When I really really think about it I believe yes all these fuckers are stone cold crazy.

The US rattles a very impressive sabre and has a history of using it deftly thus Iran cannot possibly be laughing when considering the last few years of disagreements and the current situation, positions and posturings.

Yet we were thinking the same thing last year.

Perhaps Iran is special?
One of the last few just small enough to pick on but big enough to really worry and train for type competitors.
Whoa now I am wondering silly thoughts like wether the Neocons are capable of self doubt and mistakes

Do I spy neocon weakness? can that be?
No one has stopped them so far - why would Iran pose a problem?

ahhh Russia and China .......Say hello to Irans lil frens
or so it seems........

Is the world really divided?
I have trouble with this thought - easy for me to believe the whole thing is rather manipulated and only a few "rogue" nations are able to resist control such as Iran and only after a revolution type event.
Venezuala would be a similar nation.

That is what I really question.
Will Russia and China serve their own interests or is that part of the Illusion?

Allow Iran to feel overly confident by covertly promising support, false flag operation similar to 100's of people chanting WMD WMD WMD prior to attacking Iraq and THEN when the ball drops..... overtly show disdain and cooperate fully with the "authorities"

Later on.... meet in a pub and split the winnings.......cheers comrades and drinks all around!!!

They´re dumping the dollars and we all know what happened after the neighbour did that...

Russia and China aren´t ready yet and are doing so well in their chosen areas of conflict that it´d be a bad move to start overt manouvering imho. Thus I bet on the 'pub'-scenario.

UN votes to impose sanctions on Iran.

Yahoo News

I mentioned on November 15 that Iran may stop exporting oil by 2016. John Hopkins has pushed forward that date to 2014:



Bloomberg



The Peninsula - Qatar

..... but in fact it could soon face its own energy crunch owing to failing infrastructure and lack of investments, Roger Stern at Johns Hopkins University said.



That was priceless... 'falling infrastructure and lack of investments...' As if one can re-fill an old oil field by tossing money at it.

Iran will be ut of the oil game for all eternity. This is an amazing event to contemplate. This is going to very soon really complicate matters in the ME, especially after Iran's nuclear power infrastructure gets bombed to smithereens.

Wait 'till their down, then start kicking. (sarcasm)

The Iran situation is only being discussed in dollar terms. What is the depletion situation there? Are their exports falling because they're running out, or because their infrastructure is falling apart?

Infrastructure. The point in the report is that they´ll need their own oil for domestic purposes in about ten years if it isn´t helped.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Well, its both. I think its important to review some recent history.
Iran reached peak oil in 1974 with production around 6.1 mb/d. In fact, in August 1974 the late Shah of Iran envisioned a time when the world’s oil supply would run out, and famously declared: “Petroleum is a noble material, much too valuable to burn…We envision producing as soon as possible, 23,000 megawatts of electricity using nuclear plants.”

Realizing that Iran’s oil supply was finite and that maintaining the standard of living of its people would require the construction of nuclear power plants, the Shah asked Washington if US companies could assist Iran in building 23 nuclear power plants by the year 2000. Ironically, a couple of young men in the Ford administration, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, formally approved Iran’s plans —including full domestic enrichment of Iran’s large uranium ore deposits.

Thus, Iran’s nuclear program began 30 years ago under the autocratic dictatorship of the Shah, which had the full blessing of the Ford administration. In one of the few examples of honest US reporting on this subject, a May 2005 article in Washington Post revealed today’s hypocrisy towards Iran’s long-standing nuclear energy ambitions:

Dafna Linzer, “Past Arguments Don't Square With Current Iran Policy,” Washington Post, March 27, 2005; Page A15, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Mar26.html



According to a Washington Post interview with Gary Sick, who handled nonproliferation issues under presidents Ford, Carter, and Reagan, the original Iranian nuclear program was based on “trust.” Sick acknowledged that the same rationale used by the Shah — Iran’s finite and declining oil resources in conjunction with its growing population — logically necessitated the development of nuclear power in order to preserve Iran’s valuable oil resources for cash-earning exports. Sick stated:



Although Iran does retain a tremendous amount of natural gas ready for export, its oil production is in permanent decline. Washington-based PFC Energy recently reported that Iran’s oil production is declining by 500,000 b/d per year, and without drastic changes, it will become a net importer of oil by 2016.

While one can reasonably doubt the intentions of some Iranian officials, I propose that Washington’s real goals regarding Iran are effectively the same as Iraq: (1) regime change, with the installation of a pliant-puppet regime that will give US/UK multinational oil and gas companies lucrative production sharing agreements of Iran’s oil and natural gas reserves, (2) further expanding the US empire of bases and thereby gaining strategic control of the vital pipeline routes from Iran into Central and East Asia - and thus control/dictate the economies of the G7 industrialized nations, and (3) thwart Iran’s international oil bourse that could threaten the status quo of the petrodollar system.

Of course neither Russia nor China will approve this plan, and as we witnessed last week - nor will they approve of punitive UN sanctions concerning Tehran’s nuclear energy program.

Just my 2cts worth.

This reminds me of that Cheney quote a year or so ago where he said Israel may take pre-emptive action of its own. I'm sure its linked here somewhere, would be nice to read it again.

The US's economic warfare against Iran continues. US declares Iranian bank a weapons proliferator.

Yahoo News

US puts financial squeeze on Iranian oil projects by using political pressure to stop foriegn financing.





Iran Watch

With all those actions US is likely to be doing some favour to Iran.
Crippling their oil production now, will allow Iran to develope its production later, when oil is even more scarce and expensive.

Blackmailing China is also pointless exercise. After all China may begin selling their dollar assets in retaliation.

IMO US has very limited choice of available options against Iran.
War (may be even one with nukes use) is certainly one of them, but consequences are entirely unpredictable.
Russian sales of efficient antiship cruise missiles and air defence systems to Iran does not make this option any easier to execute.
UN Security Council resolutions will do little or nothing at all (if not vetoed by Russians or Chineese in the first place).
Sabre rattling is something done at the moment, but there is no efect of it.

Overally there are 3 solutions left.
1. Do nothing and accept Iran as new regional power with nuclear arms few years from now on.
2. Go to war (possibly with nukes use) and hope for the best.
3. Take whatever halfmeasures one wish to take and accept identical outcome like in 1, perhaps delayed by 1 or 2 years.

Do I understand that Bush's "surge" is in fact an "ethnic purge" directed towards Sunni elements that a pose a considerable threat to a "pacified Iraq"--i. e., a threat to the implementation of the forthcoming "Hydrocarbon Law" which essentially gives the major oil corporations carte blanche access to Iraqi oil.

Now we see more nuclear sabre-rattling a-la Winter 2006??

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/010807R.shtml

Would that make any sense?
That puts US in a colission course with SA who do not want to see a shia ruled Iraq. Furthermore that would strengthen Iran's future influence of the country.

More likely they will try to shoot indiscrimently until noone moves and then divide the country between the stakeholders and attempt to grap the oil rich parts or form alliances with those who get control and ensure US companies are in running the business.

Bloomberg



IRNA