Thanks Thanks:  0
Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005

    Rumors on the net - Iran related...

    In other forums I am finding very strange comments and rumors. That rumors say that the situation we are living now in the world (war on Iraq, the planning of attacks against Iran) are framed in a major plan that consists in establish a global force to give the United States full power against all other countries.

    The reason to do this is that the U.S. economy is in the edge of bankruptcy.

    The rumors says that there are a series of measures to be taken in the next days, to obtain global domination before that situation gets its critical point.

    The rumors also says that the reason for invading Irak (and now Iran) was the desire of Hussein of authorize countries to pay for oil in euros instead of U.S. dollars, a thing that would affect American economy. It seems that now Iran wants to do the same thing.

    It seems to me that this maybe is exageration or conspiracy theories, but since I don't have too much economic knowledge I want to ask you what do you think about.

    Here are the links that are at the center of those rumors, as far as I have found:

    - The Next 90 Days Could Bring Nuclear War And A U.S. Financial Collapse
    - The Plan 2000
    - The Proposed Iranian Oil Bourse, from

    On the past weeks I saw an American man talking on TV here in Venezuela about President Bush's desires to declare Martial Law, but since he was talking in the government's TV channel, I didn't want to hear him (we have a problematic government here now).

    Now I'm finding those comments in internet that not seem to be serious. If the world would be in a better situation I would give bit attention to this, but you know that's not the case.

    Important note: I have asked permission to publish this to Jean-Pierre Bazinet and he gave me authorization. I want to clarify this because while I was writing this Jean-Pierre closed the other thread about Iran. So, you know that this one was authorized by him. Thank you all for your attention

    Edit: Another thing that call my attention is this:

    Iraqi Army was ranked 5th in the world given its number of tanks, fighters, bombers and men.

    Yugoslavian Army was ranked 7th in the world on the same base.

    In both cases, after well known episodes in recent history, those armies were degraded in that rank due to the loss of equipment and operativity.

    When the United States were on its campaign on Kosovo, one bomb accidentally was droped on the Chinese embassy in Yugoslavia.

    When the United States were in a mission in Irak, I believe after Hussein's fall, a Tomahawk missile impacted on Turkey's ground, apparently by accident.

    Some years ago, in the 90s, a Norwegian missile for atmospheric studies, apparently by accident, turned aside of its course and caused an instant alarm in Russia's defensive system and even president Yeltsin appeared on TV with his nuclear briefcase, a device that can allow him to activate armed systems for an counter-attack in the case of nuclear agression against Russia.

    After I have created the thread, I remember all this. Curiosly, this seems to match with what I'm saying here.

    Also curious: In the armies' lists available on wikipedia you can find this:

    - In the list of countries by military expenditures, Iran appears at the 25th position with an investment of 4,300,000,000 US$ in its armed forces in 2003 (In Iran ranks 13 in a similar list, due to its US$ 9.7 billion destined to the armed forces in 2000)

    - In the list of countries by active troops, Iran appears in the 6th position with 755,000 troops

    - And in the list of countries by size of armed forces, Iran is in position 8th

    So, in the context of this theories, Iran maybe in the same position as Iraq and Yugoslavia in the past.

    Here are the lists, all from wikipedia:

    - List of countries by military expenditures
    - List of countries by number of active troops
    - List of countries by size of armed forces

    One reflection: Commenting in another forum about the movie Thirteen Days, I get this:

    (source, data)

    I remember that Hitler, in Mein Kampf, said something about the imperial desires of Russia, England and the United States. He spoke in a way that may suggest this scenario: "What I will do if all my other neighbors are getting high concentrations of power by means that maybe I can use and, if I don't, then they will have strong power and if in the future I have problems with them, then, what will I do?"

    Also, once someone told me that Japan was in the same situation as Germany, looking how the United States had bases for its armed forces through the Pacific. Remember that Japan is a country that have fought against the influences from another countries because Japan knows his own capacity and is happy with its culture and liberty.

    What I want to say is that the tremendous power of the United States can provoke extreme reactions in another countries, as I have just exposed before, because those other countries can have fear of what its destiny would be under slavery. I'm not trying to defend anything, I'm only studing possibilities.

    Can this be the actual situation of Iran?

    On the other hand, what are the fears of the United States...?
    Last edited by jmcc; 04-10-2006 at 06:25 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    NYC, USA
    jmcc I must really thank you for writing some of the most coherent and well-researched posts I've seen in recent memory. I have a tendency to go into CAPS and **** around the 2nd or 3rd reply in the thread but lol I'm a very opinionated guy and sometimes people need to be shouted at (something I learned listening to many meetings of the United Nations here in NY).

    You raised too many questions to possibly answer but I think it all comes down to who do you trust. I think there are too many people researching things in the US to really allow for any major cover-ups. We pretty much have infaltion numbers down to a 1/10000 because people put money on things like that.

    Not to raise some Nazi discussion here but I REALLY respect people who have read things by Hitler, Marx, and the other essential political writers of humanity, Tacitus, Livy, Machiavelli, Sun Tzu....endless list. After I read Mein Kempf I found that Hitler was no different than people we applaud for being labor union leaders and such. I consider the guy an idiot due to his decisions in the war but he was liked because he was to the Germans what FDR was to the Americans. Similarly I feel Marx is vastly misunderstood and for some reason associated with Lenin and Stalin with whom his ideaology had very little in common. Marx mostly said that one day people will be so equal in all industries that it will essentially be a socialist system, which is a perfectly reasonable assumption since we have job guarantees and minimum wage and things like that.

    I don't think the US gov't will ever have to worry about money. Data is often misinterpreted and recently there was a series of articles in Forbes and Fortune that the reason our numbers for the Bush administration look so bad is that most of them have financial yields 10 years into the future and earnings from those expenditures have not yet been realized. There is an unimaginable amount of wealth here, it mostly comes from the fact that America owns much of the world. Goldman Sachs has assets that have territories larger than most countries and Exxon owns huge lots of land all over the world. The GDP of the NY metropolitan area exceeds that of Russia. The weak dollar is a controversial monetary play by our gov't that diminishes our foreign debt and while there are drawbacks I think the pros outweight the cons.

    As for Iran: militarily it is not capable of posing a threat to any US force. Their fleet is old and their submarines loud. US cruisers and destroyers could engage and sink those ships before the Iranians even saw us on radar. Air superiority is not a question either as again the US equips fighters with missles that have many times the range of Iranian missles and US has countrywide radar coverage while Iran has to depend on regional radar.

    As far as a ground war goes I am not for it, within the first 24 hours of a potential war there will not be an intact airfield or militray base left. Without air support tanks are sitting ducks, without tanks troops have no cover. This entire war could be won from the air and the progressive gov't that is currently imprisoned could be placed into power to result in a pro-western gov't. More land for Exxon and GE, great, as a side effect those people will be better off, even though I'd rather have them dead.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Quote Originally Posted by jmcc

    What I want to say is that the tremendous power of the United States can provoke extreme reactions in another countries, as I have just exposed before, because those other countries can have fear of what its destiny would be under slavery.
    Thanks in the first place for this extremely informative post. The situation is grim but its a bit premature to comment. The United States postion of power is undisputed. That does make other countries insecure and maybe even arouses a bit of jealousy but half the world can hardly stop playing poodle to America. Everyone knows that to be in the United States favour is a position of profit currently and if it comes down to war, hardly any country will stand up to the U.S.

    For example, if you know our (India's) history with Pakistan, during Bush's visit recently the Government swelled with pride under U.S.A.'s stamp of approval but expressed insecurity over his visit to Pakistan.That is the power of U.S. today. Which other country can get away with an invasion in these times?

    About the nuclear war, it hardly seems likely because, according to me, every person who has any power would try his utmost to avert a nuclear threat. There is something very inhuman in the use of a nuclear weapon, not that it takes a lot of lives but, you know, it kills something in the relationships between nations, it changes the lives of all the people living in the world. Just the fact that a nuclear weapon has been used somewhere in the world is very devastating and difficult to come to terms with.
    This also should be true that the use of nuclear power would alienate the U.S. from all other nations and if it uses a nuclear weapon, no other country would like to be bracketed with it. Because the use of a nuclear weapon would create a lot of horror, hatred, loss of security and credibilitiy in the world we live.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Prague, Czech Republic
    <<<<< profit >>>>>>
    Me angry! Where´s my food!

    My DVD Collection, My Blu-ray collection

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    NYC, USA
    Quote Originally Posted by st39.6
    <<<<< profit >>>>>>
    that's what wars are always about



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts