middle east war portfolio --- attack on Iran

just go buy shares of an attack on intrade.

USA and/or Israel to execute an overt Air Strike against Iran before midnight ET 30 Jun 2012: 23.9%, or $2.39 a share. Worth $10.00 a share if the attack happens. nice ROI.

arch8ngel said:   Wonder what Alexsoccerboy's beef is...

He is just another troll, his mommy must have forgotten to lock her computer again.

Is Natanyahu preparing the residents of tel aviv for a blitzing? No. Could the great mighty Israel even put out it’s Carmel fire? No.

So it ain’t gonna happen. Cuz tel aviv is the first target, and the daimona is on the radar.

The israeli politicos are sabre rattling for local consumption. Israeli citizens have become acutely pathological, thanks to decades of the politics of fear, and they need to daily hear that their politicians are gonna kill Arabs and Iranians before they think them sound and electable. Sure they got war fever, but they got paper balls and they’ll never go it alone.

All israel is interested in is setting-up a war: not starting it, or fighting it.

It’s the only thing they can do really.

What makes you say the Iranians don't value life?

I can see how Americans would be wary of domestic human rights issues in Iran, but in terms of war, Iran hasn't attacked one of its neighbors in hundreds of years. They have been demonized ad infinitum in the US, but if you look at recent history... assassinations, sanctions recently...in the 80s shooting down Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian jet airliner, attacking oil rigs and boats in 88, supplying Iraq with WMDs which were then used to kill like 60K Iranians...its kind of ridiculous to hold them up as the boogeyman. I am old enough to remember pre-911 reading how moderate Iran had become and how we are the cusp of having open relations with them. Its amazing how that has changed 180 degrees.

Yesterday, Ajatollah Ali Kahamenei reconfirmed his Fatwa against nuclear weapons:

"We believe that using nuclear weapons is haraam and prohibited and that it is everybody’s duty to make efforts to protect humanity against this great disaster. We believe that besides nuclear weapons, other types of weapons of mass destruction such as chemical and biological weapons also pose a serious threat to humanity. The Iranian nation which is itself a victim of chemical weapons feels more than any other nation the danger that is caused by the production and stockpiling of such weapons and is prepared to make use of all its facilities to counter such threats."

Reading the whole speech and understanding the logic of Kahmenei's judgement may be worth your time.

http://english.khamenei.ir//index.php?option=com_content&task=vi...

Its true, Iran has many vilages and IDF has a very good experience in fighting villages, like during Cast Lead against the non-state Palestenian refugees.

A possible weakness is that IDF has relatively small [recent] experience in combat in the situation where the enemy shoots back. Such as Lebanon 2006. Some experts warn that Iran’s irrational mullahs may resort to such unfair tactics. I've even heard reports that they have weapons too, other than rocks. that could prove challenging.

Seriously though, if it happens, Israel will attack Iran, and then the US will rush to support Israel with whatever it takes in treasure and grunts. No way the US will not be dragged into this. Zionism combined with the American campaign finance system, which is basically, bribery, assures that.

" Anyone who mistakes how big of a threat Iran is perceived to be and how close Israel is getting to strike is in for a rude surprise."

Everything I've read says Iran is years away making a nuclear weapon and there is no evidence that is their ultimate intention.

But even they did get one. What would they do with it? Attack Israel?...From the river to the sea where half the population are Palestinians? Destroy the 3rd holiest site in Islam? Contaminate Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and others with nuclear waste? And for what? The day after, they would be annihilated. Israel has > 200 nukes, the US, thousands....there is no parity. The whole narrative being put forth on Iran is ridiculous. There are other reasons why Israel/US wants this war. Maybe its bigger than Iran/Israel and has to do with strategy towards Russia/China...or maybe it is just a way from the Israelis to change the subject from dealing with Palestinians. The public has no way of knowing. But I do know the reasons for this war sound like every other one... BS.

beethovengirl said:   
Can you post examples in Israeli society as outrageous as these from Iran:

Oh, come now on fatwallet you have people calling for Iran to be nuked. But I will do better, you know what they say sticks and stones will break bones, but words...

Here is a article from NBC where they
"reported that Israel had been coordinating with the Iranian terror group the MEK to assassinate nuclear scientists in Iran. "
http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/08/10354553-israel...

and here is one from Foreign Policy that details
"A series of CIA memos describes how Israeli Mossad agents posed as American spies to recruit members of the terrorist organization Jundallah to fight their covert war against Iran."

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/01/13/false_flag

So there you have two sourced articles about Israel supporting terrorist attacks in Iran. One of them showing that Israelis are impersonating CIA agents. Why would they do that? Oh yes, so that the Iranians would blame the Americans for the attacks and we could be drawn into their conflict.

Does it bother you that the Mossad are pretending to be CIA agents while supporting terrorists?

I am going to respect the mods and move back on topic. If you like I will PM you quotes of Israeli politicians talking about attacking Iran.

OT, The decision of the EU to no longer buy Iranian oil starting in July was ridiculous. Oil will become more expensive for those who sanction Iran and cheaper for those who do not, primarily India and China. Iran will not feel any significant pain over this.

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2012/02/iran-sanctions-push-oil-price-into-recession-territory.html

As for the talk of an Israeli attack...that would almost certainly draw in the US. All Iran has to do is threaten to attack ships going thru the Straits and it will close it down...Insurance doesnt cover acts of war..and those tankers are worth hundreds of millions. Oil prices will sky rocket. The US will need to use its military to protect the passage however Iran could launched attacks from from all over the coast which will require bombing a likely boots on the ground. It seems like such a predictable disaster, maybe the run up in oil prices is the worst that will happen.

FYI we get involved with Iran, you want to make money, buy gold now if you think we will or oil or any raw internationally valued item, maybe even Chinese money. SELL US DOLLARS, since they will end up being devalued yet again. Inflation, F ya! Greatest nation in the world!!!

delzy --- your post comes after the moderators request to stay on topic

for the purpose of this discusiion, it doesn't matter if one team is more moral than another

I only care about me and my portfolio

nycll said:    But I also believe israel will try all it can to prevent a nuclear iran. It is in the middle of all hostile countries one nuke will destroy a big chunck of the country.

To answer the topic, you need differentiate btwn real reasons for attack...(US imperial strategy, israeli hegemony) and the phony pretexts being put forth as if they were real concerns.

You say

"one nuke will destroy a big chunck of the country"

What would happen to Iran after did that? Before the dust settled Israel would unleash its vast array of nuclear weapons from its armed submarines, millions would die and Persia after thousands of years would become uninhabitable. It is not even in the realm of possibility that this is some of preventive war to prevent a surprise nuclear strike from Iran.

One thing seems certain, the US sanctions on Iran is speeding up the process of countries buying oil in currencies other than the dollar.

'NEW YORK Commodity Online: The US dollar is fast losing out its reserve currency status with China aggressively replacing the dollar with the Yuan as a currency for bi-lateral trade. The latest is an agreement signed between the China and the UAE, which will use the Yuan for oil trade.

The deal is worth around $5.5 billion dollars and the Chinese central bank said that the deal aims at “strengthening bilateral financial cooperation, promoting trade and investments and jointly safeguarding regional financial stability”

Earlier, Russia and Iran had decided to use Rubles as a means of currency. With both China and Russia converting their bi-lateral trades into non-US dollar deals, the greenback is now under threat of losing out its status as the world reserve currency. And the impact of such a transition will essentially tip the balance of global power."

Also India didn't go along with the US push for sanctions and is now buying Oil with Gold.

"According to a new and yet unconfirmed report, India bought oil from Iran using gold. India certainly has the gold resources to fund the oil, while Iran is under pressure by the West, due the continuation of its nuclear program."

http://mondoweiss.net/2012/01/iran-sanctions-backlash.html

arsguide said:   One thing seems certain, the US sanctions on Iran is speeding up the process of countries buying oil in currencies other than the dollar.

'NEW YORK Commodity Online: The US dollar is fast losing out its reserve currency status with China aggressively replacing the dollar with the Yuan as a currency for bi-lateral trade. The latest is an agreement signed between the China and the UAE, which will use the Yuan for oil trade.
China has been signing currency swap agreements with a number of countries the past several years; the link btwn the UAE agreement and the US/EU sanctions on Iran is tenuous at best:
"China has signed a series of currency swap agreements in recent years with key trading partners in a bid to boost the use of the yuan for the direct settlement of international trade. Other countries that have signed such deals recently include Thailand and South Korea. Beijing's long-term ambition is to unseat the dollar as the dominant unit of international settlement for cross-border trade in goods and services, especially now that China is the world's single largest exporting nation and the second largest importer."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/17/us-china-uae-currency-...

arsguide said:   Iran has never been to war with Israel...What would be the motive for Iran to invite destruction on itself? The terrorism mentality that is popular in that region is not an outgrowth of religion/culture but politics. Hizbolla attacks Israel because they occupied Lebanon. Hamas attacks Israel because of occupied/controlled Gaza/WB/Palestine.
You think terrorism started after 1948 or 1967?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaffa_riots
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1938_Tiberias_massacre

beethovengirl said:    You think terrorism started after 1948 or 1967?

I want to stay on topic, but...to answer your question, yes, "terrorism" started when a group of Europeans lead a carefully planned displacement of the majority of the people from the area so that they could have make a homeland for themselves.

The Balfour letter of 1917

""His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration_of_1917

Back on-topic

arsguide said:   nycll said:   ^^^ I know a responsible government won't commit suicide just because it has the nukes. But we also has this thorny issue of terrorism mentality which is popular in that region. Granted, I think the Iranian people are probably the least influence by it since the Persian culture is not the same. What the fear is not a direct attack by Iran or any other countries, but some unidentified terrorist attacks.

This nuke used by a terrorist would have unequivocal fingerprints that pointed back to its maker, so it would be the same scenario. Iran gave a terrorist a nuke to attack Israel...a nuclear attack is launched on Iran.

Iran has never been to war with Israel...What would be the motive for Iran to invite destruction on itself? The terrorism mentality that is popular in that region is not an outgrowth of religion/culture but politics. Hizbolla attacks Israel because they occupied Lebanon. Hamas attacks Israel because of occupied/controlled Gaza/WB/Palestine. The Iraqi insurgents, the Taliban use terrorism because they see foreign troops in their country. So if a nuke goes off in an American city and later on we found the it is Russian made--I remember hearing that the nuke can even be traced back to which purification facility--what do we do? Do we nuke Russia?

I agree terrorism and war are both politics. But people in different cultures conduct politics differently. Like fist fights are common in certain country's parliaments.

There is great joke by David Cross...its goes:

I don't think Osama bin Laden sent those planes to attack us because he hated our freedom. I think he did it because of our support for Israel, our ties with the Saudi family and our military bases in Saudi Arabia. You know why I think that? Because that's what he f#$king said! Are we a nation of 6-year-olds? Answer: yes.

ha.

Anyways, here is a finance site, where they are talking about Usrael/Iran. Lots of smart commenters on it.

"Crude at 108.05 @ 2:37pm...and climbing."
"Silver is on a tear, but oil is going parabolic"

We can print oil too, right?

haha

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/and-nothing-else-matters
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/iran-israel-scenario-spiral...You are preaching to the choir. I agree most americans are not well educated in international affairs. But the severe conflict is already here. The Iran nuke program takes away the option of kicking the can down the road. America being the super power has the most options. What's the best option here?

nsdp said:   First, amateurs study strategy and tactics. Professionals study logistics.+1 for a very apropos and true statement. More people should remember the fundamental limitations of log.

That said, military history is filled with examples of people who said, effectively, "...it can't be done!" and then watched agape as a determined combatant did it. There are all sorts of machinations going on with / by / for / around the Israelis, and if anyone thinks these people won't find a way to respond to a threat, they should think again.

You will be a sure loser financially if Israel does try to strike.I'd like to know why you believe that. Seems like a clear winner for a gold / oil position.

This is a march of folly like the start of WWI. Go read the Guns of August to see how miscalculations by Serbia, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Germany, France and Britain led to global havoc beyond comprehension.A gigantic +1 for two successive Tuchman references. Best political historian since Thucydides.

arsguide said:   beethovengirl said:   

You posted primarily from explicitly anti-Israel websites to support your claims.

Articles from NY Times from the period are not acceptable?!

http://www.thejerusalemfund.org/ht/a/GetDocumentAction/i/29281

I am not going to respond to you anymore. Its like banging your head against a wall.

Huh? This article is about foreign invaders of Palestine who weren't Palestinian. Their goal was to kill all the Jews, so the Jews had no choice but to fight back. It's about a foreign army that crossed the border and is besieging Jewish settlements. Kawukji, the commander, was born in Lebanon, and spent most of World War II in Nazi Germany. He returned to command the Arab Liberation Army, which was comprised of Arabs from countries outside of Palestine. His Army was put together in Syria and invaded Palestine to attack Jewish settlements.

arsguide said:   nycll said:    But the severe conflict is already here. The Iran nuke program takes away the option of kicking the can down the road. America being the super power has the most options. What's the best option here?

The closest thing to a solution was probably less than 2 years ago, Turkey and Brazil agreed to a fuel swap deal that would have ensured Iran would not have the capability to produce weapons grade uranium.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/16/us-iran-nuclear-deal-i...

"Turkey said on Sunday Iran had agreed on a nuclear fuel swap deal which could help end Tehran's stand-off with the West over its atomic programme."

The deal died when it was not accepted by the US. Again more evidence that the justifications for the war are not what we are being told. At this point I think the American public would need make their voices heard to call off the war. But it will probably take expensive gas and a new recession for them realize that they been boondoggled again.
Bombing is not good but calling off the bombing is not good either. When you get a chance please respond to my hypothetical question about russian made nukes. Mutual distruction only works with responsible adversaries and terrorists are the least responsible people on earth.

As to the financial impact of bombing vs no bombing, the outcomes are totally opposite. I think the market is pricing in a no war outcome.

arsguide said:   The closest thing to a solution was probably less than 2 years ago, Turkey and Brazil agreed to a fuel swap deal that would have ensured Iran would not have the capability to produce weapons grade uranium.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/05/16/us-iran-nuclear-deal-i...
The article you posted is credible, but I don't see anything in the article that says the fuel swap deal would've ensured Iran would not have the capability to produce weapons grade uranium. In fact, other articles from around that time specifically contradict your claim:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/17/iran-nuclear-fuel-sw...
"It is similar to an agreement they have pushed for during the past six months, yet most observers said it would do little to slow Iran's nuclear progress. Concerns were deepened when Iran's foreign ministry in Tehran said that, despite the deal, Iran would not reverse its decision taken earlier this year to produce 20%-enriched uranium, which brings its scientists significantly closer to making weapons grade fuel."

Also, this article provides more historical context to the proposed deal, including that Iran rejected a fuel swap Western powers offered prior to the Turkey proposal:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jSa03-4Aj_2jC...

Again more evidence that the justifications for the war are not what we are being told. At this point I think the American public would need make their voices heard to call off the war. But it will probably take expensive gas and a new recession for them realize that they been boondoggled again.
It is important to note that the UN IAEA in 2003 made it clear there was no plausible indication of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq:
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtm...
"After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq...Iraq has been forthcoming in its co-operation"

This is quite a contrast to the UN IAEA's current position on Iran:
http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-65...
"While some of the activities identified in the Annex have civilian as well as military applications, others are specific to nuclear weapons....The Agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear programme. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the Agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device...Between 2007 and 2010, Iran continued to conceal nuclear activities"

The most recent UN IAEA report (which I can't find on IAEA.org) details Iran's refusal to cooperate with IAEA:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/02/24/world/middleeast/I...

Well, a good history lesson is what happened in the initial phases of the attach on Iraq. Iraq was doing some oil exports at the time, and they got disrupted. Also, the region got somewhat destabilized.

The other thing is that all public (and some private) information is already partially priced in.

Surely some hedge funds have advisors like Donald Rumsfeld and Henry Kissinger and maybe even people close to Hillary Clinton and Israeli political and military brass. So you figure, that those hedge funds have some private information that is not yet reflected fully in public.

At this point you oughta ALSO worry about prices being too much priced in.