This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: Possible Reaction Scenarios To A Preemptive Israeli Strike On Iran
Submitted by Bradley Schaeffer
Possible Reaction Scenarios To A Preemptive Israeli Strike On Iran
I have written in the past about the prospect of a nuclear Iran and its destabilizing effect in the world’s most important energy region. But what if Israel strikes before Tehran’s nuclear ambitions are realized? Although given that Iran currently could have as many as 8,000 centrifuges enriching uranium by December (IAEA estimate), an Israeli strike now, as opposed to say 2003 when the secret program was first revealed, may not effectively shut down the decentralized program. Still, it could cause a frustrating delay in Iran’s timetable and, depending on the line the mullahs take immediately succeeding the attack, weaken the regime’s hold on a populace that is more educated, more worldly, more pro-Western and less easily cowed than others in the region as the green protests last year revealed.
The (literally) billion dollar question of course for commodities traders is what will be the effect on the price of global energy in the immediate and longer dated aftermath of such a military strike? As with the current diplomatic stand-off today, much of that will depend on Tehran’s reaction. Here are three possible scenarios should we wake up to news of Israeli fighter-bombers winging away from Natanz, leaving a burning nuclear facility and a thousand questions in their jet wash behind them.
Best case scenario: Iran plays the victim. Instead of striking back militarily, Iran uses the attack to show the world that Israel and her puppet-master the United States are the aggressors. The mullahs may even use such an attack to shore up their public support at home. "It may make sense for the Iranians to play the victim," said IHS Global Insight Middle East analyst Gala Riani. "They may also use it to build the regime's legitimacy internally." Sure, they would angrily denounce the criminal raids, invite the international press to view the destroyed buildings and, of course, the hospitals treating the inevitable civilian casualties and the very public funerals that would follow. But in the end, especially if the damage is minimal, they may try to turn this military lemon into p.r. lemonade. I would expect a mild knee-jerk rally in crude oil (depending on the base price at the time of the strike). Call it $5.00 to $15.00 but I think any rally will be brief and a selling/shorting opportunity if anything.
Mid-case scenarios: Iran could retaliate in one of two-ways (or both) short of major escalation of violence. They could intensify their proxy war against the United States and her allies in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as Israel in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories through Hezbollah and Hamas respectively. Such actions’ short-term impact could have a similar impact on crude prices as the best-case victim scenario, especially if the attacks focus on Israel which is already under the gun so to speak. Although Israel has threatened to hold Syria and Lebanon responsible for any Hezbollah attacks, in the end it will be the intensity of the attacks and level U.S. support for retaliatory actions that will determine the degree of escalation such a declaration could imply.
It must be noted however that should there be a marked increase in violence against Western forces, especially beyond the immediate areas of Gulf conflict, and particularly militant-launched attacks on oil-focused targets such as refineries, pipelines, and the like, global tensions could rise quickly. This is especially true if Israel waits until the new year when a more friendly Republican-controlled Congress (if predictions hold that is) may press the tepid Obama administration for a more punishing response to Tehran’s machinations. In this case we could see oil’s floor set at perhaps $10-$20 or more higher than pre-strike levels and remain there for some time.
Worst-case scenario: Iran could react with great force, launching conventional warheads against Israeli targets while at the same time following through with its threat to close the Strait of Hormuz and choke off the most important maritime route through which 17 million barrels of crude oil move each day. The immediate supply shock would send oil futures spiraling into the $140+ range (roughly double where they are now). "Iran doesn't even need to be successful in their threat," said Michael Wittner, global head of energy research at Societe Generale. "Even a credible threat or near miss and insurance rates will spike. Then no one's going to send any oil through there for a couple of weeks until somebody's navy can re-establish control."
Should the Iranians actually attempt to close the narrow sea lanes over which they frown, the United States Navy will be compelled to re-open them by force. This will unleash unintended consequences that are anyone’s best guess. Although Iran’s ability to maintain a blockade in the face of the most powerful navy in history is in doubt, certainly the price spike will hold as insurance rates skyrocket for a time and such costs are passed on to consumers. Also re-routing the oil overland or drawing it from other regions will entail higher transportation costs and risks of their own.
Commodities derivatives are driven by uncertainty. They are, in fact, risk management instruments to be used to mitigate uncertainties in just such scenarios as described above. Uncertainty is inherently bullish. I cannot conceive of a scenario in which oil prices will fall in the event of an Israeli strike that seems more and more likely by the day.
Sadly, I do not see the current Iranian regime reacting rationally to such a strike and thus do I lean more towards the latter two possibilities I lay out above. My advice, better to be long and wrong, for a while, then wake up short when the balloon goes up. Demand for crude oil is not going away any time soon regardless…access to supplies, however, may soon be another matter entirely.
»
- 18089 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I'll the other side of that trade. I say oil goes to $200 over night. Shipping insurance thru the gulf rate doubles. USD up. SP500 down. That's if they invade. More if they just bomb.
infantile drivel
junk
Also, the unicorns who live in the clouds will come forth and shit Skittles and iPhones upon hordes of starving Iranian children.
Dumbass.
That is a hilarious visual.
A good New Yorker cartoon in that, sad/comic!
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
At least we have the element of surprise.
It's a good thing the US and Israel didn't notify Iran of an impending invasion back in 2001 and give them almost a decade the prepare. That would be rather poor strategy wouldn't it.
Touche!!
Also that "worst-case scenario" strikes me as rather optimistic, and sounds like the poster is thinking of Iran as another Iraq, which it most definitely is not.
Iran has a million men under arms. They are well-equipped and will not be surrendering to US camera crews. Read about the Iran-Iraq War to learn a little bit about how Iranians fight. They can and will fight to the death.
If I were supreme Ayatolla of Iran I would surprise attack US forces in Iraq, which I outnumber ten to one. I can't think if anything more useless than lobbing SCUDs at Israel a-la-Saddam when the US military is right freaking there asking to be shot at in the flattest most easy-to-invade place in the entire world. And which Iran could numerically overwhelm very easily. I bet I could be in Baghdad within three days. What's to stop me?
Especially with the assistance of Russia and China, which is a distinct possibility. Material and financial support from the Chinese is a certainty.
Such a narrow view of the U.S. military machine. As those 100.000 Iranian soldiers come blundering across the landscape -- video steams in from satelites and out roll fighters to level out the playing field. Iran is a festering pool of discontent and wannabees.
I don't particularily care for war or for invasion forces to kill and destroy, but frankly, I fear the threat that Iran has with nuclear weapons in the hands of religious fanatics, yes even Israel is somewhat the same and unfortunately we have to deal with that. Iran needs to sit down and justify to the world its intentions are peaceful. Until they do the situation is open for forceful closure. And by the way, Iran IS most definitely another Iraq. Obsolete equipment and an army less likely than ever to want another life disrupting war. "The Mother of All Battles" -- I think we heard that one before.
One more thought -- don't the Iranian people deserve a nuclear reactor capable of producing energy and power for many generations. Those people are not in need of nuclear weapons -- more war on the horizon for decades to come. Their future will not be enhanced with more weapons -- I mean haven't they had enough? Get on with living, the world is screwed up enough as it is.
Iran is like Iraq? You're kidding, right?
Of course, he´s kidding. Look at the landscape. Iraq is mainly a flat desert:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Iraq_Topography.png
... and Iran?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Iran_topo_en.jpg
The most hilly country on Earth. After Afghanistan ... enough said.
Iran couldn't beat Iraq in a war, it was a stalemate. The USA took over the whole of Iraq in a matter of weeks. What does that tell you? BTW, the US doesn't need carriers it attack Iran, they can uses bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the USA has them surrounded. Should Iran sink a capital ship, like an aircraft carrier, it would invite an all out, perhaps even nuclear response. I find it amusing that you seem to think Iran could just walk all over the USA in a conventional battle. Iran could definately inflict some dammage. However, look at what happened in Operation Praying Mantis. The USA could have taken out Iran's navy in 1 day, but stopped. If Iran wants to invite an all out war against the USA, the USA can rachet the scale of the war up until Iran is a smoltering pile of glass.
If Iran wants to invite an all out war against the USA, the USA can rachet the scale of the war up until Iran is a smoltering pile of glass. - Worked well in Vietnam.
Iran couldn't beat Iraq in a war, it was a stalemate. - check
US couldn't beat North Korea in a war, it was a stalemate. - check
US cannot beat few thousand goat herders with their home-made weapons for 9 years already - check
...
Yeah, that was after a decade of crippling economic sanctions. The majority of the Iraqi military didn't even resist the US invasion, they just let them roll in.
Iran is no Iraq, get your facts straight.
Hang on there just a tic. The ayatollahs took over in 79. Iraq invaded in 1980 before Iran's new government had consolidated its power AND had the full backing and support of the United States.
I'd say they performed rather well, considering. They successfully repulsed Saddam and his army. That's a win.
And anyone can invade Iraq in three days. There are no defensive positions out in the desert and nothing to hide behind. If Iran invaded Iraq right now America's best option would be to take the fight to the cities. Which is exactly what Saddam tried to do.
Point being anyone can duplicate America's 3-day drive to Baghdad because no one in their right mind is going to try to set up a defense in the middle of the desert.
Fightthepower - what power are you fighting? You sound like another one of the many traitors to the American people. re. the Iran Iraq war. Saddam gassed tens of thousands of Iranians with our help [satelite imagery of troop concentrations, weather and wind data and British help in constructing the manufacturing facilities.] and encouragement.
That's what's so twisted about the whole Saddam WMD debate. We gave him the orignial WMD.
until Iran is a smoltering pile of glass. - Does this get you off you sick fock?
.
"Iran needs to sit down and justify to the world its intentions are peaceful."
There are a finite number ways to say 'we are not developing nuclear weapons, we are enriching uranium to 20% to feed our nuclear reactor.' Iran has about exhausted the possibilities.
Perhaps you need to tattoo it on the back of your hand, so you could remember what they have said a zillion times?
"Iran IS most definitely another Iraq"
Plain, vanilla, bull shit.
"Iran needs to sit down and justify to the world its intentions are peaceful"
And Israel does not?
The world is definitely convinced that the intentions of the US neo cons are not peaceful.
BTW, Iran need not attack US troops directly in Iraq. All Iran would need do is cut the US's long supply line from Kuwait. This could be accomplished much as the Afgan fighters are occasionally cutting gas supply lines to American bases in Afganistan.
The overall strategy of Iran would probably be no different that that employed by Lawerence (of Arabia). He did not want to totally cut the rail supply lines of the Turks, instead he let enough supplies get through to keep the Turks fighting the Arabs, and thus stopped Turkish troops from redeploying to more strategic locations; ie, locations the Brits had identified as strategic to their aims.
Well said and countered Snidley.
These threads on ZH bring out such an interesting, all black and white tone.
Fascinating.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Now you are cutting to the chase!!!
"...I fear the threat that XYZ has with nuclear weapons in the hands of religious fanatics..."
Exactly how I feel about the US Federal Government.
ditto.
"Here are three possible scenarios should we wake up to news of Israeli fighter-bombers winging away from Natanz, leaving a burning nuclear facility and a thousand questions in their jet wash behind them."
And after that he says:
"Sadly, I do not see the current Iranian regime reacting rationally to such a strike and thus do I lean more towards the latter two possibilities I lay out above."
Is he really joking?
You left out the real worst case scenario: Iran has enough highly enriched uranium and will explode a crude uranium bomb in Tel Aviv smuggled in by hidden/immediate covert transport.
It would be foolish to leave Iranian army to just wait for an Israel revenge strike, so why not patriate them into northern Iraq instead. The rest are just cannon fodder, and it will not play so nicely to Israel in public if they start nuclear vaporizing Iranian cities.
As an Israeli living here for a while, I would say a strike by Israel is highly unlikely. We would probably sooner maneuver the US into attacking Iran, and will play sidekick. In the past, it was possible to bomb the Iraqi nuclear reactor because it was above ground and the target was concentrated. Iran is another story altogether - you would probably need a full scale invasion to clean that out.
In addition, I do not believe the Iranians have anything serious in the way of armaments to hit Israel harder than the Iraqis did (that was a joke, random rocket barrage which hit nothing). Hence we would be happy to let you guys do the wet work while cheering from the sidelines. And as to oil price and stock market - no worries, its a scam anyway :D.
So the USA is nothing more than a big dumb bodyguard. Thank you for the Israeli perspective. Very revealing.
You're welcome.
Don't be surprised this is the case. Eisenhower talked about the military-industrial complex and the implications on foreign policy, as has Ron Paul. You reap what you sow.
At some point, even the most playful clown gets tired and circus is over.
Sulla - Whatever else you have to say, I appreciate this bit of candor - As an Israeli living here for a while.
Unlike say Mark Noonan. I also notice that MissingLink never uses the personal plural pronoun.
A point that always outlines the comedy going on in the western world today: a country should not be pro itself but pro western world. Therefore the only ones able to be pro itself are western countries.
This leads to serious flaws in analysis.
This issue of nuclear energy is a popular issue in Iran. The current government is riding a popular wave here. They dont impose a point of view that is only theirs. On the contrary, they are trying to enforce a popular policy. People in Iran want to secure their future through a nuclear energy policy. They know the stakes and want to be as independent as they can be.
So once again, it is all about backing a minority (the green party) that does not represent its nation and as such, will be in demand of protection so they can remain in power.
Because in the present days, a popularly elected government in Iran, outside of any foreign influence, will support a nuclear energy policy.
But as it goes against the best interests of the Western world, it can not happen.
The main stuff is still the comedy going on in the West. People are said to be entitled to determine their future. But only in the scope this future is compatible with pro western interests.
Only the victors write the history books.
Sad thing is, on a long enough timeline, every victor's a loser.
I dreamt there was no Israel....
dream on.
It could happen.
I wonder whether these smart people who write such crap like this article have ever been to Iran, let alone lived there and learnt its language. Sometimes I wonder what sort of unfortunate upbringing they had so that they imagine that it is somehow to their advantage to start WW3.
Look here, the Iranians/Persians have been there for thousands of years. They liberated the Jews from Babylon. They kept the Romans out of Asia. They will be still around, in one form or another, a long time after the USA ceases to exist as one country.
It is simplistic to point to the USA as a democracy and at Iran as a theocracy. The USA has its own ruling class and so does Iran. Many Americans are far more religious than most Iranians. Israel is only a democracy because those who are not zionists are kicked out by its ever-expanding settlements.
IMHO, the Israelis are far too smart to attack Iran. At best/worst, they will get the Americans to do their dirty work - once more. Now that is really dangerous because the Americans have a good chance of losing in any conflict as they cannot sustain their garrisons in the region without a constant influx of supplies - especially during a conflict. Right now, the US military is paying proxies of the Taliban so that the Taliban does not attack their supply convoys to Afghanistan. How much weaker can one be than that?
Iran is not seeking to make a nuclear weapon. If they really wanted one, they would buy it. In any case, nuclear weapons only make sense in a defensive way - as Israel is well aware. If the Israelis nuke Iran, they would have to go back to Europe not long after.
The really sad thing about all of this is that the current ruling classes of both of Iran and Israel need a constant state of insecurity - it is how they keep in power. It is a most unhealthy state of affairs.
+100
In the week following 9/11 the US could have nuked most of the middle east into the world's largest sheet of glass and had the majority of the world cheer. Dubya did not think that worked in the master plan then and I have not seen anything recently which would suggest a change of course now. O'bummer is a subversive, not an open agressor. This is all bullshit for a larger purpose; probably an attempt to distract attention to the imminent collapse of the ponzi.
oh yeah right, we could have nuked the entire middle east in some ignorant fantasy i guess. there were protests as soon as we went into iraq. im sure your nuking of central asia would have gone over well with chinese and russians and europe. but doesn't matter what they think, right? go usa.
.
We have yet to leave the middle ages...the world is now too small for any more wars. The last thing we need to see is a truce between Sunni and Shiite, but an Israeli attack is one heck of a way to bring it about. Shame that deploying weapons is now easier than thinking.
So who are the IAEA, and how would they know how many centrifuges are buried under mountains in Iran?
From what I understand, to getting from 5% to 95% grade uranium (the difference between power generation and weapons grade) is massively difficult. However I suppose Amerika should know how many centrifuges Iran has, as they who sold them to Iran (but they forgot to mention that ball bearing centrifuges were no good for weapons grade)
If Iran wanted to get back at Israel, I’m sure they could easily source a bit of old Soviet radioactive material, and make a “dirty bomb”.
During the CIA backed Iraqi invasion of Iran, Iranian youngsters were volunteering to martyr themselves by running onto the battle field to act as targets, to enable spotters to find hidden gun emplacements. Thousands of kids died like this, their families proud of the sacrifice. For those at ZH who like numbers, check out the population of Iran, who are under 15 years (25%).
As for the green revolution in Iran, I am to be convinced that it is little more than another CIA Psy-Op with corrupt western media backed fomenting agitation to destablise the country.
Iran is no utopia full of saints, but neither is it a warmongering invader like other countries I could mention. Shame on ZH for such a piece of Orwellian crap promoting the idea that Israel would be stupid enough (let alone have the courage) to declare war on a country that could afford to retaliate.
+1 Yes, shame on ZH if promoting warmongering should be the goal. And no, thanks to ZH if they only show us how far the criminal minds start working!
The threat of an Iranian bomb is of the suitcase variety. Nothing short of regime change can eliminate that threat. Muslims seem to prefer religious regimes so change is not so easy. Sometimes there are no good solutions.
Religious regimes are part of the ARAB culture, not of a "Muslim" culture.
Indonesian muslims, Malaysian muslims, Bangladesh muslims do not "prefer" religious regimes.
(Iranians are not arabs, but are influencied by the arab "neighbourhood").
They will do well enough until a real one comes along.....
Iranians are not Arabs smart ass.
Iranians are not Arabs smart ass and what about Iraq under Sadam? Syria and Eqypt are also Muslim but have secular dictatorships. Muslims fundamentalists are like the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages and just as ignorant.
"Iranians are not Arabs smart ass"
Oh, I think I said that:
(Iranians are not arabs, but are influencied by the arab "neighbourhood").
Can you read?
Well, religious or not, arabs are more inclined to dictatorships. Not a problem of Muslim religion, but of Arab culture.
Indonesia, Bangladesh and Malaysia are three examples of Muslim democracies.
You might want to check again what is going on in the nations you mentioned.
Saudis are promoting wahhabism with massive resources and it works. Many many muslim countries are less free today, than they were 50 years ago, and the trend is towards increased imitation of Saudi.
It's a good racket, sell oil to US for gold and dollars, use wealth to support and spread ideology that is against US and US interests. Slowly but steadily, entire countries are turning into 'Islamic nations', province by province, state by state.
US may have superior firepower, at least in limited concentrations, but they will soon rule large swaths of the entire world. Yes impoverished, malnutritioned, overpopulated, ill educated, but that's a good base for recruiting millions upon millions of martyrs to do your fighting for you.
this is the stupidest thing I've ever read.
There is no such thing as a suitcase fucking bomb. Where the hell do you idiots get your fantastic scenarios from, stupid TV shows like 24?
Stop watching the damned television and do some research
A sunburn missile, which the Iranians posess, travels so fast that and irratically that one will hit a carrier before the Phalanx can detect it and compute a fire solution. And that is just one. A CBG confronted by a speedboat swarm and multiple incoming cruise missiles including the sunburn will burn to the waterline.
The nightmare scanario is that the Iranians sink the last ship coming into the Straits and then pick off all the trapped ships as they have no room to manouver. This also cuts off the supply line to Bagdad via Kuwait. Insurgents then attack, while our troops have dwindling supplies and less aircover from damaged carriers.
Worse yet, the taliban sieze the moment to close the Khaiber pass. US troops in Afghanistan are besieged by attack, and have to make a stand with no re-supply.
Losses are a function of armed conflict. It is a grisly math, expensive and unfortunate for which the probability is accounted.
I don't think the carriers will be in range when this starts. The B2 bombers will do the initial strikes and SEAD work, followed by carrier launched air strikes. A sharp Iranian counterstrike wouldn't have to sink any carriers, simply disable their ability to launch and land aircraft. Rather than keeping an eye on the carrier groups I'd watch Guam, Diego Garcia, and Whitman and Barksdale AFBs. And by the way, if we did attack Iran I'm sure they hand out as many shoulder launched SAMs as the insurgents in Afghanistan, and Iraq, ask for! We remember what those stingers did to the Soviets in Afghanistan. And remember Hitler, he was just going for a quick Blitz to acquire a corridor to Danzig in 1939.
roger that
You're right about the danger to a blue water navy getting too close to Iranian shores. Even little cigarette boats are capable of delivering munitions. One tanker sunk in the Strait of Hormuz shuts it all down. The ripple effect will play hell with freight getting moved by both trains and trucks. I suspect the Navy has made preparations for whatever Iran has to throw at them, but they still have to rely on a clueless president for orders. How many US pilots were lost to SAMs while they took out LBJ's bamboo bridge targets?
The Obamanation does not give orders. He reads them from his teleprompter.
"depending on the line the mullahs take immediately succeeding the attack"
Mullahs won't take any line. Ayatollahs will take.
Comparing a mullah with an ayatollah is like comparing a catholic priest to a catholic cardinal.
Astute and subtle observation Zina.
I always enjoy reading your posts.
Sadly, Brazil deserved it's early "kick" out this year.
And no more world-cups to come. Imagine that, Spain is the last world cup champion.
Ironic.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
By that I assume you are referring to CNN's and other MSM outlets "balanced" coverage of the protests made up of Iran's urban intellectual left (the Green Movement), tell me how successful were the Greens this past February? Even neolib Richard Haass has admitted that support for the Greens could be just 25%. (I make this comment not as an endorsement of any group but to challenge your statement above, which is a distortion of the political reality in Iran.)
The misplaced hope of the MSM (Thursday Feb 11, 2010)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/10/AR201002...
The reality (Sunday Feb 14, 2010)
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/15/world/middleeast/15iran.html
these people are idiots and never learn. they think the world is just waiting to be bombed by america into their loving corporate arms. its sick and repulsive and disgusting and they will all get what they deserve. a destroyed america, financially ruined, governed by a crooked police state and hated and despised by the entire world. in fact we are already half way there.
hy islam will never accept israel
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/06/why_islam_will_never_accept_th.html
that is correct, hence we are trying to deal with the secular leadership - talking with the religious factions (i.e. Hamas) is a waste of time. Since Iran is controlled by a religious faction, this means there is no way to reason with them.
Really? Stop watching Faux news and read a few books not written by Ashkenazi Jews. Sephardic Jews, Christians and Muslims of a multitude of denominations lived side by side since the founding of Islam. What we know as Ashkenazi Jews did not convert to Judaism until 1000 years after the birth of Christ. Ashkenazi Jews have been genetically traced to Eastern Europe. 40% of all Ashkenazi Jews can trace their ancestry to 4 women.
Sephardic Jews and Christians were in every corner of the Ottoman and Persian Empires. Ashkenazi Jews NEVER lived in the Ottoman and Persian Empires.
It was the invasion of Palestine by Ashkenazi Jews in the late 1800's that triggered many of the problems we see today. The problems were amplified 1000x after WWII when Ashkenazi Jewish refugees were not allowed to emigrate to the US. Canada, Britain..etc. due to racism and the worry about Bolshevism infecting the West. Bolshevism was a scourge Western Europe and the US wanted to wipe out.
The Western powers and Russia beside supporting Israel, have supported the most despotic Arab leaders. Most people have no clue almost 2 millions Israelis are from Russia or ex Soviet states. Almost all still have passports from their country of origin. Russia supplied most of the weapons and money used by the Israelis in the 1948 war. Russia and Israel jointly are developing hundreds of military products together.
excuse me, but the former soviet union actually supported the arab nations in pretty much all the wars in the region. If you read some speeches by most arab leaders around the six day war and the october war you'll see the reference to their soviet benefactors clearly.
I do not see how the origin of ashkenazi jews is relevant, even if your info was correct (which I highly doubt).
We do have a lot of former soviet jews in here, 2 million sounds a bit much but probably not far. They came here by their own and not because of any encouragement by Russia, on the contrary. That I know from my own parents firsthand.
A significant percentage of the 1.5 million Soviets who emigrated to Israel in the last 25 years are not Ashkenazi or Sephardic Jews. They went to Israel for economic reasons. They and millions of other Israelis would leave if they could be guaranteed the same or better economic future. Look at the huge numbers of Israelis living abroad in the US, Australia..etc. . Unfortunately for them, the US blocks easy entry of Russian Jews into the US. The US will be eventually forced to cut back on the direct and indirect subsidies that allow Israel to maintain it's military. Once that happens those who can emigrate will.
Well, I live in Israel and I think I can tell why people are living here. It is not for economic reasons, as any Israeli will tell you. Golda Meir said it best during the october war: "We have a secret weapon - we have nowhere to go". It is a matter of a national home, not economic benefits.
The issue of the origin of the Ashkenazi in the Caucasus exposes the lie of the so called 'right of return'. Yes, Palestine is signifigant in the geography of the Jewish religion ... It is significant in the Christian and Moslem religions as well.
The Ashkenazi claim to a place in Palestine is the same claim the Pope or an Indonesian could make on the land. It is a claim based on the geographic origin of the faith.
Being Moslems and Christians, the Palestinians of course can make the same faith based claim, but more significantly, Palestine is their ancestral home. In fact, many of the Palestinians are direct descendants of the Biblical Jews, who converted.
http://www.palestineremembered.com/Articles/General/Story9097.html
http://www.haaretz.com/general/shattering-a-national-mythology-1.242015
So get busy and find a way to accommodate and make peace with the people who's stolen land you are living on. Right the wrong.
The Jews were in “Palestine” 5000 years before there was such a thing as Islam. And let’s not forget WHY the jews not slaughtered in the 6th century Islamic invasion of “Palestine” converted to Islam (hint: think of the word, sword).
Stolen land would be the graves, homes and temples of the Jews in what is today called Arabian peninsula and the middle east, as attested by Mohammed himself.
So, you get busy and right the wrong.
Continued in the post below...
And the Jews were booted out in AD70. Someone clearly took notice of that famous phrase - his blood be upon our heads...
Remember that the Jews only came to inhabit Canaan by driving out the Amorites (etc) that were already there. Don't go claiming some religious "right" to inhabit some country or other - those days are long gone.
laosuwan - your big brain is not making any sense.
First off, No one disagrees that Jews predated Islam.
Then you say - And let’s not forget WHY the jews not slaughtered in the 6th century Islamic invasion of “Palestine” converted to Islam
So we agree that the original Jews in Palestine were for the most part forced to convert to Islam during the conquest. So where are the decendants of these forced-to-convert original Isrealites??? They're crammed into Gaza and the West Bank where you and your goon friends drop white phosphorus on them. You are killing and abusing the children of Moses, even while you falsely try to identify yourself as same.
Stolen land would be the graves, homes and temples of the Jews in what is today called Arabian peninsula
These people would have been Sephardic - not Ashkenazi. Most Israelis are Ashkenazi. We're talking about the bogus Ashkenaz claim to Palestine as their ancestral home, when they originated from the Caucasus region and were formerly known as Khazars.
So you're off topic.
Why don't you explain the Ashkenazi claim to not just a place in, but to all of Palestine, that displaces and murders the true decendants of Moses and Abraham?
Thanks
First of all, thanks for the history lessons. They could have been used by Bill Murray’s character in the movie Ghost Busters. The issue here is in whether this is a dispute over land or religion. The facts are the Jews have the historical claim, muslims do not.
The whole “night flight” furthest mosque myth could not have had anything to do with Palestine at the time it was written; it was an explanation given 500 years later in an effort to lay claim to the land. The same as the appropriation of Abraham by the Muslims; it is an effort to lay claim to another people’s culture and religion.
No, we do not agree that descendants of these forced-to-convert original Israelites are the existing inhabitants. All historic accounts show the land to be scarcely populated and primarily by non muslims. Even Mark Twain’s account of Palestine in the early 1800s shows that muslims were a tiny majority of the people and that they were sullen, slovenly and unwelcome by the other inhabitants. It was Arafat who imported many of the present population from Syria, Jordan, and even as far away as Africa in the 1960s that swelled the population.
Israel’s borders were decided by international law. The arabs twice invaded those borders and any additional land Israel captured is theirs to keep according to international law. They stupidly returned some land already and were rewarded by increased terrorism.
Jews do not say to the world convert to our religion or pay the tax. They do not blow up nightclubs where alcohol is served. They are the victims of this insanity called islam, as are most other countries of the world in contact with islam. This is the point; not who someone’s ancestors were or were not. The point, less you still miss it, is that islam is expansionist and fascist; it exists only as long as there is are non muslims to be conquered. This is not about Israel or Palestine.
laosuwan - You are quick to dismiss the facts you don't want to hear and then you make all kinds of assertions out of your own lucid imagination. Why don't you post any links that back up your claims?
Did you read this?
It's from an Israeli newspaper -
Shattering a 'national mythology'http://www.haaretz.com/general/shattering-a-national-mythology-1.242015
This is exactly the medicine you need because all you do is spout your ethnocentric myths. Try getting a little fact based and you'll lead a healthier life.
For example, you say - All historic accounts show the land to be scarcely populated and primarily by non muslims.
If all historic accounts show this, it should be easy for you to provide a link to one or more sources that back up your claim. Regarding Mark Twain, in Innocents Aboad, he was comparing Mediteranean lands with the fertile, green USA he was familiar with.
Mark Twain did not just describe Palestine as a barren desert, he also extended this description to Greece, Lebanon, and Syria. He stated:
From the above quote, the reader may get the impression that Greece is also empty since he stated:
To extrapolate the way you do, one would have to conclude that Greece was empty of people in the later 19th century. Obviously not true in either case - laosuwan.
Israel's borders were decided by international law - This is a joke right? Isreal never pays heed to international law.
So, in summary, there were inhabitants in Palestine prior to it's colonization by Askenazi - Eurpean Jews. The inhabitants were mainly Muslim and they were/are the true Semetic descendants of Abrahm and Moses who converted to Islam during the conquest.
Pack up your last European colony or find a way to accomidate and make peace with the rightful owners you have so badly abused. Such abuse continues to this day.
Thanks
The Palestinians are the modern day descendants of two ancient civilizations – the Canaanites and the Philistines. According to early history and the Bible, the present day land was called the Land of Canaan and the Canaanites ruled the area. Their society was fragmented with a city-state-like structure where each area or city had it own king with political and religious duties. The Canaanites came to power at around 3,000 BCE but their kingdom systematically fell to invasion from ancient Israelis freed from their bondage in Egypt.
The Philistines came into the land at around 1200 BCE and mainly lived near the southern coastal plains (near present day Gaza). Both the Philistines and Canaanites were considered “pagans” by Jews, Christianities and Muslims because of their polytheistic beliefs. Later, following the arrival of the Jews, many converted to Judaism and centuries later to Christianity
Read more: http://newsflavor.com/opinions/origin-of-the-palestinians/#ixzz0uwMtzmLl
http://newsflavor.com/opinions/origin-of-the-palestinians/
The Palestinian National Authority's own website offers nothing on the history of the so-called Palestinian people. The only article on the site with any historical content is called "Palestinian History - 20th Century Milestones" which seems only to confirm that prior to 1900 there was no such concept as the Palestinian People.
According to official Ottoman Turk census figures of 1882, in the entire Land of Israel, there were only 141,000 Muslims, both Arab and non-Arab. This number was to skyrocket to 650,000 Arabs by 1922, a 450% increase in only 40 years. To portray themselves as indigenous, Arab settlers adopted the name of an ancient Canaanite tribe, the Phillistines, that died out almost 3000 years ago. The connection between this tribe and modern day Arabs is nil. Who is to know the difference? Given the absence of any historical record, one can understand why Yasser Arafat claims that Jesus Christ, a Jewish carpenter from the Galilee, was a Palestinian. Every year, at Christmas time, Arafat goes to Bethlehem and tells worshippers that Jesus was in fact "the first Palestinian".
http://middleeastfacts.com/Articles/myth-of-the-palestinian-people.php
Israel was portioned from the Ottoman empire by the league of nations, the forrunner of the UN. It was the arabs who broke international law by invading Israel, not Israel. Anyway, international law only seems to be applied to Israel.
laosuwan - Why do you keep ignoring Prof. Shlomo Sand of Tel Aviv University?
http://www.haaretz.com/general/shattering-a-national-mythology-1.242015
He says among other things that likely get your bowels in an uproar, that the Palestinians are the decendants of the Biblical Israelis, the very same people you are pretending to be decended from.
Re. Khazaria - "Sand argues that the most crucial demographic addition to the Jewish population of the world came in the wake of the conversion of the kingdom of Khazaria - a huge empire that arose in the Middle Ages on the steppes along the Volga River, which at its height ruled over an area that stretched from the Georgia of today to Kiev. In the eighth century, the kings of the Khazars adopted the Jewish religion and made Hebrew the written language of the kingdom."
Judaized Khazars constituted the main origins of the Jewish communities in Eastern Europe.
You are just another, and hopefully the last, European colony in non-European lands.
My advise is appologize for all the blood you've spilled and make genuine peace.
you and shlomo are pretty much alone in that opinion, not that it has anything to do with my post. I guess if you have no rebuttal for the facts you have to bring up distractions. 140,000 muslims in entire palestine according to ottoman government. not a muslim land. nope. never was. And in terms of blood I think the muslims hold the record, not buddhists from asia like me.
Yeah and I'm the Easter Bunny.
If you are who you say you are, why don't you explain what your name means? Why did you choose the name?
its my nick name. it means sweet girl from laos
it means sweet girl from laos - Ah, no ... it does not. Who told you that?
And why do you have such a hard-on for Zionist causes?
now you have nothing left to talk about you insult my name? pathetic. I admire jews for fighting against the racist arabs who want to kill them in order to fulfill their religious duty in the koran. my awareness of islam began after my uncle was murdered by muslims in southern thailand for the "crime" of being buddhist and by my personal experiences living among muslims in middle east in my work. my opinions about them are based on my personal experiences and by studying their own texts. anyone who looks at the outcome of world history can see that islam is an expansionist military cult and a threat to the whole world. Only the stupid multi culti hippies of the west fall for islam's lies. No more replies from you now. I am finished with you, you are wrong on the facts, you bore me
I didn't ask why you hate muslims. I asked why you have such a hard-on for Zionist causes.
Show me where I insulted your laosuwan name. I asked you what it meant. You said 'lovely lao girl'. Sorry, but that's not what it means. Maybe you'd like to try again?
I also wrote in transliterized Laos, "Wow Lao die baw", a very simple phrase, a commonly asked question and you had no answer. Not very convincing I'm afraid.
I live in Thailand. I follow the news regularly. I have never heard of a Lao national killed in the South. Can you point to the incident as recorded in the Bangkok Post that describes your uncles death? Like ... what day did this event happen? What kind of work was he doing?
I ask because Zionist groups like GIYUS advise their cyber propaganda corp to hide their ethnic stake in the issue and spout ethnocentric, self-serving memes.
You say that's not what you are doing, yet you claim to be Laos and you don't know what your name means in Laos.
And what's with the dog avatar? Is that your Laos dog? How does that fit in with your persona?
if you live in thailand i wish you would go back to your country because you are nasty. please do not write to me any more or bother me with your demands about proving my family or name. why should i have to explain my nickname and avatar to you? lao - suwan, transliteration to english by my friends because i like lao girl, not good enough? need to know about my dog, too? maybe wrong breed for your tastes?
I like zionists; they are not afraid of trash who push them around. I admire them for that and wish we had the guts to stand up to the foreigners who are always telling us what to do. now you know. go bother somebody else, preferably in your own country.
why should i have to explain my nickname and avatar to you?
Why? ... Why should you come to this site and spew your phony nonsense? Most people here, maybe everybody here would be happy to explain their nickname and avatar. That's why they come here. To read and share information. Their nickname and avatar is like their calling card. A volontary first step in information exchange. Why not you? What's wrong with you that makes you so uptight about a few questions explaining who you are? Is it because you are not who you pretend to be?
You can see, your mind unravel as you you get caught up in your lies.
Earlier you said your name meant - sweet girl from laos. Remember that? Were you posing as a woman?
Now descending into pidgin you say - lao - suwan, transliteration to english by my friends because i like lao girl, not good enough?
What does this mean? You now pose as a hebrew man likee laos girl???
Why do you need - transliteration to english by my friends? You seem to have/had a good grasp of English [When not flustered resulting in the gibberish above.] Is it the Laos language - the language of your supposed native land that you don't have a clue about?
In any event, your name doesn't mean Laos girl anything. If you are not too lazy or incompetent, why don't you just look up the translation?
And when and where did your 'uncle' die? Why is this a big secret you can't share. As it has inspired you to such hatred of Moslems, it must be a significant time and place that you can remember. That is, if it ever really happened...
You talk about nasty - How nasty is it to hate all the people of an entire religion? Only a Zino-fool like you can engage in such warped logic.
Then the dog picture ... no dog like that exists in Laos. Smaller, sharp, brown hunting dogs abound. Those with a hint of tiger stripes are especially prized. What is that a dobberman? Maybe you got your pictures mixed up and that's your illegal West Bank settlement attack dog? yes?/no?/maybe?/maybe a little bit?
Ah, Another day. Another Hasbra outed. I predict like found-out posers of the past, you will soon disappear. Good-bye and good riddance fool.
One other thing laosuwan - your name is interesting to me.
Wow Lao die baw?
the former soviet union actually supported the arab nations in pretty much all the wars in the region
Not to mention the nazi's. the mufti of jeruselem organized two SS divisions of muslims in the balkans and was a personal friend of hitler. The original plans for auschwitz were drafted by the mufti in his home in berlin.
This guy is totally lieing in his posts here and you are right to call him out.
Ideology... How much difference exists between political and religious ideology?
Does the American perceive his/her self as a capitalist, a socialist, a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Protestant, a Catholic, or some combination of the above?
Does the Iranian perceive his/herself as a muslim, a member of a theocratic state, a liberal living in a theocratic muslim state, or some combination of the above?
Does the Jew perceive his/herself as a Jew, a member of particular tribe that has been dispersed by war many times? as an Israeli? as a German? a Frenchman? a American? Or, some combination of the above?
I have purposely left out the word average. Although we hear the term average American or average Jew or average Muslim often, no such humans exist. Humans only exist as individuals...like snowflakes, no two are alike.
It is the purpose of ideology to attempt to 'form a homogenous group' with the same world views and beliefs. So, ideology can be religous or it can be political or it can be a combination of the two.
Once a homogenous group is formed by those seeking control 'the leaders' will promote rituals unlike those of any other homogenous group. This is to distinguish one group from another, to insure that differences are apparent, to discourage a member of a homogenous group from defecting to another homogenous group. Corporations call this brand loyalty.
People the world over allow themselves to be controlled by homogination, be it an insular society like Japan, a lady wearing a burka that she hates in Afganistan, or an American working the pits on Wall St wearing a suit that he would gladly exchange for jeans and a sweat shirt.
The 'leaders' that begin the movements or the homogination process set the protocol. If the guests of the Queen of England notice that her meat fork is set on the left of her plate, that becomes the norm for all those wishing to emulate the Queen and rise to power in her court, or in the kingdom/queendom. Should a peasant inherit a windfall and employ servants the peasant will quickly learn that his meat fork should be set on the left side of his meat serving.
Those that do not comply with the rules established by the founders of the homogination soon find themselves ostricized or perhaps thrown into jail or banished.
I marvel that people the world over allow themselves be herded into homoginized groups, much as sheep are herded by dogs or cattle are herded by cowboys. I doubt if most individuals ever give their homogination much thought. They were born into a world that they did not create... and what could they really do to change their situation?
At any rate the homogination of people plays into the desires of the rulers once homogination has been in place for several generations.
All a ruler need do is point out that those folks over there are placing their meat forks on the right side of their meat course and are therefore, different from us!
Or, perhaps the leaders point out that although the folks over there hold our prophet in high esteem they do not believe that he was the son of god. Therefore, we need to launch a crusade and teach them a lesson...or, exterminate them entirely.
When you give it a bit of thought, ideology or homogination seems sort of silly...doesn't it? It sounds more like a game for children than a game for grown ups, doesn't it?
Next time you have dinner in a nice restaurant insure that the waiter places your meat fork on the side of the plate most convenient for you.
Hi Snidley,
Well said again. The homogenization of culture has been THE agenda for people dreaming of a single, easily rule-able under-class. For centuries.
But these stubborn people refuse to give up millenia old culture for MTV shtick.
Diversity, at every level, is the natural order.
We've become un-natural beings, ripening ourselves for an extinction level event.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
*slow clap*
I guess the same could be said of Israel eh.
"Still, it could cause a frustrating delay in Iran’s timetable and, depending on the line the mullahs take immediately succeeding the attack, weaken the regime’s hold on a populace that is more educated, more worldly, more pro-Western and less easily cowed than others in the region as the green protests last year revealed. "
same old arrogant, ignorant american warmongering garbage a la dick cheney. oh yes they came with flowers to greet us in iraq as well. and the oil will pay for everything don't worry. what a bunch of lies and garbage this new war will be and perhaps sink our country truly for good. and oh yes the centrifuges are just soooo dangerous. like the pakistanis, israelis and north koreans dont have theirs. we could have a better relationship with iran if we weren't israels little gun puppet.
if you want a real description of what might be going on with this issue i recommend this:
http://tarpley.net/2010/07/22/obama-preparing-to-bomb-iran/
we could have a better relationship with iran if we weren't israels little gun puppet.
Israel is a diversion for the plebescians: The USA is in fact Saudi Arabia's willing bum-boy, spreading, protecting and supporting Saudi-branded jihaddism everywhere in exchange for Oil!
Iran knows this - of course - and they have less love for Saudi-Arabia than Israel; they consider them to be "Arabs" i.e. desert rats, mere brigands and robbers, heretics even.
Therefore the "worst case scenario"* will be that Iran launces *everything* it has on the Saudi Oil facilities knowing that the US war machine runs on cheap Oil as does the US economy - a slight crimp in the supply and PooF goes "The Empire".
They may even secretly short the DOW via OTC derivatives beforehand - to keep themselves supplied with kaviar and virgins.
*) Many would perhaps consider the corrupting Saudi+US influence greatly dimished for decades "the best case scenario"... I would certainly light a nice cigar for the occasion!
Bradley Schaeffer: Congrats on your new book..Hummel's Cross!!...:-)
Nothing will happen. Israel is scared shitless of Barry Hussein and what he might NOT do. If American sponsorship of Israel is over, that country is toast. They don't dare test the new regime. The only thing that might save Barry's butt is continual crisis mode. 1984 anyone?
Fact is, no one has a clue about Barry's foreign policy. So far he has kissed the asses of Communists and thugs, but actually done nothing, except continue Bush policies that he constantly attacks. Who is this clown?
The party boys call the Kremlin
And the Chinese know (oh whey oh)
They walk the line like Egyptian
Bradley Schaeffer,
You motherfucker zionist pigs, you want war for profit, you dirty scum of the world we hate you and your alikes. Damn you, you swine and hope Israel is wiped out the day they start the war. Sorry for the poor people in Israel, old ones, women, children, the whole of them who don't support the war. You fucking beasts! The American oligarchy, which sold out their own folks, the sociopaths of the world, the TBTF want this next war. But you will destroy yourself too. No war in so many countries at the same time will be sustainable, you dirty sick scum of humanity! Fuck you all who agree to WAR!
The whole thing is a bad joke. Pakistan can have dozens of nuclear warheads with our support but Iran is somehow a threat. That insanity aside, supose the Iranian's retaliate non-symetrically with the intent of forcing the engagement of the Russians and Chinese. What if they destroy he large Saudi refineries as well as mine the straights? Gas would be unavailable at most any price. One ought not to be so cavalier when discussing attacks on nations that are clearly staying within their own borders. It's American propaganda basically meant for stupid Americans. We are so weak right now on so many fronts a major war could effectively bring us down so why would they let us off easy if we orchestrate an unprovoked attack?
hit bait - thanks td.
Oil comes into play here.. China and Russia depend on Oil from
Iran... The USA is about to make a big mistake....
and Japan, all SoH dependant. With the attack scenario of wicked fast missiles, etc. what stops killing all of the tankers? - Ned
China yes. Russia has plenty.
+1 on the point made above on Iran already having the bomb. The fact is that Pakistan and N. Korea (one of the poorest countries in the world with no formal relations with anyone other than the Chinese) have gone nuclear. The notion that Iran, a country with the second largest oil reserves in the world and attendant cash flow, who has been attempting to develop the bomb for over thirty years has not already done so, is beyond naive. It's just a game of chicken to see when the first underground test will be conducted.
Our new Muslim President " Barry Soetoro " aka Barack Obama
might not support Israel .. This guy says one thing, and does
another...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article7148555.ece
While this article deals with the middle east I have found an informative news story and analysis of the China and Japanese seas naval exercise. It has been hard to find these kinds of opinions other than the canned news and clips.
Cheers!
U.S. Risks Military Clash With China In Yellow Sea
Link to story: http://www.voltairenet.org/article166380.html
I found the Asia Pac theme interesting and perhaps relating to our ME efforts.
Yin-Yang
yes little ducklings but we tried to get the Pakistan nukes back. Bhutto was a CIA sanctioned candidate, but the quid pro quo fell apart with her death. Now the war in Afghanistan is nearing some end, (Bhutto said long ago, that the tribal region is like a hornets nest, better left alone, poking a stick into the area only inflames the resident Islamic population) Candidate Bhutto changed positions, and supported the US demands that Pakistan do more in the region.
One must fear that Obama is no longer on the same page with long term strategic policy to create US hegemony over all of Central Asia. Obama would destroy what little credibility he has left, by allowing a preemptive attack, and set up the US for a succession of hard line leaders, starting with HC probably.
Oil prices could collapse under an attack, oil prices have run counter to the deflationary world economy. They should be priced around $35, all things being equal. This has been baked into the cake for several years now. Sell the news.
the possible outcomes: One we win the regime in Iran falls, the southern oil fields are captured. Win
Two, the regimes survives the first attack, but the long term policy of regime change takes form, with a no fly zone, more military pressure. Iran still needs to sell oil, but with global sanctions and cooperation, the price is kept low. Win Win
Three, the attack is thwarted, Iran still has nuclear power, and more oil to sell into the world market. We still win.
Are you delusional? We win, we win, we win? You know people get angered when you bomb their country. Silly of them I know but they keep doing it. What if they destroy our infrastructure (Saudi refinery). Sure oil would be cheap but refined gasoline would be a memory.
win win win was the Bush rational for going into Iraq. There's really not much at risk here, which is why they will want to do it. You hit them before they can hit back. Schoolyard rules.
the speculative premium has gone higher on the idea that we would attack Iran, this is the only way to bring it back down, is that a fourth win? Bush studied Game Theory at Harvard, his professor penned an op-ed explaining it all. He had degrees from Harvard AND Yale. Obama defers to his judgement on most things, America has political continuity for a change.
and think of the pro democracy movement in Iran, shouldn't we give them a hand?
the only interesting part of all this in my OP is how they will dupe the American people, and especially the intellectuals, into getting on board, but at long as the burden of proof remains dubious, the intellectuals will just shrug, and say the government must know something we don't.
the intellectuals in this country couldn't convict Lindsay Lohan of Drunk Driving.
how they will dupe the American people, and especially the intellectuals,
That's so piss-EASY it is downright scary:
First Obama is Black a.k.a. "A Victim Of White Oppresion"(tm), To the "intellectuals" Victimhood is Sainthood, the "Get out of Jail Free"-card.
Second, most "intellectuals" are leftists, with the leftists - especially the European brands - it is not what is said or done that actually matters but By Whom. It is instructive to watch f.ex. the outrage whenever Israel or Sebian nationalists kills a few brown people versus the silence over worse atrocieties happening on a daily basis - but done by "the right people" on in the name of "the right cause".
Thus if St' Obama kills a few hundred thousand Iranians, even if he admits it is just to prove he is not the pussy he really is, the left and the "intellectuals" will express their regret at the tragic events and their understanding for the difficult position that Obama was in.
At least with Bush/Cheney there was outrage; with Obama here there will be active support!
Yes of course... we win! Just like the Iraq and Afghanistan adventures... we find the Weapons of Mass Destruction as advertised, the people flock to us in gratitude, Israel's ambitions are satisfied and the rest of the world kowtows in subservience. The war is paid for by cutting taxes and increasing aid to Israel.
Looks like an attempt to paint every outcome as a win.
Outcome 3 is such that it negates the two others in most aspects.
In other words, if you dont reach outcome number 3, you lose.
Stop already with the affect on the price of oil if U.S.-made jet aircraft with Israeli insignias attack Iran. You know what? There’s a little more at stake here, Energy Broker, than precious energy prices.
Iran, like Iraq, does not threaten the interests of the United States, unlike the threats from BiBi’s finger on the trigger. If Israel, that “special” friend of the U.S., does not begin now an aggressive program of working with its neighbors to achieve a better understanding of the interests of the Middle East, then the U.S. needs to remove not only its considerable financial support of Israel but its almost unbelievable cowardice in the face of Israeli belligerence.
To the author of this post, I was particularly incensed at your hope that Iran would react “rationally” if its property were attacked and its citizens killed.
Zero Hedge: Who is this guy and why is his solution for world peace the surrender of sovereign nations?
Full disclosure: We do know who this guy is: http://biggovernment.com/author/bschaeffer/
We know who he is...who are you??? What have you contribute to anything, including this blog?...
thanks for the link JR, kinda puts the whole thing in perspective when you read his OTHER writings. . .
this post seems to exist here to: a) take the temperature with regards an aggressive US-led (*cough* puppet) attack on a sovereign nation; b) slow weekend page hits.
sad.
I'm with JR on this one.
I'm with ZH on this one. A successful good looking guy starts to contribute here and has credentials...Woo Hoo...lets see one you come out of the closet and share??? HAHAHA
I love FOX...BECK rules!!!
Enjoy your well earned junk.
Excellent insight, as usual.
What a laugh, tell me ...how much a barrel of oil if the Zionists nuke Iran?? Whats the best case mid case worse case for nuking Iran? A suitcase full of big bills to fill the Fiat Uno?? Russia's changing relationship with Iran may encourage the Iranians to look again. Russia has cancelled arms deliveries to Iran which includes long-range S-300 anti-aircraft missiles. Reports are that without the S-300, the Iranians do not have a balanced air defense. The down side may be that the most aggressive nation in the universe will use the opportunity to do what they do best. Tell me what do you mean by: Israel which is already under the gun so to speak. Is this the regular victim bullshit?? Oh give it up, its played out.
Israel striking Iran or the US striking iran will be a catastrophic disaster. First off Iran has been preparing for a strike for 8 yrs now. They have sophisticated Chinese and Russian weaponry. They built all their nuclear reactors deep underground. Also Iran has Hezbollah in lebanon,Syria,Hamas,Shiite militias in Iraq,and tribal suppot in Afghanistan to heat things up. Since 2006 Hezbollah has armed itself with more rockets prior the summer. Its estimated they have 40,000 katusha rockets. However on top this they have scuds missiles,the M600 truck that can push a 1,100 pound warhead 190 miles,
Russian-made SA-7 “Grail”, and the SA-18 “Grouse.”These SAM missiles will make it hard for the Israeli airforce to bomb Lebanon freely. Add to this the fact Teharan gave Damascus radar systems it will be a tough fight for israel.Hezbollah is stronger then it was prior to the summer war. And who knows what other surprises Hezbollah has. Now if Iran,Syria,Hamas,and Hezbollah fire their rockets and missiles at the same time it will overwhelm Israel's anti missile defence sytemes or put heavy pressur on them. So if Israel goes on a round the clock raid on Iran,Iran will unleash hell on Israel along with the other proxies mentioned above. Israel has warned Syria that "We’ll return Syria to the Stone Age by crippling its power stations, ports, fuel storage and every bit of strategic infrastructure if Hezbollah dare to launch ballistic missiles against us,” said an Israeli minister. Now their is i believe a russian naval base in Syria,I would hope israel would not be stupid enough to strike that.Now the lebanese military said it themselves that if Israel goes to war with hezbollah again,that they will join forces with hezbollah to fight off Israel. So at this time Israel will be forced to do a ground invasion in southern lebanon and Gaza. Both campaigns will be very bloody. Syria of course will send its troops to fight along side Hezbollah/Lebanese military to fight a guerilla war with no end. Hezbollah also has agents throughout the mideast,europe and North America. So there will be terrorist attacks all over the place.
Iran rev guards also have terrorist agents in the mideast,most importantly in the Persian gulf nations. If these agents along with hezbollah attack major oil pipelines thet disrupt them gas prices would go up four fold. Attacks in Kuwait,iraq,Saudi Arabia etc would do serious damage in the oil market.
Many people have mistakenly stated that iran would invade iraq. Even though there is about 85,000 US troops they still could take on a 200,000 Iranian invasion force but it would be very difficult,and bloody affair for US troops. However iran will do something much more easier. It would call upon its Shiite militia proxies in southern Iraq to stage a major shiite rebellion against the government and start deadleir attacks against US troops and pinn them down. Basically Shiites in Iraq will unite,many shiites in the iraqi police and military will defect to the side of the militias. Iranian special forces would even join these militias to stage guerilla campaign that mirror the Pennisular Warcampaign in Spain against Napoleon in the 19th century that became a bleeding ulcer.And Iraq will plunge into chaos with US troops being outnumbered by a large guerilla forces. The sunni warlords will either join the shiites to fight US troops(highly doubtful),or fight a full blown civil war with US troops in between. With this coaliton supply lines in Kuwait will be cut off by revolutionary guard agents to put US troops in a Black Hawk bown situation Iraq. Instead of mogadishu it will be an entire nation that will go up in flames with sectarian civil wars and attacks against pinned down,low on supply, US troops surrounded by pro Iranian forces. If the Iraqi army turns against US, the situation of US forces could become extraordinarily critical. Iranian special forces and shia guerilla forces will in fact cut the supply line long US supply line alone Route Tampa from Kuwait City. A divided Iraqi military,shia militas,sunni warlords,and Iranian special forces will turn Iraq into chaos in which US troops will be in the middle of,pinned down,low on supply,and surrounded.
Nations like Egypt,Saudi Arabia,Jordan will have enraged muslim staging protests,riots,even revenge attacks against their governments. We could see Iranain backed groups stage terrorist attacks thet could one or two of these nations in the brink of civil war. Egypt is rumored to have many "etremist' grups that can spark a civil war or islamic revolution. Egypt is one flare up away from a total Islamic revoltion.
Afghanistan and Pakistan would turn into hornets nest. Tribal warlords and faction within the Afghani military would join the taliban and the insurgency in Afghanistan will take a dark turn. The afghani peopel will see the US as a nation that allowed Israel to bomb an islamic state even though it is shia. Pakistan is a scenario that is anyones guess.
Now this why an attack against Iran would be a catastrophe and would would plunge the mideast into utter chaos,and we would be in the middle of it. My opinion is that if israel and Iran want war with each other. then let them have it,but the US will withdraw from the mideast and not take a side. We have given military aid to Israel,lebanon,Egypt,Palestian Authority,Jordan,Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Yemen.It is time we do not give no one nation military aid and let them fight what they have. let them destroy each other and focus on our prolems in the homefront.We have a future debt crisis in our state governemnets,we will have a debt crisis in our federal govt in 10-15 years,we have two wide open borders. We should be part of wars that will bankrupt us further and does not help our national security. War with iran equals disaster.
War with Iran will spell disaster, even WWIII. That said, I'm tired of MSM labeling every Arab as some "terrorist", and I'd expect Iran to defend herself after being attacked I would do.
I also will no longer vote for anybody that supports Israel. How can we let dual-citizens in our government?
The outcome of such a war is likely to be more rigged than the stock market, in the end the poor little guy has no friends, the bully ends the fight with one punch, and takes the kids lunch money. Some kids spit on the little guy, others learn to fear and loathe the bully, which was the title of a book I think. So the bully grows up watching his back. He is in and out of trouble, he gets impeached maybe.
The bully graduates and gets a job driving a fork lift. Some of the other kids go to college, the ones who wanted to ignore the whole thing.
The little guy and the bully meet years later, at the reunion, no hard feelings. That's just the way the schoolyard works. The guys who ignored it all were more productive, because in the end you can't change schoolyard rules.
There were a few bullies and they needed beating up proper by the runt little guy, me. Later on in school I recognized a few much bigger bullies I could not fight because they had friends and bad odds against me. So I made them irrevelant by changing schools.
Many years later, I ran into the same bully at a work place, ironically with the ex bully being assigned the task of fixing my rig. We had a short converstation and I kept my eye on that person when he proceeded to fix the rig.
He did a professional job, and the converstation resulted in a sort of closing the book on our bully/bullee relationship. He had issues with me and I had issues with him and previous experience with bullies. But let me tell you something, if you run into a ex bully... be very careful how you behave and talk. You are not prey and not something to be stomped on for mere lunch money anymore. All that kiddy stuff gets put away when you both became adults.
Let me tell you something. Bullies in school dont know better, dont know nothing and are cowards because someone is different and they cannot stand it. But much later in life, should they survive long enough to actually become PRODUCTIVE members of society and good at something... it is not necessary to be going over the old issues that caused the bully/bullee relationship in the first place.
I say this. Children grow up someday, when they do; the toys get put away and real tools are brought out to do manly work. Everything else is irrevelant.
I think Iran is a paper tiger. In fact no muslim country has shown any ability to fight a modern war. They can only conduct gorilla tactic harassment.
It is no accident we have sandwiched the problem countries in the region via Israel, Iraq and Afghanistan. We are set to go if necessary.
I don’t want war. I would like to our troops out of the region. But the muslim doctrine is dedicated to dominating the world. When a country declares its intention to wipe an ally off the map, and then pushes to develop nuclear weapons it presents a Hell of a problem.
I wish I saw a way out of the problem while still supporting Israel’s right to exist. But the muslims who thought they could fly passenger jets into our skyscrapers and Federal buildings without forcing a U.S. military response were just plain dumb. The only thing they seem to understand is brute force.
I don’t know why so many Americans are anti-Semites these days. The muslims don’t give a shit about Palestinians. They are just a convenient excuse for all their doctrine based aggression.
What a curious post.
As far as I know, all the guys who crashed their planes on the buildings are dead.
Who are you talking about when stating the only thing they seem to understand is brute force?
As to the doctrine based aggression, what matters is actuality.
The US might not have a doctrine based agression behaviour (can be debatable) but they have been aggressive since their start.
Iran, you cant say as much.
The muslim children of Satan that crashed the planes are indeed dead; but they were just a few minions in the greater muslim army.
The entire muslim world is who I am taking about. This liberal MSM crap about a religion of peace being corrupted by an extreme faction is crap.
If you think the world would be abetter place without the United States of America that is obviously your right. Just as I can hold my view that America is The Light on the Hill in the world.
It is fashionable to bash the United States. And our Democracy tolerates it. Trot over to Iran and denounce their muslim rulers; then think things over with a cattle prod up your ass...
you've a lot of reading, and perhaps some first-hand experiences ahead of you before you climb out of that "good vs. evil" religious fairytale you hold up here. . .
it's such a naive point-of-view, begging to be dispelled. . . "the entire muslim world" vs. the "Light on the Hill in the world". . .
keep on votin' in those dual-passport holders, see how that works for you.
If only reading were an option for you.
I don't care what you think, but I will offer you the same challenge:
Trot on over to Iran and denounce their muslim leaders; think things over with a cattle prod up your ass and report back if you ever get out.
Booby, you comment about "evil arabs" entirely too much. Better get with the program. Many of "the Chosen" are realizing Israel is a thorn in the world's side, and thus no longer planning to "make aliyah". Not to mention the vast majority of "chosen ones" continue to live as diaspora having nothing to do with Israel, other than vehemently supporting it at the detriment to their host nations.
You belong in the menstrual tent you anti-Semite dim-wit. But I mean that in the nicest possible way...
Now I have to re-read Billy Graham's "Peace with God" to try and find my center again.
Which isn't all bad. So thank you, I guess...
To stoop so low as to read Billy Graham! No wonder you're confused...
I'm not bashing the United States. I'm bashing your zionist hijacking of the United States. Please release my country so we can
a) get out of the ME and GWOT.
b) Give you back all the enemies you've pawned off on us. and
c) Stop the tribute payments to your entity and payoffs to surrounding states.
It's funny, sad, but true that all the Tea Party fiscal conservatives that have survived the winnowing by the MSM, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman, Scot Brown, etc. are only fiscal conservatives as long as we're not talking about payments to Israel or our ongoing wars on behalf of Israel.
Tip of the cap to you sir, very good assessment of terra forces engagements scenarios. ;) ALL probable, and more.
ESPECIALLY like your Egypt comment and would emphatically add Saudi Arabia......as US force supply lines are cut off in the Strait of Hormuz, supply line point of origins will become Jedah, Alexandria (and possibly Ashod), as astonishingly, Incirlik wasn't available post 911, so clearly won't be now. This 1000m supply-line CANNOT and WILL NOT last for long, especially if Iranian forces are engaging Israeli and US forces with any level of success without an immediate destabilization of both regimes (Egupt & SA), and I'd put SA first, as I'd believe an opportunistic FAMILIAL threat to the crown's succession from a real hard-liner is extremely plausible, and would be palatable to the SA defense apparatus and wider populace under those cirmustances (opposition to Israel/US).
Lest we not forget...Bin Laden's big beef was the presence of US Military on the sacred soil of Saudia Arabia...Where both of the most holy Muslim sights, Mecca and Medina are located.
US troops are now gone from Saudia Arabia.
If Israel attacks Iran, Brazil will cut all diplomatic and commercial relationship with the State of Israel. You can bet on.
I would bet the reverse...there be billions in that IMF fund going to Brazil, funded by guess?????
What?
Brazil to pay off IMF debts early (14 December 2005)
Brazil and Argentina to pay-out US$25bn to IMF (10 January 2006)
IMF who?
We owe nothing to fuckin' IMF.
And you can be so pround of how your Governemnt treats the weak and poor in your country. And you owe your solvency to the "fuckin' IMF", time and time again...
back atcha bobby. . . how in debt is the Light on the Hill again?
http://usdebtclock.org/
In debt enough so we can never pay it back. Do your even read the core ZH content? But that is no defense of Brazil's corrupt caste system disgrace. "Here's a good idea - have a POINT. It makes it SO much more interesting for the listener!"
Yes, we have a corrupt elite and corrupt politicians, and so have you in the USA.
But Brazilians strongly dislike wars (the last war Brazil was involved, was more than 130 years ago), and our government won't hesitate to cut diplomatic relations with Israel in the case of an unilateral attack.
"Brazilians strongly dislike wars." You sound like a fucking stoned college student. Everybody "strongly dislikes war." But Brazil doesn't have to even be remotely prepared to defend your country because the U.S. is interested in your reserves. Brazil exisits as long as you accept your "parnership" with the U.S.. I don't defend that, it is just a fact. You are an operating subsidiary of Big Oil. And as somebody else pointed out we already own your Government. The more things change, the more the stay the same.
Everybody "strongly dislikes war."
Come on Bobby. Own up. You know you like war. And you've got lots of goulish company here on ZH.
Here, try this for your inner storm trooper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V92OBNsQgxU
"remotely prepared to defend your country"
We don't like wars here, but I have to warn you, we are extremely prepared to defend our nation in the hypothetic case of an American attack. I can assure you the chance of the US military "conquer" Brazil and establish an occupation here is ZERO.
We have supersonic jet fighters, we have an aircraft carrier and we have some submarines. And we have highly trained infantry military, including with guerrilla tactics.
I didn't know about this site until recently, but will be making a donation this week as it's one of the few places to hear the truth, and encourages free speech. Hasbara trolls have not yet run roughshod over this fine project.
Great job fellas!
Zina: US deposited 2B into IMF for Brazil off shore drilling...charity???
Lula is a peasant who's controlled by the elite!!!
Where's your source? Far as I know, Petrobras was seeking money for new projects in offshore drilling at the stock market, with a public offering.
And Lula was never a peasant, he was a metalworkers' union leader, 30 years ago. After that he was a professional politician.
israel is a country of castrati who would never pull this trigger. if they do, instant 20% flash crash is the reaction
Great article, and the reason I come to this site so frequently!