Monday, March 06, 2006

What's likely to happen over the next few months?

Earl’s scared-child-going-down-slide image does capture, as I too see it, the nature of the perilous times facing us in the very near future. Earl says “weeks” and he may be on the mark.

In my estimation,the gravest immediate threat is a nuclear attack on Iran. Others, such as Chris Cook, who are in-the-know, argue against that eventuality: What the Iran ‘nuclear issue’ is really about He sees US oil security as being the root of US policy, and dismisses the Engdahlian view [I was wrong about Engdahl here, see later comments on this thread - rkm], which I share, that sees primacy in the strategy of oil-based financial dominance. At the core of our disagreement are different judgments regarding which elements are at the top of the power pyramid, and what are their perceived self-interests.

Michel Chossudovsky offers a comprehensive overview on the Iran situation, transcribed from a radio broadcast, Regardless of our geopolitical theories, the signs from the White House, Pentagon, and Tel Aviv seem to clearly signal that an attack project is in progress.

Some observers focus their attention on an anticipated meltdown of the US economy, based on a number of considerations. Bruce Porteous covers the ground rather well in The Coming Economic Collapse. Many others focus more specifically on peak oil and/or global warming, talking not just about an economic meltdown, but the collapse of civilization itself. Others focus on the increasingly fascist nature of the US government in the wake of 911, and present evidence of a network of internment centers, and other signs that the Third Reich model is being systematically implemented.

In considering the whole picture—at the level of the child on the slide—I think it is important to keep two things in mind: (1) all of these things are unfolding at the same time, and (2) whoever is behind US policy is aware of the whole scenario. To assume less of ‘them’ would be naive. If a war is being planned in Iran, we can assume there are corresponding plans underway to deal with oil shortages, economic collapse, anti-war sentiment, etc. I don’t mean deal with them in the way you and I would consider sensible, but deal with them in a way that serves ‘their’ perceived long-term self-interest.



At Tuesday, March 7, 2006 at 6:51:00 PM GMT, Blogger rkm said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At Tuesday, March 7, 2006 at 11:39:00 PM GMT, Blogger rkm said...

William Engdahl just sent me a new article he wrote about the Iran situation, and in particular dealing with the Euro Bourse issue. The article is now featured on the cyberjournal home page: Is the Iran Oil Bourse the casus belli?.

Like Chris Cook, whose article was cited in the opening post to this thread, William discounts the Euro Bourse as being a central motivation for the anticipted invasion. He explains how the dollar’s status as a reserve currency is not based on petrodollars, but on a broader canvas of factors. An important analysis for those of trying to understand where the scary slide is headed.

At Thursday, March 9, 2006 at 5:08:00 PM GMT, Blogger Earl Duthler said...

I've been one who has subscribed to the Petro-Dollar theory, of which I first read in William Clark's essay "The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War With Iraq" in early 2003. ( )

Now comes William Engdahl with his essay, and I can also follow his logic and presentation of facts, and it may be closer to the outline of what is happening than the Petro Dollar/Euro alone.

Rather than try come to any conclusion at this point, my mind is still working on all that's been presented already in this blog, plus Clark's Petro-Dollar theory PLUS Engdahl's theory. All of these are working together, as I see it. I'm just trying to think out loud here and see what commentary others may have, and together we may be able to make a reasonable outline of what is really playing.

Engdahl is saying - if I understand him correctly - that what has always been considered the case, IS indeed the case.
- That an invasion of Iran, one of the 3 "axes of evil" was in the planning since 1996, as proposed by Freith and Perle.
- That the U.S. economy takes the recycled dollars paid by purchases of oil by other countries and reinvests them, often in loans to developing countries. That, in turn, holds these countries in check and under the neocolonial Western rule, and chiefly the U.S., adding to its economy by sucking these countries dry and keeping them weak.
- That the U.S. economy is distinctly more organized and larger/stronger than the ECB countries, thus no real challenge from the euro. Yet, anyway.
- That the debt purchased by other countries is still growing and will continue to grow for fear of the dollar collapsing in value; and that this is going to continue for the foreseeable future.
- That the U.S. military, having a presence in over 100 countries, is unchallengeable. Period. Another person said (paraphrased) that there is no McDonald's without McDonnell. This, I think, is an unarguable given. (But don't underestimate newer weapons being developed or new ones on the scene from chiefly Russia.)

In my mind, these are all factual, and are argueably the 'main outline as planned' facts of U.S. economic and military dominance as outlined by Perle and Feith.

But the other factors already mentioned do have a distinct bearing on the 'main outline'; having a great deal of influence on the timing, 'mid course corrections' and strategy. Thus, oil security is an important part. With this, the U.S. assures itself of enough oil for its own purposes, plus having control of much of the world's oil gives the U.S. political and economic leverage on other countries.

The Petro Dollar/Petro Euro situation is important to the U.S. for economic dominance. If more and more countries switch to the Euro, which they are doing, officially or not, that weakens the dollar. It is known that the Euro is in unofficial use for general trade in a number of countries, Russia, former Yugoslavia, non EC European countries and some South American ones. One can get along nicely with Euros there. If the Euro now is the currency for the Iranian oil bourse beginning this month, there will be a cascade effect. Norway has also uttered its wishes for its own bourse in Euros. Venezuela is, I think, preparing for selling its oil at least partly in Euros, and is one of the big oil suppliers. Exactly where this will lead is not for me to predict, but it will spell problems for the Dollar. And I still think that the Iranian oil bourse and its consequences has a great effect on the timing of the coming invasion of Iran, as well as 'one more log in the fire' for the reasons to invade. Iranian oil, and the currency it is sold in, must remain under the dominance of the U.S.; Iran is a key nation.

What has not been mentioned in this blog is another reason for all the U.S. military bases, and Iraq plays a great role here with the immense new bases being built, not to mention the large U.S. 'green zone' for colonial rule. The proximity to China, Russia, the whole Middle East, and other populous and cheap labor countries as Pakistan and India are also important for the military/economic dominance.

I am not so sure the Japanese and Chinese holding of huge amounts of U.S. debt is going to continue as it has. Especially China seems to be gradually turning in the direction of the Euro, diminishing its Dollars. Gradual, 'play it as it goes', may be the strategy here, bringing ever increasing pressure on the U.S. economy.

These are a few thoughts put together rather quickly. Perhaps with more input and correction from others, we can form a better outline of what is really happening. I see Engdahl's essay as a general outline, but the other factors such as Petro Dollars/Euros also being of great importance.

At Thursday, March 9, 2006 at 5:55:00 PM GMT, Blogger rkm said...

Thanks Earl, for putting our issues into a broader context, and expressed very clearly.

Cetainly Iran must be considered in the larger geopolitical framework, not only as regards the power of the dollar, and control over oil, but also, as you say, its strategic location.

Zbigniew Brzezinski, in The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives, identifies this region, and in praticular Afghanistan, as being the key to the control of Eurasia.

And we must never forget the PNAC agenda (a product of the neocon crwod), which makes it very clear that global military domination is the objective being pursued:

Here's a question I have: Are Russia and / or China ever going to confront the Evil Empire? From their perspective, they must view America's campaign of conquest and aggression much as we viewed Hitler's initial blitzkrieg attcks. How long are they going to stay on the path of appeasement? What kind of counter-measures might they consider, and where might they be 'drawing the line'?

At Friday, March 10, 2006 at 9:52:00 AM GMT, Blogger rkm said...

Here's a European perspective on what to expect later this month.

"EUROPE 2020 ALARM / Global Systemic Rupture
March 20-26, 2006: Iran/USA - Release of global world crisis":

It begins:
"The Laboratoire européen d’Anticipation Politique Europe 2020 (LEAP/E2020) now estimates to over 80% the probability that the week of March 20-26, 2006 will be the beginning of the most significant political crisis the world has known since the Fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, together with an economic and financial crisis of a scope comparable with that of 1929. This last week of March 2006 will be the turning-point of a number of critical developments, resulting in an acceleration of all the factors leading to a major crisis, disregard any American or Israeli military intervention against Iran. In case such an intervention is conducted, the probability of a major crisis to start rises up to 100%, according to LEAP/E2020."

At Monday, March 13, 2006 at 8:58:00 AM GMT, Blogger rkm said...

I don't mean to open a discussion on 911 on this thread. However, FYI, I'd like to let you know about a new, comprehensive video on 911, the best I've seen of the genre. It's by Loose Change and the URL is: Here's their blurb, which I think is accurate:

“'This is the best damn 9-11 documentary out there.' -Dave vonKleist, Producer of '911:In Plane Site' Loose Change is an extremely hard hitting, heavily referenced documentary. It has the best footage that I have seen to date, of all the bombs and explosions going off at the World Trade Center. He covers each individual aspect of 9/11 in keen detail, and after watching 'Loose Change' it is almost impossible to walk away and not believe that 9/11 was engineered, not by Osama, but by our own Government.”

911 is relevant to "what to expect", as it speaks to the modus operandi of the regime. But debating 911 here would be,I suspect, off-topic for most of us.


Post a Comment

<< Home