Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

[skhara]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Their view of the world may seem primitive and foreign to us in the West, nonetheless, our Western views regarding democracy, liberalism, globalism, homosexuality, family structure, religion, materialism, sexuality, atheism, promiscuity, alcohol/drug usage, etc, seem foreign and primitive to them.

Personally I was pretty impressed by his speaking. The other great thing about this was his major victory on the home front. It will be much more difficult for the likes of CIA/Mossad to distabalise Iran through divide and conquer tactics since the "west" has pretty much shown its true face to the anti-regime Iranians. They could think twice about helping to destabilize the nation under such a circumstance.

I'd really love to see men like Ali Larijani speaking in front international audiences. Of course, perhaps his more real-politik approach wouldn't be the best tactic when it comes to the average Ahmad, but it could have an effect on some western sheeple.

BTW, David Duke thinks Ahmadinejad has been reading his books.

[skhara]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran set for smart bomb production

Iran's Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics is ready for production of a 2,000-pound (900 kg) laser- guided smart bomb.

The precision ordnance, code-named 'Qased' (messenger) has been successfully test-fired by F-4 and F-5 fighter jets.

Defense Minister Mostafa Mohammad Najjar is to inaugurate production line of the entirely Iranian made bomb, next week.

The defense minister said last year that Iran has joined the few countries that possess precision-guided missile technology.

The bomb was successfully test-fired during large-scale war games in northwestern Iran last September.

http://www.presstv.com/detail.aspx?id=20355&sectionid=351020101

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

BTW, David Duke thinks Ahmadinejad has been reading his books.

Please explain.

[skhara]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

That was Duke's comment. He says that he thinks Ahmadinejad has been reading his book titled "My Awakening" and "xxxish supremacism". And he makes that claim based on how Ahmadinejad has attacked globalism, neo-liberalism, the destruction ancient cultures and heritage at his UN speech.

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

That was Duke's comment. He says that he thinks Ahmadinejad has been reading his book titled "My Awakening" and "xxxish supremacism". And he makes that claim based on how Ahmadinejad has attacked globalism, neo-liberalism, the destruction ancient cultures and heritage at his UN speech.

Although he has done a commendable job in putting together the books you noted, I, nonetheless, think that the redneck in question is thinking too much of himself. His relative popularity has finally gotten to him. The topics he discusses and writes about are essentially regurgitated information he has been exposed to from around the world. He only managed to compile it in a comprehensive publication. As a result, he does deserve some credit. However, the topics in question have been discussed by great numbers of individuals around the world for a long time, especially in the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

[Lucin]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Personally I was pretty impressed by his speaking. The other great thing about this was his major victory on the home front.

This is exactly how he is gaining popularity amongst Arabs ( as said earlier) and also Persians in the provinces (not Tehran) but I'd like to add another factor ( besides his rhetoric) which has contributed greatly- in my opinion- to his rising popularity and that is his looks, his clothing and how he presents himself in public... People in provinces, for instance, say; look how modest is this man, he is a man of people, etc.

I'd really love to see men like Ali Larijani speaking in front international audiences. Of course, perhaps his more real-politik approach wouldn't be the best tactic when it comes to the average Ahmad, but it could have an effect on some western sheeple.

LOL, he speaks way too slowly. Relatively speaking, he does not have that 'appealing' rhetoric and the 'sharp' tongue of Ahmadinejad but Larijani is a more polished and more experienced politician. He's been around in the Iranian political arena for a long time now, contrary to Ahmadinejad who was almost unknown until he became the mayor of Tehran and shortly after President.

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Iran says it warned U.S. two years ago what would happen if U.S. makes "mad decision" to attack



UNITED NATIONS: Iran warned the United States two years ago that it would retaliate if the U.S. made a "mad decision" to attack the country, Iran's foreign minister said Wednesday. Manouchehr Mottaki refused to disclose what Iran's response would be and stressed that the government is not expecting U.S. President George W. Bush's administration to launch an attack, although Washington has repeatedly said all options remain on the table.

"Our analysis is clear," he said. "U.S. is not in a position to impose another war in our region against their taxpayers." At a news conference on the last day of the U.N. General Assembly's ministerial meeting, Mottaki stressed again that "Iran is trying its best to avoid any confrontation in the region" and does not need or want a nuclear bomb. The Bush administration and others in the West have repeatedly voiced concern over Iran's uranium enrichment program, arguing that it is aimed at producing nuclear weapons. Iran has vigorously rejected the claims, defying U.N. sanctions while stressing its program is a peaceful one. Motaki said that every country — including Iran — must be prepared to defend itself. "We have informed two years ago the Americans ... what will happen if they make such mad decision against our country, and they know very well," Mottaki said.

How would Iran retaliate?

"The relevant people at that appropriate time will explain to their public opinion," he said. In the meantime, Mottaki said Iran is working with the International Atomic Energy Agency to answer questions about its nuclear program, though he said "I don't know how long it will take."

In a setback for the United States, Iran won a reprieve until November from new U.N. sanctions over its nuclear program on Friday. The Bush administration and its European allies ceded to Russian and Chinese demands to give Tehran more time to address questions from the IAEA about its nuclear program, which the U.S. and others allege is a cover for nuclear weapons development. Mottaki said the foreign ministers of the U.S., Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany finally took "a realistic approach to the issue" at Friday's meeting and supported an initiative by IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei that led to the current cooperation with Iran.

"We do believe that the issue is considering now in its right and appropriate place, which is IAEA, and we do hope ... this process does work appropriately," he said.

Source: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...EN-UN-Iran.php

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

With the weakening of the US Dollar worldwide the following news reports from Iran today are very significant indeed. If Tehran starts a concerted effort of moving away from using US currency (a strategic concept that has been talked about by various major powers looking to undermine US power) it is conceivable that Russia, China and various other nations may follow suit eventually. Needless to say such a move can potentially have a devastating impact on an already vulnerable US economy. As a result, I believe that US policy makers will attempt everything in their power to foil such an attempt before it fully takes shape. Consequently, this may result in drastic reverses in Washington DC's foreign policy formulations or may simply translate to a major military confrontation that seeks to attack and destroy the regime that first attempts to undermine the All Mighty Dollar.

Armenian

************************************************** **********

No more US dollars in Iran's oil deals



"Iran is selling about 85 percent of its oil in the non-dollar currencies, including 65 percent in euro and 20 percent in yen", Khatibi was quoted by the SHANA news agency." The other 15 percent of Iran's oil exports will shift to other creditworthy currencies except the US dollar."

The UAE dirham has been mentioned as a possible substitute for the US dollar. The main reason behind the decision has been fluctuations in the US dollar's parity rate against other currencies and the depreciation of its value since 2004. Iran's foreign currency reserves held in banks abroad have risen by 37 percent over the past year to an equivalent of 65 billion dollars as of the end of June 2007, the Central Bank of Iran said in September.

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020103

Iran gets over 70 pct oil income in non-US currencies

TEHRAN, Sept 25 (Reuters) - Iran, locked in a row with Washington over its nuclear work, is aiming to boost oil export earnings in non-U.S. dollar currencies to 80 percent by the end of next month, an Iranian oil official said on Tuesday. A switch in payment by Nippon Oil (5001.T: Quote, Profile, Research) and other Japanese refiners to yen has already pushed the Islamic Republic's non-U.S. dollar income to more than 70 percent.

"With the arrangements we've made with our Asian customers, hopefully by the end of October we will have around 80 percent of our export revenue in currencies other than the dollar," Hojjatollah Ghanimifard, international affairs director of the state-owned National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) told Reuters.

For nearly two years, the world's fourth-biggest oil exporter has been reducing its exposure to the dollar, saying the weak U.S. currency is eroding its purchasing power. In July, the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) made an official request to customers in Japan, which imports more than 300,000 barrels per day (bpd) of Iranian crude, to pay in yen. Mohammad Ali Khatibi, Deputy Director of International Affairs at the state oil company, earlier on Tuesday told the oil ministry's official website SHANA that some Japanese refiners have asked for more time to honour Tehran's request.

"Currently, over 70 percent of Iran's crude exports are based on euro and yen instead of dollar," said Khatibi. "Nippon Oil is not the only Japanese refinery which has replaced dollar with yen, but also there are some other refineries that have started this replacement," Khatibi said. "Others called for one or two months to do that." Before Japan made the switch, just short of 70 percent of Iran's oil income was in non-U.S. dollar currencies.

Source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt...76439020070925

70% of Iran foreign assets in euro

A senior economy ministry official says 70 percent of Iran's foreign assets are currently saved in currencies other than dollar or in gold. Iran has decided to decrease its dependence on the greenback after its strong fall against other currencies including euro, Mohammad Zahedi-Vafa noted. Following the decision, Iran began transferring its foreign currency reserves into euro, the official noted, stating, "We have taken measures and now 70 percent of Iranian assets are in euros, other currencies or gold."

Iran has earlier announced plan to diversity its hard currency holdings after constant gaining of euro against dollar. The country has also told countries importing oil from Iran to make their payments in non-dollar. To this end, early in September, Japanese firm Nippon Oil announced it is to start paying for Iranian oil in yen. Some 60 percent of Iran's oil transactions for export are currently carried out in euros. Latest figures released by Central Bank of Iran suggest foreign currency holdings in banks abroad grew by 37 percent to reach $65 billion by the end of June.

Source: http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020102

Iran: Almost Dollar-Free

Summary

Iran is trumpeting its success at shifting away from the use of dollars in its oil trade. Such a shift is not easy, and generates little but costs.

Analysis

Mohammad-Ali Khatibi, an executive in Iran's National Iranian Oil Co., said Oct. 2 that after two years of effort, Iran uses the U.S. dollar in only 15 percent of its oil transactions, with 20 percent being carried out in Japanese yen and 65 percent in euros. Insisting upon non-dollar payment really only creates rhetorical ammunition. So long as the global system -- and the energy industry in particular -- is dollar-denominated, any non-dollar payments for oil subtract the exchange rate costs from the payments. Put simply, Iran's insistence on anything but dollars translates into a small transaction fee loss on every oil sale.

So while Iran can stand proud and bite its thumb at Washington, proud that it has played a small role in reducing demand for the dollar and thus making the currency slightly weaker, the process racks up a hardly inconsequential cost. In the first quarter of 2007, a 1 percent transaction cost would have cost Iran $500 million, a significant sum for a country wracked by inflation and dropping living standards. Once the payments are done, keeping the proceeds in non-dollar currencies could make more sense. For the past few years the U.S. dollar has been weakening, so the relative value of non-dollar holdings has gradually increased. Such logic is more obvious for euros, where gains have been impressive, than for the yen, whose real appreciation has been only marginal.

But the dollar's weakness does not work against U.S. economic strength, and going dollar-free is hardly risk-free. First, a weak dollar is allowing U.S. firms to surge exports, generating strong growth at a time when a more traditional element of economic growth -- the housing market -- seems to be stumbling. Iran's diversification does push the dollar down a touch, thus doing the United States a small favor -- which could be why the Bush administration is ignoring Iran's currency rhetoric. Moreover, other and larger forces are at work in weakening the U.S. dollar. Foreign governments, including the United Arab Emirates and Russia, continue to shift increasing proportions of their currency reserves away from the dollar. When advisers to the Chinese government suggested in August that Beijing could threaten to sell off chunks of its U.S. assets as a "bargaining chip," analysts and economists jumped on it as a possible explanation for the dollar's subsequent decline.

Currencies rise and fall on a mix of factors, and one of the biggest factors leading to the dollar's fall is likely petering out. When the Europeans launched the euro in 1998, central banks the world over were not sure that it would last, so they took nearly all of their francs, lira and deutschemarks and traded them in for greenbacks. The result was a surge in the U.S. dollar that peaked in 2000-2001. Since then, central banks -- now confident that the euro is here to stay -- started switching back. Six years later a new balance is being achieved, and that is likely to put a floor under the dollar sometime in 2008.

Source: http://www.stratfor.com/products/pre...ected=Analyses

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Are Iran, Russia, China behind dollar's free-fall?



Some see 'Currency Cold War' meant to bring U.S. to its knees

October 2, 2007 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – The hottest selling book in China right now is called "Currency Wars," which makes the case that the U.S. Federal Reserve is a puppet of the Rothschilds banking dynasty and it has persuaded some top officials Beijing should resist America's demands to appreciate its own undervalued currency, the yuan. This might not be news of concern to most Americans if the U.S. dollar were not in precipitous free-fall, having reached record lows against the euro yesterday. What would it mean if China ever threw its economic weight around by dumping dollars in a major way?

Suffice it to say it is referred to in some quarters as China's financial "nuclear option," because it would be the economic equivalent of detonating a thermonuclear weapon in the world's financial markets. But the American dollar's fate is hardly in the hands of the Chinese alone. Other foreign parties suspected of participating in a new "Currency Cold War" are Iran, Russia and Venezuela. Diane Francis, a financial reporter for the National Post in Canada, says it plainly and boldly: "There is a Currency Cold War being waged by Russia, Iran and various allies such as Venezuela."

The grand strategy being engineered by Vladimir Putin, she writes, is to force the use of euros as the international monetary standard as a transition to the Russian ruble.

"This is simply a monetary version of the old Cold War, minus the missiles," she writes.

Experts don't see any short-term reprieve for the falling value of the dollar. Kathy Lien, chief currency strategist with DailyFX.com in the US, told Bloomberg she expects the American dollar to slide even further, forcing more lending rates cuts in the U.S. to stave off recession.

"It seems like every single passing day we have a new record low in the dollar, and a new record high in the euro, and it's driven by the fact that U.S. data is continuing to deteriorate," she said. If other nations do not follow the U.S. in cutting rates, the slide in the value of the dollar would most likely continue. If the dollar trend continues spiraling downward, the risk is that nations like China – or Japan or Saudi Arabia – which have been buying U.S. Treasury bonds and thereby funding America's deficit, would stop that practice.

That would be the nuclear option. China, with $1.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves as a result of the massive and growing $260 billion U.S. trade deficit, has taken huge losses with the falling dollar, given that some 80 percent of China's $1.3 trillion in foreign reserves is held in U.S. dollar assets, largely in U.S. treasury securities. Meanwhile, Song Hongbing, the author of China's runaway bestseller, "The Currency Wars," says he's pleasantly surprised at the 200,000 copies his book has sold. He is probably not eager to see the dollar punished as he lives in Washington, D.C.

"I never imagined it could be so hot and that top leaders would be reading it," he says during a book tour in Shanghai. "People in China are nervous about what's going on in financial markets, but they don't know how to handle the real dangers. This book gives them some ideas."

Among the research findings that shocked him most was that the Fed is a privately owned and run bank.

"I just never imagined a central bank could be a private body."

Some, meanwhile, are standing on the sidelines cheering the currency wars – seeing them as a way of reducing the power and influence of the "imperialistic" U.S. Rohini Hensman, who describes himself as "independent scholar, writer and activist based in India and Sri Lanka," says it's about time the U.S. got its comeuppance.

"As the bombs started falling on Iraq in 2003, I wrote and circulated an appeal entitled 'Boycott the Dollar to Stop the War!,' arguing that although the military strength of the U.S. was enormous, its economy was in a mess; with a massive gross national debt, the only reason it could finance its foreign wars and occupations was because of the inflow of over a billion dollars a day from countries accumulating foreign exchange reserves in dollars because it was the world's sole reserve currency. The denomination of the oil trade in dollars made it additionally desirable.

With the advent of the euro, however, there was the possibility of an alternative world currency; therefore individuals, institutions and countries opposed to the war on Iraq should refuse to accumulate dollars or use them outside the U.S., because these were activities that helped to finance U.S.-Israeli aggression against Palestinians, Iraqis and Afghanis. After the World Social Forum meeting in 2004, the Boycott Bush Campaign adopted the dollar boycott as part of its strategy."

In early trading today, the dollar advanced slightly, prompting gold prices back from 28-year highs set yesterday. The dollar's value against a basket of six major currencies rose slightly to 77.950 from a lifetime low of 77.657 a day earlier. The dollar traded at $1.4223 per euro, stronger than a record low on Monday of $1.4283. WND has reported the Federal Reserve is in a dilemma.

The stock market has demanded rate cuts, wanting to return to the free credit policies of the Federal Reserve that fueled the liquidity bubble that has boosted home prices and pumped the Dow Jones Industrial Average since 9/11. Yet, the Fed giving in to stock market demands and lowering rates threatens an international dollar sell-off that could lead to a dollar collapse. Former Fed Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan also sparked controversy by suggesting in his recently published book, "The Age of Turbulence," the euro is rivaling the dollar as the international foreign exchange reserve currency of choice.

The Wall Street Journal recently quoted a rule of thumb advanced by Harvard University economist Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund. According to Rogoff’s "back-of-the-envelope" calculation, a 20 percent drop in the dollar's exchange value reduces Americans' income by 3 percent, adjusted by inflation.

Source: http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57936

[Armenian]

Re: Consequences Of Attacking Iran And Why Tehran Is Not Worried

Syria, Seeking Investors, Turns Cautiously to Iran



His petroleum recycling business, the Damascus Petrochemical Refinery Company, was the first private Iranian company to set foot in Syria, the first of many, it now seems.

“Billions of dollars of Iranian projects are expected to be coming here now,” Mr. Ansare, an Iranian citizen who started operations here in 2003, said in impeccable Arabic as he lounged on a khaki-colored couch at his office in Damascus. From car manufacturing plants and a proposed $2 billion industrial zone for Iranian businesses, to plans to overhaul urban transportation systems, Iranian companies are charging into Syria, looking to cash in on a recent privatization push by Damascus. Weighed down by a behemoth public sector, an influx of nearly two million Iraqi refugees and falling oil production, Syria’s leaders are trying to liberalize their economy in hopes of avoiding a financial meltdown. In another time, the privatization effort might have presented an opportunity for the United States and Europe to use their enormous commercial muscle to drive a wedge between Syria and Iran, Washington’s foremost antagonists in the region.

But the United States imposed sanctions in 2004 as punishment for Syrian support of militant Palestinian and Lebanese organizations. These banned American exports to Syria and gave President Bush the added option of outlawing American investment in the country, effectively scaring off American and other Western companies. At the same time, Iran, the subject of two recent rounds of United Nations sanctions for its suspected nuclear weapons ambitions and a long boycott by the United States, has few opportunities to invest abroad. The end result, Western diplomats and analysts say, is that Washington has effectively pushed Damascus and Tehran into deepening their alliance of nearly three decades.

“It’s logical why we have been working much closer with the Iranians,” said Mustafa Alkafri, head of the Syrian Investment Agency, a government body. “We’re both under the American blockade.”

The Syrian government estimates that Iranian investment in 2006 alone surged to more than $400 million, making Tehran the third-largest foreign investor here, behind Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Though exact figures are unavailable, by some estimates Iran has invested a total of $3 billion in Syria, most of that in the last few years. In September, officials from both countries announced plans to expand Iranian projects in Syria to $10 billion over the next five years, which would cast Tehran as the economic powerhouse here. The countries’ growing economic ties are reinforced by cultural ties, with more than half a million Iranian tourists, mainly pilgrims, flocking to shrines in Syria every year.

“Syria looks a lot like the Iranian presence in Najaf,” said Vali Nasr, a professor at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, referring to the Shiite holy city in Iraq. “You have businesses springing up that cater to Iranian pilgrims, which deepen personal relationships that continue to grow and evolve into partnerships.”

Syria’s sudden interest in foreign investment, and Iran’s eagerness to supply it, springs from an emerging economic crisis here. Food and energy subsidies, for instance, are predicted to cost $7 billion next year, almost 20 percent of the country’s gross domestic product, but the state has been unable to increase tax collections significantly. “We didn’t know how drastic the situation was until recently,” said Andrew Tabler, editor of Syria Today magazine. “Syria has no choice but to follow the liberalization path.” But according to Mr. Tabler, American sanctions “are preventing the U.S. from using the one lever of influence it has right now, which is economics.”

Some analysts doubt that assertion, saying that political issues dividing the United States and Syria — from Israel to the activities of Hezbollah, the Syrian-backed Shiite party that Washington considers a terrorist group — need to be settled before Syria will ever begin reconsidering its growing ties with Iran. And even in the absence of sanctions, a jungle of red tape in Damascus and political turmoil in nearby Lebanon and Iraq would still give American investors pause. Bureaucratic obstacles are said to be holding up a number of Iranian projects, with several stuck in the planning stages. “In general, it’s much easier and more profitable to invest in places like Egypt and Jordan,” said Jihad Yazigi, editor of The Syria Report, an online Syrian economic journal. But none of that has dampened the zeal of Iranian companies, in part, many here say, because of backing from Tehran. State-owned and even privately held Iranian companies often have links to political figures like Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, a financial oligarch and former president of Iran, and even the Revolutionary Guards, according to Mr. Nasr, of the Fletcher School.

“There is no doubt that Iranian economic expansion is going to markets where there are political interests,” Mr. Nasr said. This form of state-led capitalism allows Tehran to direct its investments more easily in its desired sphere of influence, he said, much like President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela’s neosocialist agenda across Latin America. Places like western Afghanistan and southern Iraq, for instance, war zones that are considered too perilous for most investors, are flush with Iranian-made goods. “At one level, Iranian investment is strategic,” Mr. Nasr said. “At another, it’s simply based on economic opportunity. But you can bet that Rafsanjani won’t pass up a chance to invest in Syria.” That has some Syrians concerned. One senior adviser to the Syrian government, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss such matters, said it was no coincidence that Iran was investing in strategic industries like concrete production and power generation.

“These industries are vital and would give the Iranians a huge say,” the adviser said. In addition to these projects, he said Syria was considering having Iranian companies manage the nationwide A.T.M. network, print Syrian passports and supervise a proposed system to allocate monthly allotments of food subsidies using debit cards. “These projects will give them knowledge about all of us, even our personal spending behavior,” the adviser said. “This isn’t just about profit — it’s about influence.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/04/wo...4syria.html?hp