Just as Iranian Revolutionary Guard general was boasting that Teheran’s “finger is always on the trigger and we have hundreds and even thousands of missiles ready to be fired against predetermined targets”, the French energy giant Total was pulling out of the South Pars (the modern name for ancient Persepolis) gas project. RIA Novosti described the scope of the project:
Stages 2 and 3 of the Southern Pars gas field in the Persian Gulf were initiated by the international consortium of France’s Total (which holds a 40% stake), Malaysia’s Petronas (30%) and Russia’s Gazprom (30%) in 1997. The consortium built two offshore platforms with 10 production wells each, two 100-km (62-mile) underwater gas pipelines and an onshore gas plant with annual capacity of 20 billion cubic meters.
Total CEO Christophe de Margerie told the press “Today we would be taking too much political risk to invest in Iran because people will say: ‘Total will do anything for money’” With gas prices rising and no sign of demand abating, Total’s withdrawal from the consortium represents a huge opportunity loss that would only be borne if the French company felt that the risk of proceeding was too high. The Times Online says:
Tehran needs the technology that only the western groups possess in order to extract and liquify gas from the field. It could turn to Gazprom but the Russian energy mammoth at present lacks the expertise to exploit the fields, industry experts said. Russia may also not be keen to help Iran create a rival to its own domination of Western Europe’s gas supplies.
Total had been hoping to continue with South Pars, which has been in suspension since 2006, but it bowed to months of pressure from Washington and from President Sarkozy, a strong supporter of the drive to force Tehran to stop enriching uranium. The group was not given an order but it was told that further involvement in Iran would be unwelcome, a French official said. …
Tehran expected the South Pars field to produce 751 million cubic meters (26 billion cubic feet) of natural gas a day when completed by 2014.
The Great Game has many players at cross purposes. The recent attack on the Indian Embassy in Kabul highlighted the struggle around Iranian attempts to pipe its gas to the East. India had been part of the $3.1 billion Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan pipeline project aimed at providing Iranian fuel for its growing economy. In the days before the US invasion of Afghanistan, Teheran had been concerned about the machinations of the Pakistani-influenced Taliban on its eastern marches. Pakistan and India had only recently resolved pipeline transit issues. What effect the recent attack on Indian interests in Kabul will have only time will tell. But the terms of the Pakistani-Indian deal speak volumes not only for the magnitude of the issues but also the mistrust involved.
Madrid, Jul 03, 2008 (Asia Pulse Data Source via COMTEX) — India will host the next meeting on the 1,680-km gas pipeline, planned from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and Pakistan to India in October, even as it expects an agreement on the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline to be signed by next month. …
India and Pakistan have resolved all bilateral issues, including transit fee which saw New Delhi boycotting IPI pipeline talks for about a year. India has more or less agreed to give Pakistan a transit fee of USD 200 million per year, which is equivalent to USD 0.60 per million British thermal unit for allowing passage of the pipeline through that country.
Delivery point of gas or the place where custody of gas will be transferred to India will also be discussed at the trilateral meeting, he said. India wants the delivery point of gas at India-Pakistan border against Iran’s position that that the delivery point should be at Iran-Pakistan border to cut transit risks in Pakistan. …
As for the pipeline length, the shortest distance through Pakistan is 750 km but Islamabad wants the southern route which involves an extra 286 km with consequent increase in costs and transport tariff.
The plain geographic fact is that Iran’s petroleum resources — the source of its livelihood — must pass through seas and land masses that are either heavily influenced by the United States or by Sunni-influenced countries which are hostile to it. By keeping Iranian supplies off the market, oil producers with access to the shipping lanes and secure pipelines can benefit from high prices. The Ayatollah’s loss is their gain. Teheran can turn to Russia for help to some extent. But Moscow cannot supply all the technology Iran needs nor can it overcome the fundamental constraints of geography without undue cost.
Oil, nuclear power, religion and international politics are tied together in the Iranian Gordian Knot. Throttling Iran means keeping energy prices higher than they would be if the restrictions were lifted. Throttling Iran means stunting Afghanistan economically, because that landlocked country’s primary overland transportation routes run to its West. It means pushing Afghanistan onto dependence on Pakistani ports and roads, despite the antagonisms between the two countries. Throttling Iran means objectively enriching Sunni Arab countries which are ideologically hostile to the United States. But lifting restrictions would supercharge Teheran’s nuclear program and enrich its proxies. It would strengthen Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Barack Obama claims that American efforts to stop Iran’s nuclear program and aggression have failed because it has avoided direct negotiations with Teheran, as if the act of an American President going to Iran would by itself make a difference. But it would only make a difference if that President had something extra to offer the Ayatollahs; something never offered before. That extra goody would most likely be a guarantee of Iranian access to foreign markets and a promise not to react in ways that created the political risk that stopped France Total in its tracks.
The inherent risk in that strategy is that once Iran acquires unfettered access to the outside it would have every incentive to cheat and restart its shenanigans, knowing that the Western world would then be reluctant to disrupt its energy markets. The essential calculation that must be solved in dealing with Teheran is whether to make regime change a precondition for loosening the noose or whether the noose can be loosened today in exchange for a promise for the Ayatollahs to behave themselves in the future. There’s no way of knowing for sure which road Obama will take, or even if he has thought about the issue in any depth. The candidate’s positions on many significant issues has been blinking on and off like a Christmas light for some time. Maybe Total was right to pull out until things became clearer.
Tip Jar.
PJM Home
42 Comments
1. dla:Interesting. Maybe Iran’s $560billion GDP is big enough for economic measures to work.
Most Muslim-radicals operate from countries lacking an economy to be influenced.
My guess is that GWB has begun an attack on Mr.INeedANewJob and the American press is missing it (as usual). The EU is freezing Iranian bank assets. The French are backing out of gas developments. Etc.
Interesting.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:18 pm 2. JA:Wretchard, I would love to hear your comments on this report from Stratfor, if you get a chance.
Total’s move makes our negotiating position that much stronger, so this is good news indeed.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:34 pm 3. wretchard:Stratfor writes:
In the twilight of GWB’s term, some pundits are coming to the belated conclusion that he’s presided over one of the most crucial junctures in recent history and are amazed to discover that we’re coming out the other end of it.
I think whether or not one agrees with GWB’s policies there’s no denying he has been one of the most consequential Presidents in recent history. He did something; he acted. And whether history judges those acts to be good or bad, they will have something to judge. I’m not sure we are emerging into the ‘broad sunlit uplands’ but one thing’s for sure: the old postwar and cold-war worlds are over and we must make new arrangements for a new world. In the ending scene in Shane, he tells the villain, “our days our over, the difference is that I know it.” For that reason, I’m a little concerned about political ideologies that claim to be “new” and “progressive” but whose world views are essentially rooted in 40 years ago. In Vietnam. That’s over now but not everyone realizes it. The real question is who knows it more: the veteran or the One who has learned about it at second hand.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:54 pm 4. hdgreene:Michael Moore is going to be very upset with the Indians if they go ahead with that gas pipeline through Afghanistan. There is something inherently evil about buying gas from people who have it and want to sell it before transporting it to people who don’t have it and want to buy. Especially if there are still a few trees left to be cut down. Moore has a better way. The Cuban model. Have Hugo Chavez give it to you.
In Moore the left has a comedian formulating policy. In Gore they have a mediocre politician doing their heavy scientific thinking. In Sen Obama, Rev. Jesse Jackson, and whatever Jeremiah Wright is, they have a trinity of quasi saviors doing their politics. And they will probably win, floating to victory on torrent of Media Bull. Heaven help us. The rest of the world won’t.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:54 pm 5. Lifeofthemind:Since Total Elf was wired into the Chirac - Saddam oil for food money pump that even reached into the Canadian government Sarkozy has a job to do in cleaning out that sewer. His ability to pry this cash cow away from the Iranians is one of the most significant victories so far in the GWOT. This project could also have served as a technology funnel to the Russian partners in Gazprom (who suffer a financial loss and who have to rethink all their political threads going forward) and to the Chinese. Now the Chinese investment in Iran looks riskier which reduces the interest in that UN Security Council member in protecting the Mullahs. THe missiles Iran tested weren’t only seen buy Israel. Everyone is under Iran’s gun and they may just kick over the table. Alternately, it gives other neighbors a possible interest in setting up a confrontation between Iran and someone else, read Israel. These links of financial betrayal and chicanery make an old Raymond Chandler novel look straight forward.
Jul 10, 2008 - 4:59 pm 6. Eggplant:Wretchard said:
“I think whether or not one agrees with GWB’s policies there’s no denying he has been one of the most consequential Presidents in recent history. He did something; he acted. And whether history judges those acts to be good or bad, they will have something to judge.”
I agree with what Wretchard’ comment and would add that for the most part IMHO, GWB’s decisions were correct. Once again, America got lucky. GWB could have been too aggressive or too passive in his response to 9/11. GWB struck the right balance in going after Afghanistan and Iraq but holding back against the Iranians. We had the right man as President during some difficult times. I hope our good luck continues.
Jul 10, 2008 - 5:49 pm 7. RWE:One thing that is different now is that I am not at all sure everyone on the same side is on the same page or is even reading from the same edition or maybe even the same book. In the past, “sides” were pretty well defined, and while the Italian Facists and German Facists and Japanese Militarists were not in complete agreement in all things they pretty much wanted their side to win. This unanimity was less apparent for the Communists, but neither was it totally lacking.
But today, it is not at all certain that Iran, or Russia, or Pakistan, or many other countries each have a central position or strategy and even less likely that a combination of counties do. Trying to figure out what Russia or Iran is doing may be impossible because there is really no “Mr. Big” in those places who has all the pieces and his hands on all the controls. Things are too much of a mess there for that to be true. And it is even likely that if there is a Mr. Big he may be playing both sides of the street to his own advantage.
Jul 10, 2008 - 6:04 pm 8. NahnCee:Wish he’d'a been meaner to the Saudi’s. Think it was a mistake that he hasn’t been, and that he’s insisted that Islam is a Religion of Peace rather than what it very obviously is.
Jul 10, 2008 - 6:06 pm 9. hdgreene:In a sense, an Iran without nuclear weapons is a threat to the US and the region. A nuclear armed Iran is a threat far beyond — first to Russia and, further afield, India and China. In fact, at that point it’ll be a middle sized power in search of Allies and a patron. It could easily play all those powers off each other — and even threaten to hook up with the US once more. In fact, a mullah free government would find that move very attractive.
So if there is a “great game” between the other powers and the US as regards Iran, it is perhaps a game the other powers don’t really want to win — if the prize is a nuclear armed neighbor with an unhinged leadership. And perhaps the Iranians, who have longed played everyone else for fools, feel like they are the ones getting played now.
Jul 10, 2008 - 7:36 pm 10. Wadeusaf:Due to this kind of economic pressure applied to Iran by this withdraw of the French from the consortium, I think for the fate of not only the current president of Iran but of the entire governing apparatus, can be measured in weeks. Iran cannot create the jobs it needs, it cannot sell much of the black gold it is pumping out of the ground, and its deals with Hezbollah, Syria Hamas and who know what other radical chic, has drained its treasury. The economic and technical isolation, bolstered by the knowledge that Israel can eliminate its nuclear programs, added to the understanding that the Iranian Shi’ah are not interested in the stuff Iran is proffering, ought to be a very sobering set of circumstances for the Socialist Mullahs.
Mr. Obama’s inebriated path would leave the Mullahs giddy with new found power and could reignite sectarian, and regional violence. However, so long as an internationally wielded noose is steadily tightened, there will be no resurrecting the Iranian economy nor the restraining the Iranian people.
Yup, thank you Mr. President.
Jul 10, 2008 - 7:43 pm 11. Alexis:Afghanistan has three overland routes of supply — Pakistan, Iran, and the former Soviet Union. This has obvious implications for the resupply of American forces in Afghanistan.
I think the time will soon come when it is no longer in America’s best interests to supply the multinational forces in Afghanistan through Pakistan. Given Pakistani threats to cut off supplies and/or arm the Taliban, Pakistan’s usefulness as a partner is limited. Multinational forces need another route of supply.
For the time being, Iran is out of the question as a route to Afghanistan. This leaves Russia. The Russian rail system would be a highly effective means to transport supplies to our forces in Afghanistan. There’s only one catch — Russia would expect political concessions that would be regarded as unacceptable in western capitals.
There is a way around this dilemma. We need to reconfigure our supply network. For some supplies such as cash and troop rotation, we can still access Afghanistan by air. (Pakistani protests of sovereignty aside, there would be a heavy price to pay if Pakistan were to challenge American air supremacy.) For food, we can buy local produce from Afghan farmers. Buying Afghanistan’s wheat crop has an additional bonus of making farmland unavailable for the opium crop, thus depriving the Taliban of revenue.
This leaves weapons and ammunition. We can use Russian economic interests to our advantage here. Although Russia may be loathe to let American military supplies go through its rail network without an exorbitant political price, it would be difficult to imagine how Russians would be upset with supplying American forces with weaponry. It may seem weird for American soldiers to use Russian weapons and ammunition, but there are times when it may be wiser to use second-rate weaponry that comes with a robust supply line instead of first-rate weapons whose supplies can be cut off by Pakistan.
Buying Russian weaponry for cash has the benefit of gaining access to a Russian supply line while not giving any political concessions to the Russian state. Any weapons contract should not only include the cost of the weapons but also the cost of the transportation, so the Russian arms contractor would have the responsibility (and risk) for delivering the weapons to Afghanistan. Moreover, the Russian government could not shut off American access to its weaponry even if it wanted to, given the domestic incentives for profit and employment. What is a Russian politician going to tell an unemployed worker in a factory town when American dollars for Russian arms are available and yet spurned? Vladimir Putin may be popular, but he isn’t that popular.
The United States should also station a major machine shop in Afghanistan, not only to keep spare parts for our troops, but also to refurbish and upgrade Russian weaponry so it can be used to best effect. This installation would definitely need defense in depth.
