Cheney & Iran: Here We Go Again?
Barnett Rubin relays a message from a well-connected friend in Washington on the Cheney Administration's plans to roll out a military confrontation with Iran in September. He writes at the Global Affairs blog:
" My friend had spoken to someone in one of the leading neo-conservative institutions. He summarized what he was told this way:
They [the source's institution] have "instructions" (yes, that was the word used) from the Office of the Vice-President to roll out a campaign for war with Iran in the week after Labor Day; it will be coordinated with the American Enterprise Institute, the Wall Street Journal, the Weekly Standard, Commentary, Fox, and the usual suspects. It will be heavy sustained assault on the airwaves, designed to knock public sentiment into a position from which a war can be maintained. Evidently they don't think they'll ever get majority support for this--they want something like 35-40 percent support, which in their book is "plenty."
Of course I cannot verify this report. But besides all the other pieces of information about this circulating, I heard last week from a former U.S. government contractor. According to this friend, someone in the Department of Defense called, asking for cost estimates for a model for reconstruction in Asia. The former contractor finally concluded that the model was intended for Iran."
-----
Cole: there has been some recent similar reporting. For instance, just on Tuesday Raw Story covered a paper by two British academics arguing that the US has the capability and perhaps the intention of launching an aerial assault on Iran's enrichment facilities.
Earlier, McClatchy reported on Aug. 9 that Cheney has been urging bombing of Iranian trails to Iraq. This position struck me as eerily reminiscent of Nixon-Kissinger's treatment of Cambodia (which is what really caused the Khmer Rouge horrors, not, as Bush said the other day, US withdrawal from Vietnam; we dropped enormous amounts of ordnance on that country and severely disrupted it).
Also at Raw Story on Aug. 10.
And Gareth Porter on Aug. 16 responding to the McClatchy article.
So, maybe something is up.
If you want to see what I think of a war with Iran, see this golden oldie.
Read Rubin's whole piece.
Labels: Iran
posted by Juan Cole @ 8/30/2007 12:35:00 AM
|
Facebook
24 Comments:
We've been hearing these rumors for some time now - wasn't it said they were going to bomb when those warships were in the straits of Hormuz? Weren't they going to bomb in March?
I just really, really hope that whatever is making them stay there hand keeps on happening. Cheney is f***ing nuts.
Someone knows something big is going to happen by September 21, 2007. It could be anything that is related to either serious financial decline, China dropping the U.S. Dollar or a big military action. This warning is for real and it is based on the fact that some entity had taken huge 4.7 Billion Dollars CALLS on SPX 700 options, expiring on September 21, that is over 40% decline from today’s price value. The entity or individual offering these sales can only make money if the market drops 40%-50% within the next four weeks. If the market does not drop, the entity or individual involved stands to lose over $1 billion just for engaging in these contracts!
Clearly, someone knows something big is going to happen BEFORE the options expire on Sept. 21.
This huge option trades were also preceded the Insider Job on 9/11.
Although the SEC knows who had taken those options contracts against Airlines and the market among others, it refuses to release the name of the entity.
Bombing training camps comes under the holes-in-the-sand category, and it is normally met by cries and threats from the victim, that's all. The Iranian regime would love it in fact, it needs something to help its flagging fortunes at home.
All of this will look ridiculous in the coming months when the economic impact of the real-estate bubble burst is felt. It took Japan 10 years of recission although it had a very healthy trade surplus and enormous reserves. Not exactly what the USA has.
All together now, "it is the economy stupid". Iraq, Iran Shmiran, who cares ...in few months time.
Chatham House hosted the Hecklers program for BBC a few weeks ago
BBC Hecklers Programme recording: 'It's better to have a war with Iran than a nuclear Iran'
Speaker: Patrick Clawson, Deputy Director for Research, Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Hecklers:
Professor Ali Ansari, Professor of Iranian History and Director of the Institute of Iranian Studies, University of St Andrews
Robert Fox, Defence Correspondent, Evening Standard
George Galloway, Respect MP for Bethnal Green and Bow
Dr Claire Spencer, Head, Middle East Programme, Chatham House
Chair: Evan Davis, BBC Economics Editor
Robert Fox dropped the interesting fact into the meeting that UK MOD had conducted a study last year that indicated the the number of Dead following an American Attack would be between 100 thousand and over a million.
