China, India, Iran wait to pounce on Afghan riches

page: 6
20
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Did I mention archeology? We are sending in teams of explorers and archaeologists. Follow them and they will tell you where the best places are to build resort hotels.

With stability in the region, we will encourage tourism with a focus on archeology. And its a high brow well heeled group of tourists for the most part, and they appreciate science so the finds which are most interesting needn't be the largest or most grandiose.
It all has potential when done right.
And the problem of alcohol vs tourism. Personally like so many other people in the west these days, I am almost alcohol free. I drink non-alchoholic beer as a for instance. But the thought of not being able to, even if I don't want to, discourages me from going somewhere where it seems overly totalitarian compared to where I live.

Want an example? Where I live Sunday is like Saturday, a day to shop and have fun and drink if people want.
But Monday, for no reason other than its not a busy commercial day, lots of places treat it like Sunday.
I'm not saying they are not religious people, but they seem to like to go shopping.
Even the churches have bake sales and craft fairs to help the elderly. And flea markets and garage sales have become the second income of the middle class. They are everywhere they can pitch a bit of canvas.

Its grass roots entrepreneurship. Many of them will move into locations as they grow in business.
It is how people are coping with the new economy. At the same time I wonder if they are really hurting or just want to do it for fun. Maybe their mortgages are still too high but real estate sales here have recovered or leveled out. Everyone drives a new car. To be honest, locally, I have never seen better more pristine capitalism at work.


edit on 18-6-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


I have a challenge for you my economic friends.

If, every man woman and child in the West Bank, were given, a lump sum of 10,000 dollars and citizenship in Israel, at the cost of forfeit of the West Bank to Israel, with an option to use that money to buy back some land, and were given one further lump sum of 10,000 after all land transactions between those people and Israel had completed for farming equipment or construction materials or for them to open a shop or acclimatize as citizens and not burden Israel as new citizens by their economic poverty, can you improve on those numbers?

You could split the last lump sum into two 5,000 dollar disbursements if the Israelis were afraid that that amount of money all at once might destabilize their economy.


The West Bank, including East Jerusalem, has a land area of 5,640 km2 and 220 km2 water, the northwest quarter of the Dead Sea.[7] It has an estimated population of 2,622,544 (June 2012). More than 80 percent, about 2,000,000, are Palestinian Arabs, approximately 500,000 are Jewish Israelis living in the West Bank,[3] including about 192,000 in East Jerusalem,[8] in settlements considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes their illegality.[9]


I calculated the number of acres and decided that in my opinion it was a fair deal. But I am not going to show you the size of plot I used, and the price per acre. I am going to hand that over to you all of it, to see your opinion on this as a land purchase in the style of the Jackson Purchase or any of the land purchases in Early America. (other than ones which included beads, songs etc. you know got it for a song)

Gaza, I see as a new commercial center. And I would put Turkey as their patron.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Just for the sake of easing some people's fears that this is too much money to pay for the West Bank, the Jackson Purchase in todays dollar value would be 652 billion dollars. But America paid that sum to the native Indians over a 15 year period.

The portion of the Jackson Purchase which did not include West Tennessee. So the total land area was 6,202 km² as opposed to the West Bank which is again 5,640 km².

My suggestion was that the US arrange a loan for the second disbursement amount of $10,000

Now thats a lot of money make no mistake. And also the terms of the agreement are, that the total cost is the total cost of giving the inhabitants $10,000 each. Thats the land value. A further $10,000 is the price of peace and economic stability. and the beauty is that the Palestinians buy back the land for the same price per acre.
So its pointless for them to insist the value be raised. And no outside buyers would be permitted. Its a closed sale.
You might argue that the second disbursement is just too much money. Well you would not have a reputation for being Jewish, if you did not say that at least once.
But I think it is reasonable and I hold up the Jackson purchase as evidence that the price could be much higher and as you know, in time, the costs will increase as land becomes more scarce in Israel.
So the market worldwide is stable now, prices are normal, my suggestion is cut a deal.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


oh, did I say 652 billion? I meant 652 million. Yes I know, 50 billion plus dollars is a lot of money to pay.

But thats not that much money when you consider the current price of real estate in Israel.
And their ability to pay. And the fact that it is a closed sale so in essence you see that if a person does not buy land, then you might be paying them 20,000 to leave the country. If they take the money and leave and choose not to become a citizen.

The minute the land sales are complete, I suspect the price of land there will double in value.

edit on 18-6-2012 by Rocketman7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman7
reply to post by Rocketman7
 



But thats not that much money when you consider the current price of real estate in Israel.
And their ability to pay. And the fact that it is a closed sale so in essence you see that if a person does not buy land, then you might be paying them 20,000 to leave the country. If they take the money and leave and choose not to become a citizen.


Every country has the right to deny citizenship to persons deemed by the government of said nation to be undesirable. That is a fact of life. But we can set up an arbitration board.
Keep in mind the longer the land sales transactions stretch on, the longer it will take to get the second disbursement.
I have a huge team of geniuses here. Surely, you can use this to purchase the West Bank.

The reason I decided on this as the proper course of action is due to getting nowhere politically there over the last 20 years. Other than the building a wall to reduce the violence. And some lines drawn in the sand.
Is it the kind of deal that could encourage the parties to settle?

I think it is. Its a win win situation. Gaza can become a Palestinian State.

If you examine Plato, and Socrates, you will find that this is the solution since to have the West Bank, an autonomous region within the heart of Israel, is just wrong on all fronts. I can't even imagine why I jumped on that bandwagon with everyone else over the years. Its just not economically or politically viable.
Israel as one nation indivisible, is the right thing to do.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Lets suppose that Israel stalls on this deal, we need just remind them that 20,000 dollar babies are being born there as we speak.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rocketman7
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Lets suppose that Israel stalls on this deal, we need just remind them that 20,000 dollar babies are being born there as we speak.


