Segment 1: Trading with the Greats SEGMENT BEGINS AT 00:41 A rules-based approach to trading has been economist/trading coach Jerry Robinson’s clarion call for many years. Listen as he shares seven important trading rules he has learned and adopted from three...
U.S. Prepares for War with Syria, Iran Amid New Israeli-Palestinian Peace Talks
Plus, Tom Cloud’s Update on Gold and Silver
Hit the play button above and read along below…
U.S. Middle East Policy: Divide and Conquer
As Americans, I believe that we need to step back for a moment and realize that Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of the countries spread out across the Near East have been slow to adapt to our new world of nation states. These countries have long been at the heart of major world empires that knew nothing of the concept of a sovereign nation-state. They understood empire better than the nation-state.
The people of the Middle East have a glorious history of empire, including the Roman Empire and more recently, the Ottoman Empire, which was born in 1299. But it is not just the nations of the Middle East that are accustomed to empire. Think of the Austrian empire, the Russian empire, or the British Empire. History is filled with stories of empires, not nation-states. The nation-state, while admittedly brilliant in its success, is much more advanced in Western nations. After all, the nation-state concept was birthed in the West. It’s a Western idea.
The remnants of the ancient Roman empire, which span across modern Europe and much of the Near East, were broken up, and divided, in recent centuries in order to manage them better.
No matter where you look, the Middle East, South America, much of Asia, what you find are former colonies, that once belonged to the various empires of Europe, now trying to make their way in a world full of nation-states.
Can you imagine what would happen if the Middle East were left to its own devices? It would form an empire, similar to the one created by the Ottoman Turks. This empire would control immense amounts of oil wealth.
The Middle East and its resources would be much more difficult to manage if it were unified. So, since the Turkish empire virtually dissolved in the wake of World War I, the West has held a divide and conquer policy towards these newly formed nation-states.
The U.S., the UK, and France remapped the Middle East in the wake of World War I.
The West drew new borders and created new names for their new nation-states like Iraq, Iran, etc.
But then, something major happened. Massive oil deposits were discovered in many of these nations.
Why is oil so important? Virtually, the entire global infrastructure is based upon oil. It fuels global commerce and it enables militaries to engage in global wars.
The West, afraid of so much wealth existing in some of these countries, realized that the borders of these nations needed to be redrawn yet again to prevent these nations from becoming too strong and dominant within the region.
In the early 1950’s, Iran decided that it did not want its vast natural resources to be plundered by Western oil companies. The British treated Iran as a vassal state, taking its oil for pennies and selling it for huge profits. Iran, under the direction of President Mohammed Mosaddegh, decided to nationalize its oil fields and kick out the Western oil companies that were treating the nation as their prey.
So around 1953, Britain gained support from President Eisenhower, who labeled Mosaddegh as a “COMMUNIST.” (In the 1950’s, “communists” were viewed much like “terrorists” are viewed today.) Together, the British intelligence service, MI6, and the CIA, staged a coup to overthrow the democratically-elected Mosaddegh. In his place, they installed the Shah, who did much to destroy the national identity of the Iranian people. He was a brutal leader. And in the mind of the average Iranian, the Shah was a U.S.-installed puppet.
In 1979, the Iranian people, mostly led by college students who had learned modern history, overthrew the Shah, which gave rise to the Ayatollahs, as the Supreme leaders of Iran.
And that is just one example…
Back in 2011, the former U.S Ambassador to the United Nations was interviewed on the FoxNews channel regarding the building tensions between the U.S. and Iran.
Listen as he boldly explains the U.S. position towards the Middle East.
Neo-Con John Bolton Admits Middle East Wars Are Over Economics
How many countries has Iran invaded or even sabotaged in the last 60 years?
On the contrary, how many countries has the U.S. invaded and/or sabotaged over the last 60 years?
Too many to count on this show.
Friends, it is all about controlling the access to oil. We all know that by now, right?
Well, I don’t think so. Many in America seem intent on waging perpetual war in the region.
War will never permanently cease until Christ returns. It just simply won’t happen…
What about Saudi Arabia?
Doesn’t the Washington elites know that “we the people” know that Saudi Arabia poses the greatest threat in the Middle East?
– 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were from Saudi Arabia.
– A secret cable from Wikileaks showed that the Saudis provide “the world’s largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups.”
– The Saudis have some of worst religious freedom violations. The Christian persecution ministry, Open Doors, has rated Saudi Arabia as one of the most repressive regimes in the world against Christians along with North Korea.
– The Saudis are vehemently anti-Semitic, restricting all other religions outside of Islam. Not even a Bible or a crucifix is allowed inside the country and Christians are publicly flogged and executed for their faith.
And despite all of these facts, the U.S. — the so-called “Christian nation” — considers Saudi Arabia one of their closest allies in the region. However, if the Saudis ever decide to move away from the petrodollar system (pricing their oil in U.S. dollars), expect the warmongering neocons to demonize the Saudis and beat their war drums.
A secret U.S. State Department cable released by Wikileaks showed that the U.S. has been attempting to overthrow Syria for years.
The U.S. and Britain are financing terrorists of the worst kind in Syria. Al Qaeda, and the Al Nursa Front, which is linked to Al Qaeda. There are also sketchy reports of Taliban in the region.
For goodness sakes, Syria was a French colony until 1946.
Al Qaeda is growing in dominance throughout Syria. They will not go quietly once Assad is finally ousted from power. We simply cannot afford this. I believe, to be quite frank with you, that our current policy in Syria is absolutely appalling and I do not think sending in the U.S. military is going to make the situation any better.
I want to play you an audio clip. It is going to ask you to pretend something, that may or may not be realistic – it all depends who you ask. That is, that Chinese troops have invaded Texas. Imagine for a moment that the Chinese made a back door deal with our neighbor to the south, Mexico, that permitted them easy entry into America through our porous border with Mexico. They have come to teach us a lesson. The Chinese have come to invade Texas.
Receive our 100% FREE FTMDaily Daily News Briefing Free Right in Your Inbox
No spam guarantee!
Tom Cloud joins us for his weekly Precious Metals Update. In this segment, Tom provides an update on gold and silver.
Possible Peace Talks Between Israelis and Palestinians
Well, news recently broke that there are fresh talks of peace in the Middle East.
U.S. Sec. of State, John Kerry, has been to the Middle East region six times since March. Israel-Palestinian talks broke down in Sept. 2010 with disagreements between the two parties over Israel’s construction of settlements in areas of the West Bank where Palestinians want to establish an independent state.
According to Kerry, the new peace deal, which is based upon the 2002 Arab League Peace Initiative, would provide Israel peace with 22 Arab nations and 35 Muslim nations or 57 nations in total.
Overall, the Arab League supports current Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Their support of Abbas is important and provides stability to peace talks between both parties.
Under the terms of this new peace initiative, these 57 nations will agree for the first time to recognize Israel as a legitimate nation… IF, and it’s a big IF, Israel is willing to give up the land that it won in the Six-Day War of 1967. And of course, we are talking about the very heart of Israel, Jerusalem.
Netanyahu has said that 2013 is “a decisive year for the economy, security and promoting peace.”
Israel has already made some impressive concessions to show their commitment to the new round of peace talks by agreeing to release 80 Palestinian prisoners, many of whom have been imprisoned for decades.
But, at this point, I believe the chances for a peace agreement are small because there are just so many potential sticking points that could trip up the negotiations, including the pre-1967 borders, new attacks in the region by Hamas, arguments over Israeli Settlements, and perhaps, most importantly, the status of Jerusalem as well as access to the Jewish holy site, known as the Temple Mount.
Regardless, final status negotiations are expected to begin in Washington in the coming weeks.
2013 is an interesting year in Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu is presiding over Israel’s 33rd Government, which was formed last March. In fact, it was the ides of March.
As I watched this Israeli government form, I realized that it was the first government in a decade in Israel that had no ultra-Orthodox parties.
The ultra-Orthodox parties, who lead with a strong sense of nationalism, are experiencing an ebb in their popularity, with the exception of the Jewish Home party, which saw its numbers within the Knesset rise from just three during the last legislative session to today’s twelve.
It has the Hatnua party, which is a liberal party dedicated to making peace with the Palestinians. In fact, Hatnua is quite similar to the Labor party, with a focus on social justice, but what makes it unique is its strong push for peace.
Tzipi Livni heads the Hatnua party and she is now Israel’s Minister of Justice under Netanyahu.
Livni is an interesting character. Like many modern Israelis, she was raised with a strong sense of nationalism. But also like many Israelis, Livni seems to desire peace and prosperity and is against many more decades of struggle against its sea of enemies.
Many Israelis are no doubt realizing that a peace that they control as opposed to a peace that is imposed upon them by the outside will likely provide much better terms and conditions.
As leader of the Hatnua party, Livni has developed a three step diplomatic plan for relaunching negotiations with the Palestinians.
1) To secure full coordination with the United States. Israel will want security promises from the U.S., similar to the ones George W. Bush made during his Presidency.
2) They seek the EU’s support, but not their permission. Israel knows that the EU is much more hostile than the U.S., but its backing will be vital to the sustainability of any peace agreement. Livni has said that she will also reach out to the Arab League for their support.
The European Commission is the biggest donor of financial assistance to the Palestinians.
This week, the EU labeled Hezbollah a terrorist group and issued a funding ban on Israeli settlements.
3) Finally, direct talks with the Palestinians. But no negotiations with Hamas unless they choose to recognize Israel and denounce terror.
So, why should you care about Tzipi Livni? Why am I rambling on about this woman?
Because Netanyahu has placed her in charge of peace negotiations. She is the chief negotiator in these latest peace talks with the Palestinians.
We will be monitoring these newly revived peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians so stay tuned…
How Should America Proceed in the Middle East?
Next week, Congress will seek to apply new pressures against Iran in an effort to stop all of its current oil exports, which are currently being sold in Euros. You can read the report from the Jerusalem Post here. The Congress will simultaneously apply new pressures to Chinese banks, which are facilitating Iran’s oil trade in Euros. This is petrodollar warfare, plain and simple.
In our final word, Jerry compares current U.S. Middle East policy to America’s early moral dilemma of slavery.
Speaking on the sensitive topic of slavery in America, Thomas Jefferson once said:
“But, as it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.” – Thomas Jefferson
America’s modern moral dilemma of whether to remain entangled in the Middle East over oil and economics, is similar to our the early practice of using black slaves to build the nation. Jerry provides his commentary.