7 Signs War with Iran is Imminent

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

ayatoilet1
by ayatoilet1
18-Jul-2011
 

1.       Financial collapse in Western Europe. We’re reading about Greece, but it’s not Just Greed, its Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain …which countries have I missed? They are all teetering on near collapse. And Germany simply doesn’t have enough money to bail them all out. Solution? War.

2.       Need for massive inflation (to effectively write off debt) in US (and Western Europe). One thing about a War with Iran, probably the first reaction by Iran would be the closure of the Straits of Hormuz, with that essentially 40% of the world’s oil shipments would stop, and with that a huge spike in oil prices. That would then lead to massive inflation in the West. Perfect! No? Bread worth $2.99 today would become $29.99. US sovereign debt would stay at $14Trillion, meanwhile, with all this inflation, US GDP will rise from $15 Trillion to $140 Trillion.

3.       Need for massive government cash infusion to save the US economy. While all this inflationary pressure is going on, the US government will actually be able to pump money into the economy and start new industries and employment in support of the war. A perfect solution to the economic crisis.

4.       Reduction in oil imports. US is going through a lot of pain reducing its dependence on foreign oil, ethanol production is threatening water supplies, us poultry and meat industry with high feedstock prices …yet it’s a national priority. Imports by the way have dropped 25%, ethanol and biodiesel are now being produced to the tune of billions of gallons a year. If war wasn’t imminent and oil supplies from the Persian Gulf were not threatened why would US federal government put mainstay industries like Poultry and Meat and water supplies across the Midwest at risk? 

5.       India is being groomed as an anti-Iran ally. A Series of Bombings in India by radical Muslims is galvanizing popular support for a war against Muslims)

6.       Robert Baer Says so.   A seasoned, 21 year veteran of US intelligence says so. And he even details how the war is designed to Start.(Read the Article to the left of the Blog Column)

7.       Leon Panneta is the new Secretary of Defense, and David Petraeus is the new head of CIA.       Robert Gates retired, and in welcoming Panneta said “I have a feeling you’ll be secretary for a lot longer that you might imagine”. Now which President will change Defense Secretaries in the middle of a war? By the way, I actually think a war with Iran will boost Obama’s re-election prospects, but that is just me. 

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by ayatoilet1CommentsDate
Keep Boycotting BP
14
Dec 01, 2012
The War on Oil – Part 2
3
Nov 30, 2012
The War on Oil – Part 1
1
Nov 30, 2012
more from ayatoilet1
 
hirre

Military strikes against Iran

by hirre on Tue Jul 19, 2011 12:30 AM PDT

Military strikes against Iran will most probably not occur if we actually read current military reports from different military organizations (public available ones) and not just listening to veterens telling their own stories to different news groups.

In summory: the reason for this is that a conventional war will impact the region and the rest of the world in such a way that the long term desired effect will not be reached.

The only way to "wage war" against Iran is through sanctions and hoping the society will implode one day. However the risk is that like giving antibiotics for bacterial infections, Iran might develop immunity against most sanctions.

The only way sanctions could really affect Iran is if it could target Iran's oil exports heavily in the short terms. If it doesn't affect Iran's oil revenues in the short terms Iran will be able to use the oil money for investments in order to create dominant position in other technological fields. If Iran becomes dominant in other fields (which is good for the country and the people) and hence becomes less dependent on oil exports, then the west will have lost the sanctions war.

In my opinion the US will treat Iran as it treats Cuba. The difference is that Iran will economically be more challenging for the US.


  •  
Sheila K

war is followed after sanctions

by Sheila K on Mon Jul 18, 2011 10:59 PM PDT

Clearly US and many countries have tightened sanctions against Iran the next thing on the agenda is military actions. How they will deliver that is unknown--I'd really HATE to see anyone in Iran get hurt. 


  •  
Golinedairani

"چون ايران

Golinedairani
Mon Jul 18, 2011 06:25 PM PDT

"چون ايران نباشد تن من مباد"    There is no impending war with Iran the notion is ludicrous, where will the US bring the troops from? 

  •  
amirparvizforsecularmonarchy

War helps domination of resources and subjugation of political

by amirparvizforsecularmonarchy on Mon Jul 18, 2011 05:46 PM PDT

groups.

I don't see it for a few years, expecting it this september is wishful thinking.  Timing matters alot and there are too many unsolved fundamental economic issues for major powers that must first be resolved or else the true undeclared mission of the war would be put in jeopardy.

No one goes to war with out motives they are 1005 Certain they can achieve.

No one can really do a thing to stop these wars, irans future is very bleak, because the iranian people don't have even an outside possibility of confronting the powers which are united against them.  Look at how well they handled removing the new regime the west imposed on them in 1979.  I can't see iranians negotiating anything in their favor against the powers that are dominating them today.  That would be wishful thinking based on results.  May take 5 to 10 years for russia/usa to iron out their differences and make destroying the peanut, which is iran, with the sledge hammer, which is the usa/israel possible.

If they get the a-bomb before then, then the mullahs will impact the future more than anyone wants to admit, not the eventual outcome though.

 

 

 


  •  
ayatoilet1

Tell me something Incognito

by ayatoilet1 on Mon Jul 18, 2011 03:49 PM PDT

Yes, you are right since 9/11 (and actually even before many have cried wolf - some of them have been opportunists. But I am not one, there is no opportunity here for me ...no cash, no fame ...and I am certainly no neo-con, no former agent (read my blogs and history).

Yes, toilet training is a must; but maybe there is a nugget of reality here. Its worth at least a glancing read, and analysis. I did not create these events, I am just observing. right here 5 out 6 bloggers (so far) agree that these signs do point to something. I hope they really dont. And I hope there is positive change in Iran with no blood shed. But check out the signs....brother...and by the way, there are more signs, not listed here.


  •  
vildemose

Another sign is the US

by vildemose on Mon Jul 18, 2011 02:16 PM PDT

Another sign is the US actually allowing the IRGC to attack Kurds in Iraq...This is a trap...and the idiots have fallen for it...

 Listen to today's NPR: listen to the entire audio...the last part is very telling...

part//www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?paction=1&t=1&islist=false&id=138476660&m=138476653


  •  
incognito

Toiletarian Guile

by incognito on Mon Jul 18, 2011 12:56 PM PDT


Crying wolf is the bread and butter of crafty talking heads and pundit-for-hire conspiracy theorists. Since 9/11, “War with Iran” has brought fame and fortune for far too many opportunistic pseudo-journalists, latter-day historians, eager-to-cash-in ex-spies, neo-con clairvoyants, and agent provocateurs.

Nowadays, toilet training is a must. As we say in Persian,“The audience must be circumspect.”


  •  
RostamZ

I disagree

by RostamZ on Mon Jul 18, 2011 08:58 AM PDT

  The war is detremintal to economy of all countries involoved. Its long term effects is also not predictable or well understood.

  It might well be that the west decides to go to war but I doube it will be over economoy. 


  •  
Bavafa

I sure hope this never happens...

by Bavafa on Mon Jul 18, 2011 08:34 AM PDT

As war is not an answer to the American people's problem and sure as hell is not an answer to Iranian people's problem.

But if it does happen --

All of us here in West that some how encourged such action or even stayed silenced in our opposition to a possible war will bare some responsibility in our lack of activisum.

'Vahdat' is the main key to victory 

Mehrdad


  •  
vildemose

Leon Panneta is the new

by vildemose on Mon Jul 18, 2011 07:36 AM PDT

Leon Panneta is the new Secretary of Defense, and David Petraeus is the new head of CIA.       Robert Gates retired, and in welcoming Panneta said “I have a feeling you’ll be secretary for a lot longer that you might imagine”. Now which President will change Defense Secretaries in the middle of a war? By the way, I actually think a war with Iran will boost Obama’s re-election prospects, but that is just me.

That is the biggest sign...


  •  
Soosan Khanoom

Just an alibi

by Soosan Khanoom on Mon Jul 18, 2011 06:28 AM PDT

America's foreign policy has pretty much always been one of utter duplicity and deceit...... It has always been done in the best interest of the commerce or the corporations.

Here is just one site that lists the US involvement in regime changes whereby a benign or democratically elected leader was replaced by a ruthless tyrant in exchange for economic concessions ~ //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Covert_...change_actions ~


  •