Iran making same mistake as Iraq

[Duck Turkin]

I've just read this, from a conservative journalist but nevertheless seems to sum up how I understand this:

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... ahmad.html

I'll quote the bit I most agree with:

Ahmadinejad has used the Revolutionary Guards to buttress his domestic support with this spectacle, but he may have had to make some concessions internally. We'll see. But I don't see how the U.S. benefits from this fiasco in any way. Tehran successfully weaned Britain away from its ally, the U.S., and its EU partners, proved how alienated the British public is from the war in Iraq and the U.S. administration, managed to look more humane in prisoner treatment than the U.S. and distracted from the growing international pressure on Tehran's nuclear ambitions. That's a pretty shrewd set of moves, though it pains me to say so.

[Kemper_Boyd]

We're only seeing the public side of what's happened. On Radio 4 they
suggested that the Iranian Foreign Minister may have intervened and
gained support for the release. So it may look good for Ahmadinejad
right now but he may have weakend his own postition within the
governing powers. Fingers crossed they will soon have released our
marines and sailors, and the repercussions for Iran may come later.

As John Oliver said on the Daily Show "Iran", slurp of tea from a
bone china cup, "we will fuck you up."

[PFVA]

They´re saying here that Syria played a role in negociations.

A U.S. Congress led by Nancy Pellosi was there this week.

(Semi-related to this i have the impression that the Congressists'visit is related to the suggestions made on what was called the Baker report and study that suggested negociations with Iran and Siria among others to solve Iraq's problem.)

[GeeZa]

We're only seeing the public side of what's happened. On Radio 4 they
suggested that the Iranian Foreign Minister may have intervened and
gained support for the release. So it may look good for Ahmadinejad
right now but he may have weakend his own postition within the
governing powers. Fingers crossed they will soon have released our
marines and sailors, and the repercussions for Iran may come later.

As John Oliver said on the Daily Show "Iran", slurp of tea from a
bone china cup, "we will fuck you up."

Yes I think big A has come under a lot of pressure from within since the Iranian holiday ended. Still, I'm sure he's getting quiet applause around the Muslim world and I bet Syria played their part as honest broker. The weakness and isolation of the current British administration has been ably demonstrated, I doubt there was much to be gained by Iran from prolonging the political games. Britain has been a weak and easy target, if these were US servicemen I'm sure the whole situation would have developed rather differently. Not convinced Iran has necessarily come out of this very well tbh.

Time to move on.

[Wumpus4x4]

I would expect the whole world and his dog to start claiming credit here. Doubtless people will believe whatever they want to, perhaps that a non-public threat of noocular anihla annhi anahi bombing from the USA swayed the Iranian leadership. Or perhaps that the British government asked for the Iranians to release these people and that's what happened. Or maybe Tony Blair agreed to hand over UK yorkshire pudding production to Iran for the next 20 years and wear a silly hat in private inter-governmental discussions. What doesn't appear to have happened is anyone getting killed, presumably much to the disappointment of the warmongering cunts who think that not killing people when there are sensible alternatives is a sign of weakness. Cunts.

Oh and well done to our peeps for not starting shooting there and then. I expect it was a complex situation, I think the Iranian government owes the UK, Iraq and the UN an apology (but we shouldn't kill anyone in an attempt to get one) and I expect, nay demand, lessons to be learned.

[Kemper_Boyd]

Oh I still think this is the lull before the storm. I think the US is now more
likely to attack Iran than they were before this episode. The Iranian's can
paint it as a dispute over borders, and talk up their magnanimity, but the
hawks in the US will see the incident as more proof that Iran is as
dangerous now as it was during the revolution.

Iran may gain kudos in the Middle East but they should be concentrating
on getting to January 20th 2009 in one piece.

[Crystal_sword]

According to some reports.

A while Back there was fire fight between a US Patrol and Iranian Guards along the border.

Will post link later

[ddraig]

I guess France gets credit for their refusal to let up on the reparations that sent the German economy down the shitter. However, the Kaiser's excursion into France was the genesis of that. But hey, Bill was the spawn of Victoria and WW1 a family dispute. Bingo!

Surely the US must be responsible, non? So the reparations paid France and Britain was set against allied debt to the US... who then (in effect) lent that money back to Germany to pay off the reparations. Come the great depression, the money-go-round came to halt. Bingo!

The war reparations on Germany was economic warfare, not only did it have to pay the allied countries war debt, it had to pay many billions in extra gold reparations to the Allies which meant it had to print & borrow paper money to buy gold to pay debts effectively in gold, which caused the Weimar hyperinflation and decimation of the German economy, and some pissed off germans. Some argue that the Bank of England (i.e. The City) & the Federal Reserve (i.e. Wall Street) worked in unison to manipulate this robbery, though since history is written by the victors, Wikipedia makes a simplified argument for US 'aid' to Germany for France.
How did the US taxpayer feel about their money given away as 'aid' to Germany who they just sent their kids to fight against? This gold manipulation & stockpiling was so that the City could keep it's control of the gold standard (golden rule: he who owns the gold makes the rules) which it eventually gave up in 1931 and gave to the Federal Reserve (same crew) officially in 1944.

Similarly the much celebrated Marshall Plan after WW2 gave aid (again off the back of US taxpayers) to european countries with the stipulation that i. they use a certain % of it to buy oil from US oil companies and for Anglo-US investment & ii. they dont build refineries. Same thing nowadays with the IMF, WTO & World Bank (all mainly anglo-US controlled) giving loans backed mostly by US taxpayers to 2nd & 3rd world countries. Thats why Iraq is selling its oil to Western firms now since they cant pay off the IMF loans. Economic conquest through usury, business as usual.

As far as the start of the WW1, Rob Newman crept out of obscurity to get into this stuff with a very interesting comedy/history stage show: http://www.evworld.com/article.cfm?storyid=1195
(I dont personally agree with his alarmist peak oil stuff)

I dont agree with supporting foreign regimes over your own (its hypocrisy), but having a critical look at your own country's (*ahem* the financial/political elite's) myth making for the masses hardly makes you self-loathing, actually its liberating to disengage the systemic BS.

Jeez..This turned into a thick post, I agree with Morbeus, talking politics is not a good thing, just had to get on my sandbox one last time

[Absolute_Zero]

I guess France gets credit for their refusal to let up on the reparations that sent the German economy down the shitter. However, the Kaiser's excursion into France was the genesis of that. But hey, Bill was the spawn of Victoria and WW1 a family dispute. Bingo!

Surely the US must be responsible, non? So the reparations paid France and Britain was set against allied debt to the US... who then (in effect) lent that money back to Germany to pay off the reparations. Come the great depression, the money-go-round came to halt. Bingo!

The war reparations on Germany was economic warfare, not only did it have to pay the allied countries war debt, it had to pay many billions in extra gold reparations to the Allies which meant it had to print & borrow paper money to buy gold to pay debts effectively in gold, which caused the Weimar hyperinflation and decimation of the German economy, and some pissed off germans. [...]

Well hey, we've only just finished paying you lot off for WWII.

I was simply mocking a trend amongst the more-politically-correct-than-thou who seem to sense moral superiority in depicting the Treaty of Versailles, and it's fallout, as the singular cause of WWII. Ergo, Britain and France are ultimately responsible for the holocaust et al. I find that risible in the extreme... as it happened, the Weimar Republic flourished under the yoke of Versailles circa 1924-29.

This blind determination to ignore German internal forces in favour of gleeful 20/20 hind-sighted self-flagellation, I find fascinating. A sort of historical ambulance chasing where there's always someone/thing to blame for everything, ever, and all the better if it's ourselves.

[ddraig]

I guess France gets credit for their refusal to let up on the reparations that sent the German economy down the shitter. However, the Kaiser's excursion into France was the genesis of that. But hey, Bill was the spawn of Victoria and WW1 a family dispute. Bingo!

Surely the US must be responsible, non? So the reparations paid France and Britain was set against allied debt to the US... who then (in effect) lent that money back to Germany to pay off the reparations. Come the great depression, the money-go-round came to halt. Bingo!

The war reparations on Germany was economic warfare, not only did it have to pay the allied countries war debt, it had to pay many billions in extra gold reparations to the Allies which meant it had to print & borrow paper money to buy gold to pay debts effectively in gold, which caused the Weimar hyperinflation and decimation of the German economy, and some pissed off germans. [...]

Well hey, we've only just finished paying you lot off for WWII.

I was simply mocking a trend amongst the more-politically-correct-than-thou who seem to sense moral superiority in depicting the Treaty of Versailles, and it's fallout, as the singular cause of WWII. Ergo, Britain and France are ultimately responsible for the holocaust et al. I find that risible in the extreme... as it happened, the Weimar Republic flourished under the yoke of Versailles circa 1924-29.

This blind determination to ignore German internal forces in favour of gleeful 20/20 hind-sighted self-flagellation, I find fascinating. A sort of historical ambulance chasing where there's always someone/thing to blame for everything, ever, and all the better if it's ourselves.

I hear what you are saying. My post turned into a long winded rant, not at you personally, just the topic
I dont mean to imply the Allies should take the blame for the holocaust, of course not, and of course I agree that Germany was an enemy to the interests of Britain, since if we hadnt of made a stand then we may be speaking german now. I guess my point was that most of these modern wars and globalization are due to an ultimately fraudulant financial system & elite which are quite far removed from loyalty to any country. Its the BS sold to the masses who end up fighting in these wars (on all sides) which used to rake me. A small example would be that we are supposed to think of Iran as a 'Rogue Nation' whilst ignoring the fact that Halliburton when Dick Cheney was in charge, illegally sold nuclear reactor parts to Iran during the 90s (and still does business with Iran iirc)! Bill Hicks's Shane sketch comes to mind.

Yep the Weimar Republic did bubble thru monetary inflation (increased liquidity through borrowing and printing money), but thats not real wealth, since inflation always sucks wealth from the people, due to continuously increasing prices with always lagging wages (as well as thru seigniorage & interest paid on debt). In reality this funny money was being used to stimulate german economic growth & productivity to sell german exports cheaply (via devalued inflated german currency) to buy the real money (gold) from the Allies to pay off the massive reparations. It was this 'flourishing' economy which destroyed the Weimar Republic and helped power the roaring 20s. You see the Allies were essentially getting german exports for free for all those years, since the germans basically had to sell their exports for gold, the gold which the germans gave back to them to pay off the reparations..all by design.
It was a form of Keynesian economics on fastforward. Basically the same inflationary Keynesian system is powering the global economy & globalization today with the petrodollar and will also some day collapse due to earth's finite size, iirc Keynes admitted this himself.

I would like to believe that there are more equitable economic systems which could work(a mixture of distributism with a smidgen of socialism maybe), which doesnt suck wealth from workers or causes wars like the ones we have ..but then again maybe we do live in the best of all worlds.

EDIT: Yep the hyperinflation was indeed before the 'Golden Age'. After 1923 there still was (more controlled) inflation via US loans, and a still huge but lesser reparation levied. I imagine joining the League of Nations was Germany's reward with this 'help'. The reparations were still there though and the loan debts still due. I do believe that it was actually Hitler which finally destroyed the Republic (Reichstag Fire) also, and the Allies of course dont take the blame for that!