Peak Oil is You

Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)

Page added on August 29, 2019

Bookmark and Share

The CIA’s Dark Prince Doesn’t Want War With Iran

The CIA’s Dark Prince Doesn’t Want War With Iran thumbnail

Two comments last week highlight the dangerous security impasse in which Iran and the U.S. find themselves. The first was from Iran’s spiritual leader, the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, that maritime security will remain at risk if its oil exports continue to be compromised. The second was from U.S. Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, that sanctions may be applied on any country that helps the Iranian tanker Adrian Darya 1 as it makes its way back to Iran through the Mediterranean, having been released by the U.K. overseas territory of Gibraltar.

“Iran’s view is now that the U.S. will not launch the full-scale military attack that was previously expected, that the U.S. is increasingly isolated in its actions against Iran among its allies in Europe and even in the U.K.,” a senior source who works closely with Iran’s Petroleum Ministry told last week. “At the same time, Iran believes it can lever the U.S. back into a newly renegotiated nuclear deal involving the removal of all sanctions,” he added.

Up until a couple of months or so ago, the U.S. was actively considering a full-scale military operation against Iran and was “98 per cent ready” for such an all-out attack, according to senior political sources in Washington and London spoken to by last week. “The remaining two percent involved the final movement of men and materiel into attack positions and finalising the technology and software involved,” said one. “At that point, [John] Bolton [U.S. National Security Advisor] was the dominant voice in [U.S. President Donald] Trump’s ear, and this meant moving at least 120,000 troops into position to augment the [U.S.S Abraham Lincoln aircraft] carrier group that was already in place.”

“At about the same point, though, some of the President’s very close longstanding personal advisers and very senior CIA figures persuaded him that it would be an utter disaster, both militarily and economically, given the scale of the Iranian military and the terrain involved, its ability to launch guerrilla warfare anywhere in the world through its military proxies Hezbollah and Hamas and others, and its ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz,” one of the sources added. “In short, it was put to him that such a [full scale] military attack on Iran would lead to consequences potentially of a least the same length as the Afghanistan conflict and of at least the severity of Islamic State’s peak power,” he added. Related: U.S. To “Drown The World” In Oil

As it now stands, the U.S. side is still split. On the one hand, there are the ultra-hawks Bolton and Vice President Mike Pence, the latter of whom notably said that: “The world missed an opportunity last time to confront the regime, but not this time.” Their less war-centric remarks on the subject still find backing from Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, understands.

He and the lesser hawks still prefer the option currently being used of changing the regime in Iran by crippling its economy to such a degree that popular unrest removes the current power structures in the country, particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). To this end, the past few weeks have seen the U.S. end all waivers on importing oil from Iran, designate the IRGC as a foreign terrorist organisation, and sanction 14 individuals and 17 entities linked to Iran’s shadowy Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (‘SPND’ initialism in Farsi).

Senior political sources in Washington have highlighted to that the SPND, working together with the IRGC, has become quite the expert in continuing its nuclear weapons research under the cover of a range of quickly-changing front companies. These can operate unhindered in the international business community by pretending that they are engaged in legitimate non-sanctioned business activity, including accessing traditional finance, credit and banking facilities.

Opposing Bolton and the other hawks in the U.S. are some of the most senior figures in the U.S. intelligence community. One of these, Dan Coats, left his position as Director of National Intelligence U.S. National Intelligence – purportedly over differences with others in the Trump administration over Russia and North Korea – but also shortly after even he testified to a Senate Committee prior to the withdrawal of the U.S from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) deal that there was no indication that Iran was attempting to develop a nuclear weapon and that Tehran remained in compliance with the deal.

Another notable exception to the pro-attack view, understands, is the CIA’s Head of Iran Mission Center, Michael D’Andrea. Known as ‘the Dark Prince’ for his work in the U.S.’s sharp-end counter-terrorism operations after the ‘9/11’ attacks, and even the key figure in organising the elimination of one of Hezbollah’s leaders, Imad Mougniyeh,  in Damascus, in 2008 – when D’Andrea was Head of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center (from 2006) – he has voiced concerns over such an overt military strategy.

According to various intelligence analysts spoken to by, D’Andrea is in favour of dialogue with Iran’s non-IRGC leadership. He is even said to be in favour of talks with Iran’s foremost military leader and the architect of its strategy to create and sustain a ‘crescent of Shia power’ running from Lebanon and Syria through to Iraq and Yemen through asymmetric warfare tactics, the long-serving head of Iran’s al-Quds (‘Jerusalem’) Force, Major General Qassem Soleimani.

The weapons that Iran could use in an asymmetric war are considerable, including further upsetting oil flows (and thus the broader economy and the all-important gasoline prices in the U.S.), undermining the U.S.’s plans in Iraq and Turkey by destabilising the Kurdish populations of each, and increasing tensions between the U.S., China and Russia. They also include fracturing the U.S.’s relationships with its NATO partners in Europe, and upping the tempo of direct attacks against the U.S.’s principal partner in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, through its Houthi allies, who control the Yemeni capital of Sanaa and much of the north of the country.

“Trump is isolated in his position on the Saudi actions in Yemen against the Houthis already, which Iran knows, but by taking the war directly into Saudi sovereign territory, as indicated that they can do at will by the drone attack on the major Shaybah oilfield [which produces around 1 million barrels of oil per day] and refinery complex, this position of backing the Saudis becomes more and more untenable,” the Iran source told Related: A Perfect Storm Is Brewing For US LNG

Iran is looking to push its advantage, the source exclusively told last week, by agreeing to the opening of a Houthi embassy in Tehran, manned initially by 25 Houthi staff. This follows the unofficial appointment in the last few days of Ibrahim Mohammed Mohammed Al-Dailami as an ambassador ‘for the republic of Yemen to the Islamic Republic of Iran’, according to Houthi media sources. “This is all part of [General] Soleimani’s strategy of ‘a thousand short daggers making a thousand cuts against the U.S. for as long it sanctions us [Iran],” the source added.

Isolating the U.S. from Europe has long been at the core of this Iran strategy and the recent vetoing by the U.K. of the U.S. ‘suggestion’ to detain the Iranian tanker Adrian Darya 1 points to a much deeper opposition to the current U.S. strategy on Iran by the key European states. This has been the case form the very moment that the U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA.

This was made worse by the recent revelation by the U.K.’s former ambassador to the U.S., Sir Kim Darroch – that has been disputed by Trump’s team – that Trump abandoned the nuclear deal just to spite former President Barack Obama. Obama was not only the architect of the deal but also a figure who Trump has personally despised since Obama ridiculed him at the White House Correspondents Dinner in 2011, a key catalyst in Trump’s deciding to run for president in the first place, according to multiple reports.

When there were just rumours that the U.S. was going to withdraw from the JCPOA, the European Union’s (E.U.) foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, stated: “This [the JCPOA] is not a bilateral agreement,… so it is clearly not in the hands of any president of any country in the world to terminate [it],…The President of the United States has many powers, but not this one.” After the U.S. withdrew from the deal last May, the E.U. invoked the ‘Blocking Statute’ that effectively bans European companies from following the U.S.’ sanctions on Iran. Concomitant with this, Mogherini said that Brussels would not let the JCPOA deal with Tehran die, adding that: “We are encouraging small and medium enterprises in particular to increase business with and in Iran as part of something that for us is a security priority.”

The then-German Foreign Minister, Sigmar Gabriel, added at that time that: “We also have to tell the Americans that their behaviour on the Iran issue will drive us Europeans into a common position with Russia and China against the U.S.A.” Shortly afterwards, the E.U. – under the leadership of Germany – moved to solve the problem of how to deal with payments accruing from business between the E.U. and Iran by creating the Instrument for Trade and Exchanges (INSTEX).

By Simon Watkins for


17 Comments on "The CIA’s Dark Prince Doesn’t Want War With Iran"

  1. Sissyfuss on Thu, 29th Aug 2019 2:13 pm 

    The US thinks it can bring Iran to heel through the use of monetary strangulation. How is that working for ya?

  2. makati1 on Thu, 29th Aug 2019 5:33 pm 

    Sissyfuss, the US has hit the proverbial brick wall in the ME and it is called Iran. Backed up by two other walls, China and Russia, the US is at an impasse. Even the Saudis are realizing that they will be destroyed in any real war in the Gulf area.

    The US admirals know that to sail into the Gulf is to be sitting ducks for Iranian missiles and don’t want to risk their carriers.

    $200 oil? $20 gas? So be it. Fun to watch…from here.

  3. Sissyfuss on Thu, 29th Aug 2019 5:43 pm 

    Mak, the oligarchs and their political Kabuki puppets are keep the Ponzi going as long as possible so that they can keep their kingly existence without facing the guillotine. These times are becoming repressingly interesting. Will need strong drugs soon.

  4. makati1 on Thu, 29th Aug 2019 5:55 pm 

    Sissyfuss, my favorite is Russian OJ. 1/3 vodka, 2/3 orange juice and ice. ^_^

  5. Theedrich on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 2:59 am 

    Big problem for the U.S.: brinksmanship.  This policy seemed to work well duing the bipolar days of the U.S.-Soviet antagonism.  But for Washington to continue it today is dangerous in the extreme.  Not only Peak Oil, but the Religion of Suicide Bombers, the state of near-war between India and Pakistan, the Chinese expansion into the South China Sea and elsewhere, American existential threats to Russia with missiles in Poland, Romania and on ships in the Baltic and Black Seas, etc., etc., make brinksmanship a suicidal policy today.

    Stupefyingly, the American populace prefers to ignore such dangers as it rots inwardly.  It is concerned only with inverting the cultural and historical norms and practices of many centuries, and in destroying Western civilization.  The political and military elites share the same mentality, and cannot recognize that to engage in brinksmanship is to play with death.  The days of wine and roses are over.

  6. Cloggie on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 3:44 am 

    “Why white evangelicals should panic”

    Sure. The author of the WaPo article, the TalmudTurk Michael Gerson (otherwise floppy wouldn’t post it) should worry about his own tribe. By 2030 at the latest, they will be kosher toast, geopolitically speaking, as they are facing opposition from post-Brexit Europe, Russia, China and US white nationalists.

    Regarding the decline of Christianity getson is gloating about: bring it on! Let’s go full pagan, nay full Roman! Wtf do Aryans have to do with the bible, that is the history of the jewish people? The bible is just good enough to wipe your a* with.

  7. I AM THE MOB on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 4:47 am 


    Russia is a trailer park with nukes.

    Your movement is nothing more than a swan song.

    We run the schools, we run the media.

    You have 4Chan.


  8. Cloggie on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 5:04 am 

    “Russia is a trailer park with nukes.”

    Sure and that sufficed to kick your arse in Crimea, Syria and soon they will merge with Europe, creating a Eurasian continuum aka the New Silk Road.

    “We run the schools, we run the media.
    You have 4Chan.”

    The media, the media… ah you mean these legacy has-beens your president is mocking 24/7.

    And is not exactly 4chan and yet you have to fight me. You don’t wanna know what kind off twitter channels I’m subscribed to. I have never visited 4chan and the last time I visited Stormfront is 15 years ago. Without Infowars, DJT would not be president. And Fox News is now virtually white nationalist.

    Face it, pall, your tribe is losing the battle. Don’t take it from me, I might be a neo-natzi. Take it from your own folks:

    The only interesting question is: who gets what from the Anglo-Zionist loot.

  9. I AM THE MOB on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 6:18 am 


    Israel already annexed the Golan Heights region. Which is where all those billions of barrels of oil was discovered not to long ago.

    That means mission accomplished..

    Just like we built a base in Afgan like we wanted. And took control of the oil in Iraq and Libya.

  10. Cloggie on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 6:36 am 

    Now here is another Gerson, no doubt from the same tribe, singing the praise of 17th century Holland and its immense influence all around the world at the time:

    I lot I didn’t know about my own country. When I walked into the city center 2 days ago of Danzig/Gdansk, or “Danswijck” as the Dutch name was back then, I thought I was walking straight into Amsterdam (albeit without the canals and Moroccans)…

    …because it was built by Dutch architects, as Gerson explains:

    You have got to give it to floppy’s tribe: knowing things is their core business. It’s just that they have the tendency to set unrealistic, megalomanic goals (“NWO”), that always goes at the cost of others, who sooner or later invariably revolt:

    Look at me, I’m a train on a track
    I’m a train, I’m a train, I’m a chucka train, yeah
    Look at me, got a load on my back
    I’m a train, I’m a train, I’m a chucka train, yeah

  11. Cloggie on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 6:42 am 

    Just like we built a base in Afgan like we wanted. And took control of the oil in Iraq and Libya.

    We’ve been through this several times before….

    Donnie wants to withdraw from Afghanistan. Bye-bye base.

    There is no US control over Iraqi or Libyan oil.

    Your own ethno-pals admitted that the US handed over Iraq to Iran:

    Same source: Iran now at Israeli border:

  12. I AM THE MOB on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 8:21 am 


    Let me prove how ignorant you are about oil and energy.

    Iraq | ExxonMobil

    Iraq. ExxonMobil has two affiliates operating in Iraq: ExxonMobil Iraq Ltd. (EMIL) and ExxonMobil Kurdistan Region of Iraq Ltd. … In January 2010, EMIL signed an agreement with the South Oil Company of the Iraq Ministry of Oil to rehabilitate and redevelop the West Qurna I field in southern Iraq.

  13. I AM THE MOB on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 8:23 am 

    U.S. Companies Get Slice of Iraq’s Oil Pie

  14. Cloggie on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 8:32 am 

    “Iraq. ExxonMobil has two affiliates operating in Iraq: ExxonMobil Iraq Ltd. (EMIL) and ExxonMobil Kurdistan Region of Iraq Ltd. … In January 2010, EMIL signed an agreement with the South Oil Company of the Iraq Ministry of Oil to rehabilitate and redevelop the West Qurna I field in southern Iraq.”

    There is only here that is (wilfully) ignorant, and that is you.

    You claimed that the US is “in control” of Iraqi oil. That is not the case, as your quote proves. In control is the Iraqi government, Exxon Mobile is merely hired to get the oil above the ground. Here is a list of international oil companies operating in Iraq:

    Chinese, Russian, Italian, Arab, British, Japanese, Turkish… oh yes, I almost forgot: American.

    According to floppy they must be all “in control” of Iraqi oil.


    You are so delusional!

    Are you by any chance from Middleville, MI?

  15. Robert Inget on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 9:31 am 


    Current and former spies are floored by President Donald Trump’s fervent defense of Russia at this year’s G7 summit in Biarritz, France.
    “It’s hard to see the bar anymore since it’s been pushed so far down the last few years, but President Trump’s behavior over the weekend was a new low,” one FBI agent who works in counterintelligence told Insider.

    At the summit, Trump aggressively lobbied for Russia to be readmitted into the G7, refused to hold it accountable for violating international law, blamed former President Barack Obama for Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and expressed sympathy for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
    One former senior Justice Department official, who worked closely with the former special counsel Robert Mueller when he was the FBI director, told Insider Trump’s behavior was “directly out of the Putin playbook. We have a Russian asset sitting in the Oval Office.

    A former CIA operative told Insider the evidence is “overwhelming” that Trump is a Russian agent, but another CIA and NSA veteran said it was more likely Trump was currying favor with Putin for future business deals.

    Meanwhile, a recently retired FBI special agent told Insider that Trump’s freewheeling and often unfounded statements make it more likely that he’s a “useful idiot” for the Russians. But “it would not surprise me in the least if the Russians had at least one asset in Trump’s inner circle.”
    Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.
    “It’s hard to see the bar anymore since it’s been pushed so far down the last few years, but President Trump’s behavior over the weekend was a new low.”

    That was the assessment an FBI agent who works in counterintelligence gave Insider of President Donald Trump’s performance at this year’s G7 summit in Biarritz, France. The agent requested anonymity because they feared that speaking publicly on the matter would jeopardize their job.

    Trump’s attendance at the G7 summit was peppered with controversy, but none was more notable than his fervent defense of Russia’s military and cyber aggression around the world, and its violation of international law in Ukraine.

    Trump repeatedly refused to hold Russia accountable for annexing Crimea in 2014, blamed former President Barack Obama for Russia’s move to annex it, expressed sympathy for Russian President Vladimir Putin, and castigated other G7 members for not giving the country a seat at the table.

    Since being booted from the G8 after annexing Crimea, Russia’s done little to make up for its actions. In fact, by many accounts, it’s stepped up its aggression.

    In addition to continuing to encroach on Ukraine, the Russian government interfered in the 2016 US election and was behind the attempted assassination of a former Russian spy in the UK. US officials also warn that as the 2020 election looms, the Russians are stepping up their cyber-activities against the US and have repeatedly tried to attack US power grids.

    “What in God’s name made Trump think it would be a good idea to ask to bring Russia back to the table?” the FBI agent told Insider. “How does this serve US national-security interests?”

  16. I AM THE MOB on Fri, 30th Aug 2019 8:50 pm 

    US intelligence suggests Russia was fishing Putin’s doomsday missile out of the sea when it mysteriously exploded

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *