracy, or even about seizing oil fields; it was about defending the dollar, ergo the American Empire. It was about setting an example that anyone who demanded payment in currencies other than U.S. Dollars would be likewise punished.
 
Many have criticized Bush for staging the war in Iraq in order to seize Iraqi oil fields. However, those critics can't explain why Bush would want to seize those fields - he could simply print dollars for nothing and use them to get all the oil in the world that he needs. He must have had some other reason to invade Iraq.
 
History teaches that an empire should go to war for one of two reasons: (1) to defend itself or (2) benefit from war; if not, as Paul Kennedy illustrates in his magisterial The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, a military overstretch will drain its economic resources and precipitate its collapse. Economically speaking, in order for an empire to initiate and conduct a war, its benefits must outweigh its military and social costs. Benefits from Iraqi oil fields are hardly worth the long-term, multi-year military cost. Instead, Bush must have went into Iraq to defend his Empire. Indeed, this is the case: two months after the United States invaded Iraq, the Oil for Food Program was terminated, the Iraqi Euro accounts were switched back to dollars, and oil was sold once again only for U.S. dollars. No longer could the world buy oil from Iraq with Euro. Global dollar supremacy was once again restored. Bush descended victoriously from a fighter jet and declared the mission accomplished - he had successfully defended the U.S. dollar, and thus the American Empire.
 
II. Iranian Oil Bourse
 
The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate "nuclear" weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire. That weapon is the Iranian Oil Bourse slated to open in March 2006. It will be based on a euro-oil-trading mechanism that naturally implies payment for oil in Euro. In economic terms, this represents a much greater threat to the hegemony of the dollar than Saddam's, because it will allow anyone willing either to buy or to sell oil for Euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing the U.S. dollar altogether. If so, then it is likely that almost everyone will eagerly adopt this euro oil system:
 
* The Europeans will not have to buy and hold dollars in order to secure their payment for oil, but would instead pay with their own currencies. The adoption of the euro for oil transactions will provide the European currency with a reserve status that will benefit the European at the expense of the Americans.
.
* The Chinese and the Japanese will be especially eager to adopt the new exchange, because it will allow them to drastically lower their enormous dollar reserves and diversify with Euros, thus protecting themselves against the depreciation of the dollar. One portion of their dollars they will still want to hold onto; a second portion of their dollar holdings they may decide to dump outright; a third portion of their dollars they will decide to use up for future payments without replenishing those dollar holdings, but building up instead their euro reserves.
.
* The Russians have inherent economic interest in adopting the Euro - the bulk of their trade is with European countries, with oil-exporting countries, with China, and with Japan. Adoption of the Euro will immediately take care of the first two blocs, and will over time facilitate trade with China and Japan. Also, the Russians seemingly detest holding depreciating dollars, for they have recently found a new religion with gold. Russians have also revived their nationalism, and if embracing the Euro will stab the Americans, they will gladly do it and smugly watch the Americans bleed.
.
* The Arab oil-exporting countries will eagerly adopt the Euro as a means of diversifying against rising mountains of depreciating dollars. Just like the Russians, their trade is mostly with European countries, and therefore will prefer the European currency both for its stability and for avoiding currency risk, not to mention their jihad against the Infidel Enemy.
 
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.
 
At any rate, no matter what the British decide, should the Iranian Oil Bourse accelerate, the interests that matter-those of Europeans, Chinese, Japanese, Russians, and Arabs-will eagerly adopt the Euro, thus sealing the fate of the dollar. Americans cannot allow this to happen, and if necessary, will use a vast array of strategies to halt or hobble the operation's exchange:
 
* Sabotaging the Exchange - this could be a computer virus, network, communications, or server attack, various server security breaches, or a 9-11-type attack on main and backup facilities.
.
* Coup d'état - this is by far the best long-term strategy available to the Americans.
.
* Negotiating Acceptable Terms & Limitations - this is another excellent solution to the Americans. Of course, a government coup is clearly the preferred strategy, for it will ensure that the exchange does not operate at all and does not threaten American interests. However, if an attempted sabotage or coup d'etat fails, then negotiation is clearly the second-best available option.
.
* Joint U.N. War Resolution - this will be, no doubt, hard to secure given the interests of all other member-states of the Security Council. Feverish rhetoric about Iranians developing nuclear weapons undoubtedly serves to prepare this course of action.
.
* Unilateral Nuclear Strike - this is a terrible strategic choice for all the reasons associated with the next strategy, the Unilateral Total War. The Americans will likely use Israel to do their dirty nuclear job.
.
* Unilateral Total War - this is obviously the worst strategic choice. First, the U.S. military resources have been already depleted with two wars. Secondly, the Americans will further alienate other powerful nations. Third, major dollar-holding countries may decide to quietly retaliate by dumping their own mountains of dollars, thus preventing the U.S. from further financing its militant ambitions. Finally, Iran has strategic alliances with other powerful nations that may trigger their involvement in war; Iran reputedly has such alliance with China, India, and Russia, known as the Shanghai Cooperative Group, a.k.a. Shanghai Coop and a separate pact with Syria.
 
Whatever the strategic choice, from a purely economic point of view, should the Iranian Oil Bourse gain momentum, it will be eagerly embraced by major economic powers and will precipitate the demise of the dollar. The collapsing dollar will dramatically accelerate U.S. inflation and will pressure upward U.S. long-term interest rates. At this point, the Fed will find itself between Scylla and Charybdis - between deflation and hyperinflation - it will be forced fast either to take its "classical medicine" by deflating, whereby it raises interest rates, thus inducing a major economic depression, a collapse in real estate, and an implosion in bond, stock, and derivative markets, with a total financial collapse, or alternatively, to take the Weimar way out by inflating, whereby it pegs the long-bond yield, raises the Helicopters and drowns the financial system in liquidity, bailing out numerous LTCMs and hyperinflating the economy.
 
The Austrian theory of money, credit, and business cycles teaches us that there is no in-between Scylla and Charybdis. Sooner or later, the monetary system must swing one way or the other, forcing the Fed to make its choice. No doubt, Commander-in-Chief Ben Bernanke, a renowned scholar of the Great Depression and an adept Black Hawk pilot, will choose inflation. Helicopter Ben, oblivious to Rothbard's America's Great Depression, has nonetheless mastered the lessons of the Great Depression and the annihilating power of deflations. The Maestro has taught him the panacea of every single financial problem-to inflate, come hell or high water. He has even taught the Japanese his own ingenious unconventional ways to battle the deflationary liquidity trap. Like his mentor, he has dreamed of battling a Kondratieff Winter. To avoid deflation, he will resort to the printing presses; he will recall all helicopters from the 800 overseas U.S. military bases; and, if necessary, he will monetize everything in sight. His ultimate accomplishment will be the hyperinflationary destruction of the American currency and from its ashes will rise the next reserve currency of the world-that barbarous relic called gold.
 
http://www.321gold.com/editorials/petrov/petrov011706.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smirkymonkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. Welcome to DU, Solve_et_Coagula!
Very interesting and informative 2nd post! I am bookmarking this thread for future reference. However, this is depressing news, but I am not surprised - I have been expecting the fall for a while. At least the editorial offers solutions, of which the coup d'etat apperars to be the most palatable. I fear economic collapse more than war, bird flu and global warming combined (although they are all intertwined with each other.)

Thanks for your contribution! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-21-06 06:31 PM
Response to Original message
29. It's just business. I mean, duh, how would that NOT happen? Ergo,
there will be no sanctions.

It's as simple as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 16th 2024, 05:03 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC