For those of you worried about war in Iran:

[porphyrian]

What makes you think we will do anything China is against when they own the majority of our debt right now? If they demand that we pay it back at any time, they will own half of our country and totally bankrupt any war effort the traitors in the White House can imagine. Since China and Russia are allied against our waging war on Iraq, and certainly against our waging nuclear war, what makes you think it's going to happen?

[reichstag911]

1. Because GW's "higher father" told him to? n/t

[porphyrian]

4. I don't buy that the whole cabal in Washington believes that crap.

Too many of them are just self-serving power-mongers. They don't actually believe in anything. The idiot-in-chief might, but he doesn't call the shots alone.

[reichstag911]

26. Ultimately, though,...

...it's HIS call to make, isn't it? Let's say he actually wants to play president for a day, and gives an order without having it spoon-fed to him by Rove/Cheney/Rumsfeld. What then?

[porphyrian]

30. Greed wins over dogma.

If enough money is to be lost by the right person, bush will go down before he can make that call.

[Truthy Nessy]

2. My friend's sons orders for Iran makes me think that w

is dead set on attacking Iran. Found this out last Friday. 70,000 troops on the border now says him. Just waiting for the invasion orders.

Remember W has the christian crackheads to answer to. End days must happen so they all rise up and go heaven and leave us with the mess.

[porphyrian]

5. There are strategic reasons to ready for an invasion...

...even though you have no intention of actually doing it. The fact that you've heard this information and are posting it here proves that they aren't worried about who leaks it. That leads me to believe it's intentional sabre-rattling. I don't doubt that your son and the thousands of other troops have those orders, I just don't believe they are being told the whole truth.

[dysfunctional press]

7. 70,000 troops on the border...

i'll bet that Iran has a LOT more than that on their side of the border...and unlike Iraq, Iran has a REAL army, with REAL weapons.

and Cheneyco probably figures that Iraq had the better army, seeing that it was called the Republican Guard...

[porphyrian]

9. Heh, they were upset about the IRA disarming for the same reason. -n/t

[Yollam]

3. China also opposed thhe Iraq Invasion and they owned us then too.

The reason we will not invade is that our military is stretched too thin already and it would be very unpopular here. But that does not preclude airstrikes, even massive ones.

Hopefully, Bushco will not decide to do this, though...

[porphyrian]

8. Years have passed since then.

China had trillions to gain in letting us go ahead with Iraq while publically coming out against it. They own us considerably more now than they did then. After all, what costs more than a war? That doesn't mean they'll just let the dickhead-in-chief invade the whole Middle East before they decide to cash in.

[The Wielding Truth]

38. Why not let us rush in and spend everything we have ? If you we

are already in so deep why not exploit us more? Wouldn't you , if you wanted to destroy a powerful enemy? Let them go the way of the Soviet empire? All it would take would be to position a few greedy arrogant (think they can rule the world) business men into a place where they could not refuse the taste of world domination. Then plant the bait of high oil profits and war powers. They stand back,lend us the money and watch.

[LSK]

40. because Iran is a primary oil supplier to China

[alfredo]

48. Air strikes would be followed by human waves charging across the

Iran/Iraq border. Our supply lines are already strained. If they cut access to the sea our troops would be in deep shit.

[Skink]

6. We need bases in Iran in order to control China.

"Imperial China" as the title of Lynne Cheney's kids book reads.

[porphyrian]

10. Yeah, but bases that China owns?

If they cash in right now, how in the hell are we supposed to pay them?

[redqueen]

32. Why would they cash in?

Aren't we their biggest customer?

Wouldn't that be kinda shooting themselves in the foot?

[porphyrian]

35. We're also their biggest debtor.

If we try to do something they don't want us to do, why not do the most effective thing to prevent it? That's not shooting themselves in the foot, it's showing who has the power in this relationship, and I would think that would be in their interest.

[redqueen]

36. And us thumbing our nose at them...

would be calling their bluff.

I wonder if they'd be willing to risk such a blow to their own economy. Also, don't they owe Iran a lot for oil?

[porphyrian]

39. Iran is making a deal with China as we chat.

We can't call their bluff by thumbing our noses at them. You are overestimating the amount China relies on our economy. They are profitting from us, yes, but they will have any number of people jumping to cover their debt if they act against us in this at this point. We are no longer the most powerful country in the world, and this administration is directly responsible.

[redqueen]

41. *sigh*

Thanks... I've been thinking the same for weeks... that we're just not that big a deal for them...

The one hope I had... *poof*

[porphyrian]

45. Well, some people think I'm always full of shit...

...so you don't have to lose all hope yet - we could still go to war with Iran.

...

[redqueen]

49. Um, what?

That was my last hope of us NOT going to war.

:wtf:

[porphyrian]

50. Oh, I was arguing that we weren't going to war with Iran...

...and I thought you opposed that idea. Don't worry about what I say, most people don't.

[redqueen]

51. awwww

Nah, don't support it... was only using the arguments I'd heard against it as devil's advocate...

Peace.

[bigtree]

11. Iran wants to deepen economic ties by joining the Shanghai "club"

Iran: Plans To Join Shanghai Group Seen As Bold Geopolitical Stroke

By Breffni O'Rourke

Central Asia -- Shanghai Cooperation Organization
Senior leaders of Shanghai Cooperation Organization members


Iran's recent announcement that it intends to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) could complicate Western efforts to curb Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Iran now has observer status at the SCO, but it hopes membership could come as early as June. Although SCO membership is no foregone conclusion -- and does not include mutual defense pledges -- being inside the Shanghai "club" could bring Tehran extra support from its two key members: Russia and China.


PRAGUE, May 15, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- Membership of the SCO could offer Iran shelter from the intense U.S.-led international pressure on Tehran to end uranium enrichment.

Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mohammadi was quoted by ITAR-TASS and Xinhua news agencies as saying in April that his country hopes to join the SCO this summer. He said Iran is looking forward to reviewing the nuclear dispute with its SCO "colleagues." Mohammadi said Tehran hopes for those countries' support at the organization's June summit in Shanghai.

Russia and China have already given Tehran crucial support in the United Nations debate over its controversial nuclear program. Both have resisted pressure from the United States and its European allies to formulate a UN draft resolution that could open the way for economic sanctions or even military intervention unless Iran stops work on the nuclear fuel cycle.

The organization's present membership comprises Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan, as well as Russia and China.

more: http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/05/bd019d66-f5aa-457e-9cf2-7d88d5098383.html

[porphyrian]

12. This just supports my case, thanks. - n/t

[bigtree]

14. .

:thumbsup:

[TexasLawyer]

13. we'll just pay the Chinese back in devalued, inflated dollars

the joke will be on the Chinese.

Don't doubt that Bush is itching to nuke Iran, and don't doubt that he'll ignore good advice regarding what an attack will do to the US economy. When has he ever cared before?

[porphyrian]

16. I'm not convinced.

First, China is not going to accept garbage as payment. Otherwise, we could just print enough money to pay them off and not have a debt at all.

I don't doubt that bush is itching to nuke Iran, I just know that there is almost no chance that he'll be able to do it. As much as he'd like to present it as such, he isn't the only one making these decisions, and he's not entirely stupid. It's just not going to happen.

[TexasLawyer]

23. I didn't say the Chinese were going to be happy

about it.

Also, who in Congress is stepping up to the plate to stop war with Iran? I wrote to my Rep (John Culberson) and two Senators (Hutchison and Cornyn), all of whom are Republicans, in alarm last month when the Sy Hersh article came out in the New Yorker.

I received zero response-- until yesterday. Yesterday, I received a letter from Culberson thanking me for my "opinion on issues related to Iran." The remainder of the letter was a rant on how dangerous Iran is and how Iran's activities "increase the risk of nuclear terrorism on American soil"

Not too comforting!

The Republicans are the ones who can stop this war with Iran from going forward, and the Republicans are NOT stepping forward to do so.

[porphyrian]

25. The government's plan is to continue as if we will invade.

That doesn't mean they will, or even that we can. Of course the republicans aren't stepping forward against the plan, they're scared. Even most of the Democrats in Congress are wooses, with a few shining exceptions. That's what the elections are for, assuming we can get our votes counted correctly this time.

I'm not suggesting you should feel relieved or comforted by what I'm saying, we still have a lot of work to do. I'm just not buying that we'll attack Iran.

[LunaC]

15. The PNAC Game Plan is not built on logic or practicality

Iran is next on their list of conquests and they just flat out don't give a damn what anybody else thinks or what the potential repercussions may be. That should be glaringly apparent after Iraq.

[porphyrian]

17. PNAC does not operate in a vacuum, despite what they want...

...to believe. Too many of their plans and policies depend on assumptions about the rest of the world, many of them wrong to begin with. I don't doubt what they want to do, I doubt that the world is going to stand by and let them do it, especially after Iraq.

[LunaC]

18. In THEIR world

they got away with it once, they can do it again. This time they'll have Israel stage an attack so they can "come to the aid of an ally."

It's already a Done Deal....

Israel will hit Iran in the next few months: Israeli official
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C05%5C09%5Cstory_9-5-2006_pg1_3

[porphyrian]

19. Yes, that's what the general citizenry can read about it.

You haven't read a single news item free from propaganda in six years. What makes you think your perception isn't being manipulated now?

[LunaC]

27. What makes you think *your* perception isn't naive?

Iran to shift from dollar to EURO-based accounts within two months
http://english.bna.bh/?ID=44529

US military, intelligence officials raise concern about possible preparations for Iran strike
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/US_military_seen_ready_for_Iran_0511.html

US Army Troop Build up on Iraq-Iran Borders
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=international&alt=&trh=20060511&hn=33036

USS Enterprise en route to Middle East
http://www.wavy.com/Global/story.asp?S=4848785&nav=23ii

That’s not propaganda, that’s reality. Unless, of course, you think the foreign press and raw story are on the * payroll.

Let’s revisit this thread at the end of June and evaluate whose perceptions were more accurate.

[porphyrian]

31. Yep, let's.

I believe much more strongly in greed as a motivator than any amount of writing.

[Individualist]

22. You're absolutely right

The cabal is hell bent on carrying out the PNAC agenda. They didn't consider or care about the consequences of invading Iraq, and the same is true for their plans to attack Iran.

[porphyrian]

28. If their intent were the only one controlling the situation...

...I might be more worried. However, there's no reason to believe that they will be able to continue their crusade uncontested. I believe more strongly in the greed of this administration than its continued fanatic adherence to PNAC dogma. They're about to self-destruct from within.

[bananas]

20. What kind of crack are you smoking?

Exactly how is China supposed to collect on it's debt?
Send the U.S. Marshall in to evict us?
China will continue to finance our debt because their economy depends on it.
They might get upset that we invade other countries, but it doesn't directly affect them, so they're not going to do much about it. Same as Americans - most Americans opposed invading Iraq, Bush did it anyway, and got re-elected.

[porphyrian]

24. I smoke pot, not crack, and I've been out for a while now.

However, I fail to see the relevance.

I'll try to put this in terms that aren't too crack-smokey for you. First of all, China doesn't just own past debt, they are covering debt that we are accumulating daily. As soon as they decide to stop, our country can no longer run on credit. That means it can't pay employees, it can't pay for the war in progress, it can't buy anything new. How can they collect? The same way any other entity collects debt - indirectly. They can freeze and/or nationalize all American assets in China, which would piss off quite a few of this administration's financial and political supporters, if not members of the administration themselves. They could also sell the debt to a rival country of ours. Just look at how delinquent student loans are handled to get some ideas.

China doesn't depend on our economy more than we depend on ours, and they aren't the ones with thousands of trillions of dollars of debt to worry about. Now that Walmart has eliminated local stores in almost every American community, what happens if their prices double or triple overnight? Parties?

Deny China's power in this situation all you like. It will only make the reality that more harsh for you when it slaps you in your face.

[reichstag911]

29. "Thousands of trillions?"

Yer talking quadrillions thar, son. And we ain't there yet...

[porphyrian]

33. It doesn't matter.

The number is so big, most people can't conceive of it anyway. It might as well be a google. We aren't even considering the interest, either.

Got anything to say about the meat of my argument, son, or are you just gonna eat the parsley?

[garybeck]

21. they'll just print more money

recently they stopped reporting how much new money is being put into circulation. if their war machine runs out, they'll just print more.

[porphyrian]

34. If that was all it would take to pay off debt, no one would have any.

Yes, they are doing that. That's so they can lie to us about our "booming" economy in the midst of growing inflation. I doubt China will accept Monopoly money as pay off, though.

[AngryAmish]

37. They can't demand we pay it all back at once

Our debt is financed through Treasury bonds (commonly known as T-Bills). The gist of this instrument is that the lender (China) gives us x amount of dollars, we make periodic payments then pay back the principal in X amount of years. Bonds are constantly issued and redeemed.

There is NO and I mean NO provision for them to "call in" the debt in any way. They can refuse to buy more, driving up the costs of borrowing. But once a bond is issued all we have to do is pay interest and pay back the principal. We can simply print dollars if we have to.

There is no provision for them to repossess any part of our nation if we default. What is backing the promise to pay - nothing. We have never defaulted and we are the most wealthy nation on Earth.

There are plenty of real reasons to fear war in Iran without making things up.

China wants stability more than anything else. They have no ambition other than to be the hegemon of their part of the world. The rest of the world does not matter to them. They just want sufficient resources to keep themselves growing.

[porphyrian]

44. Who's making up reasons to fear war in Iran?

I'm offering a solid reason that it won't happen. While the other things you say might be true, they certainly aren't the only factors in the equation. Thanks for calling me a liar so nicely, though.

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. You really think he will care about what China thinks?

He's the decider! He's the el pretzeldente! He don't have to listen to CHINA!! LOL

[porphyrian]

46. If only his power was associated with his opinion... - n/t

[Blackhatjack]

43. China is handing us more rope to hang ourselves, .....

The more wars we are engaged in, and the further we spread our troops, the more degraded they become and the less able we are to respond to a real threat like the one that could be posed by China.

It is likely China is demanding we preserve all the sweetheart oil deals they have with IRAN before they stand down to allow the US to attack Iran's strategic nuclear sites. Once we attack Iran, the economic disaster that ensues will only make the debt held by China more influential in how the US operates, and diminish the US standing in the world vis-a-vis China.

The decision to attack Iran could destroy the US, in more ways than one.

[porphyrian]

47. I just think that too many people have too much money to lose...

...if we go into Iran, China being one of the biggies, and I don't think it will happen. Either they will stop it, or someone on our side will.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

52. You're assuming that the NeoCon Junta is sane. They're far from it.

[porphyrian]

54. On the contrary, I assume they aren't.

However, "they" are not all of one mind in reality. A number of "they" are just in it for profit, and a war with Iran isn't necessarily in their best interests.

[debbierlus]

53. There are a million rational reasons why attacking Iran is INSANE

But, Bush is NOT rational

Reality isn't part of the equation.

He is incredibly dangerous.

[porphyrian]

55. He isn't the only one who will make the decision.

And he won't be the one to carry out the orders. There are quite a few steps between here and there, and a number of people with an investment in changing his mind.