This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

War Council Convened In Damascus Past Friday To Prepare For Israeli Strike, Iran President Expects War "Between Spring And Summer"

Tyler Durden's picture


Abu Dhabi Media website The National has disclosed some rather disturbing news about peace "prospects" in the middle east. It appears this past Friday saw a war council convene in Damascus, between Syrian president Bashar al Assad, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Hizbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah to "devise counterattack plans and assign tasks in the event of an Israeli
offensive on one or all parties
, wrote Abdelbari Atwan, the
editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab newspaper Al Quds al Arabi." And more troublingly, "the Iranian president said he expects war to break out somewhere
between spring and summer of this year
. Meanwhile, the Hizbollah chief
vowed to strike the Israeli capital, its airports and power stations if
Israel dared to attack Beirut’s critical infrastructure."Let's recall that Goldman's most recent 2010 and 2011 WTI estimates call for prices to rise to $90 and $110/bbl, respectively.

More from The National:

“The timing of the meeting, the way it was undertaken and the
ensuing press conference that was held at its conclusion, all point to
a strategic coalition being reinforced. This is the build-up of a new
front that will spearhead the confrontation with the US-Israeli
alliance and whichever Arab countries that may, expressly or
implicitly, be affiliated with it.”“Indeed, we are being exposed to a new discourse here, an unprecedented
sense of self-confidence and an unheard-of preparedness for

What is more troubling for the US is that any potential effort to rekindle a relationship with Iran is now dead and burred, as the new axis seems to involve exclusively Syria.

For its part, the Syrian leadership appears to
have made up its mind to close off the US administration’s “trite and
” flirtation with Damascus and opted for bolstering its tactical
partnership with Tehran.

Surely this is now just another white swan in a sea of black, which has been duly factored in to various asset prices and what not.



- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:30 | 249577 Flyingtrader
Flyingtrader's picture

WTF?! Are they checking their calendars?  Who schedules a war? 

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:35 | 249582 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

Investment banks planning their quarterly profits, perhaps?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:44 | 249602 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

"Let's get out slingshots out, and get together a bunch of rocks, that we can shoot at the Israeli F-16s...."

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:02 | 249638 Stranger
Stranger's picture


The time tables for WWI were so precise that once the order to mobilize had gone out, there was absolutely no way to stop the war from taking place. The trains ran on time and that was that.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:14 | 249859 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

That is *such* horseshit. In historical terms it is simplistic nonsense and of the 'progressive' left-leaning school of myth typified by 'Oh what a lovely war!' and Blackadder goes forth. In practical terms, it strongly suggests you have either never travelled in a train or never served in the military.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:08 | 249651 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

FYI Weather is the number 1 criteria. Israel always goes in the Spring.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:10 | 249758 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The future forecasters have been saying for years now that March will be the month.

Now with Iran, proding Isreal to strike first, I imagine they we quickly and not allow Iran precious time to organize a counter attack.

If we see a surge in the price of oil, consider the atttack immient.

Inspector Asset

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:02 | 250111 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

The Rand Corporation.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:56 | 250237 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Lots of folks if you read some history...try Hitler's plans to attack Russia for starters

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 20:25 | 250367 caconhma
caconhma's picture

Few observations:


  • Jews started the WWII. They even did not dream the price they would pay for it.
  • Regardless how many nukes Israel has, it will take just 1-3 tactical nukes to wipe Israel for good.
  • The WWII got the USA out of the Great Depression. I would not count this time on the similar luck. There are no more 38 millions soviets to pay for it anymore.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:47 | 250464 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

That's funny because if you talked to anyone that lived in the US during WW2, the depression was nowhere close to being over. Yes, unemployment dropped because a sh*tload of the unemployed signed up for the job of cannon fodder and GDP grew because US factories were building things to send over to Europe and destroy but life was just as crappy in the US during the war as it had been preceding the war. Shortages of just about everything consumers wanted because of price controls and parts of the new deal that hadn't been declared unconstitutional.

In fact, it wasn't until after the war, when the government had to drastically cut spending (war spending could no longer be justified) that the economy recovered and it recovered quickly. Prominent Keynesians at the time (like Samuelson) were screaming bloody murder before the spending cuts claiming that it would instantly throw us back to 1932. Of course, like all Keynesians, he was proven wrong and "economists" still listen to him today.

WW2 getting us out of the depression is as silly as the new deal getting us out of the depression.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 07:30 | 250809 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Now that we are talking about the BIG W. You might want to read this if anyone has the time.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 01:34 | 250684 Squid-puppets a...
Squid-puppets a-go-go's picture

a somewhat naive comment.

wars are scheduled for all manner of reasons - waxing and waning political fortunes and election cycles (ie israel strongly considered provoking war prior to bush leaving office, unsure how much support obama would offer) - resources, UN deadlines, UN investigations, and the oldest of them all - weather and its effect on ground troops, mobility, effectiveness, supply lines

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:34 | 249580 10044
10044's picture

Wtf.... Gold 7k bitches

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:34 | 249581 Vacca
Vacca's picture

I guess the new "axis of evil" thinks Bernanke is agitating for another World War to get the US out of a depression.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 22:23 | 250504 wake the roach
wake the roach's picture

Remember, the US was energy self sufficient and a major supplier of crude to the allied nations in WW2...

A major disruption in oil supply at a time when much of the west is fighting tooth and nail against deflation will be devastating. Average Joe will likely mistake higher prices in goods and services as inflation, but higher energy prices are deflationary... 

Makes me wonder though because if I was Ahmadinejad, I would not allow this economic crisis to go to waste... There is no better time to kick someone in the guts than when they are down on their knees. Iran would be well aware that if not for this depression they would have been struck already so realistically, they would be stupid not to take advantage... 

This would also be advantageous to China for its future energy needs, every nation would be hurt but none more so than the United States. 





Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:38 | 249588 Zombie Investor
Zombie Investor's picture

The U.S. just needs to send Pelosi back over to Damascus and she'll resolve everything.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:47 | 249607 Bear
Bear's picture

Have her stay there.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:46 | 249723 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:39 | 249589 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

March...a month and a command...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:40 | 249590 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Masta's of the universe gotta' create the itch to scratch it.

Its about time Israel is wiped completely off the map.

Maybe we'll get lucky and fraud street NY will pick up and move beforehand.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:05 | 249646 Grifter
Grifter's picture

Wow, didn't take long for the Alex Jones crazies to show up...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:11 | 249656 Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

I think "AJ crazies" tend to support Israel.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:20 | 250014 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

AJ sure sure gets quiet- or loudly changes the subject- when Israel/zionism comes up.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 23:52 | 250593 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

AJ supports no regime, except Ron Paul, and with a little too much vigor I might add. 

He cited this article on

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 19:30 | 250298 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I will gratefully give half of everything I own to anyone who will nuke both Iran and Israel right now. They are aggressive scabs on the ass of the human race, and we need to pick them off.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 07:33 | 250813 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Sorry mate, but the same applies to US.

The most aggressive nation on this bloody planet.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:40 | 249592 Gordon_Gekko
Gordon_Gekko's picture

S&P we come!

Wed, 03/03/2010 - 19:41 | 253023 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

More like S&P 400. You are an idiot.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:41 | 249593 Oso
Oso's picture

any views on how reliable "the National" is, or what biases they generally introduce...?  Why isnt this the first question anyone asks.... Iran calls for war on a near daily basis, it doesnt mean anything in and of itself.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:42 | 249594 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Great news... Stock market will most likely go up?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:44 | 249599 Bear
Bear's picture

Can't we a little more specific about the invasion date?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:07 | 249650 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

How does next Tuesday work for you? 4pm, after the kids get home from school, ok?

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 01:13 | 250670 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

LoL! It's on!

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 02:55 | 250733 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I'll bring the Michelob Ultra. Is this a couples
party or should I come alone?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:44 | 249603 Comrade de Chaos
Comrade de Chaos's picture

"Abu Dhabi Media website "


I am very sceptical on the prospect of the war down there this year. IN addition the above media source will do everything and anything to switch any attention from their local affairs/looming debt.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:45 | 249605 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

these links will keep you up to speed... just in case US state-media outlets are slow to reveal the story as instructed.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:34 | 249894 illyia
illyia's picture

World Tribune **

Israel simulation prepares for two-front war with Hamas and Hizbullah

Sunday, February 28, 2010     TEL AVIV — Israel's military has been exercising for the prospect of a multi-front war.   

Officials said the Israel Army has been conducting exercises in preparation for a two-front war. They said the military envisions fighting along the southern Israeli frontier with the Gaza Strip as well as with Lebanon and Syria.

"The exercises enable us to prepare for possible scenarios, improve our readiness and implement lessons," Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi said.

On Feb. 25, the military concluded a command exercise that simulated a two-front war with Hamas and Hizbullah. The exercise included a scenario of massive missile and rocket strikes on Israel from Lebanon and the Gaza Strip.

"Israel has no interest in seeing escalation in the region," Ashkenazi said. "Yet, we closely monitor developments and make sure to maintain a prepared, deterring, and motivated military."

Officials said the military was preparing each of its major elements for a regional war. In the latest exercise, the General Staff tested the response and decisions of senior commanders in such areas as combat, intelligence, logistics and media relations.

"During the exercise, forces were trained in the management of joint combat methods," the military said. "Inter-branch operability procedures amongst air, ground and naval forces were examined under various scenarios. Multi-arena combat management were also tested, with the support of logistics, intelligence, communications and home front coordination, as was communication between the Israel Defense Forces and the Israeli government ."

Military intelligence has warned the government of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of the prospect of war in 2010. Officials said the intelligence assessment said Iran could order a war by Hamas and Hizbullah in an effort to divert Western attention from its campaign to halt Teheran's nuclear program.

"A wind of tension is blowing again in the north of the country," chief armored officer Brig. Gen. Agai Yehezkel said. "Despite the fact that the challenge might be more difficult than during Operation Cast Lead [Hamas war], we are prepared for it."

Officials said the next war would require a rapid Israeli ground advance into the Gaza Strip, Lebanon and Syria. They said this would require the integration of air, infantry and armored forces, with support from the navy in coastal operations. Some of these goals were said to have been achieved in the 22-day war with Hamas in 2009.

"The work is comprehensive, systematic and deep, with the ability to see a general picture of headquarters operations, a necessary condition for effective force operations," Defense Minister Ehud Barak said.

** unfamiliar source requires more investigation.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:45 | 249606 Fritz
Fritz's picture

The U.S. military industrial machine must be giddy.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:47 | 249608 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

It is certainly priced in... and stop calling me Surely.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:51 | 249614 hedgeless_horseman
hedgeless_horseman's picture

Israel must be planning on getting the Ark of the Covenant back from Goldman.  Time to short GS?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:29 | 249691 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

Too late.  Goldman already has it hooked up to Sigma X and is using it to front-run the Catholic Church.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:59 | 249744 hound dog vigilante
hound dog vigilante's picture

LOL.  Priceless.  I love a good conspiracy-laden punchline...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:44 | 249813 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture

Excellent!  We needed a good laugh, what with our country heading down the sh..., oh wait, I can say all that again later!

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:38 | 249802 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

They had top men working on it.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:54 | 249621 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Should provide some much needed economic stimulus and not a moment too soon.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:56 | 249623 aint no fortuna...
aint no fortunate son's picture

Did Goldman host the summit?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:42 | 249716 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

gotta use up those weapons so they can buy some more!!! 

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:57 | 249626 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

March 28th , 2010:

Israel strikes Iran in a continual barrage lasting 7 days.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 13:58 | 249629 Internet Tough Guy
Internet Tough Guy's picture

If there is a war israel will pick the start date.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:00 | 249633 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

All I know is that the Marines run continuous advertisement on my soccer channels. And they also run them in Spanish(!!!!!!) on Fox Soccer Espanol and ESPN Espanyol and GoalTV espanyol. Soccer playing youngsters must be signing up like crazy.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:02 | 249639 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Yeah... this is happening right around the same time as a treasury auction "fail", 10% interest rates, and the "hyperinflation" of 3% core-CPI in the US.

That is... NEVER. So dumb.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:40 | 249709 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

Oh, of course.  Never in world history have we seen 10% interest rates, stagflation, or war in the middle east.  And certainly never within just a couple years of each other.  All that nonsense is up there with the easter bunny in the realm of impossibility.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 23:06 | 250545 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

People been talking about ALL THREE for the last 20 years... hell maybe the last 200 years.

Its never the stuff you think, that you have to worry about.

"Conflict" is not particularly economically interesting anymore. The wars are small. The economic apparatus too diverse for it to matter.

Specifically --

Any country that is hostile can immediately be isolated by US power. Not a single plane takes off without the implied consent of the US airforce. In a HARD conflict... there is no country whose entire transportation supply infrastructure cannot be completely halted by the US in under 1 week (if nec).

Nuclear subs are now armed with 1000s of satalite guided cruise missles. They could (in theory) plant thousands of stikes across Iran (or any country) in a matter of hours.

Course... this is all SILLY. Its like talking with 13 year old kids.

Eisenhower -- "there is no alternative to peace".

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:04 | 249642 Going Down
Going Down's picture


Admiral Mullen In Israel


If a regional confrontation were to break out following a strike on Iran, the US military chief said bluntly, "It would be a big, big, big problem for all of us. I worry a great deal about the unintended consequences of a strike."


An Israeli first strike would be an act of suicide. Even "Zionists" are not stupid.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:15 | 249665 Grifter
Grifter's picture

That's what I don't get.  For 2 years now all I've read is that Israel attack = Strait of Hormuz gets gangbanged by Sunburn missiles & we have $300/barrel oil. 

And, China & Russia probably wouldn't take kindly to watching their energy investments go up in smoke, so we get World War III or whatever. 

I agree with your statement 1000%, Mr./Mrs./Miss Down.  Pure suicide.  And pure lunacy on Israel's part if it's seriously being discussed.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:38 | 249707 hound dog vigilante
hound dog vigilante's picture

Israel considers Iran to be a mortal threat.  So Iran+nukes=certain death for Israel, from their perspective.

Israel does not view a first strike as suicide. Israel views a first strike as necessary for the survival of their nation. Thus, an Israeli first-strike is not only likely, it is inevitable.

Further, Israel has fared very well historically against multilateral arab forces. It will probably not be Israel that takes the worst of the fight... my guess would be that the most hostile arab nations will be hit first and hit hardest. Israel is much better equipped militarily than their arab neighbors. Iran's nukes are the equilizer, which is exactly why Israel will strike before this threat can be realized.

Another arab/israeli war is INEVITABLE.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:09 | 249750 nonclaim
nonclaim's picture

Inevitable and getting closer, which means we have to stop talking about the "ifs" and prepare for the likely post-fact consequences.

On the other hand, I don't expect a "shock and awe" type of attack. That could be next, though localized, if commandos don't fully succeed in spreading internal (to the Arabs) mayhem first. They don't have to destroy the infrastructure, just enough to paralize with fear (shit, what next?) and entice internal dissent and the tradicional coups.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:18 | 249774 chet
chet's picture

I agree with much of your characterization, but Israel is smart enough to know that even extended strikes might not take out Iran's nuke research at this point.  Unless Iranians are truly incredibly stupid, their research is spread all over the country and buried as deep as they can manage.

What a strike means is Hizzbullah using whatever they have up their sleeves against Israel.  Could be not much, but who knows?

But the bigger problem is (more) direct Iranian involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan against US forces, a full-on seizure in the oil markets, likely blockades in the gulf, and the like.  That will fray our relationship with the Israelis, the Chinese and the Russians to say the least.

And Iran will be back on track with nukes within 10 years if not less.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:19 | 249776 chet
chet's picture

"Another arab/israeli war is INEVITABLE"

Also, Iranians aren't Arab.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:45 | 249818 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Right, so what does Israel do when China parks a fleet off her coast, including a few nuclear subs both in the Med. and the Red Sea?

It seems to me that China will fight to keep the Israelis from blocking their access to oil. I don't think they will have a problem turning Israel into a pile of glass beads, not when they own enough US debt to send us into the stone age without a shot being fired.

Suddenly, I see war as a real possibility. I guess it all depends on whether or not Israel can hit China with a nuclear counterstrike. If they can, then China will probably let it go. If they can't, then China has the upper hand.

Can you get away with biting the hand that feeds the hand that feeds you?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:59 | 249948 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

China is not going to park a fleet off Israel, get real. That would be tantamount to actual war with the US.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:01 | 249957 earnyermoney
earnyermoney's picture

Any Israeli strike will involve the U.S. Navy. So the Chinese navy will have to deal with the U.S. Navy.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 23:06 | 250547 wake the roach
wake the roach's picture

Yep, and just as going down commented about Admiral Mullens warning of "unintended cosequences", its fair to say that along with a global economic meltdown, China becoming involved is a guaranteed and very dangerous unintended consequence.

China would perceive (and in my opinion, correctly) that an attack upon Iran is a direct attack upon the national interests of China itself.

I think an international strike against Israel's illegal nuclear weopons would do much to ease middle east tensions and to promote non proliferation.

Oh, and lets not forget the often overlooked Pakistan too because lets face it, Iran is a much more stable nation but of course, not much oil to be won there.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:27 | 249688 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

An Israeli first strike would be an act of suicide. Even "Zionists" are not stupid.

How so?  What can Syria, Iran, and Hamas really do?

Israel took out Syria's nuke plant a few years back; Syria couldn't do a thing about it.

Hamas can't do anything but fire rockets that usually miss.  Iran could lose a lot of its military and nuclear capabilities in a hurry with a well-planned Israeli air assault.  Israel's military tech is light years ahead of Iran, Syria, and Hamas.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:24 | 249780 chet
chet's picture

"We'll be in and out of Iraq in a month!  How could those backward-ass nomads possibly make things hard on the old US of A?  What's an 'unintended consequence'?"

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:45 | 249918 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

A ground war is a different thing entirely than targeted air strikes.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:28 | 250167 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Even then, the war was over in what, a couple weeks? It's the democracy construction/occupation phase that takes forever.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 22:33 | 250508 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Takes forever? No, it will only take the time to dry up Iraqi oil reserves.

Look at how the US are eager of jumping out of Saudi Arabia, after, what, 50 years of deep cooperation...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:51 | 249930 assembler
assembler's picture

A terrorist regime like Iran, with a nuke on Israel's border, is equally suicide for them. IF it really comes down to that binary choice, a first strike is the better choice. (Of course, the whole world is hoping that is not the endgame here). But consider what your response would be if Al-Qaeda were in control of the government of the country next to yours, and they had sworn to wipe you out, and they were building nuclear weapons...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:29 | 250033 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

"terrorist regime"-cute words

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 20:36 | 250384 caconhma
caconhma's picture

<Even "Zionists" are not stupid.>

NO. Jews are stupid. This is why they are in trouble for the last 2,400 years. They still wonder why people do not like them.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 07:50 | 250817 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Interesting point. If the truly are stupid (which is hard to say about anybody) how the hell are they still around and in high places of government etc.

Also. If you look at the top 20 financial firms/Banks on this planet. How many of the CEOs or members of the boards of directors are jews. I haven't counted this but I suspect that the number is big. Just a thought that if they are "silly little girls" like Achnuld would say why the F are they in charge?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:04 | 249643 no cnbc cretin
no cnbc cretin's picture

Another war, won't fix our economy!

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:40 | 249692 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

True.  But I can't say I'd mind if Israel gave Hamas, Syria, and Iran what they've been asking for for so long.

They would not need the USA's help to take on all three.

It would certainly make the world a better place.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:10 | 249759 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

What have they been asking for?

How would it make the world a better place?

Sorry, we don't need another Iraq War Part Deux. There is no evidence that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, other than the propaganda from the same Zionist shills (such as yourself) that lied to Americans about the WMD's in Iraq.

Israel is a rogue state. The world understands this, only Americans are in the dark.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:44 | 250205 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Oh, and the propaganda coming from Iran itself. Never mind the US Intelligence reports that come to the same conclusion. "Zionist shills"? Riiiight. And the rise of radical Islam is just in our imagination too. Thanks.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:27 | 250437 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The inspectors on the ground in Iran, like the inspectors on the ground in Iraq back in 2002, have been consistent in that Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program. Only Israel and its AMEN choir in the United States claim that Iran is developing nukes.

Please present any evidence to the contrary.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 22:58 | 250537 Anonymous
Mon, 03/01/2010 - 20:40 | 250389 caconhma
caconhma's picture


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:09 | 249654 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

No surprise that Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia are the most worried about a war with Iran. Iran have nothing to gain to attack Israel but a lot more to attack someone like Saudi Arabia or Abu Dhabi.

If this happened, China would be cut-off from its main suppliers and the world would experience triple digits inflation overnight.

If you look at a map you can see that Syria can't do much for long time. On the other side Yemen although could also be dangerous for the Saudis as who really knows how many whepons transited there from Iran and from all over Africa?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:11 | 249657 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Head fake.

They've got nothing.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:34 | 249793 chet
chet's picture

Agree, from Israel's perspective.  They just have more ineffective missile-lobbing from Lebanon. 

From the US perspective, Iran would have a lot of justification to get heavily involved in Iraq and Afghanistan (moreso than they already are), making us miserable.  And who knows what they would do with their oil supply and with traffic in the Gulf.  Of course, Israel would likely go after their oils operations so that might be a moot point.

As US military has pointed out again and again and again in recent years, a strike on Iran in no way helps us right now, and would not be a friendly gesture from our "friends" in Israel.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:13 | 249660 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Here it is....

Why does the US not endorse Nat Gas...

And make Iran irrelevent....

War will not solve anything....

Improving economies will.....


This seems to be nothing but supporting the finances of the defense sector.....and what is blatantly that war is something that is easier to pull off.....versus rebuilding manufacturing.....


So here it is....

Promote commerce....

Energy independence.....

Tax structure change....

Better exchanges.....

Electric cars and nat gas trucks and trains....

Just do it....


A war will only make non productivity worse....and will seal failure....will put further pressure on taxes....

And is just plain wrong....

Shame on war promoters.....may you burn in hell....


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:41 | 249712 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

You use....... too many......  ellipses.........

Natgas is great but it is not........  a silver bullet............

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:46 | 249820 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

It also doesn't meet the political agenda of the current administration.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:19 | 249775 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture


Not only are your "...." annoying, but you're lost to the truth.

The fact is the US has NOT received oil from Iran since The Revolution of '79.

Therefore, this statement: "Why does the US not endorse Nat Gas... And make Iran [irrelevant]...." is sophomoric at best and totally ignorant at worst.

Given how you structured your comment, I can guess, with 100% certainty, that the latter is the fact then the former.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:27 | 249786 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture

When was the last time the US government did the right thing?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:57 | 249943 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

That depends on which dyspeptic asshole you ask.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:13 | 249662 J.B. Books
J.B. Books's picture

Just don't draft my boys.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:14 | 249663 truont
truont's picture

If I didn't know better, I'd say this whole Iran-Israel war was planned or something!

