Monday, Sep 28, 2009

Off topic - A good time to buy oil shares?

Times: Iran test fires nuclear missile capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe

Iran has fired one of the longest-range missiles in its arsenal as part of testing it began ahead of a confrontation with foreign powers over a previously undisclosed secret nuclear facility later this week.

Posted by tyrellcorporation @ 10:24 AM (1260 views)
Add Comment
Report Article

33 Comments

1. icarus said...

Headline should have read 'Iran fires missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead....'

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:27AM Report Comment
 

2. uncle tom said...

Totally off-topic, and not a very cheerful subject; but discussing this yesterday, one possible positive outcome emerged..

.. if a hot headed Islamic state had the bomb, might that persuade the Israeli government to deal with the minority of their population who are so hell-bent on provocation..?

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:32AM Report Comment
 

3. icarus said...

What is 'hot-headed'? Chirac has revealed that when Bush was trying to get France and other Europeans to join in the attack on Iraq Bush used apocalyptic prophecy - he told Chirac, as a fellow Christian, that Gog and Magog were massing in and around Iraq to attack the Israelites. (Gog and Magog were two Evil Forces from the north, mentioned in a couple of Old Testament Books, that were hell-bent on destroying the Israelites; the destruction of G and M would usher in a New Age. Reagan also used G and M imagery in the Cold War.)

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:47AM Report Comment
 

4. layers said...

@2 UT - hear, hear. However, that minority will do everything in their power to maintain the status quo, and they're the ones who have the nukes, intellignence services and congress in their back pockets. So change is highly unlikely unfortunately.

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:48AM Report Comment
 

5. mr g said...

Proves that the policy of appeasement towards Iran by Britain, the EU and USA is as useless as Chamberlain's policy towards Hitler in 1938.

This article is very relevant to this site as we are heading into a dangerous phase in relations with Iran and the Islamic world generally, with unknown political consequences and the potential to create havoc in financial and commodity markets and, as a spin off, the housing market.

Perhaps our 19th century policy of "send a gunboat" was the way to deal with these tinpot regimes.

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:51AM Report Comment
 

6. layers said...

@2 UT - hear, hear. However, that minority will do everything in their power to maintain the status quo, and they're the ones who have the nukes, intellignence services and congress in their back pockets. So change is highly unlikely unfortunately.

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:52AM Report Comment
 

7. drewster said...

@tyrellcorporation,

No, this would not be a reason to buy shares in oil-producers.

For the last decade, every time the oil price nudged upwards, the (largely clueless) financial media would blame it on "rising tensions in the middle-east". The middle-east has been a tinderbox for decades; every few weeks there are new scare stories. This latest development doesn't change much.

Oil prices are driven largely by supply and demand (except last summer, when we saw an irrational speculative bubble). The demand picture for the next 12 months looks weak with the global economy still in the doldrums. Nevertheless, I think MoneyWeek magazine are still recommending holding some shares in BP or Shell, because of their good dividend. (This is not a stock tip. Do your own research.)

Monday, September 28, 2009 11:55AM Report Comment
 

8. sovietuk said...

The 911 attackers didn't seem particulary bothered about whether Iran had or had not attacked a country previously and for so many x number of years before. If religious hot heads get hold of these weapons then it's pretty much a certainty that a large western city will be flattened in the future. Sorry i would rather some remote desert factory be bombed that my kids be exposed to the risk of being burnt or suffering radiation cancers. Sooner or later this problem will have to be confronted and it is not going to go away - it will get worse the longer it is left.

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:10PM Report Comment
 

9. mountain goat said...



The Next Big Move in Crude Oil. Since this article was written oil is falling even more clearly out of this triangle pattern. Of course if bombs start falling TA won't matter much.

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:10PM Report Comment
 

10. sovietuk said...

"that" should read "than"

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:11PM Report Comment
 

11. matt_the_hat said...

I've always wondered who the bbc and skynews are targeting with their scaremonger rhetoric crap its nice to have met at least two on this thread :-) Roll on Iraq 2.0

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:22PM Report Comment
 

12. inbreda said...

sovietuk - that is a bizarre way of thinking.

We are using depleted uranium weapons in Iraq. So what you're saying is that parents in Iraq should accept that their children will be suffering from radiation cancers for the next 100 years without any thought of retaliation, but we in the west should bomb anyone who might possibly do the same to us?

I think your styatement is the classic example of why the world is in such a sh1t state

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:38PM Report Comment
 

13. tyrellcorporation said...

@Drewster.

Yep good point but it's well known that Iran will pretty much instantly blockade the Straits of Hormuz where 25% of the World's oil is transported. The Iranians also have some of the most advanced torpedos in the World capable of travelling virtually undetected at over 200mph! US battlegroups would come under enormous pressure from this type of attack.

This whole question over Iran's nuclear ambitions has been bubbling for years and I can't help thinking the thought of a nuclear armed Iran capable of hitting Isreal (probably within a year if the reports are to be believed) will cause Isreal to act sooner rather than later.

When you consider high oil prices were partly to blame for kick-starting the Credit Crunch, the potential for a second wave of economic instability off the back of this situation is, IMO, very high.

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:40PM Report Comment
 

14. icarus said...

tyrell @13 - or you could turn that around "I can't help thinking a nuclear armed Israel capable of hitting Iran... will cause Iran to act sooner rather than later"

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:52PM Report Comment
 

15. the number cruncher said...

Iran has one of the most stable and enlightened political system in the region. The reason Britain and the USA are targeting them is because we cannot control their Oil. This story is pure propaganda - written by MI6 employee's towing the geopolitical line.

We should form an alliance with Iran to bring peace to Iraq and help their governments become true liberal democracies within the confines of their culture.

The real danger to stability is the neo-colonial agenda of controlling the regions oil wealth! Our short term geo-political goals are sowing the seeds of bitter division and conflict for the future.

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:05PM Report Comment
 

16. drewster said...

@tyrellcorporation,

Iran won't do that. They need our money just as much as we need their oil. They import much of their food and refined petrol & diesel. Without oil exports they would have no money to pay for the generous welfare state and food-subsidies which keep their people happy.

I've never been one for conspiracy theories, but with both Iraq and Iran there's a strong whiff of oil-money in the air.

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:17PM Report Comment
 

17. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

 

18. tyrellcorporation said...

I've never signed up to the oil wealth conspiracy, the US has spent over 4 trillion dollars so far in Iraq (from the start of the war) so I see little to benefit them financially.

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:23PM Report Comment
 

19. This comment has been removed as it was found to be in breach of our Blog Policies.

 

20. sovietuk said...

How about all of the hundreds arrested and killed during the Iran election campaign?

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:34PM Report Comment
 

21. tyrellcorporation said...

SovietUK... conveniently forgotten I'm afraid!

Best to let Number Cruncher waft around in a haze of love and happiness...

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:37PM
 

22. little professor said...

the US has spent over 4 trillion dollars so far in Iraq (from the start of the war) so I see little to benefit them financially.

The US taxpayer has spent over 4 trillion dollars so far in Iraq, with little to no benefit. However, large corporations such as Bechtel, Halliburton, Lockheed Martin and Blackwater have had a bonanza, reaping billions in profits from contracts to rebuild the country they helped destroy, with no competitive bids allowed from rival firms. These companies then donate huge amounts to the election campaigns of senators, representatives and presidential candidates, ensuring that the quid pro quo goes on. Everyone is benefiting, apart from the poor schmuck US taxpayer, and the people of Iraq.

Monday, September 28, 2009 01:46PM Report Comment
 

23. tyrellcorporation said...

LP, I said I didn't sign up to the oil wealth conspiracy, I didn't say there haven't been huge fortunes to be reaped elsewhere. The West getting hold of Iraqi oil is a bit of a red herring IMO.

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:07PM Report Comment
 

24. matt_the_hat said...

18. tyrellcorporation - they must have spent it to send girls to university then (ooops sadam already did that) - you need to educate yourself on the petrol-dollar recycling - only two states threatened to sell oil not in dollars, one down .....

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:20PM Report Comment
 

25. icarus said...

Theories for US sabre-rattling against Iran: 1. Iran's developing nuclear weapons. 2. The securing of oil supplies. 3. Iran's oil bourse threatens dollar's reserve currency status. 4. Iran's banking system - the banking model developed in Iran is a threat to Anglo-American international finance, to the continued compound interest paid by developing countries to western banks.

I think 4 has the most substance.

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:22PM Report Comment
 

26. Lem said...

'US battlegroups would come under enormous pressure from this type of attack.' sincerely doubt Irans ability to deploy would last more than a few hours.
Explosives have a 'use by date' and are very expensive to dispose of. Every now and then the US has to have a clear out

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:30PM Report Comment
 

27. the number cruncher said...

tyrellcorporation, sovietuk

It shows up your level of intelligence to use such 'straw man' augments to refute th my post. I have no love for theocracy or the political system in Iran and to suggest so is just an easy co-out for you to ignore what I said in my post.

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

"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position!

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:30PM Report Comment
 

28. the number cruncher said...

icarus

You are probably right about the banking systems are more important than oil, but the two go hand in hand. Saddam was mucking around with oil prices as a way of threatening the USA and making some cash for himself by betting on oil futures then manipulating the market. Iran's greatest crime in the eyes of the USA is to ignore the US financial systems and not trade in dollars.

America and the UK are weak, we have lived of borrowed money for too long and become inefficient. We are like an old wounded lion, dangerous and violent and we do not want to admit to our stupidity and mistakes. Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:45PM Report Comment
 

29. shipbuilder said...

The middle east, primarily because of its oil reserves, is a key region for the US to 'control'. It's as simple and mundane (and tragic) as that. Hence why we receive the propaganda that we do on a daily basis.
Also, just because it has been ingrained in us from an early age (no conspiracy, just culture) that there exists a less intelligent, more emotional, unstable and morally inferior 'them' as opposed to the civilised, fair and superior western 'us' in the world doesn't mean it's actually true, just that you've been manipulated.

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:52PM Report Comment
 

30. the number cruncher said...

8. sovietuk said...
"If religious hot heads get hold of these weapons then it's pretty much a certainty that a large western city will be flattened in the future"

Religious hot heads have already got a hold of weapons of mass destruction - its called the USA and Israel. And the religious nutters in the Bush government have just caused the death of 1.4 million people in Iraq. That's pretty devastating.

Have you ever asked yourself why a young Muslim man wants to let off an atomic bomb in London? Is it because of what we are doing to countries in the Muslim world. The best way to protect my children from Ismamist extremists is to make sure less of them are created.

Monday, September 28, 2009 02:57PM Report Comment
 

31. rumble said...

"Have you ever asked yourself why a young Muslim man wants to let off an atomic bomb in London?"
For the same reason they suicide bomb their own marketplaces day in day out?

Personally, I think religion is for primitives, and would feel somewhat relieved of this tedium if Israel and Iran did nuke each other off the face of the planet. Play nice, or leave.

"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
Been watching Iran's missile tests?

"US has spent over 4 trillion dollars so far in Iraq"
That's a lot of wind turbines.

Monday, September 28, 2009 05:21PM Report Comment
 

32. krustyatemyhamster said...

"Personally, I think religion is for primitives, and would feel somewhat relieved of this tedium if Israel and Iran did nuke each other off the face of the planet. Play nice, or leave. "

Nope, dismissing entire 'classes' of people with ignorant prejudice is primitive and is the kind of thing that is exploited by the sociopathic to create conflict to fiurther their own goals. The most gruesome conflicts in mankinds history had nothing to do with religion. Take Hitler as the most extreme example: A man who exploited prejudice AGAINST a religion (and many other forms of discrimination on racial and ethnic grounds besides) to form his power base by exploiting prejudices of people who thought they were superior (sound familiar?). Hitler didn't support his own theories with religion, but with science: Darwinism to be precise. Does that make Darwin wrong? - of course not - it was just bastardised by a sociopath for his own use. Who's primitive?

Monday, September 28, 2009 10:04PM Report Comment
 

33. rumble said...

I should not have included those two points in the same sentence. Eats, shoots, and leaves. Individually, I stand by them both. I like live and let live, but I'm not going to waste time on a bunch of ultimately self-destructive idiots who can't pull their heads out. I'll skip the religion/darwinism argument, and the ol' Hitler routine, a daft comparison, but didn't natural selection work well on him, no baby Hitlers running around. And I expect that the way things haven't been progressing in the middle east since before I was born we'll witness more natural selection as they off each other. "Ignorant prejudice" - a template response. Don't confuse prejudiced cleansing (unnatural selection) with natural selection.

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:50AM Report Comment
 

Add comment

  • If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
  • If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
  • Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
  • Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
  • Please adhere to the Guidelines
Username  
Admin Password
Email Address
Comments

Main Blog | Archive | Add Article | Blog Policies