Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

lquadland10 (< 20)

Battle Ships on the way to IRAN,

Recs

4

September 04, 2008 – Comments (5) | RELATED TICKERS: SLV , GLD , USO

THIS IS WHY THE MARKET WENT DOWN.   OH MY GOD AND NOT ONE THING ON THE NEWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

5 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On September 04, 2008 at 9:24 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

OK> I just went back to get rest of the information. What is true and what is not. Why is everything so peaceful. Or am I having a panic attack? . Here is what I could find. . Any attack 'will start world war': Iran   The West Australian - Aug 30 6:43 AMA senior military commander warned that any attack on Iran would start a new world war, as Tehran pressed on with its controversial nuclear drive despite the risk of further UN sanctions. Who are the real terrorists?   The Western Courier - Aug 29 7:02 AMRecently, the largest armada of naval ships since the first Gulf War was sent to the Persian Gulf. This took place after HR 362 was passed in the House of Representatives; the purpose of this resolution is to impose a blockade on all petroleum products into Iran as well as an inspection on all goods and services by any form of transportation. Putin's visions of grandeur bog down in new world order   World Tribune - Sep 01 11:06 AMGlobalization – the intensive intertwining complex of technology and economics – has turned old fashioned power politics into an even more complicated game. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his strategists may be finding that out the hard way. Iran warns any attack would start 'world war'   Space War - Aug 31 7:57 PMby Staff Writers Tehran (AFP) Aug 30, 2008 A senior Iranian military commander has warned that any US or Israeli attack on the Islamic republic would start a new world war, the state news agency IRNA reported on Saturday.

Report this comment
#2) On September 04, 2008 at 9:43 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Pictures you don't see everyday.

Report this comment
#3) On September 04, 2008 at 10:41 PM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

So let the debate begin? How can we trade this?  What would be some good advice to trade this? The Western Courier - Aug 29 7:02 AM  Could this be the reason the Market tanked? Recently, the largest armada of naval ships since the first Gulf War was sent to the Persian Gulf. This took place after HR 362 was passed in the House of Representatives; the purpose of this resolution is to impose a blockade on all petroleum products into Iran as well as an inspection on all goods and services by any form of transportation.

Despite virtually no media coverage on this event, we're told this is happening because Iran is enriching uranium for the purpose of making weapons of mass destruction.

First, it is legal for Iran to enrich uranium. The Non-Proliferation Treaty states that Iran has the "inalienable right to develop, research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination." As of yet, Iran has not been found in violation, even after 14 surprise inspections by the United Nations.

However, government officials continue to scare the public into believing that Iran will have atomic weapons in a few years. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, "Iran has provided the agency with access to declared nuclear materials and has provided the required nuclear accountability reports in connection with declared nuclear material and facilities."

The only shortcoming of Iran's Atomic Policy is that it was accepted in 2003, but has not passed through its parliament giving information as to design information for new facilities. The National Intelligence Estimate, which is made up of 16 United States intelligent bodies, has said that, "Iran's nuclear program is civil and not geared towards war."

In 1953, with the help of the British, the U.S. overthrew the democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammad Mossadegh. We put in place another puppet government like so many before in the form of the Shah of Iran. The Shah was a dictator who eliminated all political rebellion. We also sold Iran its first nuclear reactor for energy purposes in 1967. Let's not forget about the Iran-Contra scandal, during which we sold Iran more than 1,500 missiles.Recently, journalist Seymour Hersh reported that Vice President Dick Cheney suggested "having (Navy) Seals dress up as Iranians in fake Iranian PT boats and start a shootout in the Straights of Hormuz." This sounds a lot like when President Bush and Tony Blair discussed using a U2 spy plane painted with U.N. colors to provoke an attack from Iraq prior to invasion. Our government says that "they" are the terrorists when we are imposing embargoes, sanctions, military actions, threats and assassinations on those who do not do our will. Is it any wonder a majority of the Middle East does not like the U.S.?

Dictionary.com gives this definition of terrorism: "the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes."

I am not by any means a fan of Iran, but I believe that this upcoming conflict with Iran is unnecessary and unconstitutional. Also, we must remember the outcome at the pump. Before the Iraq war, the average barrel of crude oil was around $27; it now costs around $114 a barrel. If this embargo is put in place, we will again see the rise of the price of oil and an even higher energy concern. Preemptive strikes are an act of war, whether they are bombs from a plane or an embargo. It also seems like the U.S. government continues to push this atomic bomb deadline back further every year that we get closer to it.

It seems like Iran will be another war built on lies and deception, much like the current war. Is this True? Could this be the reason the market tanked today? How do you trade this?

Report this comment
#4) On September 05, 2008 at 9:26 AM, givmeabreak (28.52) wrote:

Oil needs a kick in tha pants from a new conflict and the administration has little time left to go to the well one more time.

Too much money to be made on oil and defense for the gov't to not give it a shot before either new party takes office.

Bush has to owe favors. This could be a big payoff opportunity. That and who cares what peoples' reactions will be. He has no credibility left to lose and lots of money and influence to gain. What does he care, its not his problem anymore once he's out.

Report this comment
#5) On September 05, 2008 at 11:22 AM, lquadland10 (< 20) wrote:

Dear give. I see your point. I know he does not follow the law and it would be nice if congress did. All they have to do is pass a law that says he can't. They won't. Where did all the members of congress go who say they believe in god.Where have all the Christians gone?

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement