Pragnosis

Prior to the war in Iraq (2002), many people actually predicted that there would be a future war with Iraq and Iran to secure their large oil reserves. Now, with this saturation coverage of the 'captured sailors', wouldn't it be a coincidence if the US & UK decided to use military action against Iran? If this happens, I think a lot of people should start to wake up and realise what on earth is going on. It is SO god damn obvious that this saturation coverage across the worlds major news network corporations is being used as a propaganda tool to sell yet another war, this time with Iran. It IS going to happen this year, it's so obvious.

Forget all of the outrageous illuminati conspiracy theory non-sense, I've decided that most of these are disinformation anyway, but the bilderberg group is REAL and I believe that the members of this group have a massive political / economic agenda. However you look at it, war generates massive profits, war needs to be created so that the military industrial complex of the US / western world can evolve. America pretty much imports everything from China (like everywhere else in the world) with the exception of military hardware, thus the US needs to hang on to this massive market, which in turn means military action is needed to use the weaponry.

Money rules, the economy rules, not peace! Peace is a non-sense term used by coalition forces as a means of selling their capitalist idealogies to the masses.

xerxes

Well, Saddam committed an atrocity when he converted to Euro sometimes in 2000. The die was cast for him. The same case is truth for Iran.

Perhapes, the US administration desired a confrontration with Tehran if everything went smoothly in Iraq. It didnt. In case of Iran, I presume the current administartion in Washington sees its window oppertunity closing fast - if not already close - on the subject of Iran, and if the government in Tehran plays its cards right, they can avoid war by the end of Bush's term. That means, no more capturing of occupier forces in Iraq and things like that.

__________________
If we contrast the rapid progress of this mischievous discovery of gunpowder with the slow and laborious advances of reason, science, and the arts of peace, a philosopher, according to his temper, will laugh or weep at the folly of mankind. - Edward Gibbon

Shek

It's funny that you miss the obvious. I guess that Ahminejead is a CIA plant and that Cheney planted the "wipe Israel off the face of the earth" lines on the teleprompter

Please tally up the profits that OIF has made, and then contrast it with the deficit spending. Also, break out the profits by existing firms and small business start ups. You made the assertion, can you back it up? Feel free to use just UK firms if you desire. Next, you need to make a causal link and not just a correlative link.

Actually, it's the other way around. China needs the US to grow and expand their economy. It's called export-driven growth, which is why the yuan is essentially pegged to the dollar. Look up Bretton Woods II and read about it.

Also, when you look up the numbers, as a percentage of GDP, our imports of China equal only 2%. Do you consider 2% to be "pretty much . . . everything?"

A healthy dose of Adam Smith would do you well. The "invisible hand" is a beautiful thing.

__________________
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

Shek

Junk argument. 9/11 changed the decision making of the Administration, as it significantly raised the risk premium. The euro oil sales wasn't even a blip on the radar screen.

I don't think the Bush Administration desired a confrontation, but I do think that they expected to hold much more leverage than they do now.

xerxes

I am not an economy man, though I am very intrested in that subject. Therefore, I cannot pretend to argue about something I am not yet its master. However, that being said the Euro argument had been raised by many who do know, and although one might dismiss them as lefties, I incline to believe that arugment over the other alternative such as: WMD.

To be honest with you, I havent decided on that yet (the underline part) ... though one does wonder why would the Bush Administartion suddenly decides to put Iran into the axis-of-evil during State of Union speech, ofcourse outside the fact that it is actual evil . Considering the fact that Iran and States work somewhat toward the samegoal in Afghanistan against the Taliban, and probably had unoffical contact. So in all fairness, one Iranian does wonder, when Bush made his State of Union speech and declared his "axis-of-evil", just like a good American might wonder when the Iranian president talks about wiping off the Israel off the map.

Low-tech

next for what??.........an invasion???

we can bomb them, thats about it.

Garry

Sounds like Iran clearly understands how good is its position..... USA can not start any large campaign at near future... Bush Administration is curbed with Iraq and raised its stakes there.... After Bush leaves new Government will start pooling out of Iraq and will not be in a position to start over with Iran.

So the ONLY action US can take against Iran in near future is BOMBING....

Unless a heavy and long bombing campaign is lauched Iranian program is not stopped.... while any bombing would make them a victim of an US, which would look like an agressor who is very much discredited with lies and arrogance around Iraqi campaign.

Long and heavy bombing campaign will sure kill a lot of Iranians and will consolidate A-jads power..... It would stop nuclear program but will remove any committments Iran has over non-prolifiration..... Iran can resume everything anytime.

I don't thourgh influece of this to oil prices....

There is only big assumption under this - GWB will not start ground attack on Iran before elections 2008 while next administration will need time to understand situation.... and it may not be willing to attack at all.

A-jad plays dangerous pocker....

I hear that in Moscow they are not happy on the idea of Iran having its bomb and becomming less dependent on Russia and more arrogant in Central Asian/Middle Eastern regions.

StanlyS

"next for what??.........an invasion???"

Maybe now that the big 5, Russia, China, Briton, France, & the USA have finely voted for Iran to stop the refinement process of uranium for cheep atomic weapons possibility maybe I could suggest these five should put their might where their vote is by doing a lot more then a collective bombing operation or is this actually a vote for the USA to again be the military arm behind UN voting? The question here is not is this war. Rather it is how is it to be fought to include Iran. This is not the time for the USA to be baited and goaded into a war with Iran as a near sole military force. Should we alone attack Iran we will be rallying the Iran people around its' messed up leadership most Iranian folks already hate? Simple answer here as unrealistic as this is should be a world wide, or just USA, economic attack on Iran. This would bring em down quick.

Sometimes we search so hard for the best answer we miss what is right under our nose and very doable.

StanlyS

So the ONLY action US can take against Iran in near future is BOMBING....


Wars are not won by just bombing our enemy. Should Iran's' uranium mines and processing ability be bombed out they will just rebuild it better then ever

Taking out the Taliban government of Afghanistan did not stop the war conducted by terrorism, neither did taking out Sadam and his government. My guess is if we alone could take out the government of Iran completely this war would continue after it let out a belch.

We liberated the country of Iraq. Now it appears the basically Sunni of Saudi and the Shiite or Iran want to go to blows. However this middle eastern problem is but eyewash compared to how our troops are being unnecessarily tied up resulting in our main inablity to see the light in the end of tunnel to the wars end.

What is the middle eastern enemies quest? Then the question is rather where on the planet must we go to completely stop the enemies' ability to conduct war this war? Where is his headquarters? Answer those two questions then let us go there. After over 1,400 years of this enemy conducting war it is past time to more then face him down.

Iran could appear to be bombed back to before the stone age and it would not stop this war.

Wake up!

Garry

US clearly has not enough force in the region to fight Iran in ground war and keep order in Iraq... They may make Iranians incurr losses but they can not occupy any significant part of the country.

They would BOMB! and once they do that they will lose those who are remaining members of coalition force in Iraq

StanlyS

The leadership of Iran has long since been more then a huge problem for the world at large.

Please, what is the difference (it has already been absolutely proven) between the old Iraq and Iran when it comes to WMD?

Easy answer, Iran's leaders have been conducting uranium mining in country, have improved refining machinery in deep shafts. Clearly adding up to how they are openly attempting to make atomic weapons as rapidly as possible. Witness EU3 finding . 20 refined uranium in Iran more then a couple of yrs ago.

Iran has clearly stated they intend to "Wipe Israel off the map" and of how they are at war with us, the USA. Again and again they have made flat statements of national priority of their hate for the infidel at large. The many previous attacks they have already performed speak loudly for themselves. The question is not are we at war. It is rather a question of when the leadership of Iran will fail and fold.

I would suggest readers when it comes to their projected use of atomic weapons FOR AN ATTACK it is totally unacceptable to all other nations. It is not just the USA but most other nations also which have taken note of this as a highly unacceptable real threat. They in no way can be trusted.

Today, as with the last four years, plus, the fight (war) going on between Sunni and Shiite now in the battlefield of their choice, Iraq, goes on and on with no resolution. Iran supporting the Shiite. Nearly the rest of the majority of the middle east supports the Sunni. Just maybe the Sunni are not to pleased with a loose cannon like Iran with their new intentional weapons development.

Which nation or a coalition of nations is actually going to bomb, destroy if you prefer, the current nuclear capable ability of Iran is yet to be seen? The fact their nuclear ambitions will be stop I feel is a certainty

I do reason our only world is not about ready to bow down to Shiite or their Iman. In a bet between the enemies Iran has created or Iran I'm putting my money on Iran's' enemies.

Pragnosis

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shek

It's funny that you miss the obvious.

What do you mean by this Shek? I'm a bit puzzled, please elaborate.

Also, I am shocked at the president's (A'Jad) decision to release the crew. It's possible that my theories are non-sense, we'll just have to see if the bush administration make up another excuse to demonise Iran. I think Iran's nuclear program is likely to be innocent as there is no evidence to the contrary.

zraver

I woul dissagree. I think Hirohito, and The Vietmanese Communist party would agree with me as well. Bombing wins wars if properly used, but it cannot win the peace if improperly used, although it can keep an existing peace in place under certain conditions (Aka Cold War)

Shek

Pragnosis,

Is Bush responsible when AJ talks about wiping Israel off the map? Is Bush responsible when Iran doesn't meet IAEA requirements and fails to fufill their NPT obligations? Who captured British sailors in international waters?

You simply cannot explain away in any shape or form the fact that Iran is playing the part of the provacateur in this geopolitical chess match. If you want to be an apologist and play blame the US for Iranian behavior, then feel free.

BTW, I think an attack on Iran would be foolish, especially given how provacative Iran has been. Kill their agents in Iraq, and ratchet up the economic strangulation, which is having quite an effect, and watch AJ's domestic support continue to crumble. However, don't attack them, and don't ratchet up the tensions through threats of military force. See, I am stronger than the drugs that the CIA gives me to control my military mind

T_igger_cs_30

__________________
FEAR NAUGHT

I don't work here ...I am an analyst!