iraqi destiny

[billy goat]

In our quest for truth in Iraqi politcal protocols, and their affect on dinar revaluation, we need to evaluate the collective external theocratic/geo-political pressure in/on the middle east. A basic review of Islamic tenets could help clarify the socio-economic position that Iraq now holds.

Jihad: using all of one's strength, as well as moving toward an objective with all of one's strength and resisting every difficulty.

Shari'a: Islamic law - best viewed as God's all-encompassing path for how people should live their lives in the world, including not only basic faith and morals, but

personal status and criminal law. The Sunni school of thought includes a universal and long standing belief that the use of individual reason is not

permitted and that all Muslims need follow versions of Shari'a.

With the above in mind, I have tried to condense the implications of current events as they pertain to Iraqi economic development.

As I have noted in the past, Saudi Arabia controls the material and political output of OPEC - and with only one percent of the world's Muslims, she controls about ninety per cent of the world's Islamic institutions. The Sunni based Wahabi doctrine they teach is one murderous to Shi'ites, Jews, homosexuals, and apostates. Repressive toward the role of women, their overall politic is shared by al-Qaeda. Both seek, differing only in tactics, to move us all toward a world-wide theocratic totalitarian dictatorship, the caliphate. "The Wahabi-al-Qaeda rivalry is lethal, but it is not a battle over values. It is essentially a bitter fight over who should be in charge of getting all of us under the Caliph's control". (James Woolsey, CIA director '93-'95). Think of the wide influence the Saudis enjoy: from Morocco to Pakistan, Turkministan to Sudan in the south - all governed by the Sunni based jihad - the exception being Iran and it's Shi'ite based radicalism. Middle east monarchies draw their impetus from their long history of rule over respective melting pots of Islamic sects i.e. Bahrain - comprised of 30% Sunni with 70% mostly Shi'ite. This, along with the fact that Saudi Arabia was essentially the first middle east country to exploit their petroleum resources, should leave us considering the trend setting nature of twentieth century development. Just watch how they dole out favors to garner global support for their insidious agenda. They think nothing of tapping reserve oil from played out fields to supply shortfalls in China and India - all the while playing the benevolent card of 'business as usual'. This business as usual sentiment is underwritten every time we fill our tank. It seems the trippling cost for a barrel of oil since the 90's coincides with trippling production costs the Saudis are currently faced with. The 'water cut' (pumping sea water into their wells to maintain well head pressure for extraction) is now over 50%. This practice increases the sulphur content and makes processing more difficult and expensive. Is it any wonder why they have their eye on Iraqi oil along with the contiguous nature of their geo-political agenda?

I've seen regional civil strife developing for several years. It started with open and free elections for Iraqis in 2005 - leaving Syrians and Egyptians hoping their Arab/Berlin wall could crack a little more. Threatened by the created dissent, Mubarak promised a presidential election and the Saudis hinted of women's voting rights. Other, smaller demonstrations throughout the region were played down by governments with little or no media coverage. The foment continued with al-Qaeda assistance and peaked with the start of the Tunisian uprising and which fed the Libyan dilema we now face. Last week, Quadafi stated al-Qaeda would rule northern Africa should the protesters win the country. He may be partly correct in his assertion but I also think he is desparate enough to evoke world fear as a last resort. The paultry Obama support for a 'no fly' zone over Lybia is his (Obama's) way of walking the fence between the major factions fueling this theocratic clash. A 'no fly' zone has little effect on military operations directed at insurgents who face daily reprisal from helicopter straffing and mercenary led ground ops. United Nations endorsed intervention is left to European subscribers of Lybian oil and provides the necessary excuse to limit US involvement.

How does this all play into the RV scheme of things? The only thing preventing a jihadist takeover in Iraq is our presence. Once we leave, it is a whole new ball game with a serious global economic outcome. An independent Iraq would lack the politcal infrastructure necessary to thwart any threat and I am afraid the remaining 50,000 US military is insufficient. Consider all the above when extracting a date and a rate.

[Thor363]

In our quest for truth in Iraqi politcal protocols, and their affect on dinar revaluation, we need to evaluate the collective external theocratic/geo-political pressure in/on the middle east. A basic review of Islamic tenets could help clarify the socio-economic position that Iraq now holds.

Jihad: using all of one's strength, as well as moving toward an objective with all of one's strength and resisting every difficulty.

Shari'a: Islamic law - best viewed as God's all-encompassing path for how people should live their lives in the world, including not only basic faith and morals, but

personal status and criminal law. The Sunni school of thought includes a universal and long standing belief that the use of individual reason is not

permitted and that all Muslims need follow versions of Shari'a.

With the above in mind, I have tried to condense the implications of current events as they pertain to Iraqi economic development.

As I have noted in the past, Saudi Arabia controls the material and political output of OPEC - and with only one percent of the world's Muslims, she controls about ninety per cent of the world's Islamic institutions. The Sunni based Wahabi doctrine they teach is one murderous to Shi'ites, Jews, homosexuals, and apostates. Repressive toward the role of women, their overall politic is shared by al-Qaeda. Both seek, differing only in tactics, to move us all toward a world-wide theocratic totalitarian dictatorship, the caliphate. "The Wahabi-al-Qaeda rivalry is lethal, but it is not a battle over values. It is essentially a bitter fight over who should be in charge of getting all of us under the Caliph's control". (James Woolsey, CIA director '93-'95). Think of the wide influence the Saudis enjoy: from Morocco to Pakistan, Turkministan to Sudan in the south - all governed by the Sunni based jihad - the exception being Iran and it's Shi'ite based radicalism. Middle east monarchies draw their impetus from their long history of rule over respective melting pots of Islamic sects i.e. Bahrain - comprised of 30% Sunni with 70% mostly Shi'ite. This, along with the fact that Saudi Arabia was essentially the first middle east country to exploit their petroleum resources, should leave us considering the trend setting nature of twentieth century development. Just watch how they dole out favors to garner global support for their insidious agenda. They think nothing of tapping reserve oil from played out fields to supply shortfalls in China and India - all the while playing the benevolent card of 'business as usual'. This business as usual sentiment is underwritten every time we fill our tank. It seems the trippling cost for a barrel of oil since the 90's coincides with trippling production costs the Saudis are currently faced with. The 'water cut' (pumping sea water into their wells to maintain well head pressure for extraction) is now over 50%. This practice increases the sulphur content and makes processing more difficult and expensive. Is it any wonder why they have their eye on Iraqi oil along with the contiguous nature of their geo-political agenda?

I've seen regional civil strife developing for several years. It started with open and free elections for Iraqis in 2005 - leaving Syrians and Egyptians hoping their Arab/Berlin wall could crack a little more. Threatened by the created dissent, Mubarak promised a presidential election and the Saudis hinted of women's voting rights. Other, smaller demonstrations throughout the region were played down by governments with little or no media coverage. The foment continued with al-Qaeda assistance and peaked with the start of the Tunisian uprising and which fed the Libyan dilema we now face. Last week, Quadafi stated al-Qaeda would rule northern Africa should the protesters win the country. He may be partly correct in his assertion but I also think he is desparate enough to evoke world fear as a last resort. The paultry Obama support for a 'no fly' zone over Lybia is his (Obama's) way of walking the fence between the major factions fueling this theocratic clash. A 'no fly' zone has little effect on military operations directed at insurgents who face daily reprisal from helicopter straffing and mercenary led ground ops. United Nations endorsed intervention is left to European subscribers of Lybian oil and provides the necessary excuse to limit US involvement.

How does this all play into the RV scheme of things? The only thing preventing a jihadist takeover in Iraq is our presence. Once we leave, it is a whole new ball game with a serious global economic outcome. An independent Iraq would lack the politcal infrastructure necessary to thwart any threat and I am afraid the remaining 50,000 US military is insufficient. Consider all the above when extracting a date and a rate.

+1 Billy Goat for obvious reasons.

Having read some similarly well thought out material from you, I'm not surprised with the the fact that I totally agree with this post but that I am pleasantly surprised that you decided to finally share this here.

Thanks for this post. Well written and well thought out!

[cardinal sin]

Thx BG. A sobering reality.

[BanG]

"How does this all play into the RV scheme of things? The only thing preventing a jihadist takeover in Iraq is our presence. Once we leave, it is a whole new ball game with a serious global economic outcome. An independent Iraq would lack the politcal infrastructure necessary to thwart any threat and I am afraid the remaining 50,000 US military is insufficient. Consider all the above when extracting a date and a rate."

There is where I have to agree with you. In terms of Money, Military Might and political clout the US has exhausted all it's resources for the New Iraq. Very soon Iraq's destiny in the Middle East will be solely in their hands. We can try and hope that we have built a good foundation with the building of Iraq's military and training of their police and all the other civil Infrastructures but at the end of the day the GOI may hold the cards. Let us hope that all the Bright and Educated People of Iraq could see the coming of such an event and preclude that with protests and sound thought. At this point I think of all that have given their lives for this belief of being free Iraqi and American alike. I guess all one can do is Pray for them and the wisdom of the GOI. Peace.

[Off-the-grid]

I do not agree with BG's assertion that the Saudi monarchy is striving for world domination. My years there as a teenager in the 70s endowed me with a respect for their culture and their respect for ours. Yes, they are extremely conservative and rule by Islamic law. Yes they are extremely shrewd - otherwise the West would have ended up owning their country. The original negotiations for the forming of Aramco (the oil production company of Arabia) included training and phasing in Saudi managers and increasing the shares owned by the Monarchy. While I was there the Saudis achieved 51% ownership and control, but you would not have known it.

I was there when King Faisel was assassinated, and we were all greatly saddened, but not particularly concerned for our safety. The people, who seemed to truly love their King, did not jump to the conclusion that the West was responsible (turned out to be a royal, a nephew).

Obviously things will have changed some, and perhaps the new King is more heavy handed. I am surprised that there have been any protests in Saudi at all, except for women asking for more rights. They were (are?) not allowed to drive, so must have a driver everywhere they go. What protests we have seen must have been prompted by the unrest in the entire region, but they have not appeared to request the monarchy be overthrown. A call for a constitution is what I see, a set of laws that all, including the monarchy, must obey. They want an end to the rulers having the last word on absolutely everything, and a way to combat corruption on the local level. They seek fairness, I think - that's all.

All that said, I have no doubt that the Saudi monarchy is not thrilled with the idea of a democratic Iraq. They are poised to be a power in the region for sure. Saddam was not liked, as he was clearly an unstable trouble maker, but a democracy will be much harder to influence. With a dictatorship you only have to influence one man. I'm sure they are concerned about the new Iraq being a wild card, and I have no doubt they don't want the US to have a lot to say. However, I do not see them trying to topple the government of Iraq.

Well, all of this is just my opinion - my take on what is going on based on my experiences years ago. I have tossed in my two cents worth.

I hope what I have been reading about Iraqi gov. employees getting paid with lower denomination currency and ramped up efforts to educate the masses about the currency adjustment means that the RV will be within weeks (days?), not months. Wish the Arab Summit had not been postponed, because I think the RV must happen before then.

Peace and Prosperity, and to a quick RV!