Wednesday, February 08, 2006

What's Really Going On With Iran?

[Update] More on this topic in Sunday's News Feb 12
[Update 2] If you have any doubts as to any of the
conclusions I've drawn here, please do check out
Robert Newman's "The History of Oil"

Why a war with Iran is now all but inevitable, and why it will have little or nothing to do with their pursuit of nukes.

Lately the impending crisis involving Iran is all over the news. Just today the Washington Post reported that the US has held in its posession, for 20 months now, Iranian plans for a tunnel designed for an underground atomic test that might one day announce Tehran's arrival as a nuclear power...

The significance of this revelation if true, is it would show that Iran is indeed pursuing a nuclear weapons program and not just one for producing energy. However, following Powell's BS report in front of the UN re: WMD's in Iraq, coupled with all of the other lies foisted on us by this administration in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, pardon me for believing more strongly at this point in the tooth fairy. This is just another major reason how the Bush administration has made us less safe. They no longer can be seen as credible, not to the US public, and certainly not to the world at large. The fact that the Bush administration has been pushing qualified weapons experts at the State Dept out the door in favor of political cronies just makes the report all the less believable.

Appears this guy is applying for a weapons expert position in the State Dept
Yep, that's a whistle missile allright. Mollify it & you've got the job!

Furthermore, as the Knight Ridder article pointed out (in the post below), the Bush administration's arms control policies began with a refusal to submit a global treaty to ban underground nuclear-test blasts indefinitely for Senate ratification, and they have thus far refused to abide by the weapons reductions requirements of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Therefore, per the universally understood 'you reneged on your end of the deal' and the 'you're a goddamned hypocrite' rules, the US really has no fucking right to tell any other country that they can't do so, even if the report is true. By breaking with every international agreement, especially the NPT which is all we have that keeps nations from pursuing nuclear weapons, Bushco has certainly made the whole world a much more dangerous place.

Now, I have little doubt that Iran may actually be pursuing nuclear weapons. In fact, they may very well even have at least a few nukes already. They certainly bought a dozen or so nuclear capable cruise missiles on the black market from Ukraine a few years back, and they reportedly were flashing around plenty of cash to obtain nuclear warheads for them too. If that's true our troops in Iraq could wind up getting incinerated because of Bushco's penchant for rushing to war as a solution to their problems. Regardless of whether Iran has nukes already or not, it is only the belligerant policies of the US that are leaving Iran little choice but to try and get them. Following the example of India and Pakistan, nukes are the proven way to force peaceful relations with the US.

Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely opposed to the proliferation of nukes, especially to Iran, but the current Bolton led PNAC strategy of do as I say not as I do isn't going to work. In fact, this type of belligerent foreign policy forces countries to push back instead of comply, just as Iran and N Korea have been doing. Furthermore, it forces nations to form alliances to counter the US threat that never would have done so otherwise. Bushco has focused solely on the US's military might and in doing so they have pissed away our soft power. Just a few years ago the whole world looked up to the US. They literally wanted to be the US. Today, they increasingly conspire how to defend themselves against the US instead.

With reports floating around for months that the US is going to attack Iran regardless, what other choice does Iran have? Just last year former military intelligence and CIA counter-terrorism official Philip Giraldi wrote the following in the American Conservative magazine...

The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States.
Now I don't know if there's a bit of truth to that or not, but again, we need look no further than Iraq to know that this administration is certainly capable of doing just that. Iran simply must take these reports seriously. The allegation that we would use nukes in a pre-emptive attack is hardly surprising either, considering that even our own generals are admitting that our forces are already stretched to their breaking point in Iraq. Besides all that, once Seymour Hersch starts saying we are about to attack Iran, you better damn well believe the odds are that it's true. One can only pray that there really isn't another 9-11 in the works to falsely justify it.

Now why on earth would we really want to attack Iran now when we are already up to our eyeballs in the quagmire that is Iraq? Well, you won't read much if anything about it in the US media, (no big surprise there) but there have been numerous reports that it has everything to do with Iran's plan to abandon the US dollar for the Euro as its medium of exchange for its oil.

As William Clark wrote in his "The Real But Unspoken Reasons for the Iraq War", the real reason for the war in Iraq was Saddam's decision in 2000, to convert its reserves from US dollars to euros.

Iraq nets handsome profit by dumping dollar for euro

Guardian: Feb 16, 2003, A bizarre political statement by Saddam Hussein has earned Iraq a windfall of hundreds of million of euros. In October 2000 Iraq insisted on dumping the US dollar - 'the currency of the enemy' - for the more multilateral euro....(more)
For an even further look at how the US dollar is so dependent on its being the oil standard that the US will go to war to preserve it at all costs, check out the following very well sourced essay...

BUSH'S DEEP REASONS FOR WAR ON IRAQ: OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTION

The fact is that the spiraling US foreign debt due to Bush's record deficits have placed the US economy in a very precarious position. If countries begin to sell off their US dollar based reserves in favor of the Euro, to say the US economy would be royally fucked would be putting it lightly.

I direct you now to check out William Clark's latest...

Petrodollar Warfare: Dollars, Euros and the Upcoming Iranian Oil Bourse

Contemporary warfare has traditionally involved underlying conflicts regarding economics and resources. Today these intertwined conflicts also involve international currencies, and thus increased complexity. Current geopolitical tensions between the United States and Iran extend beyond the publicly stated concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear intentions, and likely include a proposed Iranian “petroeuro” system for oil trade.

Similar to the Iraq war, military operations against Iran relate to the macroeconomics of ‘petrodollar recycling’ and the unpublicized but real challenge to U.S. dollar supremacy from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency. (...)

Concerning Iran, recent articles have revealed active Pentagon planning for operations against its suspected nuclear facilities. While the publicly stated reasons for any such overt action will be premised as a consequence of Iran's nuclear ambitions, there are again unspoken macroeconomic drivers underlying the second stage of petrodollar warfare – Iran's upcoming oil bourse. (The word bourse refers to a stock exchange for securities trading, and is derived from the French stock exchange in Paris, the Federation Internationale des Bourses de Valeurs.)

In essence, Iran is about to commit a far greater “offense” than Saddam Hussein's conversion to the euro for Iraq’s oil exports in the fall of 2000. Beginning in March 2006, the Tehran government has plans to begin competing with New York's NYMEX and London's IPE with respect to international oil trades – using a euro-based international oil-trading mechanism.

The proposed Iranian oil bourse signifies that without some sort 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 of U.S. global domination, Tehran’s objective constitutes an obvious encroachment on dollar supremacy in the crucial international oil market
....(there's a whole lot more)

Also worth a mention is the Fed's recent announcement that it will cease publication of the M3 monetary aggregate March 23, 2006. That's ok, I had no idea what that meant either until I read this diary over at Dailykos. Now we're talking real reason to be worried here. The implications of this decision by the Fed are enormous and will effect everyone, and it hardly seems a coincidence that it will happen the same month as the Iranian oil bourse. In fact, Greenspan's decision to retire at this time seems telling also. (hat tip to snooze alarm from the comments for pointing this out to me)

If somehow you've managed to make it this far and remain unconvinced that the upcoming conflict with Iran is eminent and that it will have little to do with their nuclear ambitions, please do post a comment or drop me an email as to why. I'd be more than interested why anyone wouldn't be convinced by all of this that we will soon be going all shock and awe on Iran. In any case, do check back in a couple months and we'll see whether I was right or not. Believe me, I hope like hell I am totally wrong.

|

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home