Paddy Ashdown explains the concept of a Just War in his new book and finds that the only wars with any chance of longer term support are those that comply with the concept.
I believe that an attack on Iran as described would be in contravention of all international law, and that this level of casualties could justifiably be described as a crime against humanity. Field Marshals Keitel and Jodl died on a rope along with the politicals for implementing such crimes.
The US would go down in the annals alongside Yazid and Hugalu.
Let us hope that deployment of Russian and Chinese Anti Aircraft Systems and Air Cover to Iran deters this lunacy.
The top political editor of Rupert Murdoch's flagship paper here in Australia today suggested that Bush will cancel his APEC visit next week:
"I have heard a whisper, a muffled, confused, hesitant, distant, unsure sort of a whisper, but a whisper nonetheless, that the President may yet cancel at the last minute."
I'd have to guess that bombing Iran will be the last great act of the American empire. Alas, poor Dick, I knew him, Horatio. No one will forgive him for destroying the Army of Mesopotamia.
As for the put options, I imagine there are a few people in the world who could put a billion and afford to lose it. Still, it makes you wonder.
Rumor mongering breeds rumor mongering. That alone may be enought to nudge Iran into some concession the Administration wants.
Bye the way, deep out-of-the-money index options trade all the time on the CBOE. It is a way to collar or hedge positions that fund managers may take simultaneously. News of any single call or put contract may say nothing about the consolidated net gain or loss the counterparty will incur on a particular date.
Well prior to 9/11, airlines were subject to speculative options, precisely because their bottom lines are so volatile and the recurring visits to Chapter 11 courts. This had nothing to do with any alleged "inside knowlege" about the attacks on the WTC or the Pentagon. The SEC did investigate allegations and found no outsized profits by people with any tip off or connection. Even if one does not trust the SEC, the vast dissemination of trading data would enable any one with a PC to do their own forensic investigation, and no report, article, or reputable financial website or blog has ever published anything to prove insider knowledge or collusion on 9/11.
Note that the Navy completed the Valiant Shield exercise off Guam two weeks ago. The exercise included three carrier strike forces and 280 aircraft. By now the Navy has had substantial practice in coordinating massive sea-based air strikes against Iran.
The U.S. military prefers to launch air strikes on new moon nights. The upcoming periods of maximum darkness for such strikes will be September 10-12 and again October 10-12.
Note the laughable shill piece by David Ignatius in today's WaPo: Bush's Lost Iraqi Election. Ignatius seeks to lay the blame on Secretary of State Rice and then House Minority Leader Pelosi for the outcome of the elections which brought the Shia (and pro-Iranian) government of al-Maliki to power in Iraq. This op-ed piece smells of clear and crude transmission belt agitprop straight out of the office of VP Cheney and his chief of staff, the neocon David Addington.
The drumbeat to strike Iran has started up again, and once again the corporatist media are serving as the amplifiers and loudspeakers.
The Democratic leadership remains silent. Why?
I've been predicting this attack on Iran for a long time and I've been wrong again and again. I hope my record stays intact!!!
oh crap, this is the last thing we need. its bad enough i feel like a murderer for iraq when i pay my taxes...
Here's an angle that I think could work to get public opposition- tell them, repeatedly, that war with Iran will drive up oil prices and wreck what's left of the economy, and push the mortgage/banking crisis situation over the edge.
Isn't it time for US business interests to abandon the Bush administration, who increasingly seems to base their foreign policy on instruction from the Likud party in Israel? For example Conoco-Phillips is co-sponsoring a conference titled "International Investment in the Iraqi Oil Industry" on September 8-10 in Dubai. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Oil are scheduled to speak on Sept. 8 and later there will be a discussion of Iraq'a oil law:
http://www.thecwcgroup.com/conf_detail_agenda.asp?FP=1&CID=178&DID=266
In addition Reuters reported Dow Chemical is one of two companies involved in negotiations with the Iraqi government to refurbish and enlarge a chemical plant in southern Iraq at a cost of up to $2.1 billion. The McClatchy Newspapers Baghdad Bureau Chief, Leila Fadels, had an extended interview with al-Maliki, who emphasized that "we are moving within a legal cover from the United Nations that also gives us the right to dispense with their [US]presence."
Also he said Iran and Syria "are moving toward a preference to refrain from interfering in Iraqi internal affairs.". Essentially Cheney's attack on Iran could easily get US business interests precluded from contracts in Iraq! Link to Fadels interview: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/iraq/story/19316.html
we run from iraq
into the arms of iran
next neo-con plan?
psycho haiku by jhm
Everytime there's something coming down the IAEA pipe, we hear the sabres rattling. The neocons are just scaremongering, to shift attention away from their failures in Iraq.
Note that the Navy completed the Valiant Shield exercise off Guam two weeks ago. The exercise included three carrier strike forces and 280 aircraft. By now the Navy has had substantial practice in coordinating massive sea-based air strikes against Iran.
Ah so that is why Bear went to Guam.
“…..Bye the way, deep out-of-the-money index options trade all the time on the CBOE. It is a way to collar or hedge positions……”
None this size and deep out of the money. There are other trading strategies that are far more profitable than taking a Billion Dollar loss. I can’t imagine someone willing to forfeits even this amount in profit, most likely handle 1 hundred billions in cash is STUPID not to know the other hedging strategies, tools and means available. Still, the point is why is betting on the market going down some 40% and by September 21,2007…WONDER
“…….Well prior to 9/11, airlines were subject to speculative options, precisely because their bottom lines are so volatile and the recurring visits to Chapter 11 courts. This had nothing to do with any alleged "inside knowledge" about the attacks on the WTC or the Pentagon. The SEC did investigate allegations and found no outsized profits…….”
They also investigated 9/11 attack by a commission and found no wrong doing, just conspiracy theories. WONDER, if they have nothing to hide, why not ridicule the conspiracy theorists and make the whole thing public, no blackened lines and know 30 pages, cherry pick summary, the truth, and the whole truth. After all this is a proud Democracy and transparent form of Government with Checks and Balances…LOL & LOL & LOL ( I can assure your Saddam Government were more fit for this classification)
IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE, WHY SEAL IT FOR 100 YEARS AND DECLARE IT TOP SECRET.
Go to Youtube.com and start your search for the facts and the truth, but I assume you already knows those and you are writing to obscure those not expose them!
Dan Plesch and Martin Butcher of the University of London did an open source intelligence analysis predicting that an attack on Iran has begun and will become manifest in two weeks with a massive bombing campaign. It is posted at
www.rawstory.com/images/other/IranStudy082807a.pdf
OIL IS $73!
US can't bomb Iran while oil prices are so high, because it would send prices much higher severely damaging the US economy.
Iran must forge ahead on Nuclear development while it has the advantage. If prices drop, a US attack becomes more probable.
"VICTORY WILL COME TO THOSE WHO SITE UPON WAVES OF OIL" - KHOMEINI
This article adds significantly to the puzzle raised a few days ago at http://www.thestreet.com/_email/newsanalysis/optionsfutures/10377063.html. I hope that I am getting the imagined picture all wrong. But if this report is prescient, I think it will be time to start connecting dots.
Dear Juan,
It looks like the Cheney administration as dangerously ignorant enough to pull the trigger was the line to bet regarding potential invasion of Iran after all.
Mark Anderson
This article adds significantly to the puzzle raised a few days ago [. . .]
My "average guy who knows squat about economics" reading of that was that Smith and Task assert that this strange option trading is just normal and nothing to be worried about, even though it's similar to what happened before 9/11. Hrm.
And, like "fillip", I've been worried about a strike on Iran ever since Ahmadinejad was first accused of being one of the Iranian students who held the American hostages in '79.
I've been wrong so far also. Let's hope my record stays consistent as well. We shall see.
I'm confused by the $4.7 billion options play allegation. If they bought calls (no matter how in the money-- below current market price-- it is) then they're betting the market goes up. A bet that a market will go down is a put option. Of course, if they're writing the call or put, everything is reversed in terms of market direction--like a ship captain in the old days calling Port rudder so the ship will move Starboard. However, if someone has "taken" put or call options then clearly they haven't written (in other words, "given") options.
Further, if they are betting the market will go down (that is by buying puts) and the option expires on the 21st, then its not $1 billion at risk, its the entire $4.7 billion that is lost if the market doesn't move the 40% necessary to reach their strike price.
Any finance guys want to correct, please chime in, but I think the commenter either made this up or has confused the facts of the actual situation.
Source of such allegations:
http://www.financialnews-us.com/?page=ushome&contentid=2448565379
(Dow Jones Financial News Online)
Mystery trader bets market will crash by a third Renée Schultes
16 Aug 2007
Carry trade unwinds as yen hits one-year high
"An anonymous investor has placed a bet on an index of Europe's top 50 stocks falling by a third by the end of September, as world equity markets plunged for a third day and volatility hit a three-year high."
I would say they're well on the way to recouping the "notional €6.9bn, and potentially even more using a market price of about 4,100 when the trades were done on Tuesday and Wednesday."
Northern Rock over the weekend... and disturbing news from French FM (Bernard Kouchner, who said: "We have to prepare for the worst...the worst is war") and FOXNEWS about the pre-meeting meeting with the Germans.
If anyone has the access, look up what Blackwater et al (& Dyncorp, Titan) are up to in Azerbeijian...it could be a staging zone for covert ground insertion.
yes, the leaders of iran are DIRTY and DISTGUSTING. like 85% of the people in iran hates them and would love to have them put away, but a war = the bastard mullahs run away with billions and the people are the ones getting murdered by the us army.
its all a charade for the media, us want to attack and waits for a reason and probably if economy allowed it tomorrow provoce an attack. poor iraq has been destroyed and lives under more terror than under saddam... why? well us probably will put someone in charge there soon, a us-friendly person that will give them oil. its all about money and power, never about peoples best. dick cheney is like hitler! fucking bastard, he will not be remembered nice in history!
my father is iranian and lot of friends are to, no body likes the one in charge, everybody is out of jobs and inflation is so high, and the mullahs preach islam but they are hippocrites. they say they hate drugs and yet they allow afghanistan to bring in tons every month just so that the people get addicted and addicted unemployed people dont make revolution. they are very smart and very dirty. so a part of me wants them gone by any means, but my people will be the ones that dies, the good ones and probably not them. and us attention is not for the best of iranians, but for oil and gas (3rd biggest in oil and 2nd in gas!) and they get a lot of support from GB.
history has thought iranians that US armys = very bad. just look at the last 50 years, who put the peoples favorite Mossadegh away? who replaced the Shah with Mullahs when the Shah didnt want to be US-slave anymore? Who put Saddam Hussein where in charge? Who gave Saddam the means to attack and supported a war against Iran?
Who bombed Hiroshima and nagasaki ? who gave orders of che guevaras death?
The iranian people knows that if they get attacked everything will get worse. it will be another iraq, and who ever gets in charge will be just a bad. its a fucked up world..
yea!!Note that the Navy completed the Valiant Shield exercise off Guam two weeks ago. Memory CardThe exercise included three carrier strike forces and 280 aircraft.Flash Card By now the Navy has had substantial practice in coordinating massive sea-based air strikes against Iran.good job!
Post a Comment
<< Home