profile_sm - Show Posts - balongShow Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - balong

Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 316 Next
Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 10:38:51 AM »
ContentBroker_contentid-0494ba6cf93a434f892437dccbf2f657 - Show Posts - balong
FILE - In this Feb. 3, 2019 file photo, an Iranian clergyman looks at domestically built surface to surface missiles displayed by the Revolutionary Guard in a military show marking the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, at Imam Khomeini Grand Mosque in Tehran, Iran. On Monday, April 8, 2019, the Trump administration designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a “foreign terrorist organization” in an unprecedented move against a national armed force. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps went from being a domestic security force with origins in the 1979 Islamic Revolution to a transnational fighting force. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 04:39:32 AM »
;D ::) 8)

Photos Unlimited / 103 yr. old woman runner
« on: June 24, 2019, 04:38:23 AM »
5d0d127ee3ecba0abf2a0493-1334-1000 - Show Posts - balong
Julia Hawkins is believed to be the oldest woman to compete on an American track.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 04:00:26 AM »
615298bc-AP446885797862 - Show Posts - balong
A Ghader missile is launched from the area near the Iranian port of Jask port on the shore of the Gulf of Oman during an Iranian navy drill, Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2013. Iran says it has tested advanced anti-ship missiles in the final day of a naval drill near the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the passageway for one-fifth of the world's oil supply. State TV says "Ghader", or "Capable", a missile with a range of 200 kilometers (120 miles), was among the weapons used Tuesday. It says the weapon can destroy warships. (AP Photo/Jamejam Online, Azin Haghighi) (AP2013)

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:47:46 AM »
kotob ra man sa pangisog si trump. hala bombahi na poslan man.

bitaw mag ampo tang tanan oi. kay lisod ni ug masugdan. mahimo na unjang WORLD WAR 3 kay labanay na man. molaban ang russia ug china sa iran. unya kinsa may mo laban sa US. ang pilipinas? ma pordoy ta kay daku ug gasto ning gera.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:43:48 AM »
hala kombate na. cool lang ang iran. kataw-an lang si trump. porbida ning ahong manok. menos ug labok hihihihi

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:41:45 AM »
?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic - Show Posts - balong


?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic - Show Posts - balong

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:36:17 AM »
I believe this is why Tehran in May opted for a riskier strategy of incrementally increasing pressure on America while whittling down its demands for resumption of nuclear talks. President Hassan Rouhani announced Iran would gradually reconsider its obligations under the JCPOA starting with retaining enriched uranium at home as opposed to sending it abroad. Then, the Trump administration accused Iran of attacking oil tankers around the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has denied the attacks, but Iran has often threatened Gulf shipping whenever it has faced sanctions and threats from America—a signal to the international community that the Islamic Republic is capable of obstructing oil commerce through one of the most strategically vital waterways. And then for good measure, Iran shot down an American drone. Tehran, I think, hoped that its incremental escalation would not lead to war, but generate a diplomatic process. It was a risky move, but one that may yet pay off.

Look closely, and you’ll see that in the past weeks, Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif have also offered their own subtle olive branch. Rouhani stopped insisting that America rejoin the JCPOA as a precondition to talks while stressing, “We are for logic and talks if [the other side] sits respectfully at the negotiating table and follows international regulations, not if it issues an order to negotiate.” Zarif has cautioned Trump, “You campaigned against costly stupid interventions,” but a “conniving cabal of warmongers and butchers, the infamous B-Team, is plotting for way more than what you bargained for.” By separating Trump from his so-called belligerent advisers, Zarif intimated that Trump can be a statesmen if only he dispenses with the reckless aides who are, in Zarif‘s words, tricking him into war.

Some in the foreign policy community at times suggest that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is opposed to any talks and will not permit his diplomats to reengage with the United States. But this is a misreading of Khamenei, who has routinely denounced talks in public while supporting them in private. After all, the talks with the Obama administration would not have taken place without his consent. In a recent speech, Khamenei claimed he had opposed the JCPOA and had warned Rouhani and Zarif not to trust the Americans. But he added that the executive branch, led by Rouhani, is responsible for diplomacy and that he himself rarely intervenes in such matters unless they threaten the revolution itself.

This tells us that if Rouhani in his role as the head of the executive branch wants to embark on talks with America, Khamenei will publicly express his skepticism while essentially allowing the negotiations to proceed. This is a convenient way for the supreme leader to disown controversial talks with the U.S. so that Rouhani will have to deal with any political blowback.

It’s clear to me that the talks between United States and Iran are coming. And the challenge for the Trump administration is to hold fast to the Pompeo parameters. Ultimately, the legacy of Trump’s Iran policy will be whether the adminisration can sustain its hawkish policy and move forward with successful negotiations or whether it will join its predecessor in abandoning its own sensible red lines for sake of an agreement at any cost.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:35:53 AM »
The hysteria of war is once more gripping Washington. President Donald Trump reportedly ordered and later canceled airstrikes against Iran for its latest provocations. The litany of Iranian mischief is certainly a long one: Tehran has declared its intention to violate the Iran nuclear deal—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—by exceeding limits on enrichment stockpiles; it has, according to the Trump administration, assaulted oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, thus interfering with commercial traffic in an international waterway; and on Thursday it shot down a U.S. drone.

Having studied the Iranian regime for decades, I believe the purpose of all this, however, is not to start a war with America. More likely, it’s to enter talks with Washington claiming to be the empowered party that has withstood America’s strategy of maximum pressure. Before negotiating with the United States, Iran needs a narrative of success. And the events of the past few days, in which the Trump administration threatened and then backed off a military confrontation, have finally provided Tehran with a justification to enter talks with, in Iran’s telling, a chastened Washington.

You could see this narrative develop on Friday, when—hours after Trump reportedly called off airstrikes—the podiums of the Islamic Republic proclaimed victory. Tehran’s influential Friday Prayer leader Ali Akbari insisted, “The enemies also know that if they start a war, they will not end it.” General Amir Hajizadeh of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps boasted that it could have easily shot down a U.S. spy plan, “but we did not do it.” (Trump on Saturday nodded to the same event: “There was a plane with 38 people yesterday, did you see that? … They had it in their sights and they didn’t shoot it down. I think they were very wise not to do that. And we appreciate that they didn’t do that. I think that was a very wise decision.”)

The reality is more complicated than Iran’s assertions of success. First, the White House abrogated the JCPOA without being isolated internationally. Then, it managed to gain multilateral support for its economic sanctions, as European businesses complied with U.S. demands over the objections of Europe’s diplomats and politicians. By the International Monetary Fund’s estimate, due to the sanctions, Iran’s GDP will contract by 6 percent while inflation hovers around 50 percent. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo then announced 12 demands for a new nuclear treaty with Iran, sensibly suggesting that the U.S. has to address not just Iran’s nuclear weapons aspirations but also its penchant toward terrorism and regional subversion. And finally, the administration has made much progress in reducing Iran’s exports to zero.

In other words, Iran has much more to gain by negotiating with the U.S. than by continuing the confrontation. Iranian diplomats, who believe they came out of talks with the Obama administration with the longer end of the stick, think that if they enter any negotiating room they can easily beset their interlocutors. Stalemated talks will inevitably generate pressure on the Trump team by European allies and Democrats who will insist that the Pompeo parameters are unrealistic and must be abandoned. Many within the professional bureaucracy led by State Department diplomats, intelligence analysts and Pentagon generals are likely to echo these themes. The Iranians have seen these pressures and fears of another war in the Middle East drive both the Obama and the George W. Bush administrations to the negotiating table, and they hope the same factors will finally cause Trump and Pompeo to narrow their gaze to some modest changes in the JCPOA, rather than a total overhaul. But Iran’s leadership, which has insisted to its populace for two years that it will not enter talks with a truculent Trump, requires a narrative of success justifying its turnabout. The regime cannot enter negotiations as a supplicant battered by American sanctions.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:30:58 AM »
The commander in chief said the response now should be increased sanctions on Iran’s economy.

“We’re increasing the sanctions now,” adding the country’s economy has already been “shattered.”

Trump said he believes Iranian officials want to negotiate and that any deal would have to be about nuclear weapons. He also claimed that Iran had violated the nuclear agreement struck by the Obama administration and other world powers.

“They cannot have a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They cannot have a nuclear weapon. They’d use it. And they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump also disputed that he sent a message to Iranian leaders through a third country, saying he did not want conflict, dubbing it “fake news.”

However, he also declined to send a message during the interview to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

“Wouldn’t be much different than that message,” Trump said.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:29:49 AM »
President Donald Trump warned the United States may launch a devastating military attack on Iran unless it comes to the negotiating table and drops its bid to develop nuclear weapons.

“I'm not looking for war, and if there is, it'll be obliteration like you’ve never seen before. But I’m not looking to do that. But you can’t have a nuclear weapon. You want to talk? Good. Otherwise you can have a bad economy for the next three years,” Trump said during an interview with NBC’s “Meet The Press” airing Sunday.

The president said he’d be willing to sit down with Iranian officials without preconditions.

The comments, made during an interview taped Friday, came the same day Trump confirmed on Twitter that he called off a retaliatory strike on Iran at the last minute Thursday night. He said he decided that the potential cost of human lives was “not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone.”

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said Thursday it had shot down an American drone, claiming it had entered Iranian airspace, a claim disputed by the U.S., which has maintained the drone was over international waters. Both countries have since produced what they say is evidence supporting their respective positions.

Trump said the U.S. had a “modest but pretty, pretty heavy attack schedule,” but planes were not in the air when he called off the attack.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 24, 2019, 03:28:20 AM »
Trump warns Iran of ’obliteration like you’ve never seen before’

Inspiration & Hope / Re: Ecclesiastes
« on: June 23, 2019, 12:06:16 AM »
65418133-29de-4677-93dc-a771dfdd5f73 - Show Posts - balong
Through entertainment and cheap satisfaction, we often seek to avoid criticism,
introspection, and self-improvement, but the joys of entertainment are temporary at best.

Inspiration & Hope / Re: Ecclesiastes
« on: June 23, 2019, 12:04:09 AM »
357b4a46-786c-4c06-a96d-85758779e538 - Show Posts - balong
Bad things sometimes happen to good people, good things sometimes happen to bad people.
Don’t overextend yourself trying to be good, or you’ll be disappointed that you are not rewarded.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 11:59:57 PM »
wala pa tay balita karon. maayo na lang nangakak si trump, wala dayona ang gi plan nga retaliatory strikes against iran. lisod na kay mahimo unyang pabilo sa WW3.

gubot kanunay ning atong kalibotan. di mawala ning gera gera. maajo unta ug walay gera kay nahilona na ko dinhi sa states. naay gamatoy nga balay, mga kotse nga kagalkal. ano pang hanapin mo.

kadtong nag subay aning topic, tune in lang mo sa youtube for updates. up to date ang balita bahin sa US vs. Iran

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 11:53:08 PM »
naka hinomdom na hinoon ko kaniadto sa SHEman pa ko pagka kita naho ining picture

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 11:51:50 PM »
?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media - Show Posts - balong
An oil tanker is on fire in the sea of Oman, Thursday, June 13, 2019. Two oil tankers near the strategic Strait of Hormuz were reportedly attacked on Thursday, an assault that left one ablaze and adrift as sailors were evacuated from both vessels and the U.S. Navy rushed to assist amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran.(ISNA/AP)

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 09:27:30 AM »
Yet experts also generally agreed that investors' concerns about a drop-off in demand were keeping prices too low, especially based on what's often called the "fundamentals" – the basics of supply and demand. The question was what it would take to shake prices from their stupor.

"Oil prices barely budged on the news. This looks far too complacent," Steven Kopits, managing director of Princeton Energy Advisors, wrote in an email following last week's attack on the oil tankers. Predicting an increase in prices,he continued, "the risk on oil prices seems clearly to the upside over the next 10-day period."

Events this week seemed to provide that answer – at least for now. Between U.S.-Iran tensions, a potential end to the U.S.-China trade war and promising news from the Fed, Brent prices going into Friday afternoon were holding above $65. West Texas Intermediate was remaining around $57, but some analysts predicted it could reach $60 in the days ahead.

What happens with prices going forward depends on a variety of factors: If Trump and Xi signal significant progress in their scheduled talks next week, prices might jump. Conversely, Trump's disclosure Friday that he abruptly called off a planned military strike on Iran seemed to indicate that diplomatic and economic responses may still be on the table – perhaps avoiding a likely increase in oil prices caused by further military actions.

"From here, prices could go down $5 or they could go up $5, but it depends whether the U.S. reaches out to Iran or not. If it does, then oil prices will fall back to $62. If it doesn't, then we'll see another Iranian incident, after which there will be another very specific U.S. military response," Kopits says. "Then we're talking about Brent will be above $70 and WTI will be above $60."

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 09:26:11 AM »
The leap in prices amounts to a remarkable turnabout for a market that had seemed all but impervious to price hikes.

"We certainly did see a jump when this occurred, particularly when it wasn't clear what kind of response we were looking at," says Ellen Wald, president of Transversal Consulting and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center. "It's a fairly good increase from where we were earlier."

While the escalation of tensions with Iran was the most obvious driver of the spike in oil prices, it occurred in the wake of other events this week that also may have had an influence.

The downing of the drone occurred less than 48 hours after President Donald Trump revealed Tuesday that he would be meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at next week's G-20 summit in Japan – fueling hopes that an end or even just an easing of the two countries' tit-for-tat sanctions may be in sight. The Federal Reserve meanwhile indicated that it wouldn't raise interest rates and left the door open for a future cut, offering further reassurance to markets that there may not be a feared slowdown in demand.

In the wake of both developments, the S&P 500 – which Brent crude prices have closely tracked – and the Dow Jones industrial average had each climbed by more than 2.5% as of Friday.

"I wouldn't be surprised if some of this elevation in oil prices is due to a more favorable economic outlook," Wald says.

Oil prices are notoriously difficult to predict. Demand from the summer driving season typically drives an increase in prices – going into the Fourth of July weekend last year, Brent was hovering around $80 per barrel.

Yet before Thursday, global worries about an abrupt dropoff in demand – sparked by the U.S.-China trade war and portents of a looming recession – had kept prices between an anemic $59 and $61 per barrel since the start of June. They remained there despite falling inventories of oil worldwide, regional unrest in major oil producing countries, an agreement by OPEC members and Russia to extend production cuts, and even attacks last week on a Japanese and a Norwegian oil tanker near the Strait of Hormuz – events that once would have ignited fears about supply and sent prices soaring. Crude was fetching about $15-20 less than the same period last year, and roughly $10-15 less than analysts anticipated.

Booming U.S. oil production is perhaps most responsible for insulating markets from wild swings in prices, at least for now: Hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling in the past decade have propelled the country to become the world's top oil producer, and in recent months it's seen production rise even as dozens of rigs have gone offline.

"Underlying all of this is the fact that U.S. production continues to grow solidly this year, and it's also expected to grow next year, which is why if demand growth weakens, then the market could be looking at an oversupply," says Ann-Louise Hittle, vice president for oils research at the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie.

Talk of the Town / Re: WW3 US vs Iran
« on: June 22, 2019, 09:24:26 AM »
BENCHMARK CRUDE OIL prices this week experienced their biggest jump in months after Iran shot down a U.S. surveillance drone near the Strait of Hormuz, prompting concerns about further regional unrest and threats to oil security in the Middle East.

Brent crude oil, the benchmark for global prices and U.S. gasoline, had climbed by more than 8% since Monday and by over 5% in just the past 36 hours, as of Friday afternoon, after President Donald Trump announced that he had called off a retaliatory military strike against Iran. West Texas Intermediate, which tracks prices for the light, sweet crude produced in the U.S., had shot up by more than 11%.

Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ... 316 Next
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk
Powered by SMFPacks SEO Pro Mod | Sitemap
Mobile View
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2019, SimplePortal