The Coming War with Iran: Why?

[civic_critic]

I recommend that people read this article on the reasons why America is increasing its aggressive threats against Iran.

Iran: the Threat of a Nuclear War

At first it is extremely alarming. Then you wonder is the guy writing it really just a nutter - until you look at his resumé: former Joint chief of staff of the Russian armies. Then you wonder is his thesis flawed or if, by writing this article, he has his own agenda that may not be apparent and within which this article is just a piece of propaganda.

However, taking it at face value it will scare the sh*t out of you, if its true. Compare this also with this seemingly insightful piece about the american housing bubble: 'Consequences of Housing Bubble Crash Ignored by the Media for 2 Years'.
In particular these comments from Warren Buffett quoted in the article are interesting:

Through the spring of 2002, I had lived nearly 72 years without purchasing a foreign currency. Since then Berkshire has made significant investments in several currencies. …To hold other currencies is to believe that the dollar will decline….Our trade deficit has greatly worsened, to the point that our country's "net worth," so to speak, is now being transferred abroad at an alarming rate.

More important, however, is that foreign ownership of our assets will grow at about $500 (currently $800 billion) billion per year at the present trade-deficit level, which means that the deficit will be adding about one percentage point annually (now 1.5% annually) to foreigners' net ownership of our national wealth. As that ownership grows, so will the annual net investment income flowing out of this country. That will leave us paying ever-increasing dividends and interest to the world rather than being a net receiver of them, as in the past. We have entered the world of negative compounding — goodbye pleasure, hello pain.

These comments of Buffett's repeat perfectly the thesis laid out by General Ivashov in the first article above.

Is this all true? If so are the roots of coming conflict so profound that such conflict is unavoidable, as Ivashov suggests?

[Sidewinder]

The US has been bankrupt in reality, and the entire global financial system based on nothing more than a gigantic confidence scam, since the 70s.

It is inevitable that the US economy will collapse in some way eventually. They've played just about every last financial engineering trick in the book since the late 70s to cover up the truth, but they're running out of road fast. They are facing either a prolonged deflation or a prolonged hyperinflation. I'm betting Helicopter Ben will go the hyperinflation route.

Whether Bush is lunatic enough to think that a global nuclear war offers a handy escape route out of the economic meltdown they face is another question.

[Thac0man]

I think the good General is way off the mark. American/Iranian posturing has been a mainstay of both their foreign policies for a long time and used to bolster domestic support, and during this time they have both cooperated (anyone remember Ollie North?).

This historical context must be taken into account, also the current events inside Iran with the current president facing mounting critisism from those above and below him. The Generals analysis is deeply flawed, assuming that the lack of conventional military options makes a nuclear one more inevitabile. This is not necessarily true.

As for the Generals resume, the Russian army has not been an effective force since the second world war. Though I think his opinions are honest ones, he fails to see the political dimension and the advantages both sides might still get from negioations.