• Sale items. Buy now - stock going fast. Specials
  • You must now select Courier Delivery if you wish to receive items before Christmas.
 

Forums > Social Discussion > America's real reason for wanting to attack Iran?

Login/Join to Participate
Page:
Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
There's a theory that America's hostility towards Iran has nothing to do with nuclear weapons, but is a result of Iran's plans to set up the first oil market that will trade in Euros instead of American dollars. If successful the Iranian Oil Bourse could theoretically lead to the collapse of the US economy (i.e., the end of the American empire), since the main reason countries keep dollar reserves is because it is the only currency that can be used to buy oil. Incidently the US also attacked Iraq shortly after Saddam decided that he was not going to accept US dollars for Iraqi oil but wanted Euros instead.

Here's a very interesting article giving all the background:

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

Mr MajestikSILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,693 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia


Posted:
have you seen syriana? really good movie about the US and middle east oil and political dealings. fictional but still very disturbing. it touches on this topic.

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley


SymBRONZE Member
Geek-enviro-hippy priest
1,858 posts
Location: Diss, Norfolk, United Kingdom


Posted:
You should watch Robert Newman's 'History of oil' and read Richard Heinberg's 'The Party's Over'. Both cover the subject very well.

https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967

There's too many home fires burning and not enough trees


KaelGotRiceGOLD Member
Basu gasu bakuhatsu - because sometimes buses explode
1,584 posts
Location: Angel's Landing, USA


Posted:
Sounds like a good time to get myself deported then wink

To do: More Firedrums 08 video?
Wildfire/US East coast fire footage
LA/EDC glow/fire footage
Fresno fire

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/ubbrollsmile.gif" alt="" />


GitasGuyPooh-Bah
2,303 posts
Location: Brisbane


Posted:
Well that makes alot more sense than anything else i've heard on the subject.

:admires giant wooden aeroplane: Its about time trees were good for something, instead of just standing their like jerks!!! ubblol ubbtickled

Homer rocks!!!! ubblol ubbrollsmile


Neon_ShaolinGOLD Member
hehe, 'Member' huhuh
6,120 posts
Location: Behind you. With Jam


Posted:
 Written by: Mr Majestik


have you seen syriana? really good movie about the US and middle east oil and political dealings. fictional but still very disturbing. it touches on this topic.



"Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. That's Milton Friedman. He got a goddamn Nobel Prize. We have laws against it precisely so we can get away with it. Corruption is our protection. Corruption keeps us safe and warm. Corruption is why you and I are prancing around in here instead of fighting over scraps of meat out in the streets. Corruption is why we win."

Brilliant and truthful line...

"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock


Sambo_FluxGOLD Member
Introverted
833 posts
Location: Norf London, United Kingdom


Posted:
That's fascinating and terrifyingly plausible in equal measure.

 Written by: Krassimir Petrov

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 Yorks NYMEX and the Londons 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.

Ah crap. Time to move to Europe rolleyes

My Mind is a Ship
Emotions become the Waves
Soul is the Ocean

If a quizz is quizzical, what is a test?


robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
intresting but why does america have to have only one reason for attacking iran couldn't it be a combination of things this been just one of them?

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches


Mr MajestikSILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,693 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia


Posted:
what other things?

i'd say they'd use other things as an excuse, but this would be the real reason.

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley


Sambo_FluxGOLD Member
Introverted
833 posts
Location: Norf London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: editorial notes on the article

An excellent and thought provoking article by Krassimir Petrov! However, I think perhaps it's not entirely correct to state that "critics cant explain why Bush would want to seize those fields." The Bush regime are probably aiming to set themselves up as policeman of the Middle East oil fields, 'protecting' oil supply to Asia and Europe in return for various advantages at any future negotiation tables. Meanwhile billions of dollars of unaccountable no-bid contracts have been handed to corporations with ties to Bush administration, and the Iraqi oil industry is set to be privatised. So the reasons for the war are rich and varied. However Petrov has given us one of the clearest explanations yet of one of the most important, and certainly least understood, motivations for the war.


I think this summes it up nicely. There are certainly other reasons, nothing is ever black and white, especially in global politics. However, I would suggest this is a fairly large, and fairly overlooked reason for the war.

My Mind is a Ship
Emotions become the Waves
Soul is the Ocean

If a quizz is quizzical, what is a test?


robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
fair point sambo.

mr majestik my point would be why do they have to be useing the other reasons as an excuse. couldn't they be genuienly concerned about the fact iran is potentaly developing nukes. and that may be the main reason they want to invade. the fact that it will help the US ecconmy is also a reason that simply sweetens the deal.

my point would be there probly isn't just one reason to invade and all the otheres are excuses. there are probly multiple reasons why they would want to do it its the sum of all theses reasons that meen they want to invade.

of course we can argue back and forth about how important each reason is relitive to eachother but we shouldn't argue its just for this reason or just for that reason and the rest are just excuses.

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches


Sambo_FluxGOLD Member
Introverted
833 posts
Location: Norf London, United Kingdom


Posted:
ditto

My Mind is a Ship
Emotions become the Waves
Soul is the Ocean

If a quizz is quizzical, what is a test?


Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: Sym


You should watch Robert Newman's 'History of oil' and read Richard Heinberg's 'The Party's Over'. Both cover the subject very well.

https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967




Very good, thanks for that!

dreamSILVER Member
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand


Posted:
 Written by: neon Shaolin

Corruption? Corruption is government intrusion into market efficiencies in the form of regulations. ....

Brilliant and truthful line...




No... That would be neoliberal propagandist bullshit. Free market capitalism is not regulation free - it relies on tomes worth of regulations laid down by the WTO, IMF, World Bank, GATT, and numerous bi/multilateral trade agreements.

Free market capitalism espouses a very particular brand of regulation (which has oft proved to be highly socially detrimental to the poor), to claim these markets are regulation free is not only naive, but involves repeating the (false) claims of the dominant economic elite.

Milton Friedman may have a Nobel prize, but he's still a [censored].

mad

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche


Rouge DragonBRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia


Posted:
1953's Operation Ajax, anyone?

i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey

Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...


robnunchucksBRONZE Member
enthusiast
363 posts
Location: manchester uk


Posted:
hes not saying the markets are free from regulation hes saying the exact opposite. hes saying that these regulations could be seen as corruption depending on how you look at it because they act to bias the free market in favor of one group or another.
EDITED_BY: robnunchucks (1166551515)

My nunchucks vital statictics biggrin

weight: 500g
handle lenght: 16 inches
chain length: 2 inches


Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: robnunchucks



mr majestik my point would be why do they have to be useing the other reasons as an excuse. couldn't they be genuienly concerned about the fact iran is potentaly developing nukes. and that may be the main reason they want to invade. the fact that it will help the US ecconmy is also a reason that simply sweetens the deal.







In my opinion it's probably the other way around. Iran is not going to be a significant military threat to the US any time in the foreseeable future, nukes or no nukes. Or to Israel for that matter.



However, it just wouldn't sound very good if the US admitted that it wanted to attack Iran because Iran is threatening the US economy, by doing something perfectly legal. So they need the nuclear excuse, even though once again there doesn't seem to be any proof that Iran is doing anything illegal on that front either. The 'evidence' is even less convincing than it was in the case of Iraq's 'WMD'.



I think the nukes are only important in that Iran having a nuke or two would make it much more difficult for the US to threaten Iran with military strikes, as the potential repercussions would be too high.
EDITED_BY: Yell fire! (1166580745)

Mr MajestikSILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,693 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia


Posted:
i agree yellfire.

Iran has stated over and over that they want nuclear reactors for power, which i believe is completely fair. of course there is a chance that they will use it to make weapons, no body is saying they mightnt have alterior motives. but really if they do so then its their choice, the US can condemn them as much as they please, but i'd be more worried about a country desperate for oil that also owns the most nukes in the world more than a country that owns the most* oil in the world and a couple of nukes.

its a bullocks excuse for the US to start a war with a country for making a couple Nukes when the US already owns and has ready to fire enough Nukes to destroy the planet.

they'd go in for oil but try to make themselves look like heros by saying its to stop nuclear warfare.

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley


GeoffonTour04SILVER Member
enthusiast
360 posts
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom


Posted:
America has been taking over the middle east (politically and economically) for a long time now. Iran and Syria are the only two countries left.

The main reason is oil. Energy is the basis of the new Cold War, now that everyone has nukes. China is strengthening its ties with the african and russian oil markets, which means america has to control the middle east.

PeleBRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA


Posted:
Wait, people thought this was about nukes in the first place? Seriously? People bought that?



It has *never* been and I thought the vast majority of the world realised that. If they didn't I would have thought they would have caught on knowing the Bush family owns oil fields and companies.



Although, come to think ago, when I was travelling abroad three years ago I ran into alot of people who though Jr. was a lawyer for some reason, so I guess I underestimated the wide spread knowledge of that.



*shrug*



Black gold. It's been cause of fights and controversy for well over a hundred years now, so why stop now?



(the last bit is sarcastic for those who don't pick up on that.)

Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK


Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
It's funny and ridiculous how the immediate neighbours of Iran, i.e., Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iraq and the Gulf States have shown zero concern about Iran's nuclear programme. These countries which constitute 70 percent of the world population and have everything at stake with stability in the region, are least bothered. The US, which lies half way round the world and Britain, who have very little to do with Iran are the countries that are supposedly frightened.

The hypocrisy is mind boggling!

faith enfireBRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA


Posted:
just asking-hasn't iran made comments that could be considered threats at the US and Britian? if so, have they made these comments to other surrounding countries?
if so, wouldn't they make these comments because of the distance, cause if they made them to China, China could just go over and squash them quickly and easily?
once again just asking and musing

Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed


dreamSILVER Member
currently mending
493 posts
Location: Bristol, New Zealand


Posted:
 Written by: Yell fire!


It's funny and ridiculous how the immediate neighbours of Iran, i.e., Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Iraq and the Gulf States have shown zero concern about Iran's nuclear programme.




I think you'll find Israel is nearer to Iran than China.

You may also find that Israelis are somewhat more concerned about Iran having nuclear weapons than the Chinese or the British. Something to do with comments like

 Written by: Preseident Ahmadinejad

Israel must be wiped off the map



 Written by: Preseident Ahmadinejad

the annihilation of the Zionist regime will come



 Written by: Preseident Ahmadinejad

Anyone who signs a treaty which recognises the entity of Israel means he has signed the surrender of the Muslim world





https://english.aljazeera.net/news/archive/archive?ArchiveId=15816

He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Nietzsche


Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: faithinfire


just asking-hasn't iran made comments that could be considered threats at the US and Britian? if so, have they made these comments to other surrounding countries?
if so, wouldn't they make these comments because of the distance, cause if they made them to China, China could just go over and squash them quickly and easily?




No, I don't think Iran has ever threatened the US or UK. They have threatened Israel though, but then Israel has done a lot more than just threaten its neigbours.

As for China, I can't see Iran ever having a problem with them because China has a very civilised policy of non-interference, unlike the US and UK. Consequently China has also not been the focus of terrorist attacks.

As you sow, so shall you reap.

onewheeldaveGOLD Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
3,252 posts
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: Yell fire!




As for China, I can't see Iran ever having a problem with them because China has a very civilised policy of non-interference, unlike the US and UK.



While I'm not disputing Chinas lack of interest in interfering with Iran, I would question whether that's due to a 'very civilised policy of non-interference' because such a policy was not evident when China invaded Tibet and attempted to wipe out an entire culture by violent means.

"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."

--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32


Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!


spudmonkeyGOLD Member
Member
55 posts
Location: kildare, Ireland


Posted:
ah man they wre only havibg a laugh everyone knows tibet is not a real country

Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: onewheeldave



While I'm not disputing Chinas lack of interest in interfering with Iran, I would question whether that's due to a 'very civilised policy of non-interference' because such a policy was not evident when China invaded Tibet and attempted to wipe out an entire culture by violent means.





I'm not supporting Chinas invasion of Tibet but it pisses me off when people in the west voice their support for the Dalai Lama without having any idea what Tibet was like under Lama rule.



Out of a population of 1.2 million, 700,000 Tibetans were slaves who were owned by Lamas.



According to Wickipedia, "Prior to 1959, Tibet's land was worked by serfs most of whom were owned by the lamas and were sometimes subjected to punishment and cruel conditions, particularly if they tried to escape. Before Chinese rule, mass slavery existed with over 700,000 of Tibet's population of 1.2 million in feudal serfdom."



So all those 'free Tibet and bring back the Dalai Lama' people are actually supporting an oppressive theocracy that exploited and enslaved the working classes (or peasants to be more accurate).
EDITED_BY: Yell fire! (1167019658)

spudmonkeyGOLD Member
Member
55 posts
Location: kildare, Ireland


Posted:
i heard that dalai lama was a total censored man forcing poor tibetians to undergo circumsision in order to make shoes for us western capitalist pigs i for one will never wear nike sheos make with raw materials from some tibitans prick but in all fairness man dont believe everything you read on wickipedia after all i could have wrote that entry and im addicted to lsd
EDITED_BY: spudmonkey (1167020207)

Yell fire!SILVER Member
member
151 posts
Location: London, United Kingdom


Posted:
 Written by: spudmonkey


but in all fairness man dont believe everything you read on wickipedia after all i could have wrote that entry and im addicted to lsd



Tibetans living under slavery during Dalai Lama rule is historical fact documented in many places other than Wickipedia, maybe if I get really bored I'll post more reliable references.

Nike shoes being made out of Tibetan pricks on the other hand sounds like a really bad acid trip! ubbloco

spudmonkeyGOLD Member
Member
55 posts
Location: kildare, Ireland


Posted:
it could b a really good acid trip either depends on your perspective man that magic paper is horribly unrelyible once again spelling im just aweful but it does teach you some mad [censored] and for that it must be commended are facts really important at the end of the day they can be rubbished and the person that rubbished them can be distroyed to i believe you if you believe me if we both believe nothing and everything at the same time just dont pop that cat im tempted my shot gun is loaded but he creates and distroys new worlds just like us hve fun wreaking creation its what jah would have wanted

Mr MajestikSILVER Member
coming to a country near you
4,693 posts
Location: home of the tiney toothy bear, Australia


Posted:
........ umm

"but have you considered there is more to life than your eyelids?"

jointly owned by Fire_Spinning_Angel and Blu_Valley


Page:
HOP Newsletter
Sign up to get the latest on sales, new releases and more...