Is an attack on Iran close?

[straffo]

Originally posted by Sixpence
And the euro is stable?

yes.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by straffo
yes.

http://www.moneyweek.com/file/3095/fsl-gold-euro.html

[Syzygyone]

Originally posted by WhiteHawk
Yea.  In any event, we have proven that we are unable to win the hearts of people who despise us to the very core of thier existance, so lets not make that mistake again.

Prey tell, on what empirical data do you base this amazing statement?  The western news media, or do you have a hotline into everyday Iraqui citizenry?

Just curious.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Sixpence
And the euro is stable? Yeah, right, the middle east is won't switch because they are afraid we will attack? lol, no, they don't switch because of the money they make from us and the welfare checks we send their neighbors

The middle-east is already switching, they have been buying up gold and diversifying thier currency reserves.

[weaselsan]

Originally posted by beet1e
It's not unlikely that the USA will invade Iran at some point in the next 5 years. Whether it will because of Iran's perceived nuclear capability, or whether there is some other ulterior motive remains to be seen.

The USA is facing an energy crisis, as those people living in California know only too well. The supply of non-OPEC oil for electricity generation is in decline, with liquefied natural gas (LNG) now finding favour as the fuel for electrical power plants. Since 1999 in the USA alone, an additional 220,000 megawatts of gas fired power capacity has been built, and will meet approximately 30% of US demand for electrical power. US demand for natural gas is expected to rise by another 50% in the next 15 years!

But there's a problem. Only about 2% of the world's stock of natural gas can be found in North America. Mexico is lending the USA a helping hand, having built a gas fired power plant near Mexicali, just three miles south of the US border. But no way was the prime purpose of that facility to provide power to Mexico. For one thing, Mexicans could not afford the infrastructure cost. And they wouldn't need the amount of power it generates. No, the power being produced by that plant is routed to Arizona and southern California via the Southwest Powerlink.

Oil is becoming too expensive. LNG might provide the breathing space we need. The problem for the USA is that much of the world's supply of gas is located in countries not sympathetic with American interests. More than HALF the world's gas reserves are to be found in two countries: Russia and................ Iran.

Just this week, Russia has been persuaded to backpedal on its stance of having turned off the gas supply to Europe, which runs through a pipeline passing through Ukraine, a move designed to penalise Ukraine for failing to comply with a Russian initiative to quadruple the price of gas. Under western pressure, Russia has backed down. Clearly, the Russians are going to be easier to deal with than certain hostile regimes.

Which brings us to Iran, a country with a very poor record history of diplomatic relations with the US. Would the USA invade Iran to safeguard a supply of natural gas? Well, America won't admit to it, but that doesn't mean it won't happen. Just as the "war on terror" afforded America an excuse to invade Iraq on a pretext which was shown not to exist, Iran's perceived nuclear capability might serve as the perfect smokescreen and provide a justification to invade Iran, while the real reason for invasion might be something different.

Sorry to appear cynical, but after the Bush/Blair snowjob over Iraq, I don't see why the reason(s) given to invade Iran will be any less dishonest.

We have the worlds largest reserves of coal.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Thrawn
The middle-east is already switching, they have been buying up gold and diversifying thier currency reserves.

Who has switched?

[bj229r]

Originally posted by WhiteHawk
OK,  Generals.  How about we tomahawk the factory and predator the religious fanatic who is going to martyr the muslim people for a sucker punch at the USA.  Sometiems I wonder if people just dont like to sit back in thier vomit encrusted easy chairs and watch real wars on TV for entertainment value.  Why dont we attack Pakistan?  Bin Laden is hiding in that country.  He cant be but a few friends away from the nuclear arsenal over there?  WTF?  

Tomahawks, etc are useless. there are some NINE different sites, all deeep underground. (Remember the stories/arguements about the 'bunker-busting' bombs a year or 2 ago?) The only way to destroy the things is with the afore-mentined low-yield NUClear deep penetration bombs.... and it's hard to say if anyone has the nerve to pull such a trigger. If we wait until the 'power plants' are up and running before attacking,  then we/Israel will likely spread radioactivity over a very large area. Also if we wait, Iran will most certainly come up with enough enriched uranium to make a decnt bomb or 2. Heard on news the other night they are going to try for (Iran) plutonium. Hard to say what's worse, doing something or NOT doing something. Only thing for sure is there is nothing anyone can do short of military action which will force them to change their thinking. Would YOU feel comfortable with the Iranian gov't having nuclear weapons?

[Squire]

"Iran makes North Korea look like level-headed and open minded individuals."

Thats only because nothing comes out of N. Korea.

[AKS\/\/ulfe]

Hot air does.
-SW