... and oil does go to $9.00 a gallon, does that mean whoever's going to sell us that oil will then have the money to issue us the $50 billion in govenment bonds that we'll need to finance the war with Iran?
I guess that would work out very well for a lot of people:
1. The bond-holders.
2. The oil companies.
3. The arms companies.
4. Whoever gets the commission on the bonds.
5. Whoever gets campaign contributions from the bond-holders, the oil companies, the arms manufacturers, and Wall Street.
And, of course, a number of professionals and/or mercenaries--shouting heads, torturers, psychologists, "scholars" in think tanks--will also make sums that, although they seem large to us, are trivial by the side of the real money to be made.
Of course, the American people will:
1. Pay the interest on the bonds.
2. Pay the gas prices.
3. Finance the arms companies.
4. Finance the commissions.
4. And finance, though indirectly, the kickbacks campaign contributions.
So, really, what's not to like?
NOTE Inspired by a thread at the Agonist.
UPDATE But don't worry! The Heritage Foundation has wargamed everything, and it's all going to turn out just fine:
In the meantime, administration officials are studying the lessons of the recent war game, which was set up to devise a way of weathering an economic storm created by war with Iran. Computer modelling found that if Iran closed the Straits of Hormuz, it would nearly double the world price of oil, knock $161 billion off American GDP in a single quarter, cost one million jobs and slash disposable income by $260 billion a quarter.
The war gamers advocated deploying American oil reserves - good for 60 days - using military force to break the blockade (two US aircraft carrier groups and half of America's 277 warships are already stationed close to Iran), opening up oil development in Alaska, and ending import tariffs on ethanol fuel. If the government also subsidised fuel for poorer Americans, the war-gamers concluded, it would mitigate the financial consequences of a conflict.
The Heritage report concludes: "The results were impressive. The policy recommendations eliminated virtually all of the negative outcomes from the blockade."
Excellent. I'm sure the billing department at Heritage is pleased.
Oh, and Michael Ledeen has a new book out. It's about Iran. Isn't that precious?
- lambert's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
I'm still on the fence
I mean obviously they would love to do this. Is it possible that Bush and Rummy have driven every last decent competent General in the Pentagon?
No military person that cares about this country of the future of the military would attack Iran, especially unprovoked. Forget Iraq and Iran and the joining of the Shi'a into one big F-U... This would be all out... 1 billion people are pissed at you kinda thing.
On the one hand Bush is already a war criminal, so there is no reason (except China and Russia) to not proceed... I mean one the one level there is Iraq war type violation of UN Charter.. And then... there bombing Iran for really no reason, which is a whole different story. (By the way, why doesn't Congress impeach Bush on Wednesday for violating UN Charter which is Constitutionally binding agreement.)
Ok, I'm off track. Why we won't bomb Iran...
(1) it would have to commence by the 12th at the latest, unless they are stupid enough to do this during Ramadan.
(2) it would require false flag event
(3) China would arm Afghans and Iranians and it would get ugly, heck Kim Jong might get in on the action, and they actually HAVE nukes (sort of).
(4) and this is what I'm unsure of.... it would require cancelling the 2008 elections. I mean you are committed at that point, so why the hell not. Once you order a hit on Iran, the game is up, heck Congress might even grow a pair in that event. But, to cancel elections would require more than just riot cops. In order to cancel the elections in this country, it would require drawing down reservists and bringing them home. Even a draft wouldn't work, because no draftees would police marshal law.
And if they didn't cancel the elections, the GOP would lose almost every race and maybe even for a decade. Sure you made some war profiteers happy, but at what cost? Is Halleberryburton really running this country? Does Cheney have human hearts and voodoo mind-control dolls in his man-sized vault?
this might make you feel better
Here's why the US might not attack Iran
By Andrew Exum
Andrew Exum, a Soref fellow at the Washington Institute for Near Policy, led a platoon of US Army Rangers in Iraq in 2003.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Leaving aside the relative merits of a strike against the Iranians, why might America's military resist such action? First, consider the fact that the US has at the moment 162,000 troops in Iraq, 30,000 in Kuwait, 4,500 in Bahrain and 3,300 in Qatar - not to mention the two carrier battle groups in the Gulf or the 8,500 troops on the ground in Afghanistan. In the event of an American or Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear facilities, for example, the troops in Iraq, the Gulf and Afghanistan would be in even greater danger than they already are, vulnerable to an Iranian counterattack or, more likely, an Iranian-sponsored terror campaign.
....
Third, in the wake of the Iraq war, professional military officers are more suspicious than ever of think-tank types with theories on how easy military victories can be achieved. As an active-duty US Army officer recently told me: "If I hear one more lawyer with no military experience explain to me how air power alone really can do it this time, I'm going to kill him."
.... the Pentagon is almost Ottoman in terms of its scale and complexity. The system is dependent on thousands of mid-level military officers and civilian bureaucrats, and if a few determined bureaucrats set their minds to slowing a march to war, they can do it. The employees of the Pentagon can insist that every form be filled out in triplicate, that every authorization be approved by Congress, and bury those agitating for war in so much paperwork it would take a determined effort just to dig out.
...
Finally, it is not inconceivable that serving military officers would resign rather than sanction another poorly planned military adventure in the Middle East. High-profile resignations, along with leaks to the press, would only feed already strong domestic opposition to a war with Iran.
In the end, it is still possible that the US military might assent to going to war against Iran. US Air Force Major General Charles Dunlap - a respected strategist - has publicly advocated bombing Iran in order to win in Iraq, and Air Force officers in general are far more enthusiastic about the potential of air power than Army and Marine Corps officers.
But...
And..
"Fallon’s resistance to the proposed deployment of a third aircraft carrier was followed by a shift in the Bush administration’s Iran policy in February and March away from increased military threats and toward diplomatic engagement with Iran. That shift, for which no credible explanation has been offered by administration officials, suggests that Fallon’s resistance to a crucial deployment was a major factor in the intra-administration struggle over policy toward Iran."
One source said Fallon sent a memo that “insisted there was no military requirement for” for an additional carrier. Fallon private conveyed around the time of his confirmation hearing that an attack on Iran “will not happen on my watch.” IPS notes, “Fallon’s refusal to support a further naval buildup in the Gulf reflected his firm opposition to an attack on Iran and an apparent readiness to put his career on the line to prevent it.”
Equation much simpler
The war profits are so impressive, Carlyle cannot pass up another war while their people are still in charge. The bottom line is all you need look at.
Ruth
Ruth
public opinion and the market
Martial law quickly shuts down everthing except Fox News and its clones. That includes sites like this.
Immediately there are billions for new private security, armed for bear, and indoctrinated to shoot the godless. On sight. Although protestors will doubtless mostly be carted off to the new work camps, also run for a tidy profit by all that private security.
Cheneyburton only has the support of 20% of 'Merika. But they are the 20% with the most and biggest guns, and the 20% most likely to use them.
Think your DINOcratic representatives are going to help? Think again. Think your local police, maybe your neighbors, are going to help? Think again.
This all boils down to whether they think they can maintain their precious economy and profits in a police state. If they really think they can, we are really in trouble. I think this is the only factor that's kept them from martial law so far: when the market and economy tanked after 9/11, the Company was really surprised and hurt in the only place they really care about.
Their wallet.
No Hell below us
Above us, only sky
No Hell below us
Above us, only sky
i was saying
if they tried marshal law it would take many many reservists, I don't think local police (despite our militarizing them) would handle it. And right now, the only way to get enough national guard would be a draft. And drafted service members probably wouldn't enjoy policing Americans.. But who knows.
ANyways, it looks like Iran is playing their part in the scripted Act II of "Chicken Hawk Theatre"
[AP] Iran: Uranium Centrifuge Goal Reached
The U.N. Security Council had threatened a third round of sanctions against the country if it did not freeze the uranium enrichment program — which Iran maintains is for peaceful energy purposes, but the U.S. says is to hide a weapons program.
"The West thought the Iranian nation would give in after just a resolution, but now we have taken another step in the nuclear progress and launched more than 3,000 centrifuge machines, installing a new cascade every week," the state television Web site quoted Ahmadinejad as saying.
Still, Ahmadinejad's comments seemed at odds with independent assements of the status of his country's enrichment program.
As recently as Thursday, a report drawn up by International Atomic Energy Agency chief Mohamed ElBaradei, put the number of centrifuges enriching uranium at closer to 2,000 at its vast underground hall at Natanz.
The 2,000 figure is an increase of a few hundred of the machines over May, when the IAEA last reported on Iran. Still the rate of expansion is much slower than a few months ago, when Tehran was assembling close to 200 centrifuges every two weeks.
As well, Iran continued to produce only negligible amounts of nuclear fuel with its centrifuges, far below the level usable for nuclear warheads, the report said.
"They have the knowledge to proceed much more quickly," said a U.N. official.
While Iran has denied stalling, the official and others suggested it could have decided to proceed at a slower pace as it increases its cooperation with agency investigators looking at past suspicious activities so as to reduce any sentiment to impose new U.N. sanctions.
Their religious loons need our religious loons
almost as badly as our religious loons need their religious loons.
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
What makes you think the Sheeple wouldn't blandly
(or terriffiedly, depending on the stimulus) just roll over and accept martial law?
Personally, I have utterly NO confidence that the 'people' would reject it, under a BIG LIE campaign that was about terror, fear, and jingoism.
I have NO confidence that, even if they might be just a tad skeptical, they'd actually do anything about it.
I have NO confidence that the "people" would sacrifice their comfort for their liberty.
"So, if Bush bombs Iran, and Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz..
and gas goes to $9/gal, Exxon/Mobil PROFITS go through the fucking ROOF, cuz all that additional money goes right into the corporate bottom line.
BTW: Today is the anniversary of the surrender of Japan and the end of WW II.
Um, Woody, that's a bad word around here
We don't have a whole lot of rules on language--advocacy of lethal force against persons, particularly elected ones, is pretty much the only absolute no-no--but let's just say that that word "sheeple" has been very strongly discountenanced hereabouts.
It's rude, it's condescending, it's snobby/snotty, and worst of all it's inaccurate. People believe what they believe for all sorts of reasons, some of which might appear to us to be against their own best interests. Many times these beliefs are based on having been lied to, particularly by elected persons or the media. The solution there is to tell the truth, not spit on people for being credulous cretins.
"Jane, you ignorant slut" works as a conversational opening in a comedy sketch, not so much in actual discussion with well-meaning but misinformed people.
Okay, xan...point taken
n/t
We're going in
Damn
This has been floating around for a minute now. I can't find it much now but the market is buzzing about put options in September.
I doubt it
I check Northrup and Rayteon calls and they would be higher if the market "knew" something.
Read this on why it is just normal crap that people with billions of dollars do with their money. I'm not sure what is normal. It is interesting that Sept13 is the earnings announcement for big subprime folks. Maybe the housing market is the real terrirsts.
Don't worry, be happy
This will work out very well for them. (A heads-up on the passage of the oil law.)
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Iran is dead set on
Iran is dead set on starting this war. The comments made against Israel were an act of war. Israel attacking Iran may bring us into this war, and Iran closing the Straights of Hormuz.
The anti war left needs to protest Iran now, before the war.
Iran is the problem, Iran has been the problem since that weak sister Jimmy Carter let the radicals take over that country.
Oh fer gawdsake
For a minute there, I had some hope for your rationality, plumber.
Since when are words a casus belli?
Since when is out national interest dictated by Israel's?
And if you have any actual evidence that Carter could have kept the Shah of Iran in power--by what, invading Iran back then--I'd really like to hear it.
Your credulity makes you so vulnerable to a false flag operation, too. Pitiful to see.
We. Are. Going. To. Die. We must restore hope in the world. We must bring forth a new way of living that can sustain the world. Or else it is not just us who will die but everyone. What have we got to lose? Go forth and Fight!—Xan
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi