As I said, it will be business as usual. Its the same way Russia was involved when Egypt was going after the bomb, to keep a finger on the trigger so to speak. Why would Russia have to publicly ask Tehran not to pursue Enrichment work if they were so in control? Dealing arms doesn't really matter to be honest, Israel sells arms t China they buy from the US and no one cares. Just because I sell you 500 tanks and 200 aircraft does not mean I want you to have the bomb.
As I said, it will be business as usual. Its the same way Russia was involved when Egypt was going after the bomb, to keep a finger on the trigger so to speak. Why would Russia have to publicly ask Tehran not to pursue Enrichment work if they were so in control? Dealing arms doesn't really matter to be honest, Israel sells arms t China they buy from the US and no one cares. Just because I sell you 500 tanks and 200 aircraft does not mean I want you to have the bomb.
What will take there place? The diversified Arab economies will rise up and provide a new world economy bedrock depending on there number one trading item oil? The west will cannibalize Africa and the middle east before it falls.
Innovation happens when a problem that needs a solution surfaces and can take years, if not decades for it to be solved. Oil was just $30 a barrel a couple of years ago, so it was a non-problem. Now that it's gone into the $100s people are seriously contemplating it'se replacement. If it hits $500 a barrel, you can bet that the money that's being invested in finding it's replacement will turn into a torrent (just google renewable energy investments and see what I'm talking about).
The only reason why oil is king is because of the mega-sums invested in it's distribution. Ripping it out and replacing it will again take mega-sums, which will happen if oil prices itself out of the market. At every level, it is obvious that the oil economy is detrimental to the future of planet and it's inhabitants (non-renewable, polluting, de-stabliizing, you name it) which also makes a compelling case to reduce our dependence on it.
Because the deal is for Iran not to add centrifuges for 6 months while the UN figured out what to do. Iran can currently use their current 3,500 centrifuges but under the agreement they are not to add anymore.
Israel selling arms to China is a big deal. No F-22 for Israel then. You must be very foolish if you think the U.S does not care about Israel giving China weapons.
Iran is not buying tanks or aircraft from Russia. It is buying commercial aircraft. What do you think the list of incentives on the offer made to Iran included? They included Airbus aircraft. Russia stepped in and gave Iran an excellent deal. So why the hell would Iran need to accept Europe's deal if Russia is helping them out?
Russia sees zero evidence Iran is building a bomb. Enriching uranium does not mean you are building a bomb. You cannot prove Iran is building a bomb. You can only prove they are working on nuclear achievements which they are allowed.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Don't be a fool RichardE, if oil rises to $1000/barrel there will be world wide misery like you cannot believe. And yet you seem to post like everything will be business as usual
and any effects will be minor. People will be unable to come to work, good will not be able to be afford ably moved, inflation will be out of all control, store shelves will be bare,
and all the war machine equipment can't move without oil. And that's just a tiny list.
And roughly 99.99% of the blame will be directed at Israel for opening that pandora's box.
and any effects will be minor. People will be unable to come to work, good will not be able to be afford ably moved, inflation will be out of all control, store shelves will be bare,
and all the war machine equipment can't move without oil. And that's just a tiny list.
And roughly 99.99% of the blame will be directed at Israel for opening that pandora's box.
By people ignorant of the entire history of oil, or how the middle east oil started. (IE you) If oil rises to 1000$ a barrel there will indeed be a very real and very likely bloody (though not on our home turf) shift to a new standard. How hard would it be to revert the US back to an Isolation type of environment? Not to mention forging even stronger bonds with Canada/Mexico as sort of a "together we stand" type thing? Government intervention to ensure none of the food leaves the borders ect ect ect. Sure it seems very unlikely in todays environment but you are talking extremes so we can talk extremes. The world can survive without cars for civilians (Europe did it during the war) people will move closer to work, the free market will develop some sort of mass bus carpooling more than likely.
Will oil be the end of us? No, it will be the end of this type of living, Our standard of living will not go down significantly though. (Though I suppose this depends on your own view of "how you want to live")
So people are going to sell their homes away from the cities and move closer to the cities?
Nice. I didn't know the housing market was that hot and I didn't know we had a lot of people who were willing to move away from the cities when gas prices are $10-15/gallon. Those homes away from the cities would not sell. They would be worthless.
Nice. I didn't know the housing market was that hot and I didn't know we had a lot of people who were willing to move away from the cities when gas prices are $10-15/gallon. Those homes away from the cities would not sell. They would be worthless.