So, census, qualification for inclusion, land sales to those included what if it takes 10 years to get the second installment? What if they are really slow moving? Would you believe, that there may be dare I say it, Jewish bankers, who might buy your second installment, for a slight profit and give you a cash buyout of your paper.

They will issue you a disbursement, providing that they earn interest. They will collect from the government when the paper is due.

I know there are other trouble spots so if you cannot agree to terms for those spots you had better carve those areas off and put them in escrow.
And set a time-line for binding arbitration on those trouble areas.
Israel as a nation, must not have competing interests within its nation regardless of WHO lives there.

Which means religious sites are not for sale. And it also means though that Israel has a land use plan.
And that is how they would distribute purchase rights according to their plan so if its slated for parkland, f''getaboutit you cannot have your farm in the park if that is the land use specified.

And yes at all times in this it will seem as if Israel has all the rights. Well as the nation who will be granted stewardship, it is their right to manage it according to their standards. Like any other country in the world.
I am not going to put thumbscrews on them to convince them that they have to do things like speed up the transactions. So that is why the day of the census, that is the last day of qualification.

What if you aren't a resident but are in a foreign jail?
All Palestinians will be given the right, to give their portion awarded to those people.
You know what I'm saying? If they are so important to you as a people and they are unjustly imprisoned, in your eyes, then by all means share your win with them.
Personally I am not looking for ways to make this issue last forever.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


So what if, you have a family member like a son or daughter who would be a resident but they are unjustly imprisoned or similar, unable to return to the country after they went to visit your aunt or anything substitute x here.

If Israel at the time wants to be seen as being generous and good willed or beneficent or merciful, they may do that. Do not be surprised if they do.

For me, I need things completely cut and dry. Those people inside the West Bank who should rightly be there on the day of the census qualify for those monies period.
Very simple and no need to take 5 years to determine who qualifies. I could have not told you the formula that it was awarded per person, I could have merely given you the total purchase price, and then said it would be given to your (least) trusted representative to distribute in accordance with your laws (which you do not have).



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 08:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


What about the issue of sneaking relatives in for inclusion? At our last talks we discussed that and as you can see, the area is now secure. They would just be deported. Well the area WILL be secure when the Russian helicopters get past the British, and once Hilary is finished talking.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Are we taking any new memberships into the Muhabeans? Lets see your bike. AND, lets see you ride it.

It's the G20's turn to talk and the people's turn to ask further questions through the press.



posted on Jun, 18 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Rocketman7
 


Its no different than the invasion of Iraq a second time. You cant pick and choose who to give the moral high ground when they themselves are just as or worse than the US. The worlds all shades of grey and not black and white.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 12:44 AM
link   
Why is nobody mentioning the very obvious fact that America is not entitled to any Afghan 'riches'.

We know deep down what the war was about, but officially, it was the 'War on Terror' and for freedom etc, so given they never invaded to make 'riches', it shouldn't really matter.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:43 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Chief among them are China, Iran and India - nations that contributed nothing toward the military effort over the past decade but hope to reap benefits from it anyway


thats not a very fair common. They never asked to be invaded. They should be able to deal with whom ever they wish.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer

Chief among them are China, Iran and India - nations that contributed nothing toward the military effort over the past decade but hope to reap benefits from it anyway


thats not a very fair common. They never asked to be invaded. They should be able to deal with whom ever they wish.


I didn't write the article but I'd research the Afghan Northern Alliance who were more than happy to have the US help them overthrow the Taliban



posted on Feb, 6 2013 @ 01:55 AM
link   
Isnt Karzai the cia installed OIL PRESIDENT?

Obviously America's sitting back and waiting for them to build the pipelines then 'pounce' on China, Iran, etc

"Build it they will come" taken to a while other level



posted on Feb, 6 2013 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


nothing new with that. The US makes the civilized world live in stability and the rest of the west gets the benefit of our efforts without putting where their mouth is.

Notice how the US will probably be in Mali soon enough since France wont live up to its role in Africa. They cant stomach the cost in wealth and man power to make it a stable area. They also cant stomach the back lash everyone has become complacent in leaving at the US´s door.

well, the US is growing tired of our responsibilities. The world has convinced us that maybe we should not field Carriers, and quell radical uprisings, and pay more than everyone else for UN and NATO costs of operations, ECT. So what if we lose markets and areas of security our nations ALL profit from and make our standard of living possible in the west.....The US doesnt really need them.

We are isolated enough and have enough resources to last countless generations.
The rest of the world on the other hand, MAY need us to continue doing our "job".

edit on 6-2-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2013 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Laugh out LOUD at the topic and some responses, tell me the topic is a JOKE.

Who did start the war back in 2001, occupying a sovereign country 20,0000 km “AWAY from their international borders ILIGALLY under the pretext of WAR ON TERROR “”even they had nothing to do with the 9/11 event””, killing the natives (still doing), continue destroying the country right after previous disaster and then freakishly… asking for “REWARDS”..?
I Guess Russian should start their own claim as well.

Rewards my arse.

Do you all believe in KARMA…? (what goes around, comes around). Wait for your turn SOON.

Afghans has every RIGHT to do business with their neighboring countries of their choice, the closer the better, start with the Iran (they were once ONE country before the Britain put their filthy foot in the region and start STEALING their treasures, dividing the area, causing conflicts and enmity between peaceful local tribes men).

You guys sux big time, really.





new topics
top topics
 
20
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join