The Iranian Euro Bourse

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 28 Jan 2006, 10:53

Bozzio wrote:I don't think the Strait will the issue you think it is. If many countries are dependant upon it then it will have to be defended. Even China will have to keep it open.

To "intend" or even "try to" protect Hormuz is one thing, to actually protect it is something different. A couple of bearded guys in a Zodiak packed with explosives could damage a supertanker enough to stop it. And Lloyds would recalculate the insurance fees accordingly.

It is my sincere belif that we would be over and done with in case of an attack against Iran, and only madness could initiate it.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 28 Jan 2006, 11:05

Reuters Story

So what does this mean?

Bush is backing the Russian / Chinese plan?

Is this just for "show", to make out Bush is trying to find a diplomatic solution?

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 28 Jan 2006, 11:54

Totally_Baffled wrote:Reuters story

So what does this mean?

Bush is backing the Russian / Chinese plan?

Is this just for "show", to make out Bush is trying to find a diplomatic solution?

Maybe a bunch of generals finally got their collective guts together and told the truth to Mr Bush? Scared him sh*tless and threatened with mutiny?

Bozzio · Post by **Bozzio** » 28 Jan 2006, 12:40

Yeah. Let's hope that this agreement is new way forward and any mention of military action against Iran can now be set to one side.

We can all stop worrying then. I've got two young children to think about. I don't want them to suffer. PO is a bad enough concept without other problems to get stressed about.

Thanks,

B

Bozzio · Post by **Bozzio** » 28 Jan 2006, 15:28

Having said that, I think the argument is going to continue. Is Iran asking for trouble?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 653376.stm

Iran's top negotiator said it had merits but was not enough to provide "for Iran's nuclear energy needs".

Iran had earlier reacted warmly to the proposals, raising hopes it might be the key to unlocking the crisis.

While US President Bush praised it as "a good plan", his secretary of state accused Iran of using delaying tactics.

MacG · Post by **MacG** » 28 Jan 2006, 16:15

Bozzio wrote:Having said that, I think the argument is going to continue. Is Iran asking for trouble?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 653376.stm

Iran's top negotiator said it had merits but was not enough to provide "for Iran's nuclear energy needs".

Iran had earlier reacted warmly to the proposals, raising hopes it might be the key to unlocking the crisis.

While US President Bush praised it as "a good plan", his secretary of state accused Iran of using delaying tactics.

I have read some speculations that the entire thing is a cleverly constructed trap for the US. Sponsored by Russia. Create conditions so Bush think he MUST act, and *bang* goes the trap. The russians are probably very very eager to know if the Moskit/Sunburn actually can take out a carrier, and so are the guys in Beijng. They have bought quite a bunch of Moskit's.

It would be quite some shock for the world: Hormuz blocked, US carrier groups suddenly vulnerable and useless, and a Europe which barely manage to stay afloat with the kind "help" of Russia. We would all be living in the political equivalent of Georgia or Ukraine!

There is quite a bunch of people in Russia who feel that the Soviet collapse was a very humiliating experience, and they would not shed any tears over a collapsed US. Putin himself is ex KGB.

Bozzio · Post by **Bozzio** » 28 Jan 2006, 17:07

MacG wrote:There is quite a bunch of people in Russia who feel that the Soviet collapse was a very humiliating experience, and they would not shed any tears over a collapsed US. Putin himself is ex KGB.

Yes, I think you are spot on here.

It wouldn't surprise me if this is a trap.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 28 Jan 2006, 17:11

Nice conspircy theory MacG! You should write a book!

I can see the headlines now;

"Iran sinks US carrier group"

the next hour:

"Iran has been removed from the map***"

*** = except the oil fields of course !

The last thing Russia and China want is collapsed world economy.

I can understand them being very pissed at the west, but they would need to use a tactic that would transition economic and political power over time. NOT some big bang world event that causes so much chaos that Russia and China end collapsing as well!

Russia would do well just to restrain the oil/gas export taps and bleed the west financially.

Lets face it , Russia has the resources to be rich but the country is rife with corruption and so will never acheive economic conditions that resemble that of the west.

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 28 Jan 2006, 17:30

Link

Yep here it is.

Iran thinks the Russian plan isnt enough.

I wonder what they mean? Are they saying the Russians cannot enrich enough Uranium?

If so, why not let China do some for them ? (or other Nuclear powers)

Im sure Israel could help out! (yes i am joking)LOLOLOLOLOL

hatchelt · Post by **hatchelt** » 28 Jan 2006, 18:42

Totally_Baffled wrote:
The last thing Russia and China want is collapsed world economy.

that's right...i'll post this reply i got from an iran post i made else where:

We Yankees are certainly not in good financial standing with the current despotic regime running huge deficits in order to line the pockets of the top 1% by way of massive tax cuts for the rich and corporate while, then turning around and saying... well, it?s all these damn social safety net programs, they cost too much, we?ll have to cut them. But, as for a Chinese led revolution against the U.S. economy, I wouldn?t say that is necessarily in the cards. You see, the Wal-mart Shopper is as integral to the Chinese economy as it is to Redneck nation. China is facing a major crisis of growth, namely, people want a slice. With masses of rural poor rushing to the city to live in slums and work shitty manufacturing jobs making tacky Wal-mart lingerie, China depends on exports for its entire economic solvency. It has an infantile service industry compared to the U.S. If the faucet stops a?flowin? with labor jobs, they face an urban crush, massive and widespread unrest, and an imminent collapse of their quasi-Communist government. So they would really much rather the U.S. Dollar stay afloat. Not to mention, as you have that they have invested in roughly 600 billion dollars in treasure bonds that are currently funding Bush?s run around the Toys R Us of defense contracts. If the Dollar tanks, those bonds become worthless. It?s a pretty good thing for us they didn?t invest in Euros. So, until China takes a major hit and sells those bonds, establishes a more balanced economy, or has major regime change, they?re economy will be tied at the hip to that of the U.S. It ain?t perfect, but I?ll take it for now.
________
CAR ADVERT REMOVED

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 17 Feb 2006, 21:56

The End of Dollar Hegemony
HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS
Before the U.S. House of Representatives
February 15, 2006

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congr ... 021506.htm

The U.S. did exactly what many predicted she would do. She printed more dollars for which there was no gold backing. But the world was content to accept those dollars for more than 25 years with little question-- until the French and others in the late 1960s demanded we fulfill our promise to pay one ounce of gold for each $35 they delivered to the U.S. Treasury. This resulted in a huge gold drain that brought an end to a very poorly devised pseudo-gold standard.

It all ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon closed the gold window and refused to pay out any of our remaining 280 million ounces of gold. In essence, we declared our insolvency and everyone recognized some other monetary system had to be devised in order to bring stability to the markets.

Amazingly, a new system was devised which allowed the U.S. to operate the printing presses for the world reserve currency with no restraints placed on it-- not even a pretense of gold convertibility, none whatsoever! Though the new policy was even more deeply flawed, it nevertheless opened the door for dollar hegemony to spread.
....

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 22 Feb 2006, 20:57

Norwegian Bourse Director wants oil bourse - priced in euros
by Laila Bakken and Petter Halvorsen

http://www.energybulletin.net/13081.html

Andersen in of the opinion that Norwegian oil must be traded in Euros, which can be advantageous for international customers.

PowerSwitchJames · Post by **PowerSwitchJames** » 22 Feb 2006, 21:16

Does Norway want to get invaded or something?

Totally_Baffled · Post by **Totally_Baffled** » 22 Feb 2006, 21:32

fishertrop wrote:Norwegian Bourse Director wants oil bourse - priced in euros
by Laila Bakken and Petter Halvorsen

http://www.energybulletin.net/13081.html

Andersen in of the opinion that Norwegian oil must be traded in Euros, which can be advantageous for international customers.

HOLY FU**ING SH*T!

Now thats what I call a geopolitical curveball!

Where on earth did this come from!

Post by **clv101** » 22 Feb 2006, 22:48

PowerSwitchJames wrote:Does Norway want to get invaded or something?

Maybe they just don't want any more monopoly money dollars...