Forgive me if this is even O.L.D.er than me, but anybody with an interest in the geopolitics of the Middle East ought to read THIS. It gives sharp definition to that generalised sense that the US (& UK) invasion and occupation of Iraq was primarily based on oil - not securing it per se, but maintaining dollar dominance in trading it.
It's worth noting that the reference in the first paragraph of the second section to the Iranian Oil Bourse being 'slated to open in March 2006' has been overtaken by events, or rather by the lack of them: Iran is still vacillating about the opening of the Bourse, presumably because they are aware of the likelihood that it will trigger retaliatory action from the US - or rather, from the agents of the US in the Middle East.
Whether the US would dare to carry out attacks against Iran in the current global (or even domestic US) political climate is moot: that it is dreamt of in their philosophy is in no doubt. In 2005, Philip Giraldi, an ex-CIA operative wrote in Pat Buchanan's American Conservative magazine:
quote: The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing—that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack—but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.
The underline is mine. That sentence is a bit of a chiller.
Should I get a blog?
The west wanted democracy in the middle east, & that's exactly what it got. Now we will see whether this talk about democracy is really genuine. When you start applying conditions to democracy, it no longer remains a true democracy.
Adil Haneef, commenting in the Guardian on Hamas' victory in the Palestinian elections 26/01/06 |