Iranian revolt Explained - Wake Up!

China 'deeply committed' to North Korea sanctions: US official

WASHINGTON (AFP) — China has given its word to the United States that it is "deeply committed" to implementing tough new nuclear sanctions against North Korea, a senior US official said Friday.

The official also said that as part of the effort to put a straitjacket on Pyongyang after its latest nuclear test and missile launches, Washington had set up an inter-agency team to coordinate the sanctions with other nations.

"They are certainly saying quite strenuously that they are deeply committed to full implementation of the provisions that are in the resolution," the senior administration official said, referring to China.

Nothing really new here, anyone who knows anything about the world and it's history would come across the same assumptions. That being said, the amount of people wowing over the obvious shows how insular America has become.

reply to post by rogue1


Hey rogue I know how hard that was for you.
Thanks

Has anyone been able to access the anonymous site iran.whyweprotest.net...

it's been down since some time early this morning.

Server maintenance or another reason?

it's back again now.

reply to post by hangerhead


Interesting.
Havent been to that site before.
Anybody know how reputable the links are that they provide?

Originally posted by rogue1
Nothing really new here, anyone who knows anything about the world and it's history would come across the same assumptions. That being said, the amount of people wowing over the obvious shows how insular America has become.

The problem with that statement is the same mistake you always make Rogue.
You assume that everybody that read this thread or visits ATS are Americans.

reply to post by SLAYER69


reasonably accurate - site was set up by the anonymous org and has folk working on verifying what they can

reply to post by hangerhead


The reason I ask is because I saw this article here
US to invade Iran any day now?

12 September, 2008, 05:50

A few weeks ago the Russian newspaper Izvestia, a well-known and authoritive daily published nationwide and abroad, came forward with something that would have been looked upon as a conspiracy theory if published by a tabloid.
Yahoo StumbleUpon Google Live Technorati
Scoop del.icio.us Digg Sphinn Furl Reddit

The paper suggested that by attacking South Ossetia, the Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili had badly damaged a planned U.S. military operation against Iran. In the newspaper's opinion Georgia was supposed to play the role of another “unsinkable aircraft carrier” for the U.S., i.e. an operational and tactical base for U.S. aircraft that would be making bombing raids into Iran. Something akin to what Thailand was in the Vietnam war.

Thailand certainly benefited from the arrangement, and Georgia would have too, insists the paper, if its President hadn't put his ambitions above the US national interest and ended up beaten, disarmed, chewing on his neckties and totally incapable of providing whatever the U.S. needs from him.

I'll have to look into the facts behind this one.

"Ordo Ob Chao"

Create the Chaos so that the new order can then be created.

Nothing new here.

Concerning the Venezulean Dictator, Hugo Chavez..and oil. As I recall...During WW2 theses oil fields were under the control and direction of Occidental Petroleum Company. What was of interest to me was that the contracts for oil to Nazi German ran up to 1943 an oil was delivered to the Nazis under that contract from Venezula. It would seem that some companies are bigger/taller in the pecking order than governments or peoples.

I agree it is about oil.

I was looking at the job openings for a large stateside company with overseas obligations. What I found interesting was the number of civilian contractor jobs in Kazakhstan and also Afganistan..and of course Iraq. Most of these being jobs in the technical fields...computer programs, computer security, training, communications, etc.

I do agree..this is about oil. My initial feeling is that this is about oil...but not in the manner most people think. They want the oil alright..but they want to keep it off the market...yet keep competitors out as the same time. The historical pattern has been to acquire control over certain territories. Like Vietnam...and then under the guise of a war...bring up the infrastructure into the 20th or 21st century standards..at public expense of course. THen carefully keep the bulk of the oil off themarket ...out of the hands of competitors..also not accessable to the people of your country.
Thus keeping prices up and from the standpoint of the buisnesses....stable/profitable.
This is why Alaskan oil went anywhere but the United States..to keep the price of oil up. Vietnamese oil remained in the ground and not on the market....thus keeping prices stable. A communist government gauranteed that no oil or economic progress would happen..and the oil/country essentially remain in storage until the proper time. A communist government is the perfect method or pattern to keep a whole country in storage and its resources off the market. I think a variation of this fingerprint is happening in Iraq. The oil fields and refineries repaired but most of the oil kept off the market to maintain price stability. At the same time in Iraq..under the guise of a war...competitors are being kept out...while the infrastructure is brought into the 21st century at public expense.

Yes it is about oil ..but not in the pattern most people would think.

Oil seems to be a commodity similar to diamonds. The intent is not only to control the supply but the demand as well. Monopolists....and Monopsonists as well.

Oil seems to be a commodity similar to the illegal drug buisness..to many competitors on one corner..they will turn on each other lest one guy on one corner undercut the price of all. No unauthorized competition allowed. No one outside the clique or guild is authorized.. NO independents allowed.
It would seem that if nations have to go to war to maintain this control over oil...millions perish...so be it.

You know...when you look from buisnes standpoint...the number of Western buisnesses operating in the countries surrounding Iran...it seems that influence wise...we have Iran surrounded by Western buisnesses operating in these countries. It does not take much wisdom to understand that someone in these buisnesses operating in the countries surrounding Iran is doing double duty reporting back to intelligence agencys of what is happening there..both in Iran and these surrounding nations.

I was quite startled to see how many western buisnesses were firmly extablished in nations like Kazakhstan or Turkmanistan...et al. I quickly realized that in this manner ..we have had Iran surrounded for many years now.

Thanks,
Orangetom



[edit on 27-6-2009 by orangetom1999]

Originally posted by orangetom1999
My initial feeling is that this is about oil...but not in the manner most people think. They want the oil alright..but they want to keep it off the market...yet keep competitors out as the same time. The historical pattern has been to acquire control over certain territories. Like Vietnam...and then under the guise of a war...bring up the infrastructure into the 20th or 21st century standards..at public expense of course. THen carefully keep the bulk of the oil off themarket ...out of the hands of competitors..also not accessable to the people of your country.

Thus keeping prices up and from the standpoint of the buisnesses .... stable/profitable.

This is why Alaskan oil went anywhere but the United States..to keep the price of oil up. Vietnamese oil remained in the ground and not on the market....thus keeping prices stable. A communist government gauranteed that no oil or economic progress would happen..and the oil/country essentially remain in storage until the proper time. A communist government is the perfect method or pattern to keep a whole country in storage and its resources off the market. I think a variation of this fingerprint is happening in Iraq. The oil fields and refineries repaired but most of the oil kept off the market to maintain price stability. At the same time in Iraq..under the guise of a war...competitors are being kept out...while the infrastructure is brought into the 21st century at public expense.

Yes it is about oil ..but not in the pattern most people would think.

[...]

You know...when you look from buisnes standpoint...the number of Western buisnesses operating in the countries surrounding Iran...it seems that influence wise...we have Iran surrounded by Western buisnesses operating in these countries. It does not take much wisdom to understand that someone in these buisnesses operating in the countries surrounding Iran is doing double duty reporting back to intelligence agencys of what is happening there..both in Iran and these surrounding nations.

I was quite startled to see how many western buisnesses were firmly extablished in nations like Kazakhstan or Turkmanistan...et al. I quickly realized that in this manner ..we have had Iran surrounded for many years now.

Good analysis. The oil industry will always mystify us because we don't really know what their long term strategies are.

One theory has been that they ultimately want to drain the Middle East of it's resources and move onward to more profitable less politically charged places.

Much of the concern is not just for the amount of oil but also it's relative quality and accessibility. Some countries were blessed with gushers producing higher qualities, other countries such as Iran were not.

It looks now as if the short term agenda is to bring world prices to the $200-300 per barrel level. But then there is the factor of keeping certain countries starved of revenues, again Iran, to make them more compliant politically.

Iran's aberrant behaviour the pas few years has indeed been due to it's paranoia at being surrounded and contained. The US went into Afghanistan and Iraq in great part due to the desire to intimidate Iran. IT worked.

But there are so many wild cards that it is hard to say how things will play out. The Global Meltdown was probably not anticipated, or it's scale. How the oil business responds remains to be seen.


Mike

reply to post by mmiichael


Agreed that was a good post.

It seems the logical choice would be for them to become "Energy companies" Not just oil companies. Diversify into all forms that way when the wind changes so to speak and public outcry becomes loud enough they will be sitting with already pieces in place to produce what ever comes down the pike.

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by rogue1
Nothing really new here, anyone who knows anything about the world and it's history would come across the same assumptions. That being said, the amount of people wowing over the obvious shows how insular America has become.

The problem with that statement is the same mistake you always make Rogue.
You assume that everybody that read this thread or visits ATS are Americans.

Well to be fair I don't think that, it just seems that the overwhelming majority of people wowing over this thread are Americans. That's all.
Through my travels I've found people in other countries are inherently more questioning of the world around them. This is probablt because that is a necessary part of their life - the constant interaction with other bordering countries in their region etc.
Many Americans, especially the young people are too hooked on what is happening in America, namely sports, Xbox and celebrity. And from what I've seen this is stronger as you move towards the central states in the USA.

Many college students I've met here have expressed no desire to leave America let alone worrying about what is happening around the world.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by mmiichael

 

Agreed that was a good post.

It seems the logical choice would be for them to become "Energy companies" Not just oil companies. Diversify into all forms that way when the wind changes so to speak and public outcry becomes loud enough they will be sitting with already pieces in place to produce what ever comes down the pike.

You really should read Thomas Freidman's work "Ho, Flat and Crowded". It isn't finding green energy sources which will be fo most benefit to us, it's making effecient use of the energy we already consume. This book is a real eye opener to the waste of energy on all levels.

reply to post by rogue1


You and I have rarely seen eye to eye on many subjects. There are those that we both cannot argue about.

I'll be doing an in depth Case Study of the Iraq war I think even you might be surprised at some of the interesting facts I have dug up.

Stay tuned.

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by rogue1

 

You and I have rarely seen eye to eye on many subjects. There are those that we both cannot argue about.

I'll be doing an in depth Case Study of the Iraq war I think even you might be surprised at some of the interesting facts I have dug up.

Stay tuned.

Looking forward to your in depth analysis of the Iraq war. Any way do you think if the US wanted to they could funnel in weapons to the opposition groups that are against the Iranian government? Is there a way to get them in under the noses of the government much like Charlie Wilson and the CIA during the Afghan Soviet war of the 80's? I mean if the intelligence is correct and there is support for the west in Iran among the youth why not fight a war by proxy?

I know we hear all this talk of engaging Iran head-on, but why do it; when the proxy idea would be perfect and cost effective. We can have training sites in say Iraq or Afghanistan and there we could use the intelligence and special ops assets to train anyone that is willing to fight the government. Slay and anyone else do you think this option can hold any water?

Rogue 1

You really should read Thomas Freidman's work "Ho, Flat and Crowded". It isn't finding green energy sources which will be fo most benefit to us, it's making effecient use of the energy we already consume. This book is a real eye opener to the waste of energy on all levels.

I have myself been thinking along these very lines...with a view to the concept that there is something very wrong and misleading about the green movement.
I am not saying that we should not be good stewards about the resources with which we have been blessed. I just dont think it is a good idea to turn ourselves back to 1600 AD methods to keep things green. Beinig a good steward of what we have is always prudent as is more effecient use of what we already have.

The one which really browns my backside is the cutting off of water to those farms out west to save some kind of smelt. All those farms/farmers going out of buisness in an irrigation project built and gauranteed by the Government back in the 1960s. To me that kind of thing borders on madness. Water ....hydraulic energy is energy as well even if used in irrigation.

I am also aware that many nations arising into industrialization are ruining their lands and territories at an alarming rate. China comes to mind....though there are some in South America.

I also believe that a good portion of the green movement is politicial in that it is used to discriminate against buisness who dont play ball..donate properely to selected candidates, political parties...to shake them down/blackball them. I saw this pattern coming from the early days...and I think it will be used/misused more so in the days to come.

Thanks,
Orangetom



[edit on 27-6-2009 by orangetom1999]