The Crazies are trying to goad Iran into war the same way we goaded Japan in WWII.

[robertpaulsen]

It's all about oil. The historical parallel is scary:


The League of Nations, the U.S., the UK, Australia, and the Netherlands, which had territorial interests in Southeast Asia and the Philippines, condemned the Japanese attacks on China and applied diplomatic pressure. Japan resigned from the League of Nations in response. In July 1939, the U.S. terminated the 1911 U.S.-Japanese commerce treaty, which both showed official disapproval and removed legal barriers to imposition of trade embargoes. Japan continued its military campaign in China and signed the Anti-Comintern Pact with Nazi Germany, formally ending World War I hostilities, and declaring common interests. In 1940, Japan signed the Tripartite Pact with Germany and Fascist Italy to form the Axis Powers.

These Japanese actions led the U.S. to embargo scrap metal and gasoline, and to close the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. The situation worsened, and in 1941, Japan moved into northern Indochina. The U.S. responded by freezing Japan's assets in the U.S. and instituting a complete oil embargo.<1> Oil was Japan's most crucial resource; her own supplies were very limited, and 80% of Japan's imports were from the U.S. The Imperial Navy relied entirely on imported bunker oil stocks.<2>

snip

Diplomatic negotiations with the U.S. climaxed with the Hull note of November 26, 1941, which Prime Minister Hideki Tojo described to his cabinet as an ultimatum. Japanese leaders felt they had to choose between complying with the demands of the U.S. and UK — backing down from its actions in China and surrounding areas — and continuing to expand. Concerned about losing status and prestige in the international community ("loss of face") if compelled to comply, and with the perceived threat to national survival posed by the western powers, the Japanese leadership (under Emperor Hirohito) decided to implement contingency plans, choosing war with the United States, United Kingdom, and the Netherlands as a direct response.

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

This response was just what LCDR Arthur H. McCollum hoped for when he wrote his infamous 8 part memorandum proposal in 1940:

9. It is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested:

* A. Make an arrangement with Britain for the use of British bases in the Pacific, particularly Singapore.
* B. Make an arrangement with Holland for the use of base facilities and acquisition of supplies in the Dutch East Indies.
* C. Give all possible aid to the Chinese government of Chiang-Kai-Shek.
* D. Send a division of long range heavy cruisers to the Orient, Philippines, or Singapore.
* E. Send two divisions of submarines to the Orient.
* F. Keep the main strength of the U.S. fleet now in the Pacific in the vicinity of the Hawaiian Islands.
* G. Insist that the Dutch refuse to grant Japanese demands for undue economic concessions, particularly oil.
* H. Completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, in collaboration with a similar embargo imposed by the British Empire.

10. If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.

A. H. McCollum

CC-0p-16
0p-16-F
File

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


Now, back to the present. While the author of this next piece might not see the parallel, the facts laid out show history repeating itself:


What's Behind The Crash In Crude Oil?

By Gary Dorsch

January 10, 2007

snip

Yet given a difficult investment environment and concerns over its nuclear program, Iran has been unable to upgrade its oil facilities, nor increase production capacity for the past few years. Oil production was stagnant last year, which resulted in the oil sector expanding by just 0.6% in real terms. Instead, Iran’s economy is being driven by higher government spending, which grew by 5.4% in real terms in 2006, the highest rate of growth in five years.

snip

The latest plunge in crude oil, perhaps inspired by Saudi Arabia, is likely to put a squeeze on Iran’s budget surplus, which could turn into a deficit if oil prices fall towards $45 per barrel. To finance the government’s subsidies, Iran’s central bank increased the broad money supply by 36% in 2006, sending inflation soaring to 14.6% in September. Tehran cannot afford to cutback on oil production and reduce its oil income, without cutting back on subsidies and risk riots in the streets.

snip

While apparently ruling out the military option for 2007, the Europeans and the US are quietly engaging in economic warfare with Iran, by demanding that international banks and oil companies to pull out of dozens of Iranian projects, including development of Iran’s two massive new oil fields Azadegan and Yardavan that could expand Iran’s output by 800,000 bpd over the next four years.

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Dorsch/jan102007.html


The stakes at this point may be even higher for Iran now than they were for Japan in 1941. Why? Iran has reached Peak Oil as we did in 1970, and their production is declining at a staggering rate:


Iran oil industry founders, report says

By BARRY SCHWEID

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Iran is suffering a staggering decline in revenue from its oil exports, and income could virtually disappear by 2015 if the trend continues, according to an analysis published Monday in a journal of the National Academy of Sciences.

Iran's economic problems could make the country unstable, with its oil industry crippled, Roger Stern, an economic geographer at Johns Hopkins University, said in the report and in an interview.

Iran earns about $50 billion a year in oil exports. The decline is estimated at 10 to 12 percent annually. In less than five years exports could be halved and then disappear by 2015, Stern said.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003494872_iranoil26.html

Talk about a New Pearl Harbor in the making!

[Holly_Hobby]

1. K & R

:hi:

[robertpaulsen]

2. Thanks!

I'm sure most of that info on Japan is old news to you, but I appreciate the rec. ;)

[Little Wing]

3. Japan's involvement in WW2 is our fault too?

Oh for fuck's sake :eyes:

[Lord Byron]

5. It's war politics

I don't see anything controversial or inaccurate in the original poster's post.

[Little Wing]

6. Besides taking the current situation of Japan on its own Island campaign

throughout Indo-China.

[LostInAnomie]

11. C'mon, how can you say that not providing imperialists with the...

... resources necessary to continue their expansionist war isn't provoking? What, are you blind? Hell, the Japanese had no choice but to bomb Pearl Harbor!

:sarcasm:

Some people stretch their "logic" a little too far.

[Little Wing]

13. We shut off their oil because they were being bastards

edited to remove unnecessary comma

[LostInAnomie]

16. I was agreeing with you.

That's why I used the :sarcasm:

[Little Wing]

17. And I was agreeing with you

Which is why I didn't use the :sarcasm: :)

[Holly_Hobby]

4. Page 4

[seemslikeadream]

7. For a second please hold me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxFRFIssQDc


Enveloped in a sentiment,
A sound that rushes over me.
Engage an impulse to pretend
I have a faith as pure.
Not forgetting what it means to dream.
Indulging everything.
Entertaining thoughts that I've the strength
Of those I yearn to be.
Cheers and tribute greet the saviours.
Reckless thoughts survive.
Anachronistic and impulsive.

And what will happen?
Will I dream?
I am too scared to close my eyes.
For a second please hold me.
None can change in me these things that I believe.
But I don't know what happens now.
I am too scared to close my eyes.

Legion
Vnv Nation


http://www.bushflash.com/year.html

[leftchick]

8. we are so screwed

:scared:

[happydreams]

9. Japan SHOULD have been goaded. Shit they were

trying, along with the Nazis, and with the help of the Duponts, to take over the world!

But I don't really think they were goaded as much as the US simply exercised common sense in cutting off their supplies.

The Rape on Nanking and the subjugation of Korea for over 30 years to a virtual slave colony left little doubt about their intentions.


Please don't read this as justification for attacking Iran. I am totally against that.


A knife can slice bread or kill.

[robertpaulsen]

12. You are raising a point lost on The Crazies.

Japan was an imperialist country aligned with fascists. Iran is neither imperialist nor fascist, "Islamo" or otherwise.

[happydreams]

19. Exactly. You clarify that well. Iran is not imperialist,

but the US by any measure is.

The key thing to watch is what the overt actions of a country are. Iran, like Iraq before we turned it into a hellhole, were not expansionist. I think that Bush is doing what he had planned all along

"Today Iraq, Tomorrow the Mid-East".

I think the US should have sent a couple of divisions of troops into Europe after Hitler took the Sudetenland. WWI never would have happened.

But then again if Prescott Bush's UBC hadn't financed Hitler's moneyman Thyssen along with IG Farben Hitler would never have done anything period. :crazy:

[robertpaulsen]

29. Nice end point there!

If we want to really dig into who encouraged WWII economically, GrandPoppy Bush is a good place to start.

As I said in another post though, what I'm really exploring here in this historical analogy is method more than motive. Oil was a huge factor in how WWII was fought and won. With oil production in Iran clearly peaking, the US is trying to back them into a corner. I don't think Ahmedinijad is like Hirohito, but I'm sure The Crazies do.

[Lord Byron]

21. Whether we were RIGHT to have goaded Japan

That's another matter. Was Japan "goaded"? Yes.

[happydreams]

25. How is cutting off support for fascism goading? The US

like any country has a right to do whatever it wants with its trade policy to promote, or demote, what it considers good or bad causes.

By your reasoning cutting off funding and other means of support of OBL, if in fact OBL is truly as he is depicted, would be "goading" them to attack. :crazy:

[section321]

14. I have to support happydreams here

WWII Japan and Germany really were "bad guys" bent on taking over the world. There was another one of these nuts at that time named Joseph Stalin. These people not only had the motivation to try and take over the world, the had the hardware. Don't think that just because we won WWII it wasn't hard. And never discount the role played by the Russians in defeating Germany.
(Where am I going with this?)

[happydreams]

22. I've been doing quite a bit of research on this. ....

It's convoluted to say the least but Russia, IMO, has been the sacrificial lamb of US imperialists for the last century. They were aligned with France and Great Britain prior to WWI, the Entente powers, then in the blink of an eye they became the enemy after WWI and Red Scares started. Within a few months after WWI the German delegation started feeding the West fears of Soviet expansionism, blah, blah.
The same thing happened after WWII. It's like a bad movie re-run. Allen Dulles provoked the Cold War by violating an information sharing agreement the US had with our ally the Soviet Union. It's horrendous.
Fascism aligned with Wall Street because they had a common enemy: labor.
The Bolshiviks were financed by Wall Street to gain access to Russian markets. Whatever the Bolsheviks were at first they became aligned with Wall street on the issue of labor as well a "technical slave colony" subdued by the opiate of Communism. The Soviets were never the West's enemy, they could not survive without the West's capital. We see this in the wheat and other product sales to the Soviet Union all through the supposed Cold War. It was all an Orwellian nightmare.

IMO the whole East West Capitalism Communism struggle is the biggest bamboozle in history.

Many early proponents of Bolshevism were trying to have a constitutional government, but the Central Committee was funded by Wall Street moneycrats, particularly the Morgan banking empire which knew the power of "independence movements" to further its own ends--access to market concessions.
Sponsoring revolutions worldwide was a standard Morgan MO.

[Rosemary2205]

10. Thank you thank you thank you.

For the info and the sources. Education is power. Thanks again.

[LostInAnomie]

15. We goaded Japan? You have got to be fucking kidding me.

They were imperialists, raping and enslaving those they conquered. How the fuck was cutting off their access to resources goading, or put us in the wrong?

[robertpaulsen]

20. "Put us in the wrong?" Nice strawman.

Please reprint where I said that in the OP.

I think the word goad fits the dictionary definition of what occurred through our economic embargo. And if you look at post 4 reprint of the McCollum memo, you'll see it was no accident. You can place whatever value judgement you want, but that is not my point. My point that the neo-cons are doing this "the same way we goaded Japan" refers to the method, not necessarily the political motive. I thought I made that parallel clear, but I guess not. Sorry if I confused you.

[femrap]

18. If Iran is running out of oil, I guess that

explains why they want nuclear power plants.

[robertpaulsen]

39. Right, femrap! Sorry I missed your post earlier.

But I think you're right on the ball as far as their real motive for pursuing nuclear energy. But the way the current misadministration is trying to exploit the situation by having Saudi Arabia help drive down the price of oil is nothing new. This article explains how the CIA discovered back in 1977 how they could exploit the peak of oil production in the Soviet Union, and how the Reagan administration did exactly that:


August 15, 2003, 1200 PDT, (FTW) -- A recently declassified CIA document casts new light on some of the most significant geopolitical events of the past quarter century. This document, an Intelligence Memorandum titled "The Impending Soviet Oil Crisis (ER 77-10147)," was issued in March 1977 by the Office of Economic Research and classified "Secret" until its public release in January 2001 in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. (1) Until now, the document has prompted little discussion.

The Memorandum predicts an impending peak in Soviet oil production "not later than the early 1980s" (the actual peak occurred in 1987 at 12.6 million barrels per day, following a preliminary peak in 1983 of 12.5 Mb/d). "During the next decade," the unnamed authors of the document conclude, "the USSR may well find itself not only unable to supply oil to Eastern Europe and the West on the present scale, but also having to compete for OPEC oil for its own use." The Memorandum predicts that the oil peak will have important economic impacts: "When oil production stops growing, and perhaps even before, profound repercussions will be felt on the domestic economy of the USSR and on its international economic relations."

The significance of the document requires some unpacking. First, we must understand the historical context in which it appeared.

Oil production in the US had peaked in 1970, just a few years earlier. This was arguably the most important economic event of the past half-century: until then America was the world's foremost oil producer; for much of the twentieth century it was also the world's foremost oil exporter. American oil won both World Wars for the Allies and made the US the world's richest and most powerful nation. Meanwhile, throughout most of this same period the USSR remained the world's second foremost oil-producing nation.

more...

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/081503_cia_russ_oil.html

[Totallybushed]

23. So it's OUR

fault the Japanese launched a cowardly sneak attack on Pearl Harbor? Because we took diplomatic steps to curb their war-mongering, nationalistic agression?

OK, then.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Hmm.

Seems to me it's more like when Japan invaded China. And then attacked Pearl Harbor.

The U.S. being Japan, Iraq being China, and so on.

[Jim Sagle]

26. Fascist rubbish.

[robertpaulsen]

27. That's exactly what The Crazies are. Fascist rubbish.

[JVS]

28. Embargos are not goading, they are a civilized way of saying "We don't like your agression"

[happydreams]

30. On another level this is a veiled attempt at de-legitimizing

FDR by making him look like just another imperialist leader of the US who provoked an enemy.

If he did "allow" Pearl Harbor to happen on purpose history has forgiven him, because he, an extraordinarily brilliant and compassionate man, no doubt calculated that the only way to get the US public to fight the bastards was to have the enemy strike us first, which they were going to do anyway.

It is not very democratic way to start a war, but he knew damn well that we would be fighting it sooner or later and it is always best to pick your battles.

In a similar vein I think that the first waves of US torpedo bombers that attacked the Japanese fleet at Midway were, IMO sacrificed for a larger objective: win the goddamn battle. America had its own version of kamikaze.

Almost everyone of the US planes was shot down, but that brought the Japaneze fighters down to sea level and when the wave of dive bombers came in behind the torpedo bombers they didn't have to worry about the Japaneze fighters. The rest is history the Japaneze fleet was destroyed and the chances of Japanese victory gone.

This is the true nature of war.

Admiral Chester Nimitz had to make and then live with those decisions. I'm sure as hell glad I didn't have to.


The fascists are now home grown and they are doing what Japan and Nazi Germany were trying to do then: enslave the world.

[robertpaulsen]

31. I wasn't trying to create animosity, but you made me understand how I did.

When I first read some of the responses along the lines of: "Oh, so Pearl Harbor was our FAULT, huh?", I couldn't understand that reaction. I felt like replying, 'Yeah right, I just hate America. I hate us for our freedoms. Next question!'

But if anyone thinks I'm trying to compare FDR to Dumbya on an ideological level, I say emphatically, ABSOLUTELY NOT. I place no value judgement on the word 'goad' to imply "USA: bad. Japan: misunderstood", or whatever it is people think I meant. It was not my intention to draw a comparison between the Commander in Chief and the Commander in Thief, though after reading what you wrote, I can understand how it could be read that way. Also Ahmedinejad, while he may be an anti-Semite prick, is not an imperialist or fascist, so there's no comparison there with Hirohito either.

My point is that The Crazies earned that nickname because THEY have a penchant for historical revisionism. It would be very easy for them, as I'm sure they have, to look back at the dawn of our involvement in World War II and say, "Hey, look how we got the fascists to attack us then. We should use the same method to get the Islamofascists in Iran to attack us to justify the war we want with them!" Forgetting conveniently, of course, that Iran is neither imperialist nor fascist. Forgetting conveniently that Japan actually was a clear and present danger to our security, Iran is not. The common denominator is the method, but the motives are diametrically opposed: FDR's was defense, GWB's is offense.

Sometimes I write good original posts, sometimes I don't. Perhaps I should have done more writing and less cutting and pasting to get my point across. But I feel the links are important, especially the last two. Iran's economy will not run on oil much longer. Ahmedinejad may threaten to cut off oil supplies to the West, but as long as Dumbya has US carriers patrolling the Persian Gulf, it's an empty threat. Empty up to the point where the economic losses sustained by the embargo threatens their security. Then The Crazies might have the window of opportunity to have their wish fulfilled, one way or another. Call it LIHOP or MIHOP, the real justification remains the same: OIL!

[happydreams]

34. You know I'm probably more guilty of taking your topic off topic.

Your topic is about oil as a factor in both cases as you have said. But I was so gung-ho to confront the Crazies crap about Roosevelt being just another imperialist that I decided to chime in with my take.

:hi:

[NeedleCast]

32. i'm just nitpicking

but as a history buff, I have to say that the Japanese fleet was far from "destroyed" at Midway. They lost two carriers and suffered damage to a handful of other surface combatants, lost the majority of the air capacity of that carrier group and ultimately had to call off the invasion of Midway, which would have been a stepping stone to Hawaii. However, their fleet was by no means destroyed and they won several major naval engagements against us after that.

Just nitpicking. No big whoop.

[happydreams]

33. Yer right, my error. What I meant was

IMO they lost their chances of winning the war with the defeat of Midway.

((I'm going to put you on my ignore list))

:hi:

[barb162]

35. You need to grab some history books or talk to a history teacher

at your local community college or talk to someone who lived through WW2. Next thing I know you're going to tell us the Japanese didn't invade China and kill millions of Chinese in their ruthless aggression. You should take this utterly silly and inaccurate beyond belief argument against the US to some PhDs in History as I am sure they will want to get a good laugh.

[robertpaulsen]

36. Wonderful group of strawmen you've got there.

Try reading the entire thread next time, instead of misrepresenting my position.

[Conan_The_Barbarian]

37. Your argument is lacking in metacommentary

I see the comparison your making here and the observation is certainly an intriguing one, however you should clarify what the reader is intended to infer from your WW2 reference. A lot of the objections your dealing with are over historical context.

A simple, "don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Japan was the victim of the War of the Pacific, like the rest of the Axis Powers they had to be defeated... etc etc" would focus more attention on the real point your trying to make.

[robertpaulsen]

38. Agreed. I wish I could make most of post 31 part of my OP.

Because I think it's important for everyone to understand how The Crazies are instigating war with Iran is not just political, but economical. The environment in which Peak Oil can be exploited by one country against another also has another historical precedent: the Soviet Union. In 1977, the CIA predicted that oil production in the Soviet Union would peak in the mid 80's; it actually occurred in 1987. The situation was exploited by the Reagan administration who got their friend in Saudi Arabia to convince OPEC to increase production and drive the price of oil down. Four years after their peak, the Soviet Union ceased to exist.

Key difference between the Soviet Union and Iran: the Soviets had ICBMs armed with nuclear warheads, Iran doesn't. In other words, with the policy of MAD, if the Soviets reacted militarily to the economic warfare of the West, they had EVERYTHING to lose. Iran, on the other hand, could bog us down in a quagmire worse than Vietnam and Iraq COMBINED. Iraq may be Bush's Vietnam, but Iran would be Bush's Waterloo.

[Strelnikov_]

40. "Soviets had ICBMs armed with nuclear warheads, Iran doesn't"

Which explains the neocons urgency in proceeding with their original designs against Iran, even in our greatly weakened state due to the Iraq misadventure.

You can't steal the resources of a state that can defend themselves with nuclear weapons.

On edit: I think eliminating a possible rival who could challenge hegemony over the Middle East resources may be the primary goal of the neocons.