Comments on: Gary Sick on Iran and the Hawk-Realist Power Balance http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/ Fri, 21 Nov 2008 22:51:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: david monaghan http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157911 david monaghan Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:40:45 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157911 wars are like chocolate sticky puddings the cooks who make them say--dark sweet and messy but is needed to complete the meal. To make sense out of any of the world policy decisions from 100's and 1000's toppings good luck---it makes about as much sense as this scribble wars are like chocolate sticky puddings the cooks who make them say–dark sweet and messy but is needed to complete the meal. To make sense out of any of the world policy decisions from 100’s and 1000’s toppings good luck—it makes about as much sense as this scribble

]]> By: Eugene Costa http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157867 Eugene Costa Sun, 20 Jul 2008 03:02:35 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157867 <i><b>Ahmadinejad calls oil price hikes ‘manipulated’</b> Online Journal Jun 26, 2008 Jerry Mazza How is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, a country we’re about to attack for building a nuclear power reactor, is commenting more cogently on our soaring oil prices than our own president, George Bush, who continues to perceive enemies everywhere, but sees no solutions to our oil price crisis in the immediate future? In a televised speech Tuesday, the Iranian president, who was called “either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated” by President Lee Bollinger of Columbia University, said, with the precision of a graduate school instructor that he also is, that oil was abundant in the world’s crude market and that the current high oil prices were, “fake.” Ahmadinejad attributed the daily increases in the price of crude oil as “unwarranted” since the market “has more than enough oil.” These comments were made at a meeting of the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) Fund for International Development, not exactly a group lacking oil savvy. It took place in the central Iranian city of Isfahan. Like a good economist, he added. “The dollar is being manipulated weaker, too.” Specifically he said, “At a time when the growth of consumption is lower than the growth of production and the market is full of oil, prices are rising, and this trend is completely fake and imposed.” He ironically attributed the oil price manipulation to “visible and invisible hands.” ....Ahmadinejad underlined the fact that “The price of oil is skyrocketing in order to secure economic and political gains.” Could that possibly be? Yes. “Speculation is the reason behind the increasingly high prices of crude, not a lack of supply,” the ‘provocative’ president added.... Ahmadinejad, obviously no fool, pointed out that Iran has “repeatedly blamed geopolitical factors and the weak US dollar for the out of control oil prices.” Once again, he was on the money. He added that “the dollar has already lost 15 percent of its value over the past 12 months against the euro, to $1.54 per euro. Since oil is priced in dollars [petrodollars], producers have had to increase prices in part to offset losses when converting that money into local currency.” So our sinking currency is at the root of the problem, which has to do with our excessive debt, the constant bailouts to subprime debt-ridden banks, to making war, and giving tax cuts to the rich, among a few of the reasons. “As you know,” Ahmadinejad said, “the decrease in the dollar’s value and the increase in energy prices are two sides of the same coin which are being introduced as factors behind the recent instability.” Oil prices have climbed to $140 per barrel of late. Yet they leveled, the Iranian President pointed out, as Saudi Arabia, the world’s top oil exporter, announced it will increase output to its highest rate in decades. This as consumption has slipped as well, and there are signs that a slowing US economy could lower prices. Could it be that some hedge funds and oil brokers are hoarding oil futures....</i> [Excerpts http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3420.shtml] Ahmadinejad calls oil price hikes ‘manipulated’

Online Journal Jun 26, 2008 Jerry Mazza

How is that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, a country we’re about to attack for building a nuclear power reactor, is commenting more cogently on our soaring oil prices than our own president, George Bush, who continues to perceive enemies everywhere, but sees no solutions to our oil price crisis in the immediate future?

In a televised speech Tuesday, the Iranian president, who was called “either brazenly provocative or astonishingly uneducated” by President Lee Bollinger of Columbia University, said, with the precision of a graduate school instructor that he also is, that oil was abundant in the world’s crude market and that the current high oil prices were, “fake.” Ahmadinejad attributed the daily increases in the price of crude oil as “unwarranted” since the market “has more than enough oil.”

These comments were made at a meeting of the OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) Fund for International Development, not exactly a group lacking oil savvy. It took place in the central Iranian city of Isfahan. Like a good economist, he added. “The dollar is being manipulated weaker, too.”

Specifically he said, “At a time when the growth of consumption is lower than the growth of production and the market is full of oil, prices are rising, and this trend is completely fake and imposed.” He ironically attributed the oil price manipulation to “visible and invisible hands.”

….Ahmadinejad underlined the fact that “The price of oil is skyrocketing in order to secure economic and political gains.” Could that possibly be? Yes. “Speculation is the reason behind the increasingly high prices of crude, not a lack of supply,” the ‘provocative’ president added….

Ahmadinejad, obviously no fool, pointed out that Iran has “repeatedly blamed geopolitical factors and the weak US dollar for the out of control oil prices.” Once again, he was on the money.

He added that “the dollar has already lost 15 percent of its value over the past 12 months against the euro, to $1.54 per euro. Since oil is priced in dollars [petrodollars], producers have had to increase prices in part to offset losses when converting that money into local currency.” So our sinking currency is at the root of the problem, which has to do with our excessive debt, the constant bailouts to subprime debt-ridden banks, to making war, and giving tax cuts to the rich, among a few of the reasons.

“As you know,” Ahmadinejad said, “the decrease in the dollar’s value and the increase in energy prices are two sides of the same coin which are being introduced as factors behind the recent instability.”

Oil prices have climbed to $140 per barrel of late. Yet they leveled, the Iranian President pointed out, as Saudi Arabia, the world’s top oil exporter, announced it will increase output to its highest rate in decades. This as consumption has slipped as well, and there are signs that a slowing US economy could lower prices. Could it be that some hedge funds and oil brokers are hoarding oil futures….

[Excerpts http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3420.shtml

]]> By: Eugene Costa http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157864 Eugene Costa Sun, 20 Jul 2008 02:07:37 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157864 Oil was down yesterday from a high of $147 per barrel to about $128 per barrel. That seems roughly the amount of variation due to options trading in regard to the possibility of the US treating with or attacking Iran. Most of the rest above the initial $30 is at this point clearly the collapse of USD. After demurring for years, supposedly because it would "help Chavez", the state of New Hampshire is now going to help itself to Chavez's offer of free heating oil, which offer no "US oil company" has joined in making. Besides Kucinich, I see no politician on the national scene worth paying any really serious attention to. It is a curiosity that so many continue to pay such attention to the dramatis personae of the Bush administration, and its nefarious deeds, as well as to the Democrats, but do not join Kucinich in his call for immediate impeachment. Paul Craig Roberts is one of the few honest brokers on the scene, left or right, and with the economic insight to grasp what is going on. The USD is no longer the world reserve currency. The Americans can threaten to bomb any sandbox, and deliver on it if the American people put up with it, but as the world knows, and most Americans seem not to, the fat lady is preparing to sing, and the song is a satire of the American national anthem. The Israelis meanwhile are building up a reserve of Euros, as are "the nation's top five oil companies", as Fox News incongruously calls them in regard to Maxine Waters' supposedly inadvertent summons to the "socialization" of oil. Finally, the mainstream media, if one pays close attention, has begun a systematic campaign to persuade the morons who pay any mind to what it promulgates as "reality" that oil at $128 per barrel is just peachy, and at such a low premium that the American economy may survive at that price level. Walk more, eat less--the jingle goes--"Americans" will be happier and healthier in the concentration camp Chertoff is building to protect them from--are you ready?--"terrorists". One may or may not see on Monday what a U.S. ultimatum to Iran is worth in the price of oil and the collapse of USD. Oil was down yesterday from a high of $147 per barrel to about $128 per barrel. That seems roughly the amount of variation due to options trading in regard to the possibility of the US treating with or attacking Iran. Most of the rest above the initial $30 is at this point clearly the collapse of USD.

After demurring for years, supposedly because it would “help Chavez”, the state of New Hampshire is now going to help itself to Chavez’s offer of free heating oil, which offer no “US oil company” has joined in making.

Besides Kucinich, I see no politician on the national scene worth paying any really serious attention to.

It is a curiosity that so many continue to pay such attention to the dramatis personae of the Bush administration, and its nefarious deeds, as well as to the Democrats, but do not join Kucinich in his call for immediate impeachment.

Paul Craig Roberts is one of the few honest brokers on the scene, left or right, and with the economic insight to grasp what is going on.

The USD is no longer the world reserve currency.

The Americans can threaten to bomb any sandbox, and deliver on it if the American people put up with it, but as the world knows, and most Americans seem not to, the fat lady is preparing to sing, and the song is a satire of the American national anthem.

The Israelis meanwhile are building up a reserve of Euros, as are “the nation’s top five oil companies”, as Fox News incongruously calls them in regard to Maxine Waters’ supposedly inadvertent summons to the “socialization” of oil.

Finally, the mainstream media, if one pays close attention, has begun a systematic campaign to persuade the morons who pay any mind to what it promulgates as “reality” that oil at $128 per barrel is just peachy, and at such a low premium that the American economy may survive at that price level.

Walk more, eat less–the jingle goes–”Americans” will be happier and healthier in the concentration camp Chertoff is building to protect them from–are you ready?–”terrorists”.

One may or may not see on Monday what a U.S. ultimatum to Iran is worth in the price of oil and the collapse of USD.

]]> By: John Lowell http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157858 John Lowell Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:38:55 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157858 reggie, Lets hope that whatever "action" is "needed here by all of us" carries absolutely no resemblance to the jackassity just forged by Glenn Greenwald together with the blessing of the Barr Campaign called Accountability Now and Strange Bedfellows. Pretending to be in rebellion with fellow "progressives" and allied "libertarians" against those members of the Democratic Congress that have consistently sided with the Republicans on the war and on privacy questions, Greenwald's out to get 'em. Why he's going to go right into their districts and run embarrasing ads, that's what he's going to do. But all of that outrage won't have anything to do with the Obama candidacy. No sir, Obama, his FISA vote and his AIPAC grovelling are going to get a pass: "Speaking only for myself, anyone devoted to these issues ought to prefer an Obama presidency to a McCain presidency, and those are the only two choices." It never seems to occur to Greenwald - or to Barr - that any meaningful accountability is an accountability of the system, not simply isolated aspects of it. And no, "those" aren't "the only two choices", there are Nader and Baldwin besides. Greenwald just has to be one of the most formidable self-promoters since Rush Limbaugh came on the scene and that requires his being system through and through, of course. In this respect, Greenwald never disappoints. With all the kvetching he manages about perfidious Democrats, when it really counts, Greenwald has no more courage than they do. Any meaningful remedial action must be action bent on dismantling the system, that and nothing less. I've seen enough Shirley Temple outrage of the Greenwald variety. reggie,

Lets hope that whatever “action” is “needed here by all of us” carries absolutely no resemblance to the jackassity just forged by Glenn Greenwald together with the blessing of the Barr Campaign called Accountability Now and Strange Bedfellows. Pretending to be in rebellion with fellow “progressives” and allied “libertarians” against those members of the Democratic Congress that have consistently sided with the Republicans on the war and on privacy questions, Greenwald’s out to get ‘em. Why he’s going to go right into their districts and run embarrasing ads, that’s what he’s going to do. But all of that outrage won’t have anything to do with the Obama candidacy. No sir, Obama, his FISA vote and his AIPAC grovelling are going to get a pass:

“Speaking only for myself, anyone devoted to these issues ought to prefer an Obama presidency to a McCain presidency, and those are the only two choices.”

It never seems to occur to Greenwald - or to Barr - that any meaningful accountability is an accountability of the system, not simply isolated aspects of it. And no, “those” aren’t “the only two choices”, there are Nader and Baldwin besides.

Greenwald just has to be one of the most formidable self-promoters since Rush Limbaugh came on the scene and that requires his being system through and through, of course. In this respect, Greenwald never disappoints. With all the kvetching he manages about perfidious Democrats, when it really counts, Greenwald has no more courage than they do.
Any meaningful remedial action must be action bent on dismantling the system, that and nothing less. I’ve seen enough Shirley Temple outrage of the Greenwald variety.

]]> By: Yehya http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157856 Yehya Sun, 20 Jul 2008 00:02:12 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157856 The Muslims are the least of Israel's problems, especially when compared to their own government. The Muslims are the least of Israel’s problems, especially when compared to their own government.

]]> By: Brad Smith http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157841 Brad Smith Sat, 19 Jul 2008 19:41:09 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157841 Well John I have to say I agree with you on this one. I have also thought that from day one the purpose has been to put Iran in a vice grip. If we don't attack now we will later, whenever it's the most adventagous. Well John I have to say I agree with you on this one. I have also thought that from day one the purpose has been to put Iran in a vice grip. If we don’t attack now we will later, whenever it’s the most adventagous.

]]> By: reggie http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157838 reggie Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:40:21 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157838 To paraphrase Noam Chomsky, what is needed here by all of us is "more action less speculation". To paraphrase Noam Chomsky, what is needed here by all of us is “more action less speculation”.

]]> By: John Lowell http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157836 John Lowell Sat, 19 Jul 2008 18:32:23 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157836 I marvel at the naivete of some regarding the Obama withdrawal plan. The man has made quite clear that troops exiting Iraq are headed for Afghanistan. The whole thing begins to take on the appearance of a shell game with force levels of American troops in the region remaining constant, actually. Just as easy - perhaps easier - to position American ground forces for a pincers movement of sorts on the Iranian capital, one prong the troops redeployed under the ruse of assisting the NATO force in Afghanistan, the other prong fashioned from the remaining force in Iraq. One should never forget the concepts expressed in Securing The Rhelm, it seems to me. Iran was always the purpose of Iraq militarily. And this purpose remains unfulfilled. Obama, Oschmama. I marvel at the naivete of some regarding the Obama withdrawal plan. The man has made quite clear that troops exiting Iraq are headed for Afghanistan. The whole thing begins to take on the appearance of a shell game with force levels of American troops in the region remaining constant, actually. Just as easy - perhaps easier - to position American ground forces for a pincers movement of sorts on the Iranian capital, one prong the troops redeployed under the ruse of assisting the NATO force in Afghanistan, the other prong fashioned from the remaining force in Iraq. One should never forget the concepts expressed in Securing The Rhelm, it seems to me. Iran was always the purpose of Iraq militarily. And this purpose remains unfulfilled. Obama, Oschmama.

]]> By: andy http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157834 andy Sat, 19 Jul 2008 17:44:25 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157834 I can only say that it will be a disaster if America attacks Iran. Whatever happened to the idea that congress was supposed to declare war. This imperial presidency is a disaster waiting to happen. I can only say that it will be a disaster if America attacks Iran. Whatever happened to the idea that congress was supposed to declare war. This imperial presidency is a disaster waiting to happen.

]]> By: richard vajs http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157826 richard vajs Sat, 19 Jul 2008 16:42:15 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157826 If you watch the poker games on TV, you know that a player with limited chips has to soon go "all in" or surely lose. Israel is losing the demographics battle with the Muslims. They sense that without a series of spectactular wins in the region, they will soon have to leave and return to the West. Why go quietly? If you watch the poker games on TV, you know that a player with limited chips has to soon go “all in” or surely lose. Israel is losing the demographics battle with the Muslims. They sense that without a series of spectactular wins in the region, they will soon have to leave and return to the West. Why go quietly?

]]> By: Aren Haich http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157810 Aren Haich Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:19:45 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157810 #### WILL ISRAEL ATTACK IRAN? #### The question is that how far does Israel dare to go if given green light by a faction in the Bush Administration to bomb Iran. The most likely scenario in such a case is that Israel would at best want to test the waters first before diving in headlong There is no question that Israel would do anything big, risky and foolish to begin with. Sending one hundred or more aircrafts to bomb Iran is an absolute non-starter. At its very most daring; Israel will do a Syria number on an easy target in Iran and hope to get away with it with minimum of costs. Israel will then sit back and hope for the best; i.e. Iran taking the bombing passively like Syria did. And hopefully introducing more turmoil to US-Iran relations. The Israeli problem right now is that the country has painted itself into a corner, and ever more commitment into the above course of action. if Israel were not now to lose face and credibility both at home and abroad it would simply have to do something stupid with many unforeseen consequences for Israel itself and the world. And finally; Israeli decision-makers admit privately all that Iran will never become an existential threat to the Jewish State. They consider the Islamic leadership in Iran highly calculating and intelligent; not at all bent on committing nuclear suicide. Scary talk of Iran ever becoming an existential threat to the Jewish State is only for US public consumption. So why risk a war with Iran, when you have no idea what the consequences will be?   #### WILL ISRAEL ATTACK IRAN? ####

The question is that how far does Israel dare to go if given green light by a faction in the Bush Administration to bomb Iran.

The most likely scenario in such a case is that Israel would at best want to test the waters first before diving in headlong
There is no question that Israel would do anything big, risky and foolish to begin with. Sending one hundred or more aircrafts to bomb Iran is an absolute non-starter.

At its very most daring; Israel will do a Syria number on an easy target in Iran and hope to get away with it with minimum of costs.

Israel will then sit back and hope for the best; i.e. Iran taking the bombing passively like Syria did. And hopefully introducing more turmoil to US-Iran relations.

The Israeli problem right now is that the country has painted itself into a corner, and ever more commitment into the above course of action.
if Israel were not now to lose face and credibility both at home and abroad it would simply have to do something stupid with many unforeseen consequences for Israel itself and the world.

And finally; Israeli decision-makers admit privately all that Iran will never become an existential threat to the Jewish State. They consider the Islamic leadership in Iran highly calculating and intelligent; not at all bent on committing nuclear suicide. Scary talk of Iran ever becoming an existential threat to the Jewish State is only for US public consumption.

So why risk a war with Iran, when you have no idea what the consequences will be?
 

]]> By: Nike http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2008/07/18/gary-sick-on-iran-and-the-hawk-realist-power-balance/#comment-157802 Nike Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:15:27 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/?p=4427#comment-157802 "As usual, John Bolton is absolutely right." Surely this is a tongue-in-cheek comment? LMAO,Bolton has predicted for the last four years that Iran will build a bomb - by next week - and will immediately use it to attack Israel. I can only hope that the author was joking. And by the way, the US isn't about to attack Iran in the immediate future. From the 'deal' with N.Korea to establishing diplomatic ties in Iran, methinks Condi has been whispering sweet nothings into Chimp's ear regarding his 'historical legacy.' Chimp would like a couple of diplomatic 'victories' on his record to soften the American-made genocide in Iraq. Rush can shake his flacid penis in anger all he wants, but the attack will have to wait until the next administration. God Bless America. “As usual, John Bolton is absolutely right.”
Surely this is a tongue-in-cheek comment? LMAO,Bolton has predicted for the last four years that Iran will build a bomb - by next week - and will immediately use it to attack Israel. I can only hope that the author was joking.
And by the way, the US isn’t about to attack Iran in the immediate future. From the ‘deal’ with N.Korea to establishing diplomatic ties in Iran, methinks Condi has been whispering sweet nothings into Chimp’s ear regarding his ‘historical legacy.’ Chimp would like a couple of diplomatic ‘victories’ on his record to soften the American-made genocide in Iraq. Rush can shake his flacid penis in anger all he wants, but the attack will have to wait until the next administration.

God Bless America.

]]>