239 replies to this topic

[DrBubb]

Mabon, on 02 December 2011 - 04:22 PM, said:

What Time Magazine fails to mention is that Iran has to send the vast majority of its heavy crude across the straits of Hormuz.

The same straits of Hormuz its supposedly going to block with military action.
Why?
To get it processed in the refineries on the 'Arab' side of the gulf.

There are other refineries that can be used - cf in Singapore or in China

[sid]

marceau, on 03 December 2011 - 01:43 AM, said:

I think you've been listening to BS too. All of the recent WW3 noises from the Russians and Chinese have come from completely irrelevant sources.

Russia and China will NOT risk involvement in a conflict with Iran, it does not serve their strategic interests to do so. The bottom line is that they have nowhere near the military capability to offer anything but token assistance in conventional terms - and I seriously doubt they'll even offer that.

While Iran may provide far more of a challenge than Iraq did in the 90s, it will still fall quickly, and it will certainly fall on its own. A few purchased Russian S300s will make minimal difference.

Irrelevant sources? like their media & Officials!!!

open your eyes, its moving faster than many realize.

Quote

Major General Zhang Zhaozhong commented that, “China will not hesitate to protect Iran even with a third world war,” remarks described as “puzzling to some”.

The news report also quotes Professor Xia Ming as paraphrasing Zhaozhong’s quote that, “not hesitating to fight a third world war would be entirely for domestic political needs.”

China has vehemently reaffirmed its alliance with Iran in recent weeks, most notably yesterday when it refused to criticize Iran for a raid on the British Embassy in Tehran launched by Iranian students earlier this week.

Both China and Russia have made it clear that they will veto any UN authorization of military action against Iran in the aftermath of claims that Iran is on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon.
http://www.eutimes.n...ar-3-over-iran/

Quote

Russia and China are rightly worried about what is behind the policy of the US and its allies in Syria and Iran, Freeman told RT.

“President Obama is acting on a British geopolitical plan to force a confrontation with Russia and China, a military confrontation of which Syrian and Iran would nearly be the ignition point,” Freeman explained. “But the real goal is a war to stop the progress that Russia and China are engulfed in.”


http://rt.com/news/s...ssia-china-921/

[marceau]

sid, on 03 December 2011 - 08:37 PM, said:

Irrelevant sources? like their media & Officials!!!

open your eyes, its moving faster than many realize.

I see nothing from any government officials.  I see media hyperbole and a statement from a 'General' (actually a professor) in a Chinese Defence College - that is not an official statement!  Defence colleges worldwide educate, speculate and hypothesise - that's the point!

Do 5 minutes of googling on the guy and you can see what else he's been up to over the past few years. He's a celebrity military commentator with outspoken views, often used by the Chinese government to gauge public reaction to unconventional viewpoints.  Of course, to find this out you'd have to get past the websites parroting the same BS you've just been spouting and dig in a few google pages, but I'm sure you can handle it.

[Carlton]

John Doe, on 01 December 2011 - 08:49 PM, said:

  Yeah right  

I don't know why the scaremongers insist on hyping this as a possibility - I guess it attracts attention.

There is no chance whatsoever of either Russia or China going to war against the US over Iran or Pakistan.

[azazel]

Carlton, on 04 December 2011 - 04:55 AM, said:

I don't know why the scaremongers insist on hyping this as a possibility - I guess it attracts attention.

There is no chance whatsoever of either Russia or China going to war against the US over Iran or Pakistan.

Perhaps there is a good chance that China would go to war over resources. America already has Saudi oil, now Iraq and Afghan minerals and they threaten to deprive China of Iranian oil, or at least insist on it being traded for dollars.

[sid]

are we moving towards ww3?

work it out yourselves.

Quote

Iran Military Shoots Down US Drone, Threatens Response

A senior Iranian military official says Iran's Army has shot down a remote-controlled reconnaissance drone operated by the US military in the eastern part of the country.
The informed source said on Sunday that Iran Army's electronic warfare unit successfully targeted the American-built RQ-170 Sentinel stealth aircraft after it crossed into Iranian airspace over the border with neighboring Afghanistan.
He added that the US reconnaissance drone has been seized with minimum damage.
The RQ-170 is a stealth unmanned aircraft designed and developed by Lockheed Martin Company.
...
Iran's response to the downed U.S. drone's violation of its airspace will not be limited to the country's borders, a military source told state television.

"The Iranian military's response to the American spy drone's violation of our airspace will not be limited to Iran's borders any more," Iran's Arabic language Al Alam television quoted the military source as saying, without giving details.

http://www.zerohedge...s-down-us-drone

[John Doe]

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 07:08 PM, said:

are we moving towards ww3?

work it out yourselves.

Iran said they shot down 2 of these drones last year too.

No war then.

edit  Another one claimed in January http://www.bbc.co.uk...e-east-12105225

[sid]

azazel, on 04 December 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Perhaps there is a good chance that China would go to war over resources. America already has Saudi oil, now Iraq and Afghan minerals and they threaten to deprive China of Iranian oil, or at least insist on it being traded for dollars.

Thats one of the reason, other includes:

US/ NATO is perceived as threat by both Russia & China. Both are encircled by US/NATO & have or about to pass the RED LINE.

Things may escalate fast from here. Time will tell.

[John Doe]

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 07:18 PM, said:

Thats one of the reason, other includes:

US/ NATO is perceived as threat by both Russia & China. Both are encircled by US/NATO & have or about to pass the RED LINE.

Things may escalate fast from here. Time will tell.

Major powers with nuclear weapons realised a long time ago that direct war was pointless, it couldn't be won.

That's why if (when) they ever come to the point of blows, (which might well happen in the future) it would be done through 3rd party countries.

There will not be a "WW3", just major powers Vs smaller ones,  limited skirmishes and proxy wars. Just like the last 66 years.

In fact, their (big powers) latest approach seems to be very small scale, targeted attacks, like the recent assassination of several of Iran’s nuclear scientists and unexplained (and quickly hushed up)  explosions near to their nuclear research sites.


EDIT @ 20:45 Stand down your nukes gents, it appears it was all a big misunderstanding. Apparently, the US lost contact with one of their drones flying over Western Afghanistan last week and the helpful Iranians have found it for them  

[marceau]

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 07:18 PM, said:

Thats one of the reason, other includes:

US/ NATO is perceived as threat by both Russia & China. Both are encircled by US/NATO & have or about to pass the RED LINE.

Things may escalate fast from here. Time will tell.

Iran is a minnow.  If you're really desperate for a possible major war hotspot look to South East Asia and the conflicting interests of India, Japan, Russia and China.  Add in Pakistan, N Korea, Burma & a whole host of other proxy nations and you've got a semi-plausible scenario for a conventional skirmish (with Russia and China most likely on opposing sides, they are in no way allies).  Anything else is just Doomster fanstasy.

[sid]

marceau, on 04 December 2011 - 08:50 PM, said:

Iran is a minnow.  If you're really desperate for a possible major war hotspot look to South East Asia and the conflicting interests of India, Japan, Russia and China.  Add in Pakistan, N Korea, Burma & a whole host of other proxy nations and you've got a semi-plausible scenario for a conventional skirmish (with Russia and China most likely on opposing sides, they are in no way allies).  Anything else is just Doomster fanstasy.

Ignorance is surely bliss for some.

SCO exist since 2001, Russia & China being the main players, also include as guest members are Pakistan & Iran. Here we have the East vs West ready to go. It may not be tomorrow but its heading that way. BBC, SKY or Fox are just pure empire propaganda, many of us find other sources more reliable.

Quote

'America’s great game could spark World War Three'
Published: 04 December, 2011

Following the latest report that the Iranian military has shot down a US drone in eastern Iran, radio host Stephen Lendman told RT such US reconnaissance missions point towards greater ambitions for domination, which might lead to all-out war.

...

Lendman believes that if the allegations regarding nuclear weapons are used to justify war, Iran, unlike Libya, is a big country with a powerful military, and any unjustified strike by Israel or the US could prove disastrous.  

“Iran has been very bluntly saying, if it is attacked by Israel, by America, it will respond, it will fire back. It can attack Israeli cities, it can attack US bases. We’re talking about something very serious, we’re talking about the possibility of general war, dare I say it, World War III.”

http://rt.com/news/i...-war-drone-013/

[sid]

still thinks everything is ok!




The US Is Sending Four Of These State Of The Art Destroyers To Be Part Of The Contested European Missile Shield
Robert Johnson|December 03, 2011|


Despite chest-pounding Russian protests, the US is moving ahead with plans to install a missile defense shield to protect NATO European territory, and has committed four of its 60 Arleigh Burke-class destroyers to sit off the coast of Spain.

Geoff Ziezulewicz of Stars and Stripes reports that the ships will deploy to the 6th fleet in Rota, and bring with them a full Lockheed Martin Aegis combat system with a long list of heavy ordnance and a "detect to kill" radar array.

Read more: http://articles.busi...s#ixzz1fbm1XmOZ

[John Doe]

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 10:12 PM, said:

Ignorance is surely bliss for some.

SCO exist since 2001, Russia & China being the main players, also include as guest members are Pakistan & Iran. Here we have the East vs West ready to go. It may not be tomorrow but its heading that way. BBC, SKY or Fox are just pure empire propaganda, many of us find other sources more reliable.

Just like this this?  

Quote

Saddam Hussein threatened that if international forces led by the United States attacked Iraq, it would be "the mother of all wars.

http://www.answers.c.../saddam-hussein



Sorry Sid, but some of us "older" guys have been hearing the same old hype and sabre rattling over every dispute for decades. The reality is that, nowadays, the major powers all have way too much to lose in direct conflict.

[Carlton]

azazel, on 04 December 2011 - 09:07 AM, said:

Perhaps there is a good chance that China would go to war over resources. America already has Saudi oil, now Iraq and Afghan minerals and they threaten to deprive China of Iranian oil, or at least insist on it being traded for dollars.

China doesn't need to go to war for resources; and they also lack the ability to go to war beyond Asia. China has multiple sources for oil, and they already expect the oil price to rise (hence all their energy investments), so a war-induced oil price spike would not send China into a panic.

Also, China is just beginning to build a blue-water navy and cannot project any significant amount of conventional force beyond east Asia. So, there will be no China-US war over Iran.

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 10:12 PM, said:

Ignorance is surely bliss for some.

SCO exist since 2001, Russia & China being the main players, also include as guest members are Pakistan & Iran. Here we have the East vs West ready to go. It may not be tomorrow but its heading that way. BBC, SKY or Fox are just pure empire propaganda, many of us find other sources more reliable.

Many international organizations exist, that doesn't make the members strategic allies. The fact is China and Russia have been geopolitical rivals for decades, and indeed longer than that. Russia has long suspected that China would like to get hold of Siberian land and/or water. And both countries are trying to expand their spheres of influence in places like Central Asia. So, "the East vs West" is absolutely NOT "ready to go."

Those "other sources" you get information from are the opposite of reliable.

[DrBubb]

Apocalypse Theatre ?

[DrBubb]

Jerry Corsi on Coast-to-Coast:
"An attack on Iran is imminent...
In fact, there is some evidence that it may have happened already."
"The recent 'trouble' at the British Embassy may have been an excuse for them to pull their people out... ahead of an attack that they knew was coming."

[marceau]

sid, on 04 December 2011 - 10:12 PM, said:

Ignorance is surely bliss for some.

SCO exist since 2001, Russia & China being the main players, also include as guest members are Pakistan & Iran. Here we have the East vs West ready to go. It may not be tomorrow but its heading that way. BBC, SKY or Fox are just pure empire propaganda, many of us find other sources more reliable.

You lack any appreciable understanding of the subject. I'm actually starting to think you might be a troll, but if you're really interested in understanding geopolitical tensions I suggest you look away from the news altogether and start reading.  The history books are a good place to start, maybe try Sino-Soviet relations over the past century.

All you have are headlines, propaganda and posturing.  Your 'information' sources are no less biased, emotive and propaganda driven than western ones.  To gain insight you need to understand the resource pressures, cultures, motives and historical biases of those involved.  You won't get that from the news, although I'm sure you'll try to prove me wrong by posting something from Zerohedge.

[sid]

I actually do it full time (research & analysis) & have regularly contributed to & appeared for media both published & TV, here is some grown up material for those who understand:

Quote

World War III: The Launching of a Preemptive Nuclear War against Iran

by Michel Chossudovsky

World War III is not front-page news. The mainstream media has excluded in-depth analysis and debate on the implications of these war plans.

The onslaught of World War III, were it to be carried out, would be casually described as a "no-fly zone", an operation under NATO's "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) with minimal "collateral damage" or a "limited" punitive bombing against specific military targets, all of which purport to support "Global Security" as well as "democracy" and human rights in the targeted country.  

Public opinion is largely unaware of the grave implications of these war plans, which contemplate the use of nuclear weapons, ironically in retaliation to Iran's nonexistent nuclear weapons program.

Moreover, 21st Century military technology is at an advanced stage of development combining an array of sophisticated weapons systems.  

We are at the crossroads of the most serious crisis in World history.

The future of humanity is at stake.

...

http://www.globalres...xt=va&aid=28026

[DrBubb]

If Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz,
"it could put gasoline prices up from $4 to $8."



($8 unleaded is just what the Dr ordered - A few important lessons might be learned.
Actually, I'd much rather it be done with a tax.)

[DrBubb]

OIL UP?  Maybe sooner, rather than later

Penalties May Send Oil Prices Soaring, Iran Warns
New York Times - ‎42 minutes ago‎    

Alarmed by the possibility of new Western penalties that could abruptly reduce or even halt its oil exports, Iran issued a warning on Monday that crude oil prices could more than double to $250 a barrel if such sanctions were given ...