In my January 16th, A.D. 2012, article, “Invading Iran (Rounding Up the Usual Suspects),” I reported on Iran’s recent decision to sell crude oil to India for gold rather than fiat dollars or even fiat rupees. I explained my belief that the U.S., EU, NATO, the central bankers, and the New World Order would be thereby compelled to invade and destroy Iran. By moving away from all fiat currencies, Iran was implicitly returning the world towards a gold standard. By doing so, the Iranians had struck a potentially mortal blow against all big governments, all central bankers, and the New World Order—all of which are ultimately built on fiat currencies. I predicted that the “forces of fiat” would be compelled to invade and destroy Iran as an act of self-preservation.
Until that time, the primary pretext for invading Iran was Iran’s nuclear weapons program. We had to invade to prevent Iran from getting “the bomb”. The actual reason for invading was probably to seize control of some Iranian oil wells. In other words, our government’s primary reason for invading Iran was looting–to steal Iranian oil.
Looting is a time-honored reason for invading a foreign country. Armies have marched since time began in order to loot weaker nations and steal their wealth.
Looting is one of the “fun” reasons to invade a foreign country. But it’s not a compelling reason. Sure, we’d like to rob Iran, and if we get the chance, we will–but we are not compelled to invade Iran simply to steal their crude oil.
However, I also reported that, on January 15th,
“Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was interviewed on Face The Nation and said,
“I think the pressure of the sanctions, the diplomatic pressures from everywhere, Europe, the United States, elsewhere, it’s working to put pressure on them. To make them understand that they cannot continue to do what they’re doing. Are they trying to develop a nuclear weapon? No. But we know that they’re trying to develop a nuclear capability, and that’s what concerns us.”
I observed that Secretary of Defense Panetta had thereby destroyed the Iran-is-getting-the-bomb pretext du jour for invading.
“After Leon Panetta’s admission that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, I’m not convinced that Iran will be invaded. Without a plausible rationale, the special interests might not be able to invade. (But if somebody could sink a ship or two in the Strait of Hormuz and pin the rap on Iran, there’d be “reason” to invade.)
“Before Secretary of Defense Panetta’s admission that Iran has no nuclear weapons program, I’d have placed the odds in favor of invading Iran at 4:1. Today, after Panetta’s admission, I’d place the odds at 3:2 in favor of invasion.”
The problem with the January 16th article is that there was only a single source (DEBKAfile) alleging that Iran was going to sell its crude to India (and soon, China). There was some doubt if the story was true.
• On January 27th, I posted “Iran to Sell Crude Oil for Gold Story CONFIRMED”. In this article, I presented evidence from other credible sources to affirm that Iran was, indeed, preparing to sell its crude for gold.
“The sale of crude oil for gold is not an absolute guarantee that Iran will be attacked or invaded, but it’s pretty close. The world is shaking, right now. The world is being changed by the sale of crude for gold. If this sale is allowed to stand, the U.S. dollar will die, and the New World Order will expire. The world is at war.”
While invading Iran for the purpose of looting Iranian oil is a nice reason, it’s not compelling. It depends. Maybe we’ll invade and loot. Maybe we won’t.
But when Iran started trading its crude for gold, Iran directly threatened all fiat currencies, all central banks, all big governments, and the New World Order. This threat is mortal. If the world is allowed to sell crude oil (and then other commodities) for gold, all fiat currencies and all the institutions that depend on them will be destroyed.
Thus, invading Iran is no longer optional. It’s virtually mandatory as a means to stop Iran (and any other nations that would like to emulate Iran) from selling crude for something other that fiat currencies.
• Consistent with this mandate, The Washington Times for January 30th, A.D. 2012 (see, “Pannetta: Iran Could Have Bomb Within a Year”), Secretary of Defense Panetta said on Sunday, January 29th,
“U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned on Sunday that Iran could develop a nuclear bomb within a year and reiterated that the U.S. would do anything to stop it . . . .
“When asked if “whatever steps necessary’ include military steps, he responded, ‘There are no options that are off the table.’”
Just two weeks earlier Panetta told Face the Nation that Iran did not have a nuclear bomb and, more, had no plans to build one. At that time, Panetta seemed to destroy the pretext for invading Iran. But on January 29th, Panetta reversed himself and assured us that 1) Iran could have a nuclear device within one year and, ominously, 2) “the U.S. would do anything to stop it.”
“Anything” presumably includes dropping bombs from the air, invading with soldiers on the ground, or in the extreme even “nuking” Iran.
Panetta’s statement reads like an admission that the pretext for invading Iran has been restored; that the U.S. government therefore intends to invade Iran—and probably soon. Panetta’s statement is clearly in line with last Tuesday’s State of the Union speech where President Obama said,
“Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal.”
• Here’s another report from DEBKAfile (“Massive US Military Buildup on Two Strategic Islands: Socotra and Masirah”) that was published on January 27th, but I didn’t see until today. In that article DEBKAfile alleges,
“Sources estimate from the current pace of arrivals on the two island bases, that 50,000 US troops will have accumulated on Socotra and Masirah by mid-February. They will top up the 50,000 military already present in the Persian Gulf region, so that in less than a month, Washington will have some 100,000 military personnel on the spot and available for any contingency.”
I don’t know that 100,000 military personnel are sufficient to invade Iran. I also don’t know what sort of climatic conditions must be taken into consideration. Does Iran have a “rainy season” in April and May? Nevertheless, I suspect that, as invasions go, it’s a lot more pleasant to invade Iran in the Spring than in the Summer.
But there are also political considerations. Should Obama invade this Spring? Or would he get more of a political bounce for this year’s presidential election if he waited until next Fall?
Of course, it’s possible that Panetta’s remarks and the recent buildup of troops in the Middle East are simply attempts to bluff Iran into reaching some diplomatic agreement whereby Iran will agree to stop selling crude for gold. On the other hand, Panetta’s remarks, the troop buildup, the weather, and the mortal threat Iran has posed against the world’s central bankers and the fiat monetary system, suggest that there’s at least a 90% probability that U.S. and/or Israeli military will attack Iran within 90 days.
More, Iraq dared to sell its crude for fiat euros (rather than fiat dollars) in A.D. 2000. By doing so, Iraq threatened the fiat dollar, the world reserve currency, and the New World Order. We invaded in A.D. 2003 on the false pretext that Iraq had WMDs (weapons of mass destruction) and stayed for most of nine years. That was a pretty stiff punishment for Iraq having had the audacity to dare sell its crude for a fiat currency other than fiat dollars.
Today, Iran is threatening to sell its crude for gold rather than any fiat currency. In comparison, Iraq’s audacity in A.D. 2000 (selling crude for fiat euros) was a misdemeanor. Iran’s current threat to sell crude for gold is, comparatively, a felony . . . a capital offense. Iran is threatening all fiat currencies, all central banks, and all big governments—especially the New World Order.
I can’t give prophecy on such matters, but if my meager understanding of money and geopolitics is roughly correct, those military forces that serve central banks and fiat currencies are about to subject Iran to the single most devastating, brutal assault that nation has ever experienced or imagined. Under the pretext that Iran might acquire a nuclear WMD, our government appears determined to subject Iran to a dose of “shock and awe” that would make Hitler proud.
I’m guessing that a major assault against Iran will be launched within the next 90 days.
We shall see.