As I said, right now no. There is no need. We were talking in extremities though. If you are ignorant enough to think nothing will change than you have not really been paying attention even now. Our society (North American) is set up in a way due to the fact we have relatively cheap gas compared to our income. We could afford, with ease and without thinking about it the 1-2 hour commutes from Suburbia. Now, a good chunk of people (myself included) are not affected by current gas prices, but slowly but surely as they rise the little line on the chart of people affected by it will rise. You are already seeing some changes, such as the move from 5 to 4 day work weeks (more 4x10's), the ability to do more work at home (something my business is already offering and I will be taking advantage of).
You seem to think that we will have an upheaval of some sort and that people will march through the streets to keep the status quo, and we either have our society based on cheap gas or nothing!. This is pretty ignorant of the many, many examples of people doing what they can to make it. Chances are, in 4 years or so I will be one of the ones who will not be worried even if gas hits 5-6$ a liter (here in Canada) or 10$ a gallon (if I am living back in the states) because I will be able to more than likely afford it, if for some reason I can't afford it though I will obviously make changes that enable me to live my life rather than go and fight a war or protest to keep the status quo.
People are more adaptable than you give them credit for.
Do you live in the U.S or Canada?
You all are used to taking the train and metro.
In the U.S people live 30 miles away from their work so they can live in a big house. We drive to work. There is major traffic in the mornings backed up here in D.C. Traffic is backed up going South of D.C for 40 miles after 4P.M all the way up to 7P.M.
The homes in the city cost 2x-5x as much as homes away from the city. When the demand skyrockets for those homes they will increase to $1,000,000+ a home. I would love to see how people are going to adapt to such prices.
U.S is facing a financial crisis. Banks are losing money. They are not going to give out loans to people making $70k for $1M homes in the city.
You all are used to taking the train and metro.
In the U.S people live 30 miles away from their work so they can live in a big house. We drive to work. There is major traffic in the mornings backed up here in D.C. Traffic is backed up going South of D.C for 40 miles after 4P.M all the way up to 7P.M.
The homes in the city cost 2x-5x as much as homes away from the city. When the demand skyrockets for those homes they will increase to $1,000,000+ a home. I would love to see how people are going to adapt to such prices.
U.S is facing a financial crisis. Banks are losing money. They are not going to give out loans to people making $70k for $1M homes in the city.
I never said they would. I said things would keep changing though, unless you have some insight into how a nice smooth transition of us keeping living the way we are if oil reaches 500$ a barrel (as Lemon was saying and which I based my thoughts off)
Once it reaches the point where Joe Schmo is spending half his paycheck on gas and parking do you think he is going to continue to commute as he is? Do you really think when a good chunk of people are bitching and moaning (real bitching and moaning) and deciding to take drastic action that people will develop innovative businesses to keep people happy, or perhaps with solutions to the problems? You don't seem to be able to look outside the box Aimster.
As well, I lived in the US, La Jolla to be exact, and still live there a few months of the year when I am not going to school. I understand the commute and I also understand the inner city transit system (Thank you Toronto). People will adapt.
1.) Bunker busters are not all they are cracked up to be. While they are good for traditional bunkers and the badly dug out Taliban caves that serve as hold outs they cannot reach a facility that has been dug extremely deep into a mountain.
2.) Nukes are just plain stupid. If Israel were to use them preemptively they'd lose pretty much all their support and legitimacy around the world. Not to mention that even nukes just like bunker busters are not able to reach a facility that has been designed to be buried deeply into a mountain. Hence why even our own military has it's key control centers in the event of a invasion or nuclear war in this nation buried deeply inside mountains.
StageLeft
No Lifer
- Sep 29, 2000
- 70,150
- 5
- 0
Anybody who's followed my predictions on P&N for the last year and a half knows that my accuracy is without measure. I am never wrong. I predict a 50/50 right now of Israel striking Iran, so chances are definitely up. I predict a 100% chance it will not use nuclear weapons in such an attack unless as substantial change occurs, such as Iran tests as nuke and then Israel strikes, using its own nukes on Iranian facilities to help ensure complete destruction.
The negative about conventional bombs is that you need a lot of them, but anybody who's ever built something and watched it destroyed by bombs from the sky (I have many times in person and you know I never lie about these things!*) knows it's a lot more effort to build something than it is to press the trigger on a bomb hatch and building underground facilities is extremely laborious, so I wouldn't count on Iran being protected from an air attack in a way necessary to continue progress with nuclear "whatever it's trying to do".
* except this time
The negative about conventional bombs is that you need a lot of them, but anybody who's ever built something and watched it destroyed by bombs from the sky (I have many times in person and you know I never lie about these things!*) knows it's a lot more effort to build something than it is to press the trigger on a bomb hatch and building underground facilities is extremely laborious, so I wouldn't count on Iran being protected from an air attack in a way necessary to continue progress with nuclear "whatever it's trying to do".
* except this time
My prediction for this situation. Iran builds nukes, launches them at Israel. Isreal retaliates. World blames Israel while Intel builds fabs in Iran with 1000 years worth of silicon.
Shit who knows, maybe that nutjob regime launches one into the heart of Europe for good measure.
Shit who knows, maybe that nutjob regime launches one into the heart of Europe for good measure.
Iran would never launch a nuke at Israel or anyone else.
If Iran's regime is run by a bunch of lunatics then the same can be said about the regime of the U.S and we have thousands of nukes
If Iran's regime is run by a bunch of lunatics then the same can be said about the regime of the U.S and we have thousands of nukes
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
A concern is that if those that run Iran's regime are willing to allow such a mouth piece, what does that say to the rest of the world.
They have to know that such words will cause concern. Yet, they are willing to allow tensions to be racheted up by such words.
Nobody inside Iran has ever threatened for the destruction or death of any people.
Iran's entire hate is targeted at regimes. They have made this clear.
We hate Iran's regime and they hate our regimes.
Does that mean we are going to go nuke Iran? No. Same with them.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
You have admitted that the Presidents rhetoric is directed to remove Israel.
Now you are able in your mind to seperate Jews (as a race) from Israel (the State) by saying that the Jews in Iran are safe.
So when the President of Irantalks about removing the regime of Israel what does he mean? The State of Israel does not exist - he wants the area put back pre '48?
The Jews within Israel are not going to pack their bags and marck into the sea.
So what is only way to eliminate Israel?
Logically, the only way that can happen is by an all out war of extermination.
If the above paragraph is not what he is stating/implying, then what is he stating?
Now you are able in your mind to seperate Jews (as a race) from Israel (the State) by saying that the Jews in Iran are safe.
So when the President of Irantalks about removing the regime of Israel what does he mean? The State of Israel does not exist - he wants the area put back pre '48?
The Jews within Israel are not going to pack their bags and marck into the sea.
So what is only way to eliminate Israel?
Logically, the only way that can happen is by an all out war of extermination.
If the above paragraph is not what he is stating/implying, then what is he stating?
There are tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of people inside Israel who support the President of Iran's message. Thousands of these people are Jewish.
Should Israel arrest them all and put them in concentration camps?
When the President of Iran gave his speech where he first said "the regime of Israel must be wiped off the map" there were Jews present in the audience. He said it at an anti-Zionism rally.
If people are afraid of this Iranian President then they should be terrified of the thousands inside Israel who share his views.
Should Israel arrest them all and put them in concentration camps?
When the President of Iran gave his speech where he first said "the regime of Israel must be wiped off the map" there were Jews present in the audience. He said it at an anti-Zionism rally.
If people are afraid of this Iranian President then they should be terrified of the thousands inside Israel who share his views.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
And how does he indicate how it would be done and what it actually means.
These are the same questions that I asked you in my above post.
How Israel handles its own affairs if there is an uprising, then that will be Israel's business unless the uprising is supportby other states.
The key issue is that what is the President of Iran stating/meaning and is he a mouthpiece for those in power?
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,591
- 5
- 0
Where the religion/race is considered to be Jewish, I would think that Israel is considered to be the Government/State that is responsible for the land boundaries.
Realize that Israel has (in your words) stolen land as a defense against when they were previously attacked by peace loving Arabs.
Possibly when the peace loving Arabs actually comply with their promises, then Israel does not have to worry about having a land buffer.
Note that when Arab countries have actually provided peace, the Israel has released land that was occupied in conflict that previously has acted like a buffer.
So there is a track record - When an Arab country has been sincere to Israel, Israel has accepted their hand and reciprocated. That may be the way to have peace in the region.
That's wrong. He said himself in a speech where he used the phrase, wrongly translated as 'wipe off the map', that the regime of the USSR is gone, and that's what he means.
There was no "all out war of extermination" against the USSR to get that to happen (almost there was, the generals told Kennedy to pre-emptively nuke); no violence at all.
Bill Clinton's official policy on Iraq was that the US wanted regime change; that didn't make Clinton launch an "all out war of extermination" or do much at all.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 17K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter