The Cellar - Iran

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - Iran (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=13074)

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce (Post 310984)

What we should have been doing right along, is providing a way for the locals to make a living with something besides poppies. That would have prevented the Taliban from extorting the profits from the poppy crop to buy arms.

spot on! the majority of the UK's heroin comes from Afghanistan, and this should ahve been tackled at the beginning, by helping to provide an alternative cash crop. the same thing is happening to South America with the coca crop, and that could easily be rectified. sorry, a little off-topic.

A nice thought -- but the difference between the money Yusuf Afghani can make from a field of wheat and a field of opium poppies is nothing short of astromomical, whether legal or no. Nobody has been able to wipe out this dollar difference nor even to close the gap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45 (Post 309902)

Why would Bush send a "surge" of troops when no one wants that? They may give us an illusion that we have power when in reality, it is just one big cycle.

To steal the oil and natural gas, duh!
Time to make the move.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 311157)

the problem is that it has never been properly addressed. for example, coca could be used in a lift-me-up-tea, or in conference mints for the boring post-lunch sessions, or coca cake for hikers and walkers. of course, the strength and purity would have to be lessened so that it doesnt become addictve, like coffee, but the answers are there.
regards the opium plant, until you get to the top of the hierarchy, the cost of heroin in Afghanistan is miniscule compared to the cost when it gets to the UK. Afghanis are not getting rich from this: they are existing hand to mouth stylee.
off topic again, but needed to be brought up, i think.

for more on Coca, there is an excellent book available called THE BIG DEAL by Anthony Henman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 311157)

Not so because they have to pay the Taliban most of the profit for protection and marketing. But you couldn't know that, not being there.
I think I'll go with the opinion of the people that are there dealing with Bush's mistakes.:p

Quote:

Competing with opium requires teaching Afghan farmers how to earn more money with alternative crops once we have demonstrated the credibility of an eradication program. Experimental farms in the southern region have had success with “cotton, fruit and certain vegetable crops,” according to Rashid. CDAG projects have overseen agricultural development that includes apricots, raisins, pistachios and walnuts, rice, corn and cotton.

Mr. Koch and others who know both the climate and the people in Afghanistan say that persuading the farmers to use drip systems for irrigation, or to train grapevines to trellises so that the vines and rows can be planted closer together, is a serious obstacle. But, these methods are essential to make vineyards a viable alternative to the poppy plant because the higher crop density increases profits. Despite inertia, it is possible to persuade farmers to try new ideas by subsidizing the work and giving them access to mentors like Koch, who can increase the odds of success with those first critical harvests. The confidence that is the chief by-product of success is also the only antidote to inertia. In just a few years, the vineyards depicted in the next two photographs will compete with opium poppy. Although he can’t say for certain at this point, Michael Koch believes that in the long run, these vineyards can probably earn more than opium poppies.

jump

The tragic irony with all of this is that after winning stunning military victory after stunning military victory in the early war – crushing and vanquishing the Taliban – instead of setting in to seal the victory, we squandered it and ran off to Iraq, and the Taliban re-inflated and returned. At the current rate we, the Brits, Aussies, Canadians, French, Germans, Italians, and all the rest who are there, will lose the war in Afghanistan. We must change course with great haste.

The alternative crops approach can work, and there are other ideas for alternative economies not mentioned here. People are thinking about it. But we are not moving fast enough on long overdue and badly mismanaged reconstruction efforts. We are not taking the opium threat seriously, and so we literally are subsidizing a deadly enemy with poisoned blood and dirty money. Western money will flow into Afghanistan whether we invest it wisely or not. We’ve seen what happens when we ignore the place.

Not to drag this back in but, I saw some cable tv last night. The nut is serious about attacking Iran, isn't he?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griff (Post 312058)

Not to drag this back in but, I saw some cable tv last night. The nut is serious about attacking Iran, isn't he?

He was serious about attacking China over a silly spy plane. How many saw what should have been obvious back then? He (really Cheney) is that Stalinmanic. Iraq was Pearl Harbored. Next on his well publicized list is Iran. Only a brown shirt did not see veins hanging from his teeth in 2001 - over a silly spy plane.

But then I even read his book. The word nut no longer applies. We long passed 'nut' when he (actually Cheney) wanted to attack China over a silly spy plane. He even promotes China as a next 'evil' - and brown shirts (ie Urbane Guerrilla) love it.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/Print/2007/013107.html

This guy thinks we will attack Iran in the next month.

The French will not pressure Iran, when push comes to shove:

http://story.news.ask.com//article/2...D8N0VEKO1.html

Quote:

PARIS (AP) - President Jacques Chirac backtracked Thursday and said a nuclear-armed Iran would be unacceptable, reversing earlier comments that Tehran's possession of a nuclear bomb would not be "very dangerous."

"France, along with the international community, cannot accept the prospect of an Iran equipped with a nuclear weapon," Chirac's office said in a statement seeking to limit fallout from the French leader's remarks to the International Herald Tribune and two other publications.

"The Iranian nuclear program is opaque and therefore dangerous for the region," the statement added. It urged Tehran to suspend uranium enrichment, and said the United Nations would respond to such a move by suspending sanctions and that negotiations with Tehran would resume.

The statement followed a remarkable morning of damage-control by Chirac's office, which took the unusual step of asking reporters to come over in person for a clarification about his comments that Iran's possession of a nuclear weapon would not be "very dangerous" and that if used on Israel, Tehran would be immediately "razed."

Chirac, who made the comments during a Monday interview, called reporters back the next day to try to have his quotes retracted.

The publications said the interview was tape-recorded and on the record.

China will not pressure Iran, when push comes to shove.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/20449.html

Quote:

BEIJING, Jan. 15 China is in talks and close to an agreement to invest $3.6 billion in a major Iranian natural gas field, which would see liquified natural gas for China.

Gulfoilandgas.com reports the China National Petroleum Corp. is negotiating with Statoil of Norway on investing in a South Pars natural gas field.

The SP14 project has 370 billion cubic meters of reserves.

The tentative agreement would have CNPC build a $1.8 billion LNG plant and $1.8 billion dedicated to exploring and producing gas.

If approved, China would get a dedicated 4.5 million tons of LNG a year from the plant.This comes as U.S. officials condemned Chinese investment of $16 billion into the North Pars gas fields and facilities.

A spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said the United States shouldn't get involved in trade negotiation with Iran.

Russia will not pressure Iran, when push comes to shove.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/21083.html

Quote:

MOSCOW - Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov announced on Tuesday that Russia has delivered anti-aircraft missile systems to Iran that were a part of a defense deal inked by the two countries in 2005. Ivanov also said that Russia would consider further orders from the Middle Eastern country.

"We have supplied the modern short-range anti-aircraft systems TOR-M1 in accordance with our contracts," Ivanov confirmed. "Iran is not under sanctions and if it wants to buy defensive ... equipment for its armed forces then why not?"

Iran had inked an agreement in 2005 to buy 29 TOR-M1 missile systems from Russia in a deal believed to be worth $700 million. The TOR-M1 missile systems are capable or hitting airborne targets like cruise missiles or helicopters.

The United States had asked Russia to nix the defense deal in the light of the defiant position adopted by Iran over nuclear weapons. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is peaceful, but the US feels that it is getting ready to make nuclear weapons. The standoff has been tense and hence Russia's sale will not be viewed favorably.

State Department spokesman Tom Casey had harsh words for this deal, "We don't think that it's an appropriate signal to be sending to the government of Tehran at this time, particularly when they are under U.N. sanctions for trying to develop a nuclear weapon, and when they continue to be in defiance of U.N. Security Council resolutions," he said.

British/Iranian opinion: US/UN pressure on Iran will only hurt

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...001703,00.html

Quote:

Ironically, it is this very international crisis that may serve to save Ahmadinejad's presidency, a reality that the president undoubtedly understood all too well. As domestic difficulties mount, the emerging international crisis could at best serve as a rallying point, or at worst persuade Iran's elite that a change of guard would convey weakness to the outside world.

There can be little doubt that US hawks will interpret recent events as proof that pressure works, and that any more pressure will encourage the hawks further. Yet the reality is that while Ahmadinejad has been his own worst enemy, the US hawks are his best friends.

Worked for Castro...

That's it; thread's done!

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw (Post 312095)

But then I even read his book. The word nut no longer applies. We long passed 'nut' when he (actually Cheney) wanted to attack China over a silly spy plane. He even promotes China as a next 'evil' - and brown shirts (ie Urbane Guerrilla) love it.

Well, well, well: the thread is officially over. Tw just stooped or slumped down to calling somebody a Nazi.

As for the "silly spy plane" thing, the only person talking like an attack on China was contemplated is again our very own delusive, dear ol' tw. He also fails to understand what's behind the Heinleinian remark "Men are not potatoes." Those of us who do understand this are shaking our heads at tw's take.

Your communist sympathies, and your virulent anti-Americanism, have never been more on display than in this post, tw. Always your bias is away from America and her worthwhile traits and towards all the evils of Communism, which you would like us to believe are good things. But then, you usually cover yourself with your own shit when you reveal your thoughts. Nithing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 312307)

Well, well, well: the thread is officially over. Tw just stooped or slumped down to calling somebody a Nazi.

UG is using his menza grasp. Clearly a brown shirt could only be a Nazi. Because 1930 brown shirts supported the Nazi party, then 2002 brown shirts are also Nazis? Cheney would be angry with UG for his assumption.