Target : IRAN

[GostHacked]

http://www.newyorker.com/printables/fact/060417fa_fact

Already they are shouting the call for war with Iran. They never were going to be diplomatic at all. They SAY they are being diplomatic, but given the documents touting the banner for war with Iraq, I really don't trust them when they are saying they want to be diplomatic.

Former Pentagon Official

One former defense official, who still deals with sensitive issues for the Bush Administration, told me that the military planning was premised on a belief that “a sustained bombing campaign in Iran will humiliate the religious leadership and lead the public to rise up and overthrow the government.” He added, “I was shocked when I heard it, and asked myself, ‘What are they smoking?’

With or without the nuclear option, the list of targets may inevitably expand. One recently retired high-level Bush Administration official, who is also an expert on war planning, told me that he would have vigorously argued against an air attack on Iran, because “Iran is a much tougher target” than Iraq. But, he added, “If you’re going to do any bombing to stop the nukes, you might as well improve your lie across the board. Maybe hit some training camps, and clear up a lot of other problems.”

I give it maximum 2 years before operation Irani Freedom starts. UGH

[Michael Hardner]

Already they are shouting the call for war with Iran. They never were going to be diplomatic at all. They SAY they are being diplomatic, but given the documents touting the banner for war with Iraq, I really don't trust them when they are saying they want to be diplomatic.

I don't think anybody thinks it would be a war, along the lines of Iraq.

It would be air strikes, support for uprisings (?) and the nuclear 'option'.

If there was a scintilla of trust, or a real desire for compromise then a deal could be brokered. They did it with Cuba. A non-agression pact co-signed by Russia and China ? Does anybody else think that's possible ?

Of course, the US would have to be willing to compromise.

[KrustyKidd]

I don't think anybody thinks it would be a war, along the lines of Iraq.

Iran doesn't have military expansionism in mind and will never have a nuclear weapon. Those are two wide based realities. So, their threat and the need for action?

They have ifluence through subversion and economic throughout the area. They are however, out classed by militaries from Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait in terms of quality. The single most powerful military force in the Persian Gulf is the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet, which would make short work of any Iranian attempt to block the Strait of Hormuz, probably before it could even begin.

So, reason for war with Iran?

[gerryhatrick]

A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”

WHY IS EVERYONE OBSESSED WITH BUSH? CAN'T WE JUST STOP TALKING ABOUT HIM? LEAVE THE POOR GUY ALONE!!!

HE'S ONLY GOT ONE ARMY FOR PETESAKE!

[Drea]

[

Of course, the US would have to be willing to compromise.

And on that day, pigs will fly.

[sharkman]

I wouldn't be surprised in the least to hear coming over the radio that Israel has just bombed nuclear research facilities in Iran. They are the ones who face the biggest threat when Iran gets nukes. They took out Iraq's facilities in the early 80's.

IMO, the U.S. has their hands full with Afghanistan and Iraq.

[Drea]

This from one of the best websites I've ever come across...

Why The United States Will Attack Iran

The master plan of the United States is to control the oil in the Middle East. Only two countries stood in the way of that plan: Iraq and Iran. Iraq has been neutralized and will remain impotent for the next decade because of civil war. Iran alone now stands in the way of the U.S. master plan

[GostHacked]

This from one of the best websites I've ever come across...

Why The United States Will Attack Iran

The master plan of the United States is to control the oil in the Middle East. Only two countries stood in the way of that plan: Iraq and Iran. Iraq has been neutralized and will remain impotent for the next decade because of civil war. Iran alone now stands in the way of the U.S. master plan

That is the overall big picture here in the Middle East. It IS about the oil. Not freedom and democracy.

[KrustyKidd]

The master plan of the United States is to control the oil in the Middle East. Only two countries stood in the way of that plan: Iraq and Iran. Iraq has been neutralized and will remain impotent for the next decade because of civil war. Iran alone now stands in the way of the U.S. master plan

What about the fact that most of the oil goes to Europe and that most of the oil companies are non US? (France, China, Russia etc) Won't they be somwhat miffed at being controlled?

And, isn't oil a commodity that can be bought and sold by virtually anybody - and is? Leaving only money to be the controlling factor as everybody that can sells it?

And, isn't the price of oil set by a worldwide cartel which in turn does factoring of supply, demand and future forcasting to set those prices?

So, wondering, what exactly the US would 'control' that it does not already control.

In the meantime, Iran will foment Shiite insurrection in Iraq, resulting in a dramatic increase in casualties among American soldiers. Iran can also sink a few U.S. warships and oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, and indeed slow or stop the flow of oil through the gulf.

Iran can only do so much in Iraq and, they have pretty much reached that point. Iraqi Shiites are iraqi, not Iranian and thus, don't wish to become part of Iran. The fact that Iran wishes to hold popen talks is an indication they have reached their crest on that point. As for sinking ships and closing the Straights, not a chance. The fifth fleet has more fire power than Iran does, not to mention SAudi Arabia, Oman Quatar and the UAE.

[GostHacked]

KrustyKidd

What about the fact that most of the oil goes to Europe and that most of the oil companies are non US? (France, China, Russia etc) Won't they be somwhat miffed at being controlled?

Yes indeed. France Russia and a couple other countries has deals with Saddam for the oil. Once the US invaded Iraq they stopped all contracts to those countries. Why would that be? Iran is just stage 3 of the overall plan. (Stage one was the first gulf war, stage 2 was the 2nd invasion of Iraq.) France and Russia were very much pissed at the fact that those contracts would be cancelled.

Now understand that the oil is sold in two markets each dominated by a certain currency. The Euro and the Greenback. Iraq and Iran were both hoping to ditch the Greenback for the Euro. Causing a world wide shift in economic power. The US did not want this to happen. The Euro would become more powerfull than the Greenback. More money would be going to non-US foreign banks.

http://peakoil.com/static/editorial/Oil_Cu...Geopolitics.htm

Moreover, the euro’s higher valuation relative the dollar also explains why Russia, Venezuela and perhaps even Saudi Arabia have expressed interest in moving towards a petroeuro system for oil transactions.[6][7] Without a doubt, a successful Iranian oil bourse may create a shift away from U.S. dollars and towards euros in the oil market. The drop in demand for petrodollars would cause the value of the dollar to plummet further, thereby undermining the U.S. position as the global economic leader.

Now we do know that Iran was to open up their Oil Bourse on March 20th 2006. This never happened do to some technical di

http://www.iranmania.com/News/ArticleView/...20%26%20Economy

"The oil exchange would strive to make Iran the main hub for oil deals in the region," he said, adding that most deals will be conducted through the Internet.

http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html

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.

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.

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.

The rest of that arcitle is quite amazing. Now of you look at this and compare it to how Iran wants to sell their oil, it is clear what is going on. This shift from Greenbacks to Euros threatens the overal US economic stability/dominance of the world.

The US must dominate the Middle East in order to sustain it's global economic dominance. Democracy and Freedom has sweet fvck all with it. Or it may mean something different to those in charge.

[KrustyKidd]

Yes indeed. France Russia and a couple other countries has deals with Saddam for the oil. Once the US invaded Iraq they stopped all contracts to those countries. Why would that be? Iran is just stage 3 of the overall plan. (Stage one was the first gulf war, stage 2 was the 2nd invasion of Iraq.) France and Russia were very much pissed at the fact that those contracts would be cancelled.

Scince the war, the following has occured.

IRAQI OIL SHIPMENTS AND CONTRACTS

On June 5, 2003, SOMO issued its first oil sales tender since the war started, for 8 million barrels of Kirkuk crude stored in tanks at Ceyhan and 2 million barrels stored at Basra. Dozens of companies placed bids for the oil, with winners including ChevronTexaco, Cepsa, ENI, Repsol, Total, and Tupras. Bids for the Kirkuk oil reportedly ranged around $2.70-$3.30 per barrel below dated Brent (f.o.b. Ceyhan). On June 22, a tanker arrived at Ceyhan to load the first oil since March 20, 2003, when the 600,000-barrel tanker "Caithness" completed loading one day after the outbreak of war. On July 3, SOMO issued its second spot tender, for 8 million barrels of Basra Light. At the time, SOMO stated that it was not yet ready to resume term sales, which generally require a certain level of stability, certainty, and predictability.

In late July 2003, however, SOMO signed its first term contracts since the war, for Basra Light oil from Iraq's southern fields. Exports of about 650,000 bbl/d were anticipated through the rest of 2003. Major purchasers included BP, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Marathon Oil, Mitsubishi, Brazil's Petrobras, Repsol, Shell, Chinese trader Sinochem, and Vitol. However, with difficulties at the southern port of Mina al-Bakr (see below), Iraq has only been averaging exports of 545,000 bbl/d or less since the restart of term contracts.

Iraqi Oil

In late July 2003, SOMO signed its first term contracts since the war, for Basra Light oil from Iraq's southern fields. Major purchasers included BP, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips, ENI, ExxonMobil, Marathon Oil, Mitsubishi, Petrobras, Repsol, Shell, Sinochem, Total, and Vitol.

In addition, three exploration and production deals were signed between Iraq and Russian companies (Soyuzneftegaz, Stroytransgas-Oil, and Tatneft, to develop the 100,000-bbl/d Rafidain field, the Western Desert's Block 4, and the Western Desert's Block 9, respectively).

In early April 2001, Russia's Zarubezhneft received U.N. approval to drill 45 wells in the Ajil (formerly"Saddam") field, plus Kirkuk and Bai Hassan, as part of an effort to reduce water incursion into the fields.

Another large oilfield slated for development is Majnoon, discovered by Braspetro of Brazil in 1975, and containing reserves of 11-30 billion barrels of 28o-35o API oil. Majnoon is located 30 miles north of Basra on the Iranian border. In the 1990s, French company Elf Aquitaine (now merged with Total) negotiated on a possible $4 billion deal with Iraq on development rights for Majnoon. In 1999, however, TotalFinaElf declined to sign a 23-year production sharing agreement (PSA) with Iraq on Majnoon. Following this, the field reportedly was brought onstream (under a "national effort" program begun in 1999) in May 2002 at 50,000 bbl/d. Future development on Majnoon ultimately could lead to production of 450,000 bbl/d within two years or so at an estimated (according to Deutsche Bank) cost of $4 billion. Eventually, Majnoon could produce significantly more oil than that, possibly as high as 3 million bbl/d.

In May 2003, Thamir Ghadban stated that three exploration agreements for blocks in Iraq's Western Desert were still valid. These included Indonesia's Pertamina on Block 3, Russia's Stroitransgas on Block 4, and Indian's Oil and Natural Gas Corp. for Block 8. In January 2003, Stroitransgas signed a $33.5 million contract for exploration on Block 4, and in July 2003, it indicated its interest in winning post-war business in Iraq. In September 2003, Pertamina announced that it planned to begin oil and gas exploration in Block 3, investing around $24 million over the next three years. The small Irish company, Petrel Resources, also has expressed interest in exploring and developing oil resources in western Iraq. In May 2004, Pertamina suspended its exploration activities in the Western Desert region due to security concerns.

In February 2004, there were reports that Iraq was negotiating with Iran on the possible construction of a 250,000-bbl/d oil pipeline to the Abadan refinery in southwestern Iran. In exchange, Iran would export a similar volume of its own oil in a so-called "swap" arrangement. The pipeline was discussed by former Iraqi Oil Minister al-Uloum when he visited Tehran in December 2003 and met with Iranian Oil Minister Zanganeh. In early August 2004, Iran and Iraq agreed to a framework crude oil swap and transit agreement.

If oil is going only to the USA or mainly, why would the UN be giving Iraq immunity from legal proceedings such as debt collection from their LOL 'non existent (because the USA is stealing the oil) oil revenues?' Read below and report back prior to your next unfactual, yet highly opinionated post.

Under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1483, Iraq's oil export earnings are immune from legal proceedings, such as debt collection, until the end of 2007. Leaders of the G-8 major industrialized nations have pledged to complete Iraqi debt reduction talks by the end of 2004.

If the oil is going only to the USA or the revenues are, then you had best warn the UN that they are being hoodwinked and the money is going to Bush. Also, why are the Iaqis not mentioning this problem? Why are none of the governments of Russia, China, France and such mentioning that they are not getting enough Iraqi oil? Answer, because you are wrong, they are all there. Buying Iraqi oil at world prices. Their companies setting up wells using Iraqi labor, and, paying for that labor at the going rate.

Now understand that the oil is sold in two markets each dominated by a certain currency. The Euro and the Greenback.

Ya ya ya. Old standard argument that has big holes in it. A base factor is that only one country in the world uses gold to back it's currency - Switzerland. Hence, the US is not alone by any means.

First, while adventageous to the US to have it's currency being used to trade, it is not impertive. And, they can do without.

Second, there is no way to cause hardship to the US by making this move. To do so suddenly is financial suicide given the size of the US economy. US dollar goes down because of runs at the bank, the savings of every country on earth goes down with it.

This in turn causes backrupt governmnets and they deffault in payments to places like France, Spain etc causing them to endure hardships.

Next, you try to turn in your dollars faster but, nobody is buying them. To cover what they can, the US turns in their Euros, pesos or whatever causing runs at banks all over the world.

Between economies going broke all over the world, the entire planets currency exchanges in a convulsion and collectively headed down the tubes, I would imagine that prior to any major shift there will be checks and balances in place.

Now, I have a question for you. What income amount does the US make yearly for having this commodity sold in their currency? And, if it is traded in Euros (after a ten year adjustment period) with the US shifting investments to the Euro to balance this out, what will they make then?