Iran's latest bid to unseat U.S. dominance is likely to end badly and could take our economy with it.
Iran has announced its intention to create an oil bourse (market) denominated in euros on its soil. The U.S. will likely not permit its creation if it can prevent it. This appears to be a last desperate effort on the part of the Iranian leadership to create an alternative to Anglo-American financial power in order to become the center of an anti-U.S. resistance worldwide and avoid having to stop their WMD program.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Dave Nalle
It's my impression the US has been supporting your Israel since the land was last "divided" up, leaving the Palestians sucking hind tit. Comments like yours make me wish that support had been terminated 50 years ago. Believe me, our relations today with the Arab nations of the world would be much different.
Howard, I think Ruvy agrees with you on this. And I'm not at all sure he's wrong. The relationship between the US and Israel has not been terribly good for either nation or for the region.
Dave
27 - nitpicker
Dave says:
"Because unlike most of you I've lived in the middle east..."
This leads to the conclusion is that anyone who has lived in the Middle East has a poor perspective of the issues there.
28 - Dave Nalle
Nit, why don't you actually address my analysis of the Iran situation and show me where I'm wrong?
Or are you just a nitpicker?
Dave
29 - nitpicker
When I see a nit, I pick it.
Don't come up with any more nits that I can pick.
30 - Dave Nalle
I only respect you if you crunch them in your teeth to kill them after you pick them.
Dave
31 - nitpicker
Dave wrote:
"Howard, I think Ruvy agrees with you on this. And I'm not at all sure he's wrong. The relationship between the US and Israel has not been terribly good for either nation or for the region."
Let's see how the master of equivocation avoids issues and then says "[I] know what I'm talking about"
"I think..."
"I'm not at all sure..."
"has not been terribly good..."
Can we take "analysis" to the bank?
32 - Dave Nalle
Nit, I prefer to be circumspect when speaking for someone else, rather than braying like an ass which some seem to prefer.
Dave
33 - Howard
In the original article, "The reason the U.S. dollar is threatened is because high demand for the U.S. dollar and Treasury Bills exist because foreigners need dollars to purchase resources in the primary markets for commodities, specifically oil."
I believe you have the cart before the horse. Foreigners don’t need dollars to purchase commodities. They (China, various Arab nations, Venezuela, Japan, Taiwan, etc) already have dollars they need to invest. They do so primarily in U.S. Treasury instruments. Their demand has driven up the price of these bills, notes and bonds to the point that interest rates for longer term instruments are less than interest rates on short term.
During the Carter administration, the Saudis threatened to adopt some currency other than the U.S. dollar to value their oil. I don’t blame them. Our nation came closer to bankruptcy under that miserable leadership than at any time in the last 200 years. Today, as long as the world is willing to sell oil and shirts and automobiles and computers to citizens of the U. S. for our dollars, we’ll do well, thank you. Iran’s threat is nil.
34 - znzward
Norway would like to start selling it's oil in euros. Russia is keen on the idea of being able to purchase oil in euros, and China, so I've read, is too. The threat is not Iran's share of global oil sales, the threat is other nations realizing they can get a better deal buying and selling their oil in euros, and following suit.
And here's a conspiracy theory some of you might like- Deep throat, (whome we all now know was an f.b.i. agent) did not give his info to the washington post because he thought the world needed to know, nor did he act alone. He was ordered to do so by higher ups. The reason? Nixon was about to start really twisting Israel's arm, basicaly forcing her to the bargining table with the Palestinians. Peace in the middle east, being contrary to the aims of that cabal known today as the "neo-cons", had to be stopped. Nixon was easy pickin's, basicaly due to his own paronoia. Like Bush said, "Mission accomplished." Just a conspiracy theory (and not one that I can take credit for), but food for thought.
35 - Dave Nalle
Another thing to consider here is that in a modern economy the idea that currencies are truly distinct and that it makes a difference what nominal currency is used for a transaction is debatable. Since all of these transactions take place electronically rather than with a suitcase full of cash, we're not really talking about real dollars or real euros, but rather about numbers in an account somewhere which can be converted into whatever currency the holder wants virtually instantaneously. When buying oil in Iran it doesn't matter whether the source used is US Govt T-Bills or a Swiss Gold fund or a Euro-based investment account, nor does it matter what nominal currency it gets converted into. You buy whichever investment is most attractive, and convert your money instantly and electronically into whatever currency the thing you're buying is being sold in.
The article suggests that you have to buy US debt instruments so you can use them to pay for oil in dollars, but that's just not true in our modern electronic economy. The two are entirely separate.
Dave
36 - nitpicker
“Our energy demands have grown so rapidly that they now exceed our supply.”
-- Richard Nixon, February, 1974.
This was Nixon's way of downplaying the reason for the 1973 oil embargo which he had caused.
The price of oil quadrupled on October 17, 1973, the day Richard Nixon sold out the American economy and the American people. Nixon caved in to political pressure from AIPAC, the Jewish lobby in Washington, in defiance of a clear warning from Saudi Arabia to stay out of Middle East politics during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war.
Now when Bush does an encore in Iran, where will the price of oil go?
37 - Dave Nalle
Aha! Eventually the mask slips. Nitpicker, meet TommyD. You guys can carpool to the next rally together.
Dave
38 - nitpicker
"The article suggests that you have to buy US debt instruments so you can use them to pay for oil in dollars, but that's just not true in our modern electronic economy."
So?
The key issue is when other countries switch from the dollar to the euro, they will also switch from US Treasury Bonds and investments in this country.
And then comes the inflation.
39 - nitpicker
Having failed at everything the obtuse one tries to be humorous.
40 - Dave Nalle
The key issue is when other countries switch from the dollar to the euro, they will also switch from US Treasury Bonds and investments in this country.
Why? There's no requirement that they do this. There's no motivation for them to do it. If the US debt instruments continue to be reliable and pay a competitive rate, why would they switch?
Dave
41 - nitpicker
"If the US debt instruments continue to be reliable and pay a competitive rate, why would they switch?"
They wouldn't.
What makes you think that a shrunken dollar would be reliable and pay a competitive rate?
42 - Dave Nalle
But why would the dollar be shrunken if people aren't pulling out of it? These seems to be some circular logic going on here.
Dave
43 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
First of all, Howard, I agree with you 100%. America should never have stuck its greedy, do-gooding, culture destroying, imperialistic fingers in this nation at all. Ben Gurion should have told Rabin to stay in El Arish in 1949, and the Americans could hsve withdrawn recognition in a huff of anger. The net result is that Israel would have had to deal with Russians instead. Israel would have been part of the Iron Curtain. Ben Gurion and the rest of the leadership hated Russians but knew how to deal with the bastards. They were born in Russia.
But it didn't happen that way. So, we've stolen French nuclear energy systems, and now they are ours. We've gotten loads of "aid" from your country, and now its ours - there will be no check in the bank returning the money.
Our technological systems, in various fields, are out front. Our ability to do without oil, if we need to, is way ahead of yours. Our ability to conserve water, and we do need to, is way ahead of yours. Our ability to support the entire nation with food is all there. It would be hell to sort out at first, but it could be done. Teva Pharceuticals, one of the leaders in making generic medicines is located here. In short, we do not need the world at all.
The system that runs this country now is collapsing. And when it does, your government's puppets and the EU puppets will be thrown out on their asses - or hung from butcher hooks - depending on how bad the damage they've caused has been.
So, in sum, Israel does not need America. Its leaders, bought off fools who reject the concept of G-d, think that they need America. They and all their murderous methods, are on their way out.
You will see this happen and your mouth will drop with shock and surprise, because you do not believe me. And if G-d gives me to live - I won't have time to care. I'll be busy building a new nation on the ruins of the old.
Dave, you wrote,
BTW, Ruvy. Horrible though the loss of life might be from an Iranian nuke in Israel, it might be the best thing that could happen for you guys in the long run. It would likely be the straw that broke the camels back on islamic extremism, and discredit those who oppose Israel once and for all.
If you guys are not yet convinced of the dangers of the Wahhabi attempts to take over your civilization, your children, not mine, deserve to die.
As it is, the danger to us is not from a nuclear strike from Iran, but from a massive coördinated missile attack from Iran's lapdog in Lebanon, Hizb-Allah.
The nuclear threat comes from the willingness at some point down the road of the Arabs to transfer sufficient funds to North Korea for them to provide nuclear tips to their missiles that sit in the Middle East that they man.
My sources out of North Korea, sources which must remain anonymous at present, tell me this is a real danger.
44 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Just Chris,
Your analysis of Israel's position does not take into account that the government here is terribly corrupt and on the verge of collapse, and the fact that there are two conflicting visions for what Israel should be.
There is the secular vision of such people as Shimon Peres (Ehud Olmert is too stupid to have a vision beyond cheating people of money) which would lead to war. It is a vision built on compromise, "land for peace", etc. This vision would not lead to war because of faults in the vision, per se. This vision would lead to war because the interlocutors, the Arabs, do not respect secular Israelis at all. They have contempt for them because they are hypocrites who will not stand up for their own faith or right to live here. They are the precise people that the Qur'an refers to when it talks about Jews being the brothers of apes and monkeys.
So without mutual respect, there will be no peace, only war.
Ironically, the vision of religious Judaism, a vison that talks about a Temple, removing the foreigner from the land, following the law of the Torah, is the one that will lead to peace. This is because the interlocutors, the Arabs, respect Jews who will fight and kill for their own land, who follow the laws of the Torah and who are not hypocritesin doing so. They do not necessarily like us. But they respect us, and only on mutual respect can peace be built.
Peace would have to be built on two prongs. One is to restore the Hashimi family to their rightful rulership over Mecca and Medina, to eradicate the ibn Saud clans and the cancer of the Wahhabi sect from Islam. This the Arabs must do. The other prong is the public following of the Sabbath here, the instituion of modest dress, the return to the laws of the Torah and the expulsion of corrosive Western influence.
The rest is between the Children of Abraham and is fo us to negotiate and work out.
This peace plan would neccesitate much bloodshed, because the patrons of the Saudi family and of Wahhabism, the American government and oil and banking establishment, would not sit still idly.
So be it. There is a reason that one has faith in G-d.
45 - Howard
Ruvy said,"America should never have stuck its greedy, do-gooding, culture destroying, imperialistic fingers in this nation at all."
Unfortunately, we'll never know where Israel would be had we not championed its cause time after time in court of world opinion. You certainly negate some of the admiration I hold for your nation and its leaders.
46 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Howard,
I do not mean to hurt your feelings. Please do not construe what I say as some kind of personal attack. Americans, by and large, are damned decent people. But your government is evil, particularly in how it deals with nations overseas. Your soldiers win for you good will with their decency (compared to Russians, for example), and your government loses all the good will your soldiers get for you through its policies. And your media misinform you to boot. Better you should see an ugly truth than a pretty lie.
47 - Just Chris
Ruvy,
I will have to consider some of your comments, because honestly I have never heard a point of view like yours probably exactly like you said because the American media doesn't let comments like yours (or any truly International point of view) appear any longer on our TV sets. They prefer to pursue the faith of keeping Americans addicted to conspicuous consumption and self indulgent narcissism. But if I understand your belief, it is that the Arabs do not respect people who do not fight. They only respect strength, is that correct?
48 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy: It may well be true that Israel, whether the current version or the radically different one you foresee, could effectively be entirely self-sufficient, wall itself in and complete this "we do not need the world at all" self-ghettoization vision of yours, but then what?
Are you proposing a sealed country like ancient feudal Japan or some novel nation-hermitage centre of religious introspection (by the way, if it's that, you might enjoy "The Heaven Makers" and/or "The God Makers" by Frank Herbert, one of my all-time favourite authors) or what exactly?
49 - Henri
There is one old national geographic article from the 1974 after the embargo that you might find interesting up at:
http://www.ergo.ee/ng/index.6.html
Reccommended.
50 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chris,
I don't propose any self-ghettoization at all. That would accomplish nothing. I detailed these points to make clear to all and sundry that we could accomplish what the Irish sought to do decades ago - "ourselves alone" - and make it work successfully.
A sealed off country like feudal Japan would kill our technological edges where we have them, and prevent us Jews from pursuing our task in the world - spreading the Seven Laws of Noah.
Israel, in its present condition, is on the way to collapse - mere intertia keeps many istitutions going at this point. Think of a set of rotting back stairs. You'll have a good picture of this country's institutions. Suddenly, without warning, the stairs cllapse.
If we here in this country re-order our own priorities towards self sufficiency, then working out the reconciliation with the Arabs can be done much more easily, because then you do not have foreigners messing with the economy or pushing alien ideas to their own profit.
Accomplishing the task will be no mean feat. Many foreigners have agendae that include controlling this country, particularly Jerusalem. The Shia want the Temple Mount. The Catholics want Mt. Zion. When you have time, BTW, check out the titles of his Catholic Majesty in Madrid - all of them. The Wahhabi (and their spoor, the Moslem Brotherhood and Al Qaeda) want to erase our presence here. The American oil and banking establishment wants us out of the way so that they can do business unimpeded. That covers most of the foreigners that I can think of off the top of my head.
But its quite enough.
51 - Mike
The idea if severe devaluation of a dollar is a myth for several reasons: 1 the value of currency is determined by the economic not political conditions which means that attempts by Iran to devalue american currency is silly. US dollar had bottomed out few years back because of loose monetary policy, now that there have been relative tightening by monetary policy the value has increased from 1.38 at lows to 1.19. It is unlikely at this point that EU will have a very tight monetary policy due to their attempt to revive economy and low inflation. At the same time inherent political instability of EU will likely keep it as an alternative but not predominant currency. At the same time asia which holds majority of us currency counting in trillions will not likely stat dumping dollars because it would devalue their own assets, theywill likely diversify further which means that us dollar would be somewhat devalued but the extent is not likely to be catastrophic. At the same time american political pull and the inherent middle eastern antagonisms between iran and the gulf arabs will mean that saudis out of necessity will side with US and keep dollar assets. As far as budget deficits, they have stabilized in us while in absolute terms they had gone up ,in terms of GDP, they had hovered at historical averages. The disbalance of trade another often used argument is not absolutely valid because even though there is disbalance in terms of import-export, it is well financed by foreign investments. And the last and most important point if dollar collapses, world economy collapses which is not in anyones interest including iran because with collapse of dollar the european oil buyers will likely suffer long recessions with subsequent greatly diminished ability to buy oil, what else can iran sell? what source will it have for currency? Also, I do not understand why israel must be brought up at every term, despite the believe of anti-semites world wide, sensibly israel is insignificant in world economy and affairs
52 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
I have only two sentences for you Mike. Check out the price of gold. It's not goin' up for nothin'.
53 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Just Chris asks,
"But if I understand your belief, it is that the Arabs do not respect people who do not fight. They only respect strength, is that correct?"
They do not respect someone unwilling to fight for what they view as theirs. There is a bit more to this. If you go to a souk (an Arab open air market, called shuk in Hebrew) and just buy an item at the price the fellow tells you, he'll be insulted and he'll regard you with a certain level of contempt. He expects you to fight him over the price and to have the savvy to argue over what might be pennies. It's part of their culture - and ours, to a degree as well.
54 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Mike writes,
"Also, I do not understand why Israel must be brought up at every term, despite the believe of anti-semites world wide, sensibly Israel is insignificant in world economy and affairs."
I'm with you, Mike. I'd rather get left out of all your arguments in the world. Explain your point of view to the Iranian president.
55 - Christopher Rose
Ruvy, if anyone tries to take your country, I'm a-gonna shoot 'em.
On the other hand if you and your militant religious extremists turn up at my house demanding I sign up for your extra-terrestrial god cult, I'm a-gonna shoot you!
Apart from that, I think you ought to remind yourself of the full meaning of the word paranoia...
56 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Chris, if I ever make to to Spain, I'll remember to wear a bullet proof vest.
57 - Howard
Mike #51, what a relief to see a post that makes sense. At the moment, the greatest danger to the world economy is the fall of the Saudi monarchy to be replaced by radical islamists. They might "suicide bomb" the world economy by totally shutting down their oil production which is significant.
Of equal concern to the world economy at the moment is Iran's stated intent to obliterate Israel and the thought that Israel might "beat them to the punch." Can we take Ruvy at his word that Israel can take care of itself?
As far as Iran having any effect in the world's economy by establishing an oil trading market, it'll never happen.
58 - ss
Dave:
The point I was trying to make was that Wall Street's a little jittery right now, and no one wants to drive oil up on the speculation of 'widening conflict', thereby depressing the stock exchanges. Even if these effects are short term, and I doubt they'd last more than a couple months, I don't see Bush opening that can of worms right now.
Besides, Iran's threatening at the UN but accomadating at the OPEC meeting. I imagine the administration's just going to sweat Iran out.
Last but not least, it seems to be mostly pundits talking about all this. G-Don&Condi are threatening sanctions, not air strikes.
59 - ss
And you know I'm not a huge fan of sanctions if they leave the poorest and most defensless people in the world hungry, it's just objectively, that's where I see this one going.
Ruvy:
The Iranians also have a puppet in Iraq who can turn the sectarian violence off and on like a spicket while Iraqi security forces stand by and watch. Coincidently enough, 18 bodies were found in a minivan and 50 people were kidnapped at a cell phone company today (same day Iran got refered to the IAEA).
That's how I see this one playing out, we threaten economic sanctions, they threaten more violence in Iraq. I doubt airstrikes or missles will come into it.
And if you'll note, I'm in no way being optimistic here. It'll still be the typical 'watch the innocent die while the politicians wrangle' Middle Eastern clusterfuck,
I just think both governments involved have something to lose if they take it to any level of violence higher than starving the poor/killing a few more Sunnis (who may or may not have anything to with the insurgency) than Sadr's boys would have anyway over the next few months.
60 - David Bright Morning
What WMD? And yes they ARE negotiating: with WMD not even a consideration for them.
Too often the media says "Iran's Nukes" when referring to their non-aggressive NPT compliant nuclear energy program.
61 - Am I a Fool?
We had an embargo on Iraq for 10 years. That didn't work so we attacked because we were told Iraq had WMD's.
Now the King wants to embargo Iran. When that doesn't work he is expected to attack because we are told they have WMD's...
As the King stuttered...
Fool me once, shame on ... you.
Fool me... you can't fool me twice...
62 - MCH
"Aha! Eventually the mask slips. Nitpicker, meet TommyD. You guys can carpool to the next rally together."
Aha! There's that same old triangulation, control-freak crap that you used to manipulate your students in playing them against each other.
63 - nitpicker
You fail.
Try again Sherlock.
64 - Dave Nalle
If you guys are not yet convinced of the dangers of the Wahhabi attempts to take over your civilization, your children, not mine, deserve to die.
Hey, I'm convinced. My contacts in Iraq sold me on this long ago.
As it is, the danger to us is not from a nuclear strike from Iran, but from a massive coördinated missile attack from Iran's lapdog in Lebanon, Hizb-Allah.
The nuclear threat comes from the willingness at some point down the road of the Arabs to transfer sufficient funds to North Korea for them to provide nuclear tips to their missiles that sit in the Middle East that they man.
Who needs North Korea for that? You think there aren't a few old Russian warheads available somewhere?
Dave
65 - Bliffle
FWIW, I don't think Iran has the throwweight to pull off an oil bourse deal. They just feel bold because they figure Bush for a chump who can't even pull off a decent colonial occupation in Iraq and/or afghanistan.
66 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
It doesn't matter here what Iran is actually capable of doing, though they may have an ace up their sleeve that we do not know about. What matters here is 1) what George Bush thinks Iran is capable of doing and 2) what a man who has an empire glittering before his eyes and who thinks his messiah is just around the next bend is willing to do to get around the next bend himself - that is the Iranian president.
There is a second point to be considered here. The Bush's worship money and power. People like this want as much money and as much power as they can get as fast as they can. George W. Bush has a history of being a failed businessman taking the wrong gamble and being bailed out. Bush took a wrong gamble in Iraq - and there was nobody to bail him out. He's about to take the plunge again.
67 - nitpicker
"...what a man who has an empire glittering before his eyes and who thinks his messiah is just around the next bend... that is the Iranian president."
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is expecting his messiah anytime now...
George Bush is expecting his messiah anytime now...
Ruvy is expecting his messiah anytime now...
Will there be one, two or three messiahs?
68 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
"Will there be one, two or three messiahs?"
Takin' bets here folks! Just lay the hundreds and fifties in the hat...
69 - nitpicker
Bets, hell.
I thought you knew.
70 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Nitpicker writes,
"Bets, hell. I thought you knew."
I do. But I gotta pay the bills somehow...
71 - nitpicker
You'd lose.
Then you'd be homeless.
72 - Dave Nalle
Will there be one, two or three messiahs?
I vote for a big mess o' messiahs.
Dave
73 - troll
Larry - Curly & Moe
74 - Dave Nalle
Hey, I thought they were our top presidential advisers.
Dave
75 - nitpicker
I wish they were.
The country would be better off.