But, that would be silly to say...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:24 | 249671 MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

Iran is not stupid and they recently moved certain nuclear facility bits above ground instead of deep inside a mountain. The reasoning is that if they attack said facility the nuclear waste will then spread and contaminate not just Iran, but also other parts of the world including Israel depending on the airstream. This is not to condemn Iran for doing this as it is another factor of how to prepare for war. The Goldstone report tells quite a bit about Israel's tactics and their willingness to break international laws.

Then there are the Mossad terrorists and assassins, which has now lead to UAE not allowing any Israelis into their country or those who look Israeli. Due to Mossad's constant actions, the EU, Britain, Asia, Canada and the USA should put a ban on allowing Israelis from entering the country due to the high risk of spying and secret operations that could very easily lead to more killings.

The USA's House/Senate/Congress should reassess the qualifications of those members who also hold Israel passports. There are many members within the USA government who hold dual allegiance to the USA and Israel and it may make some wonder which side they will take when it matters most.


PS: The USA invasion of Iraq began March 20th, which was an interesting day for reasons i'd prefer not to disclose. Could be an interesting time line give or take a week just as some believe in the Mercury retrograde or other things.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:25 | 249682 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

Ironically, burying your nuclear facility deep in a mountain makes it EASIER to attack without harming others.  Ever heard of underground nuclear testing?  You detonate a nuke underground and it creates a nice glassy spherical cavern that is pretty well sealed.  Even if you attack the facility with a big conventional bomb, most if not all of the radioactive contamination (UFl6, etc.) would stay buried or at worst be released fairly slowly.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:26 | 249685 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

and moving our ships into pearl harbor resulted in...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:52 | 249731 merehuman
merehuman's picture

You mean to say a usa senator or representative can have dual citizenship?

Conflict of interest isnt it? I am surprised that this is legal. Its insane from my point of view.

Do Russians and Chinese have same option or is it just one special country?

America is incredible!

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:38 | 249801 Oracle of Kypseli
Oracle of Kypseli's picture

Certain countries consider citizenship as an inalienable right. Even if the US forces you to denounce that citizenship in exchange of becoming an American, the  validity of your earlier citizenship is still intact.

Otherwise, the US has to declare that Dutch, Israeli's, Greeks, Peruvians and many others can never become US citizens. (Unconstitutional) The US even allows you to vote in your ex country's elections. something you could not do 20 years ago.  

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:53 | 249828 MarketTruth
MarketTruth's picture

Well, many senators and others in high ranking US Gov were not born in Israel and do not have Israeli parents yet yes, many of them hold Israel passports/dual citizenship.

If you are in doubt, do some research as it will be very eye opening to many just who holds dual passports and how they tend to vote on certain issues. Also look at how few have dual citizenship to Asia, Canada or other countries by comparison. This is a very serious issue that should be addressed.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:15 | 249762 Greyzone
Greyzone's picture

Iran Moves Enriched Uranium Back Underground

The fuel in question is once again underground.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:23 | 250430 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Spring Equinox. Zero degrees Aries (god of war).
Which Uranus (shocks/surprises/"events")will enter around 27 May 2010.

yeah, just saying.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 23:10 | 250554 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Spring Equinox. Zero degrees Aries (god of war).
Which Uranus (shocks/surprises/"events")will enter around 27 May 2010.

yeah, just saying.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 11:50 | 250974 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

UAE's official policy of not allowing Isaeli Nationals to enter their country has been in place for ages. So what did it do to prevent alleged Mossad actions in Dubai?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:22 | 249679 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Posturing in my opinion. I don't read too much into this to be honest with you.

I think Iran is genuinely concerned about an attack and if I were them I would be too. So they are playing head games on the world stage to attempt to preempt any attack by going on the offensive in the world opinion stage.

Let's face it. One way or another the US is going to find a boogeyman who's people it's going to slaughter. It's the logical next step. We need an enemy to distract us from our domestic misery.

If not Iran, then I think it'll be Russia. Just watch.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:57 | 249740 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

I think Iran is genuinely concerned about an attack and if I were them I would be too. So they are playing head games on the world stage to attempt to preempt any attack by going on the offensive in the world opinion stage.

That's ridiculous.  If you don't want to get attacked, you keep your head down and avoid attention.  Iran is acting idiotic on the world stage for a very simple reason: the Iranian regime is genuinely stupid.  Any answer beyond that is over-thinking the problem.

Let's face it. One way or another the US is going to find a boogeyman who's people it's going to slaughter. It's the logical next step. We need an enemy to distract us from our domestic misery.

That's ridiculous.  What makes you think Israel needs the USA's help to deal with Iran?  Have you been following Israel's advances in military technology?

If not Iran, then I think it'll be Russia. Just watch.

That's ridiculous.  Russia's nuclear weapons, substantial military, and inability to seriously threaten the US hegemony each individually precludes the idea that the US would ever attack Russia.  Put together, they rule it out entirely.

Seriously.  We didn't get into a fight with Russia during the Cold War.  But you're trying to tell me that now, decades later, with the countries on friendly terms, suddenly NOW a war is going to break out with Russia?

You're just trolling, aren't you?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:18 | 249772 Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

Seriously.  We didn't get into a fight with Russia during the Cold War.  But you're trying to tell me that now, decades later, with the countries on friendly terms, suddenly NOW a war is going to break out with Russia?

You think that the US and Russia are currently on friendly terms?  I would hate to see what you think hostile terms look like.

Wars happen for two reasons: (1) dumb ones, and (2) greed of special interests who stand to profit.  Arguably the latter is a subset of the former.

Bear in mind that Russia is a rapidly dying country demographically, much like Japan.  It wants to be a superpower but its weapons are rusty and its resources running short.  It may see one last chance for glory, at least the chance to go out with a bang.  The US, in turn, is a massively overstretched "accidental empire" (depending on your POV), which could easily take on one more battle and find that battle to be the straw that breaks its back.  Economic stress + dying empires longing for past glory is a common factor in big bad wars.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:25 | 249781 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

You think that the US and Russia are currently on friendly terms?  I would hate to see what you think hostile terms look like.

Are you kidding?  Putin visited Bush at his ranch back in the day.  Then we let them invade Georgia with a wink and a nod when that country was supposedly our ally.

Yes, there's occasional bluster from Moscow about our missile defense systems, but that's all hot air.

It wants to be a superpower but its weapons are rusty and its resources running short.  It may see one last chance for glory, at least the chance to go out with a bang.

Sheer lunacy.  Absolute, complete, and total lunatic folly.

The Russians aren't like the Iranians.  They're way too smart for that and they don't make desperate gambles with the odds stacked far against them.  If they did, they'd have done it during the Cold War.

Russia has powerful and growing China on its doorstep and nuclear-armed USA across the pond.  It's going to do what it can to economically develop and defend itself but it's not going to pick a fight with any country bigger than Poland.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:56 | 249836 DoChenRollingBearing
DoChenRollingBearing's picture


No way we will go to war with Russia.  They are getting weak.  But, they are smart too.

+ some more about your comment on Russia's "China Problem".  I do not know why the Russians are not interested in warming up their relations with us, as their obvious threat is losing their Asian holdings to China.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:44 | 249814 chet
chet's picture

"If you don't want to get attacked, you keep your head down and avoid attention.  Iran is acting idiotic on the world stage for a very simple reason: the Iranian regime is genuinely stupid."

On the contrary, both Iran and North Korea have been acting very rationally.  In early 2002, the POTUS very publicly put them in an "Axis of Evil" with Iraq.  And within a year, the US attacked the first of the three.  The other two members of the named "Axis" began blustering about their nuclear capabilities immediately.  That was and is aimed at us, and perfectly explainable behavior if you look at the sequence of events.

The greatest fallacy in foreign relations is assuming that your enemy is "stupid" or "crazy" and you can't possibly understand their motivations and actions. There all just humans and you can't understand their movitivations just fine as long as you're not the stupid one.

"Have you been following Israel's advances in military technology?"

Yeah, that would be OUR advances in military technology.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:31 | 249690 junkyard dog
junkyard dog's picture

I am not buying any country standing behind Iran during an attack on that country. Syria may be placating Iran and Hizbolla has as much sense as democrats. The attack on Iran will come from the US only; when the US is ready, not when Israel is ready. If Syria would like to loose it's infrastructure all it will need to do is flinch on that fateful moonless night. But I think everyone in Syria will be asleep when Iran burns.


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:52 | 249732 hound dog vigilante
hound dog vigilante's picture

It will be interesting to see how US public opinion/support for Israel unfolds after a "preemptive" first-strike...

If Israel fights the battle themselves, with minimal US involvement, then I believe public support for Israel would remain high here in the US.

But if the US military engages and costs+body count become newsworthy, then I believe public support for Israel will plummet here in the US, and the continued involvement of US forces would become a serious political problem.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:46 | 249819 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

the spike in energy costs will turn everyone against Israel unless they are attacked first, or pull a Gulf of Tolkin, whichever one's easier.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:34 | 249896 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Iraq, a country where we have about 100k troops, a Shite country controlled by Iran?

Does anyone really think the if we or one of our allies attacks Iran that we will soon have real serious problems with our withdrawl, as in those troops may be killed in a general uprising?

Also, we are at war with Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, and Yemen. Do we really want to fight Iran too. Hasn't anyone ever hear of "over-reach?" Also, do we really need to put another war on the USA's credit card?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:35 | 249702 Missing_Link
Missing_Link's picture

Israel recently announced the Heron UAV, which can reach the Persian Gulf from Israel.

Pro tip: If a war breaks out in the Middle East involving Israel, don't bet against Israel.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:47 | 249727 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

of course not, when we unconditionally back up
whatever hair brained stunt they pull out of the hat.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:37 | 249703 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The decision has been made. The choice was cheap oil or low interest rates. Banksters don't use much oil.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 14:53 | 249735 Ned Zeppelin
Ned Zeppelin's picture

Say good night to whatever prospects the US economy has if oil goes to $90 or higher. 

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:49 | 249823 swmnguy
swmnguy's picture

Didn't the word used to be that $80/bbl was the point at which long-term damage started to accumulate?  Seeing as it's been sitting around $80/bbl and I at least see long-term damage accumulating, well, I'm not sayin.'  Just sayin.'

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 23:55 | 250604 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

Oil is going past $100; this by the beginning of summer.  Electric cars can't get here soon enough!

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:11 | 249760 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

To the person who said that Israel always strikes in the Spring

The attack on the Osirak reactor was 6/7/1981

The attack on the Syrian reactor was 09/06/2007

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:13 | 249761 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

FED QE is almost done.....then we will see the action.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:34 | 249794 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The US has really grown into "who's next?" Not only they dont seem able to perceive this developpment but they also project onto others. That's always the others who are going to initiate wars...

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:44 | 249817 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

(1) Distance is too far for conventional air strike, would require refueling enroute, which means attack aircraft would have to pop up high enough to do it and would be detected on radar. (2) Shortest and fastest route would be thru Iraq airspace - better known as US air space - we'd have to agree - Obama does't have the balls, cuz we'd be in it at that point. (3) Israel doesn't have anywhere near enough aircraft to hit all the targets necessary. Take them days and days - too long, too many losses, to much politcal pressure to stop before the jobs done.
Consequently - Israel must consider missile strikes w/sufficiently large warheads to decimate multiple targets below and above ground and destroy C3I. Bad news for the Persians, lot a collatoral damage in that kind of fight - maybe millions if they use the heavy stuff (nuke).

Best thing for everyone - Joint Saudi/US/UK/AUS/French airstirke - do it all in one night. US Navy secures Hormuz, Marines secure key terrain along coast in Iran to keep sealane open and the black gold flowing. US Army in Iraq goes into defense on border and preps in case of counterattack, repositioning TF's to draw Iran military movement. US Army in Afghanistan repositions S to border of Iran w/ heavy armored TF's also requiring Iran military forces to reposition. Seconadary strikes against all Iran military attempting to reposition to counter two pronged threat in their west and north - they'll be moving on the roads ripe for joint air attacks. Game over, hold and isolate.

Tell the Russians and China that they can have the joint if they want it, but don't f'k w/us, since we've got combat vets and every economic reason to convert our empty government-owned car factories into tank engine producers and our 17% unemployed into soldiers and bomb makers - now those are geen jobs - Army green.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 11:52 | 250977 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Are you in the military, or do you spend all day playing PS3 war simulations? For this scenario you pose, will you be over there fighting, or sitting at home eating popcorn watching it on CNN? Will you be the one to help console the bereaved families for losing their sons and daughters, or will you just be on more forums war mongering?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 15:56 | 249835 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

The reason why an Israeli attack on iran will be suicide is simple. iran will fire tens of thousands of missiles against israel, hezbollah will start trouble in the north and hamas on the south. the mahdi army in iraq will start a shiite rebellion against US troops in iraq that will be very bloody and be worse then the sectarian violence days of 2004-08. Iran then will close the port of hormuz then oil will go prob 20 dollars per gallon. Iran will fire missiles in saudi arabian oil fields. and israel will fire missiles back and continue air strikes. but all i have to say is if israel were to attack many of their planes will not come back. in a military perspective they should have done it in 2004. but the did not so iran is ready and armed themselves up for an attack and will take down many planes. and the other problem is how will such a war end? a war like this can go on for months or years. so i think its a bad idea. blood shed on both sides, will plunge the world into the depression that we know is coming. an attack will cause effects from egypt to pakistan. but now i think its an 75% israel will attack in the late spring/early summer.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:04 | 249846 Going Down
Going Down's picture


Mas Loco: Las Malvinas


South Atlantic: Britain May Provoke New Conflict With Argentina


Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:07 | 249974 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Given that the Falkland islanders hold their allegiance to the Crown and not Argentina, how are the British provoking conflict?

Also interesting that a part Argentinian company is intending to drill there too...

If anyone starts anything there it'll be the Argies.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:10 | 249988 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Argentina laid claim and inhabited the islands for 5 years in the early 1800's, after the French, Spanish and British had already built settlements. The United States forced the Argentinians out and the British returned to establish a permanent colony.

Fast forwarding to the 20th century and the formation of the UN, the Argentinian government tried to lay claim to the Falklands, but the inhabitants of the islands identified themselves as British and the islands remained a British protectorate.

In the 1980's the Argentinian government tried to illegally sieze the island chain, and Britain was drawn into warfare to defend her protectorate.

Basically, the Falklands are (well) outside Argentinian maritime waters, have a long established population identifying themselves as British and has been under British control for the vast majority of its populated existence. Argentina has no valid claim on these islands.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 22:41 | 250514 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Valid claims? Does this kind of stuff matter?

Look, under President Andrew Jackson, the Supreme Court notified that the Indians had valid claims on their territories.

The result is easy to see.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:21 | 249870 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

 The attack on Iran will begin before the airstrikes.

 You'll know when Iran's fiber goes black

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:30 | 249889 Gimp
Gimp's picture

Let the Israelis defend themselves. If they wait for the UN and the Europeans to actually put pressure on Iran it will be too late and they know it.



Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:39 | 250061 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

You really should read more.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:47 | 249923 congoapd
congoapd's picture

This is super annoying if this happens. I'll be in Israel spring through summer. Wish me luck surviving. 

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 16:50 | 249929 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Good grief.

It suits the Iranians to make bellicose noises because that plays well at home.

It suits the Israelis to make bellicose noises because that's a good distraction from the main aim which was and always has been settler realities on the ground in Palestine.

Energy security has been the principal aim of US foreign policy for 100 years, and it's the principal aim of Chinese policy now. The US has used military strength to enforce their economic hegemony and it has bankrupted them the same way it bankrupted the Brits.

IMHO the Chinese now have an economic veto over US policy and have exercised it in respect of Iran. Apart from an outbreak of insanity, like B52s shipping nukes about on a freelance basis, or something equivalent in Iran if and when they acquired nuclear capability, then there'll be no attack on Iran.

It's Pakistan that worries me: their Islamic revolution wasn't 30 years ago - it's arguably already happening, and they HAVE nukes.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:16 | 250011 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I always wonder at this, the Persians are as a people the most progressive, liberal, educated Islam country there is and we have driven them to bellicosity. We fucked up our foreign policy aims in the region, they should have been the most friendly and most ideologically compatible country in the area.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:51 | 250224 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

What's to wonder about?

Our 51st state is the only one recognized in the region.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:06 | 249970 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

War is inevitable. The choice is now or later when everyone have a nuke. It is best Europe and USA, Russians, Chinese are prepared for war to stop nuclear genie for at least 25-30 years. If they don't stop Iran all will break loose.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 17:51 | 250089 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Don't suppose they could thread the needle and take down 85 Broad street while they take out Israel?

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 18:11 | 250134 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Just to state the obvious, there is no evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapon program.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 19:22 | 250290 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Iran is not the Danger. The Money Ghanger again.
It's not a War between Moslems and Jews, it's time for chaos in the world.
CONQUER AND DIVIDE, Good and Bad. It's over 300 Years now and its happening again and again. so Guys don't Fight together, this exactly what they want.
But when i read your comments on this great Board , i think we have a very small chance to stand against them.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 19:40 | 250309 mkkby
mkkby's picture

The world has seen how N. Korea has been left alone since they got their nukes.  Iran's dictators want to stay in power too.  Therefore, Iran has a nuclear weapons program because it would be irrational for them NOT to have one. 

Now that that's settled, what to do about Iran?  Iran definitely uses terrorist orgs as their proxy armies.  Iran definitely threatens their neighbors, and Iran definitely has long-range missles.  This all makes them 100x the threat Iraq ever was.  It's just a matter of time before an Iranian nuke ends up in a shipping container via some smuggling operation.

It would be stupid for the US and/or Israel NOT to attack Iran.  Israel has the capability of doing it themselves, even with all those allies lined up against them.  It would be better if we do it because an in/out commando raid would be quick and easy.  (I'm not talking about a long term occupation like Iraq).

As for the timing... who knows?  This kind of "imminent" war talk has been going on for years.  As for Iran's allies attacking at once -- notice none of them supported hezbollah in any of the recent wars.  They all know Israel can swat them easily, so they won't follow through on their bluster.








Tue, 03/02/2010 - 09:00 | 250835 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Yeah baby.

The same can be said: "Now that that's settled, what to do about US (Oligargs)? US definitely uses terrorist orgs as their proxy armies (For example CIA oper. etc.). US definitely threatens their neighbors (and the whole world for that matter), and US definitely has long-range missles. This all makes them 100x the threat anybody ever was. It's just a matter of time before an US nuke ends up in a shipping container via some smuggling operation (if not already).

We are royally f*^^ed as is. Do we really need missiles and nukes flying around. Why are there so many folks who immediately hate those around them who happen to be different when they have problems. When the chinese people died while digging routes trough mountains for coast-to-coast railroads, none of them where present or invited for the picture taken of the workers in the end.

Also a few years after this there was a down turn in the economic situation of US and then all the chinese were either killed or deported from US cities. For some reason a lot of US citizens are proud to be facists and rasists or sons and daughters of said people(Heroes indeed) and the same happens now.

For the record I'm ashamed that I have had these feelings and thoughts as well.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 20:17 | 250358 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Yeah Iran is not controlled by the nwo hitler was not so this will make Iran nwo material

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:22 | 250429 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Re post 250309 by mkkby:

Israel's dictators want to stay in power too. Therefore, Israel has a nuclear weapons program because it would be irrational for them NOT to have one.

Now that that's settled, what to do about Israel? Israel definitely uses terrorist orgs as their proxy armies. Israel definitely threatens their neighbors, and Israel definitely has long-range missles. This all makes them 100x the threat Iraq ever was.

All one need do is substitute Iran for Israel & vice versa to come up with a similar, but different conclusion.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:35 | 250446 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

Israel's dictators want to stay in power too. Therefore, Israel has a nuclear weapons program because it would be irrational for them NOT to have one.

Israel definitely uses terrorist orgs as their proxy armies. Israel definitely threatens their neighbors, and Israel definitely has long-range missles. This all makes them 100x the threat Iraq ever was...
It would be stupid for Iran NOT to attack the US and/or Israel.

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:44 | 250457 caconhma
caconhma's picture

History likes to repeat itself.

"It would be stupid for the US and/or Israel NOT to attack Iran.  Israel has the capability of doing it themselves, even with all those allies lined up against them.  It would be better if we do it because an in/out commando raid would be quick and easy.  (I'm not talking about a long term occupation like Iraq)." WOW. 

Just look at American "successes" in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, etc., Yes, but let us see as the USA smashed Iraqi army. Well.

Let us have a history tour. Late in June of 1941, Nazi invaded the USSR. In just 2.5 months, Soviet professional army disappeared. More than 4.5 millions Soviet soldiers were either killed or surrendered. By late Sep. 1941, Nazi thought, it was all over for Stalin and his Red army.

On Dec. 5, 1941, Soviet started the huge Moscow counteroffensive. The Blitzkrieg was over. Nazi barely were able to survive but lost its strategic initiative. So, what miracle did happen in just 2 months that changed the world? The answer was very simple but nobody, even today, like to talk about. Well,

- The Red Army was not very good to begin with but, most important, it did not want fight for the Stalin State and his Jewish commissars

- On Nov.7, 1941, Stalin changed the tune: It is not anymore war for the Soviet State. No. It is a war for "Mother Russia". In his famous speech, Stalin said: " Brothers and Sisters, the Great Russian people. Our Motherland is in a grave danger..."

- From this moment on, it became a "total war" with "no step back". It has ended in Berlin.

The bottom line. Dear fellow American, please be careful and do not underestimate your enemies!

Mon, 03/01/2010 - 21:50 | 250465 caconhma
caconhma's picture


Tue, 03/02/2010 - 00:19 | 250624 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

If Leon Panetta knows that an an Al Qaida attack within the U.S.will occur within 3-6 months, why can't he stop it? or ...... is he organizing it ?

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 02:35 | 250727 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

U.S. knows all this intel . They know these people are here al cia da . They let the panty bomber in on purpose , Penhead peneta is no better . All these attacks inside U.S. can be stopped they don't want to stop it . They want everyone to live under NWO with no rights , we are already loosing the life we had .

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 04:28 | 250759 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

God Bless, Good Hunting and good fortunes Israel.

Here at home we are ready for 30 dollar gasoline financially and have laid in reserves in case the People lose it and run riot.

I would like nothing better than to settle this with Iran, it took us decades to settle Iraq. I think about Beirut in 1983 and think that there will be a war at some point and it will settle a lot of things permanently.

There is a certain peace that is here when one accepts the inevitable and prepares for it.

Tue, 03/02/2010 - 04:57 | 250768 Anonymous
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 08:27 | 250825 Anonymous
Anonymous's picture

I am from Iran And I say Kill Them All

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!