Any military conflict with Iran would likely close down the Pakistani supply route for our forces in Afghanistan, if only in response to domestic political pressure. In any case, Pakistan thinks it can dictate terms of alliance to the United States. This is not good. At the very least, the United States needs to construct a strong enough alternative to a negotiated agreement so Pakistan is in no position to dictate terms. Reconfiguring our supply network in such a manner so we don’t need a Pakistani supply route would also allow our forces to enter the Northwest Frontier Provinces to fight the Taliban on their home territory, something our forces have been reluctant to do so far.
Jul 10, 2008 - 8:40 pm 12. NahnCee:I thought we had already been buying left-over Russian arms. Isn’t there some kind of dollars for Russian nukes program in place where we’ve been paying them to destroy or better protect their nukes for some years now? It would appear that Putin has decided that he can get more for rusty Russian nukes from North Korea and Iran than he can from Uncle Sam … or maybe he’s just double-dipping and selling the same old moldy nuke over and over and over again to different bidders.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:34 pm 13. whiskey:First off, it’s likely that Total-Elf’s reaction is due to Sarkozy, not “cleaning up a sewer” but reacting to French interests, namely not having Iran threatening France with nukes on behalf of independence minded French Muslims. Europe is terrified that some Muslims will declare independence and Iran will back them with nukes. Nukes that CAN likely reach places like Paris if enough technical hurdles are overcome. I.E. replicating Soviet technology circa 1965.
Second, look at what Iran is doing. It is pointed threatening well, everyone. India, Saudis, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, most of Europe, as well as Israel. For what gain? What conceivable Iranian interest gains by shooting off publicly ICBMs, while constantly threatening to nuke Israel (and perhaps the US) “out of existence?”
France’s pressure on Total to withdraw was quite foreseeable. As is mounting pressure to “do something” about Iran and weakening Barack Obama, the candidate most favorable to Iran. Presumably, Iranian leadership is not stupid. What then are their goals?
They seek, very likely, to intimidate the West and their neighbors into surrender. THEY view themselves as the surging, strong, “world power” with “unstoppable” Hezbollah and able to humble the US at will. Iran likely seeks to destroy Israel as an object lesson, wants war, because they think they can WIN. Win against Israel, and win against the US. Perhaps with deniable shipping container nukes that will have the remaining US leaders walking around in lawfare circles. Barack Obama does not inspire fear that the US would actually do something.
Obama, Eggplant, simply won’t win. All the buzz and hype in the world can’t help him. “Gossip Girl” on the CW got the most buzz and hype of any televised series in memory, and only rated 2.2 million viewers per week. The CW network may be “cancelled” by early January if ratings do not improve. Yes the Media loves Obama. He’s had a Summer of Flip-Flops, looks weak and indecisive, lecturing, elitist, and disconnected. Hillary supporters hate him. His very cult-like following turns people off the way say, David Koresh turned off much of America. Obama is already conceding Ohio and Florida saying he can win “without them.” He’s not a serious politician nor one with any real skills. Whenever he speaks “you English speakers embarrass me in France, everyone MUST learn Spanish, nobody needs to learn English!” he keeps digging his hole deeper.
Yes. Because of all America is humiliated by only being able to say “Merci Beaucup” when on Summer Holiday in Paris.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:41 pm 14. Elroy Jetson:Just a note to say bravo, Wretchard.
Jul 10, 2008 - 9:52 pm 15. Eggplant:Thanks for reporting on important news the MSM refuses to. Total pulling out of the gigantic NG project is big news. I’ll be hitting your tip jar for the first time after my next paycheck.
Keep up the good work. That includes those who post comments. I even find the ones I disagree with thought provoking. I like that.
I wonder if this turn of events will force the Mullahs into a stupid gesture. “Nasrallah, get into your bomb shelter and commence firing” may be an order from Tehran coming sooner than we think.
Whiskey said:
“Obama, Eggplant, simply won’t win.”
I remember people saying there was no way a ridiculous moonbat like Nancy Pelosi could become the third most powerful politician in America and yet here we are today with Pelosi as Speaker of the House with congressional job approval at 18.5%. Wishing or simply asserting something doesn’t make it true.
B. Hussein has the MSM, George Soros and the moonbats solidly behind him. We must not be complacent. Hussein is a serious threat.
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:11 pm 16. Elroy Jetson:I agree Eggplant that we must brace ourselves for the possibility that Obama might win. And to fight tooth and nail to avoid that.
Jul 10, 2008 - 10:31 pm 17. Eggplant:I wonder when McCain is going to realize that? How long can you lie low and allow your opponent to have the entire focus?
Elroy Jetson (cool name) said:
“I agree Eggplant that we must brace ourselves for the possibility that Obama might win. And to fight tooth and nail to avoid that. I wonder when McCain is going to realize that? How long can you lie low and allow your opponent to have the entire focus?”
It worries me that McCain’s people are laying low.
One possible explanation is McCain just changed his campaign’s top management and they’re reorganizing.
Another possible explanation is the optimal strategy against Hussein requires careful timing. George McGovern’s campaign collapsed like a house of cards shortly after he was nominated by the Democrat Party Convention. It’s possible that McCain’s people have identified a fatal weakness with Hussein and are waiting for him to be formally annointed as the Democrat candidate before delivering the death blow.
Yes, I know this sounds way too glib to be true.
I’m concerned. We should not be complacent. By the way, I’ve sent my campaign contribution to McCain and urge all patriots to do the same. We’ve got to stop Hussein.
Jul 10, 2008 - 11:10 pm 18. Lifeofthemind:Wondering if the Democrats might look at the turkey they are getting stuffed with and pull a Laughtenberg? Force Obama to announce he is suffering from crippling halitosis and replace him at the last minute with a better candidate. The problem is that they remember that Jimmy Carter got into the White House and Obama is a stronger candidate than Carter was. They think they will win, and they might.
Jul 11, 2008 - 4:32 am 19. John Samford:“After all, while both want influence, neither demands domination.”
Given the historical evidence in the form of statements followed by actions from the Mad Dog Mullhas, I tend to see this article as more crack dreams from Stratfor. Stratfor has never been the ones to let hard, cold facts come between them and their fantasies. I still get a chuckle out of their predictions on Afghanistan;
http://eha.no-ip.org/eHa/wiki/index.php?page=2001-10-25+Stratfor%3A+Kabul+and+the+Air+Campaign+are+a+Sideshow
http://eha.no-ip.org/eHa/wiki/index.php?page=2001-11-13+Stratfor%3A+Taliban+Withdrawal+was+Strategy+Not+Rout
If there is another group this clueless, Please point them out. Debkka files? The Mossad Edition? Perhaps.
Jul 11, 2008 - 5:06 am 20. davod:On a positive note, at least it gives CIA analysts who retire after 30 years of incompetence as GS12’s something to do. The last thing we need is them loose on the streets. It would be the Keystone cops doing ‘Burn Notice’.
I could understand being wrong 90+% of the time if they were doing Black Swan predictions, but this is run of the mill, bread and butter stuff.
The Mad Dog Mullahs make no secret of their ambitions. After all those ambitions were oulined in a book written about 1400 years ago. The cat is out of the bag.
I guess 1400 years isn’t long enough for Stratfor to figure it out. Pretty soon now.
“congressional job approval at 18.5%.” 9 percent.
Jul 11, 2008 - 5:08 am 21. John Samford:LifeoftheMind (LotM if I may)
Ohhhhh….BAMA is NOT yet the nominee. He is the presumptive nominee. No one is the nominee until the balloons fall, which happens AFTER the acceptance speech. There are several procedural thingies that have to precede the acceptance speech. Normally, the presumptive nominee becomes the nominee in the course of events.
This is NOT a normal election cycle, starting with there being no incumbent or heir apparent on either side. Right now NO Democrat has enough PLEDGED delegates to win. Ohhhhhoo..bama is claiming the nomination by counting nonpledged or ’super’ delegates. They DO NOT have to vote how they said they would. It is perfectly OK for them to change their mind.
The supers represent the party while the pledged represent the states. The voters DON’T get represented, since we live in a Republic and the voters already had their say. Or at least some of them did.
I don’t think we are looking at another Klanbake;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1924_Democratic_National_Convention
but the fat lady is still trying to snap her girdle.
Jul 11, 2008 - 5:31 am 22. 3Case:Ohhhhh….BAMA is being premature, but that is Michelle’s problem, not mine. Ohhhh…BAMA lacks the demographics to win RIGHT NOW. He is working on that. Working on that means swerving hard right to get back to the center. If he tosses enough supers out with that swerve, no nomination.
If you think Billery has given up, think again. She knows all this much better then some hick from Alabama. So I suspect she is quietly working the supers behind the stage.
These are politicians. They will follow the strongest wind as soon as they figure out which way it’s blowing. Ohhh….BAAMA is counting on a politicians promise for victory.
Good Luck with that.
“In Moore the left has a comedian formulating policy.”
There’s nothing funny about the fat, rich boy from Flint. Never has been. He’s just a disheveled prep school jokester.
Jul 11, 2008 - 6:30 am 23. Boob:Why would the US consent to allow IDF forces to use bases in Iraqw knowing full well that such an offense would not only complicate long term basing negotiations, but also raise the ire of neighbors (and solidify long held inherent biases about US intentions all along?) Second Q: why would such a leak be a second headline in the JPost - sound like a clear disinformation headline? What is the optimal air routes given targting and range of aircraft?
Jul 11, 2008 - 6:48 am 24. Fen:once Iran acquires unfettered access to the outside it would have every incentive to cheat and restart its shenanigans
And why not? Why would Iran accept one bribe to discard its nuke program when it can expect countless bribes every time they threaten to use one?
Jul 11, 2008 - 7:18 am 25. Benj:“I think whether or not one agrees with GWB’s policies there’s no denying he has been one of the most consequential Presidents in recent history. He did something; he acted. And whether history judges those acts to be good or bad, they will have something to judge.” Thanks for memories - for real - I remember talking to a hard leftist years back - and saying - Look - BUSH acted - got rid of a human horror - what have you ever done for anyone Over There besides wring your hands?…Truth hurts. Course one reason to support Bush acting abroad was because you knew he would do nothing useful here at home - See Brownie & Alphonso & ….
Jul 11, 2008 - 7:32 am 26. David M:The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 07/11/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
Jul 11, 2008 - 8:16 am 27. Roderick Reilly:“”"Total Elf”"”"
That’s such a funny company name! It sounds like a nickname for Dennis Kusinich, the ventriloquist dummy from the Vegan Star System.
Oooh, sorry. This is a serious discussion isn’t it?
My bad.
Jul 11, 2008 - 8:25 am 28. Lynn Britt Barco:Cantor ‘08: the South’s Best Hope?
Today the Republican Party sits in complete disarray, split between the pure secularism of the Neoconservatives and the latent anti-Semitism of the Religious Right. Is there a figure who can weave together these disparate tendencies for electoral triumph in ‘08? I submit there is … I submit that Rep. Eric Cantor of Richmond is that very man … and the *clear* choice for running-mate on the McCain ticket. His youth alone is enough to cause the Obama enthusiasts to shake in their Birkenstocks.
The loss of the South during the American Civil War is instructive with regard to the Middle East today. As the inspired anti-Stalinist Leon Trotsky stated long ago, a truly successful revolution myst be GLOBAL in scope … and surrender is not an option.
COWARDICE IN HIGH PLACES
Consider the cave-in by advertisers and network executives over on-air remarks by Don Imus. In the Spring of 2002, James S. Hans said as much about “poet” Maya Angelou and no one batted an eye. Why? Because it was mere months after 9/11 when Americans still shared a sharper sense of priorities, back when America knew who the *real* enemy was (Palestinians, al-Qaeda, ad nauseam). Unlike most of the flavor-of-the-month club (read Obama, Obama, Obama), the Honorable Eric Cantor hasn’t forgotten.
On the race issue in general, the positions of the highest exemplars of Hebrew-Americana (the late Irving Howe and CUNY Professor Michael E. Levin) aren’t that far apart. It is folly to disregard differences in nature within the human species. No one with an elementary background in biology would deny the Negro’s basic humanity, but those of us who, historically, have tried to help are treated increasingly to base ingratitude. Instead of “thank you,” we are taunted instead with cries of “bloodsucker.” Do we deny the Black Man’s contribution to culture? Heavens, no … but many of their most towering figures are either old or in the grave: Ornette Coleman was then, John Zorn is *now*.
THE EXAMPLE OF REAGAN
Political scientists agree that it was Ronald Reagan in 1980 who broke, once and for all, the Democratic Party’s hold on the South. And it’s no coincidence that Reagan was a great and dear friend to the Jewish people, appointing Elliott Abrams, a man who continues to serve this nation with honor. But that was nearly 30 years ago and the South longs for a native son on the national ticket with both unassailable conservative principals and a blood connection to Ancient Israel. Southerners and Judaics are, after all, a right and natural fit given our shared Old Testament values. And the symbolic value of Richmond, the city Eric Cantor proudly calls home, is not without significance:
“When the Civil War came, most Jewish families sent their sons to serve proudly in the Confederate Army. As the human costs of the war escalated, a section in Hebrew Cemetery on Shockoe Hill became the last resting place for many soldiers. They lie in the only known Jewish military cemetery outside Israel. The very unusual cast-iron cemetery fence was designed by Richmond artist William B. Myers and for years after the war the Hebrew Ladies Memorial Association decorated the graves of the fallen each May in a well-attended and moving ceremony.”
The Jews have survived thousands of years of pain and invective, far beyond that of any Native American, Armenian or West African. Who has endured the hatred inspired by the notorious forgery known as The Protocals? Who continues to suffer the slings and arrows of the hoax circulating in many Christian Bibles as Revelation 3:9? They call us “Scythian,” “Khazar” and every other infamy they can lay their imaginations upon, all without a shred of evidence. It is high time we had a standard bearer on the national ticket - someone less wishy-washy than the unreliable Joe Lieberman - a man unafraid to declare - in his bearing, if not in word - that the Ashkenazim are every bit as legitimate as the 25,000 Jews living in Iran, a nation that, officially, worships the G-d of Abraham, but - in fact - prays to the moon rock enshrined in Mecca.
In short, this is the time to let Candidate McCain know how you feel about Eric Cantor. McCain may have several paths to the White House, but Cantor represents the most reliably CONSERVATIVE one. Help keep the South solid by supporting a ticket that will work to protect and maintain our Judeo-Christian values and institutions, the very BEDROCK of our nation.
thank you,
Jul 11, 2008 - 8:25 am 29. NahnCee:Lynn Barco
former volunteer coordinator
The Museum of the Confederacy
Roderick - bet you fall down and roll around laughing about a middle name of Hussein, too, don’t you?
Benj - did you really stick up for poor old Dubya? I may have to redefine my definition of your “ilk”.
Jul 11, 2008 - 9:34 am 30. Wadeusaf:Some thoughts…,
“Why would the US consent to allow IDF forces to use bases in Iraqw knowing full well that such an offense would not only complicate long term basing negotiations, but also raise the ire of neighbors (and solidify long held inherent biases about US intentions all along?)”
What neighbor would object? Syria? So? IAF used Turkish assets to refuel in taking out the little nuke thingy it Syria’s desert. Where was the ire on that one?
(NOTE: How that also indicates how much government orchestration of Arab street demonstrations really occurs.)
“Second Q: why would such a leak be a second headline in the JPost - sound like a clear disinformation headline? What is the optimal air routes given targeting and range of aircraft?”
Could be disinformation, it could also be a prod. There is probably more than one target area in separate parts of Iran, that someone would want to take out to eliminate the Iranuke project.
Most Sunni Arab near neighbors have come to an arrangement with Israel and so too have many of the Gulf Sunni, only Syria and Lebanon have not as Syrian accessed Iranian backed Shi’ah Hezbollah will not allow it and Assad is too wedded to the mullahs to stop. It is not big a stretch to see cooperation on eliminating the threat of a mutual enemy. And Iran has becoming a bigger problem for the region than Israel ever was.
Only Palestinian blackmail schemes are in jeopardy. That may be a good thing I think.
I believe that the new members of the Pakistani Government, because many of the leaders until recently were living in exile, were not prepared to view their old NW tribal pals with clear eyes. Now that they are seeing with their eyes wide open, a different tune is being played in Islamabad. What is striking about the 2001 Stratford document linked is that the predictions of timing were too compact,(that and the labels offered to identify types of thinking were off by a decade or two). But the nexus of the problem, the NW frontier in Pakistan was nailed as the heart of the matter for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The resilience of the Pashtun and Taliban as predicted is actually somewhat uncanny. Perhaps, given the reference to the MAD Mullahs, John Stamford meant to link to a different document.
The trouble caused in Afghanistan by an alien Al Qaeda was not fully realized then, while the ill effects of an AlQ presence is easier to recognize today.
Jul 11, 2008 - 9:44 am 31. Wadeusaf:NahnCee,
Yes, Benj did stick up for President Bush and supports our martial efforts in both Iraq and in Afghanistan. His differences and objections may have a different root, but it is Benj’s thinking on “why” Iraq, that is “right”.
Jul 11, 2008 - 9:52 am 32. Boob:wade,
now we have both israeli and US pentagon statements on the report. begs the question of why would someone leak that to an international paper…seems to me could be a blowback to the Gates.Mullen camp that wants so desperatley to avoid a showdown. Also news that gates could be a defense sec ion an obama camp may be its own version of sticks and carrots.Take the pentagon into a spead defense for the remiander of the term and get yourself a renewed lease. Who knows..Strong arrguments on both side for a leak…The worse it gets in the financial markets, the more likley a strike, contrary to conventional wisdom. it is becoming increasingly clear that the stakes are getting lower and lower for the US.
Jul 11, 2008 - 10:34 am 33. NahnCee:Wade - he’s always seemed to be a garden-variety carrot-chewing moonbat to me. I don’t understand what you mean about “why” and “right”, but then maybe I’m still stunned and amazed by Benj’s Bush-support.
Jul 11, 2008 - 11:40 am 34. Teresita:By keeping Iranian supplies off the market, oil producers with access to the shipping lanes and secure pipelines can benefit from high prices. The Ayatollah’s loss is their gain.
As has been pointed out before, oil is a fungible commodity with very little slack between supply and demand. If you attack Iranian oil infrastructure without cause, besides incurring the wrath of the world community, you raise prices dramatically for everybody. If you seize tankers on the high seas bound for China, you’ve just picked a fight with them as surely as the oil embargo against Japan led to Pearl Harbor. There better be a damn good reason to get into another war, like an Iranian chemical attack on Tel Aviv. Sending Condi Rice to the UN to wave around some pictures of WMDs ain’t going to work this time, on the principle of Fool Me Once, Shame On You, Fool Me Twice, Shame On Me.
Jul 12, 2008 - 1:01 pm 35. Doug:Dissident’s Tale of Epic Escape From Iran’s Vise
Free after years in Iranian prisons, a well-known dissident provides a rare window on Iran under its ruling clerics.
Video: From Iran to the U.S.
Jul 12, 2008 - 6:01 pm 36. Wadeusaf:Teresita,
Iran is incurring difficulties moving that fungible commodity, that is what is important about Total Elf’s withdraw from the consortium. There is no need to attack Iran’s oil infrastructure, nor to seize tankers bound for China,(although a thorough inspection on the return trip might be in order) replacement of the NG is available in the Stans, and it appears that a ready supply is available for market under the sands of Al Anbar. As a fungible commodity the folks in Iraq should be able to trade interest in oil stocks between them as a means of funding the development of that field, while increasing the flow of current production through the existing port facilities at Basra.
I do not see a strike on Iranian Nuclear facilities affecting the price of anything, and perhaps it might lower the “terrorism tax” the speculators are making a fortune off of. UN resolutions and agreements made in good faith by Iran with the world community are enough reason to take out their capability. We are not about to suffer the demolition of numerous cities, nor wait for the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians just to mollify your conscience. That would be inexcusable beside being just plain dumb. We don’t need and we don’t want another war, we just need for certain actors to change their lines and stop acting as though it were a soliloquy.
Jul 12, 2008 - 6:26 pm 37. let’s take a breather — infotainment rules:[...] Wretchard notes that the French company announced its decision [...]
Jul 13, 2008 - 6:01 am 38. Whitehall:Why oh why oh are the Democrats so dead set against new domestic energy? They block oil shale, offshore drilling, nuclear, coal-to-liquids, etc etc. Then they try this carbon cap’n'trade racket (Lieberman of all people!) that will just shut us down more.
Can’t they see why we need energy and how the world beyond the Beltway is going? Their explanations are so vacuous. Anyone read Markey’s (D-MA) latest? And he’s chairman of the House Energy Committee I understand.
They seem stuck in this fantasy land about solar and wind - that’s like buying a banana split just for the cherry.
Jul 13, 2008 - 10:06 am 39. John:I have been wondering just how difficult it would be for the US to launch a decapitation strike specifically aimed, but not limited to, Iran’s parliament, the GC and its military command. Is there any possibility the US would consider such a risky move? Could such a strike succeed?
Jul 13, 2008 - 2:22 pm 40. NahnCee:I think that’s probably what the concept of nuking them would entail: decapitation. From what I’ve read, their nuclear facilities are spread around and are in public areas and/or deeply underground, so bombing a facility like the one in Syria and getting it right the first time would be problematic.
If I were planning, I’d go for surgical strikes for the nuclear facilities that are gettable-to, even if they are in the middle of a city, and I’d also be aiming for Ahmadinnerjacket and the first tier or three of mullah’s. Then I’d use the burrowing down bunker-buster bombs as a back-up, hoping to get lucky on the remaining nuclear facilities buried underground.
Note that technically, these probably wouldn’t be nuclear bombs as we understand them from Hiroshima, but would be newer-developed with more precise aims that I’m thinking aren’t necessarily radioactive.
Jul 13, 2008 - 5:26 pm 41. kabud:Iran, Gazprom set to sign cooperation memorandum
TEHRAN (RIA Novosti) - Russian energy giant Gazprom and Iran’s Ministry of Petroleum will sign on Sunday a memorandum of cooperation in the oil and gas sphere, an Iranian deputy oil minister said.
“Interaction between Iran and Russia in all spheres and especially in the energy sphere is very wide. We expect to further broaden this cooperation in the future,” Hossein Noghrehkar Shirazi said.
Shirazi said a series of discussions would precede the signing of the cooperation memorandum.
Iran ranks fourth in terms of crude reserves after Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait, as well as fourth in terms of oil production after Saudi Arabia, the United States and Russia. Iran’s proven gas reserves total more than 28 trillion cubic meters.
http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=173140
Jul 13, 2008 - 7:30 pm 42. Jay:Most people have no idea about the destruction produces by modern nuclear weapons. I believe that the Iranians want nukes as a diplomatic weapon as well as for status.
Jul 14, 2008 - 12:59 pmOnce they get the nukes their leadership will be sorely tempted to use at least one on Israel by setting them off from a ship from a country that trades with Israel. People with the internationalist bent of Obama and Soros can not think through the problem. They may actually hope that the Israeli population will be so defeated that they will give up without a second strike.
If not then we are the world of a very confusing nuclear warfare game. Such a world is beyond the conceptions of lawyers and diplomats and US college students.
Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.