The Myth of an "isolated" Iran, page 1

The Myth of an "isolated" Iran

With all the hoopla and hype about Iran with nuclear weapons, we need to wonder what the real agenda is.

Iran has very little to do with “Western” corporations and contractors. They deal with Russia and China for technology, and maybe some others.

Attacking and stopping Iran’s nuke program by itself (assuming it really exists) WILL NOT create a financial benefit for the “West” !!

If TPTB want to “centralize” the Iranian financial system and re-gain financial power there, they are going to need to somehow re-conquer Iran.

It’s been done before, and they may be ready to do it again.


This article: AsiaTimes – (page 1 of 2)
Has some interesting comparisons and history lessons.

These days, with a crisis atmosphere growing in the Persian Gulf, a little history lesson about the United States and Iran might be just what the doctor ordered. Here, then, are a few high- (or low-) lights from their relationship over the last half-century-plus:

Summer 1953: The Central Intelligence Agency and British intelligence hatch a plot for a coup that overthrows a democratically elected government in Iran intent on nationalizing that country's oil industry. In its place, they put an autocrat, the young Shah of Iran, and his soon-to-be feared secret police.

He runs the country as his repressive fiefdom for a quarter-century, becoming Washington's "bulwark" in the Persian Gulf –
until overthrown in 1979 by a home-grown revolutionary movement, which ushers in the rule of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and the mullahs. While Khomeini & Co were hardly Washington's men, thanks to that 1953 coup they were, in a sense, its own political offspring.

In other words, the fatal decision to overthrow a popular democratic government shaped the Iranian world Washington now loathes, and even then oil was at the bottom of things.

Here is some “irony” to think about:

1967: Under the US "Atoms for Peace" program, started in the 1950s by president Dwight D Eisenhower, the shah is allowed to buy a five-megawatt, light-water type research reactor for Tehran (which - call it irony - is still playing a role in the dispute over the Iranian nuclear program).

So we see what looks like the “West” paying double for something they initiated.
But is it really something they will actually collect “double-up” with a new regime in place ?


AND soon after:

September 1980: Iraqi ruler Saddam Hussein launches a war of aggression against Khomeini's Iran. In the early 1980s, he becomes Washington's man, our "bulwark" in the Persian Gulf, and we offer him our hand - and also "detailed information" on Iranian deployments and tactical planning that help him use his chemical weapons more effectively against the Iranian military.

So, after a failed attempt to re-secure Iran, The “West” decides to “destroy” Iraq as punishment ?
Iran seems to be a tough nut to crack. Military actions could prove to be difficult.



Perhaps TPTB will re-instate The Shah ?



Perhaps TPTB are planning a "return ticket" for the 1953 coup.

With many frozen assets from the 70's still in the deep freeze as well as new sanctions, the money is available, at Iran's expense of course !

The old regimes started in the 600's and have been "on hold" since 1979.

The Shah's eldest son Reza Pahlavi is the Prince Regent, meaning if the Peacock Throne was ever restored he would be the one in line for it.

He has "visions" for the future....

Reza's Visions for Iran

Peacock Throne

History of Iran


Does anyone else see this possibility?

---

And,

Iran's amendment to it's Constitution in 2004 says they are "privatizing" 80% of their state-owned assets.

Including oil refineries !

I Wonder WHO is "owning" them when this is accomplished when the 10-year plan is finished?

The next few years will be interesting for business.

I wonder WHO "owns" whatever is already completed?


The whole political structure may need to change because of this "plan".

Maybe that's the real "hidden plan" we are not hearing much about in the West !


source from Aug 2011 (Iranian source)
Iran Plans Privatizing Oil Refineries

Iran, the world's fourth largest oil producer, is due to implement a major economic plan to privatize its oil refineries in line with its privatization scheme.

Managing-Director of the National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company (NIORDC) Alireza Zeiqami announced that seven of the country's nine oil refineries will be ceded to the private sector by the end of the current Iranian year (March 2012).

"National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company and its subsidiaries will become privatized. At least 11 companies and refineries will cede their shares to the private sector later this year," he stated.

Zeiqami, who is also deputy oil minister, said that domestic and foreign investors can purchase the shares of the refineries through the Privatization Organization of Iran.

Article 44 of the Iranian Constitution stipulates that the country's economic system shall be based on public, cooperative and private sectors.

All large-scale industries, mother industries, foreign trade, large mines, banking, insurance, power supply, dams and large irrigation channels, radio and television, post, telegraph and telephone, aviation, shipping, roads, rails, refineries and the like are public property and under the guidance of the government.

A 2004 amendment to the Article, however, has set in motion a ten-year plan to privatize eighty percent of Iran's state-owned assets.

If TPTB replace their current "regime" in Iran to suit a new "approved" agenda,

a new "regime" could transfer even more wealth away from the citizens.

Iran's net foreign assets are huge.

$61 Billion in 2009.

steady increases since 1998.

Iran, Islamic Rep. - net foreign assets

Definition: Net foreign assets are the sum of foreign assets held by monetary authorities and deposit money banks, less their foreign liabilities. Data are in current local currency.

Source: International Monetary Fund, International Financial Statistics and data files.

Think about Where those assets are if they're not in Iran?

And WHO really has control?


Take time to read the AsiaTimes article (two pages)…

The Answers May be in between the lines

reply to post by theBigToe

---

If I remember correctly was there not an article on Iran here somewhere on ATS the Russia and China said any attack on Iran would be an attack on them? Or did they change their minds?

Originally posted by mytheroy
reply to post by theBigToe

---

If I remember correctly was there not an article on Iran here somewhere on ATS the Russia and China said any attack on Iran would be an attack on them? Or did they change their minds?

Didnt see your response sorry.

China and Russia will never go to war with the U.S. These countries are every bit as much an ally of each other as the rest of the civilized world. These two countries are more greedy then the U.S.A. will ever be. They are in a position to demand exactly what theyre doing to Iran right now with the EU/UN oil embargo's, which is demanding discounted oil on sanctioned states. They provide these states with outdated Soviet technology that they think builds up their outdated armies and then they make trillions sitting back and laughing at both them and the West.

Theyre not going to intervene in Iran because the oil in Iran will still be controlled and they will still have as much access to it in the Wests possession as they would in Irans. China and Russia know full well what Islam mandates, and theyre in the same boat as the West. Theyll be used by the Iranians until theyre no longer needed and Iran thinks it can win and make the world an Islamic world.

reply to post by xuenchen

---

Good points about the Karma of the U.S. strategy on Iran over the past half century. Ron Paul has tried to point out to the masses in the U.S. that foreign policies often times have long-term effects that are opposite the intended short-term goal of the original policy. He gets criticized for questioning the arrogant, short-sighted, approach to dealing with Iraq, Iran and other countries in that region.

I wonder how our perspective will change on Cuba in fifty years. If we get rid of the Castro brothers and prop up a democratic free-market system, will we be complaining in 2051 that American jobs are being outsourced to Cuba and then place sanctions on Cuba to restrict their ability to have a successful free market?

reply to post by TopDogCynic

---

Cuba may very well be on the "list" !!

Their central bank is not fully aligned yet, and ....

They do have some oil and resources worthy of "corporate" interest.

reply to post by xuenchen

---

WILL NOT create a financial benefit for the “West” !!

Yes it will, just not the public. It will benefit the corporations that control our government 100%. War is the best form of money laundering and without it the banking cartels cannot complete their cycle of debt imprisonment of the public.

To the people saying that the US can destroy Iran no problems: Grow up.

Originally posted by TheCommentator
reply to post by xuenchen

---

WILL NOT create a financial benefit for the “West” !!

Yes it will, just not the public. It will benefit the corporations that control our government 100%. War is the best form of money laundering and without it the banking cartels cannot complete their cycle of debt imprisonment of the public.

To the people saying that the US can destroy Iran no problems: Grow up.

To clarify, I was referring to an attack to stop the nuke program.
Like a single bombing attack, not an invasion.


Quote from OP:

Attacking and stopping Iran’s nuke program by itself (assuming it really exists) WILL NOT create a financial benefit for the “West” !!

Yes, the gain will come later, but they need to get financial control first.

reply to post by xuenchen

---

We have covered similar ground...and you've brought the issue bang up to date, I may revise the idea that I had for my next thread a little...anyway, you may find this report interesting...

www-wds.worldbank.org...

Oil is not the only issue in Iran, Natural Gas prices has been rising consistently too, and Iran has some of the richest reserves of that in the world. The way I look at it, if Iran is forced into a conflict, and knocked back into feudalism, the people will not be using as much of those resources and they will be ripe for exploitation by richer nations able to pay for them without subsidies. As the above report from the World Bank clearly states, the main problem that other producers and refiners have with Iran is that they are not squeezing their people and therefore not getting 'top dollar'....

reply to post by xuenchen

---

I found this recent article on Bloomberg interesting too...

www.bloomberg.com...

Now read it carefully...and I will be most interested in your view of whether this is an attempt to make the US populace believe that Russia would actually turn on Iran.

BREAKING New Documentary Investigates the Death of Andrew Breitbart
  Posted 6 days ago with 93 member flags

The Zombie Apocalypse is Real! And it\'s Here Now!
  Posted 17 days ago with 87 member flags

While Americans keep arguing about Trayvon-Zimmerman
  Posted 11 days ago with 79 member flags

"CIA are drug smugglers." - Federal Judge Bonner, head of DEA- You don\'t get better proof than th
  Posted 2 days ago with 73 member flags

Proof ATS is being watched!
  Posted 1 days ago with 67 member flags

Code Name** Stellar Wind. Objective** Infiltrate All. Chances For Sucess** High.
  Posted 2 days ago with 65 member flags

Faked Moon Landing - Amazing Documentary
  Posted 13 days ago with 59 member flags

This is scary!
  Posted 18 days ago with 57 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: