Thread: Iraq/Dinar News. 09/05 to 01/14/07

Originally Posted by billknows

So maybe you can just feel the attitude coming from Moneybags in every post. Never a hint of doubt - never a moment of genuine uncertainty - never a trace of concern that maybe he's just walked right over your best contributions without so much as a glance - so maybe he isn't the sort of person you could just sit down and have a friendly conversation and a beer with - we've all met these types before, right?

Well, let me just say this - i have absolutely no doubt that when we get real close to a reval, Munnybags will be right there - in all his brainiac glory - encouraging all of us, cheering us along, using his logical formulations to shed a bright light on the path that will lead to us all becoming millionaires!

Go Munnybags!

ditto! just because munnybags isint in the (its gonna reval big tommorrow club) dosent mean his theories dont have any merit, dont we have room here for different ideas??I for one can see he has put alot of thought into his research and i appreciate a different view..cause up till now he's just as right as anyone else..(i'm hoping he's wrong though lol) lol go dinar!!!

Originally Posted by Inscrutable

China's dropping the dollar for the dinar? Who said this?

See, this is how rumors can start. Would be nice. Yen they can.

Here is an interesting article.....Now if any of this is true as far as China offloading the US dollar what effect will this have on the Iraqi dinar? Anybody want to guess????



U.S. lawmakers urge action after China meeting

U.S. lawmakers urge action after China meeting - washingtonpost.com


"Democrats will again ask the U.S. Trade Representative's office to formally challenge China's currency practices at the World Trade Organization even though USTR has rejected that request a number times in the past, Levin said.

Lawmakers will also reintroduce legislation requiring the Commerce Department to consider China's "currency manipulation" as a subsidy under U.S. trade laws so companies can apply for countervailing duties to offset it, Levin said.

Levin also urged the Treasury Department to formally label China as a currency manipulator in a semiannual report that is now two months overdue."





Now I do not necessarily agree with this view of the dollar collapse....but interesting read




And more news on the US currency debacle.... found this on a forum.....


BEIJING, CHINA -- Sources with a U.S. Delegation in Beijing have stated the Chinese government has informed visiting Bush Administration officials they intend to dump One TRILLION U.S. Dollars from China's Currency Reserves and convert those funds into Euros, gold and silver!

China was allegedly asked to withhold the announcement until Bullion Markets closed for the weekend to prevent an instant spike in gold and silver prices. This delay will give the world the weekend to consider appropriate actions rather than have a knee-jerk reaction which could see the U.S. Dollar totally collapse in value Monday.

According to this Senior source, China told the U.S. delegation they no longer have faith in U.S. Currency for several reasons:

1) The Federal Reserve Bank ceased publishing "M3" data in March, making it nearly impossible for anyone to know how much cash is being printed. China said this act made it impossible to tell how much a Dollar is worth.

2) The U.S. Dollar has lost upwards of thirty percent (30%) of its value against other foreign currencies in the recent past, meaning China has lost almost $300 Billion simply by holding U.S. Dollars in its reserves.

3) The U.S. has no plans whatsoever to reduce deficit spending or ability pay down any of its existing debt without printing money to pay it off.

For these reasons China has decided to implement an aggressive sell-off of U.S. Dollars before the rest of the world does so. China reportedly told the US delegation; "we are the largest holder of U.S. Currency and if the rest of the world unloads theirs before we unload ours, we will lose our shirts."

Early this week, in an unusual move, the Bush administration sent virtually the entire economic "A-team" to visit China for a "strategic economic dialogue" in Beijing Dec. 14 and 15.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke lead the delegation, along with five other cabinet-level officials, including Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. Also in the delegation is Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.

The Bush administration wanted to get China's cooperation in preventing a dollar collapse but we have been told the effort failed.

According to the source, Fed Chairman Bernanke left the meeting "pale and in a cold sweat" as the implications of China's decision seemed to sink in.

The implications are enormous: The U.S. Dollar is likely to collapse in value against all other major currencies as early as Monday, December 18.

This would cause a worldwide sell-off of dollars, create almost immediate "hyper-inflation" in the US and also impact world markets at a level "worse than the Great Depression of 1929."

Originally Posted by Innkeeper1

ditto! just because munnybags isint in the (its gonna reval big tommorrow club) dosent mean his theories dont have any merit, dont we have room here for different ideas??I for one can see he has put alot of thought into his research and i appreciate a different view..cause up till now he's just as right as anyone else..(i'm hoping he's wrong though lol) lol go dinar!!!

I agree that Munny has obviosly put a lot of effort into this. The problem is that he has been spouting this for years and doesn't seem to think anyone else has a lick of sense. His "model" changes constantly and if it revals tomorrow he will swear that his "model" had predicted this the entire time. Not bashing and I respect that he has his theory. He just comes across as quite pompous to me. That being said I wanna say thanks to all you brainiacs for the time and effort that you invest in this forum, even you Munny. .

Really looking forward to the auction here later tonight....Go Baby Go!!

Originally Posted by Pippyman

Here is an interesting article.....Now if any of this is true as far as China offloading the US dollar what effect will this have on the Iraqi dinar? Anybody want to guess????



U.S. lawmakers urge action after China meeting

U.S. lawmakers urge action after China meeting - washingtonpost.com


"Democrats will again ask the U.S. Trade Representative's office to formally challenge China's currency practices at the World Trade Organization even though USTR has rejected that request a number times in the past, Levin said.

Lawmakers will also reintroduce legislation requiring the Commerce Department to consider China's "currency manipulation" as a subsidy under U.S. trade laws so companies can apply for countervailing duties to offset it, Levin said.

Levin also urged the Treasury Department to formally label China as a currency manipulator in a semiannual report that is now two months overdue."





Now I do not necessarily agree with this view of the dollar collapse....but interesting read




And more news on the US currency debacle.... found this on a forum.....


BEIJING, CHINA -- Sources with a U.S. Delegation in Beijing have stated the Chinese government has informed visiting Bush Administration officials they intend to dump One TRILLION U.S. Dollars from China's Currency Reserves and convert those funds into Euros, gold and silver!

China was allegedly asked to withhold the announcement until Bullion Markets closed for the weekend to prevent an instant spike in gold and silver prices. This delay will give the world the weekend to consider appropriate actions rather than have a knee-jerk reaction which could see the U.S. Dollar totally collapse in value Monday.

According to this Senior source, China told the U.S. delegation they no longer have faith in U.S. Currency for several reasons:

1) The Federal Reserve Bank ceased publishing "M3" data in March, making it nearly impossible for anyone to know how much cash is being printed. China said this act made it impossible to tell how much a Dollar is worth.

2) The U.S. Dollar has lost upwards of thirty percent (30%) of its value against other foreign currencies in the recent past, meaning China has lost almost $300 Billion simply by holding U.S. Dollars in its reserves.

3) The U.S. has no plans whatsoever to reduce deficit spending or ability pay down any of its existing debt without printing money to pay it off.

For these reasons China has decided to implement an aggressive sell-off of U.S. Dollars before the rest of the world does so. China reportedly told the US delegation; "we are the largest holder of U.S. Currency and if the rest of the world unloads theirs before we unload ours, we will lose our shirts."

Early this week, in an unusual move, the Bush administration sent virtually the entire economic "A-team" to visit China for a "strategic economic dialogue" in Beijing Dec. 14 and 15.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke lead the delegation, along with five other cabinet-level officials, including Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. Also in the delegation is Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.

The Bush administration wanted to get China's cooperation in preventing a dollar collapse. The Hal Turner Show has been told the effort failed.

According to the source, Fed Chairman Bernanke left the meeting "pale and in a cold sweat" as the implications of China's decision seemed to sink in.

The implications are enormous: The U.S. Dollar is likely to collapse in value against all other major currencies as early as Monday, December 18.

This would cause a worldwide sell-off of dollars, create almost immediate "hyper-inflation" in the US and also impact world markets at a level "worse than the Great Depression of 1929."

well isnt this a charming and a bright article ....NOT !

Originally Posted by mustang sally

Please excuse if this was already posted. thank you

Date: Saturday, December 16, 2006


Iraq to meet Iran, Kuwait on common oilfields


Dow Jones 15/12/2006

Iraqi officials are to meet representatives from Iran later this month and Kuwait after that to discuss sharing oil production contracts in cross-border fields, Iraq's oil minister said Thursday.

Speaking at a press briefing on the side of a Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries meeting here, Hussein al-Shahristani said: "We will meet in a sitting committee...with Iran in December" to examine data on the fields.


Al-Shahristani added the parties will then "select a company in a bidding round to assess the reserves."

Separately, Al-Shahristani said some $1 billion of a $1.6 billion loan granted by the Japan Bank for International Cooperation would be invested in a new fluid catalytic cracking unit at Basra's refinery.

An FCC unit produces lighter products such as gasoline from heavier crude fractions.

He said some of the loan would also be used for a new pipeline and floating terminal in the Persian Gulf and the processing of gas, which is currently flared off.

In addition, the minister said he expects a new hydrocarbon law, which would enable the signature of the first national oil contracts since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, to be enacted in January.

He said all contracts signed under Saddam and since would be reviewed.

The new contracts would be overseen by an Iraq Petroleum Council that will define the rules of licensing qualifications as well as which companies could prequalify.

He said most details of the law had been agreed with the Kurds in the oil-rich north, who controversially have set up a separate licensing process, though there remained sticking points on the council's decision procedures.

sounds superficial the hangup which pretty much wraps this baby up!!
WOoTTTTT!!!
(and a big ole kiss for ride around sally!!!!)

Today: December 16, 2006 at 10:40:11 PST

Bush Rejects Most Dramatic Iraq Options
By ANNE GEARAN
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -

President Bush has taken the most dramatic options off the table as he tries to change direction in Iraq, leaving him with a list of modest military and diplomatic moves to announce in the new year.

Bush probably will ignore the boldest suggestions from a bipartisan commission that studied U.S. options in Iraq, adopting some of the group's lesser prescriptions alongside those drafted by his civilian and military advisers.

The White House National Security Council has compiled recommendations from several agencies as the administration's internal reassessment of Iraq policy nears an end. Bush plans to address the nation in early January, two months after heavy Republican losses in congressional elections.

A look at some of the president's options:

---

On the military front, there are various ways to "go big," by adding 10,000 to 20,000 troops to the approximately 135,000 U.S. forces in Iraq. Bush has gotten competing advice about how many troops to add, whether to define their mission as temporary or long term and whether to add troops at all.

Some military officers doubt that the results from any increase would be worth the damage to the Army's readiness. Others advocate adding forces and launching an offensive against Shiite militia leader Muqtada al-Sadr while increasing industrial and economic aid to civilians.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has said the U.S. should send five to 10 more brigades of combat soldiers, translating to 15,000 to 30,000 additional troops. The current U.S. force includes about 15 combat brigades made up of 50,000 to 60,000 soldiers. Bush has been told that adding up to 20,000 troops would be fairly easy to arrange and a short-term surge of up to 50,000 could be done with difficulty.

The additional troops would be assigned primarily in Baghdad, where sectarian killing has surged out of control in the past 10 months. Some could go to Anbar province, where U.S. forces have been unable to dislodge the Sunni-led anti-government insurgency.

Another element of the "go big" idea is increasing the total size of the military. The chiefs of the Army and Marine Corps want to expand the size of their services, although departing Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld opposed it. He cited an estimated cost of $1.2 billion a year for each 10,000 extra troops. The Army also wants the ability to mobilize Guard and Reserve troops more frequently than is now allowed; some in Congress are likely to resist such a change.

Bush probably will reject the Iraq Study Group's recommendation to pull back most combat forces by early 2008. Proposals before him include integrating or embedding more U.S. advisers in Iraqi Army units to provide guidance on tactics and leadership. The long-term goal would be a shift away from a primarily combat role, which some advisers say consigns U.S. forces to a defensive posture as they await the next attack by insurgents.

No matter how it is calibrated, this "go long" shift would reinforce the administration's recognition that U.S. troops will be in Iraq for years to come. Bush has rejected any suggestion for a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces, as some lawmakers recommend, and probably will not set a firm exit timetable. He is likely to endorse the basic idea recommended by the commission and others to condition at least some U.S. military and economic engagement to the performance of Iraq's government. Economic steps could include a significant jobs program. Unemployment in Iraq is estimated at between 20 percent and 60 percent.

---

Diplomatic options include expanding the U.S. outreach to various centers of power in Iraq and engaging Iraq's neighbors to help in a more vigorous and formal way - the "go wide" strategy. Bush probably will endorse elements of this approach while ruling out a new overture to U.S. adversaries Iran and Syria.

The State Department has recommended the U.S. keep supporting the shaky government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki but "diversify our portfolio," as one official put it. Seeking common ground with leaders in and out of government would help protect U.S. interests if, for example, al-Maliki were to lose power.

The starkest choice for diplomacy is one Bush is almost certain to reject: stop trying to recruit greater Sunni participation in a unified government and cast U.S. fortunes with the Shiite and Kurdish majority. Sunnis make up about 20 percent of the population but are blamed for fanning insurgent violence that accounts for most U.S. casualties.

A competing plan would woo the Sunni elite by guaranteeing them a share of oil revenue and reversing the previous policy of "de-Baathification," which purged ex-members of Saddam Hussein's Sunni-led Baathist rule from the top layers of government institutions.

Bush is weighing plans for a more structured network of Arab nations with a goal of clamping down on the violence in Iraq. This regional forum could become an expanded version of an existing State Department-backed initiative, offering a framework for countries to discuss Iraq and meet with Iraqi leaders.

Such a partnership presumably would have to include Iran and Syria. Those countries, which share borders with Iraq, hold great influence inside Iraq. U.S. diplomats would participate alongside Iranian and Syrian representatives but Bush probably will not endorse direct negotiations with them, as the Iraq Study Group recommended.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said both nations would probably use direct talks to seek unacceptable "compensation" from the United States. If Iran and Syria see it as in their interest to help Iraq they will do so on their own, she suggested to reporters last week.

Bush also is likely to endorse a renewed effort to resolve other Middle East conflicts as a means to an end in Iraq.

--

i know this article has been done to death but here is no mention to the dinar...just the us amount...guess they noticed the error and switched what they were saying.

Sunday, December 17, 2006 50 percent of Iraqi's now unemployed
(MENAFN) Curtailing unemployment, which is now approaching 50 percent in the Iraqi workforce of some regions, is essential to restoring stability, the Iraq Directory reports. The Minister of Labor and Social Affairs has proposed a project to offer short-term financing for new companies. With thousands of small-scale business possibilities, he has requisitioned the government to provide funds for this project in the coming year. The plan involves offering assistance to families who are now dependent on government subsidies. Providing small, short term financing of $6,600 to initiate new businesses will also help citizens to rebuild their country. Reducing unemployment is essential in the battle against terrorism. Providing venture capital for new companies will create new jobs, which can be an important tool in combating terror.

Trade Bank of Iraq - Your Trade and Investment Partner in Iraq

Rice rejects talks with Iran, Syria on Iraq
12/15/2006


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has rejected a bipartisan panel's recommendation that the Bush administration engage Syria and Iran in efforts to stabilize Iraq, The Washington Post reported on Friday.

The "compensation" required for any such deal might be too high, Rice told the paper in an interview.

Rice said she did not want to trade away Lebanese sovereignty to Syria or allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon as a price for peace in Iraq, the Post reported.

She also argued that neither Syria nor Iran should need incentives to help achieve stability in Iraq, the Post reported.

"If they have an interest in a stable Iraq, they will do it anyway," Rice said.

The bipartisan Iraq Study Group included talks with Iran and Syria among its key recommendations it presented to the White House last week for dealing with the worsening chaos in Iraq. (Interactive: Key recommendations by the Iraq Study Group)

The group, led by former U.S. Secretary of State James Baker and former Democratic Rep. Lee Hamilton, urged that its report be adopted as a whole.

President George W. Bush is reviewing policy in Iraq and plans to outline a shift in course early next year.

Rice told The Washington Post that Bush could be "quite expansive" in the policy review and that the new plan would be a "departure." However, she told the newspaper that Bush would not radically change any of his long-term goals or commitment to Iraq.

Rice said the administration's goal over the next two years was to help Iraqis marginalize extremists and create a moderate middle that can hold the country together, the Post reported.

The newspaper said she acknowledged that violence may not have ended before the administration leaves office in about two years' time, but said she hopes that Iraqis would "get to a place that is sustainable" by the end of 2008.

Rice also said the administration would not retreat from its push to promote democracy in the Middle East and reiterated her commitment to pursuing peace between Palestinians and Israelis, the Post said.

"Get ready. We are going to the Middle East a lot," Rice said.

Copyright 2006 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.


Rice rejects talks with Iran, Syria on Iraq - Source

Iraqi Dinar News Article List

Iraqi Dinar News - Rice rejects talks with Iran, Syria on Iraq, SafeDinar.com

Search for Iraq strategy produces more questions than answers
12/15/2006


by Jim MannionFri Dec 15, 8:30 AM ET

President George W. Bush's high profile search for a winning strategy in Iraq is generating more confusion than clarity as he sorts through contradictory advice on a new way forward.

Bush appeared to throw up his hands after a Pentagon meeting Wednesday with the military chiefs and the future and current defense secretaries, putting off a decision on what to do about Iraq until early next year.

"I'm not going to be rushed into making a difficult decision, a necessary decision, to say to our troops, 'We're going to give you the tools necessary to succeed and a strategy to help you succeed,'" he told reporters.

The debate over Iraq options is coming at a time when the chiefs of both the army and marine corps are warning that they do not have enough troops to sustain the current level of effort in Iraq and at the same time meet other contingencies.

General Peter Schoomaker, the army chief of staff, said Thursday the pace of deployments will break the active army unless it expands and has greater access to its reserve forces, a politically sensitive issue.

The army's stretched position severely limits Bush's options in Iraq, which range from a short-term surge of US troops to quickly shifting the mission in Iraq from combat to primarily training Iraqis.

Bush said one reason he was delaying a decision was to give Robert Gates, who is to be sworn in a defense secretary on Monday, time to evaluate the situation.

Gates, a former member of a bipartisan panel that conducted a nine month review of Iraq strategy, said in his confirmation hearings there were "no new ideas on Iraq" but he wanted to talk to US commanders before making up his mind.

The Los Angeles Times reported on Wednesday that support was coalescing within the Pentagon for "doubling up" in Iraq with a substantial buildup of US troops coupled with an offensive against Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr.

The Washington Post, however, on Thursday cited unidentified officials as saying the military chiefs were recommending changing the mission from fighting insurgents and militias to supporting Iraqi troops and hunting terrorists.

The Post said half the 15 combat brigades in Iraq could be assigned to train and advise Iraqi units while the others would be pulled back from the cities and assigned to rapid reaction, border protection and counter-terrorism missions.

The Iraqi government, meanwhile, has its own plan to put Iraqi security forces in charge in Baghdad -- the most important battleground in the country, according to US commanders.

Under the Iraqis' plan, some US forces would be embedded as advisers to Iraqi units, but the rest would be moved to the outskirts of the capital to keep insurgents and suicide bombers out.

Pentagon spokespersons refused to comment for the record on what the military chiefs discussed with the president.

A defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the chiefs and the president reviewed a wide range of options, rather than recommend a course of action.

A plan to shift the emphasis of the US mission to advising Iraqi forces with larger teams of embedded trainers already has been announced by US commanders in Iraq.

But the defense official said how the transition will work has yet to be decided.

"A lot of pieces have to fall into place for this Rubix cube to come together," the official said.

Where the troops will come from to man the larger training teams is a key question still under discussion, according to the official.

Lieutenant General Peter Chiarelli, the top field commander in Iraq, has said most could come from units already in Iraq. But that would involve extending tours of some units or accelerating the deployment of other units slated to go to Iraq.

Arguments also have been made for bringing in troops specifically for the training mission, defense officials say.

That would keep current combat brigades intact, but would require an increase in the overall size of the force, which currently numbers 134,000 but has fluctuated to as many as 150,000 in recent weeks.

The size of the embedded teams also has to be decided. Currently, 11-member teams are assigned to each Iraqi battalion. Army officials have said they could be enlarged to 25 or 30.

The Iraq Study Group, a bipartisan panel that delivered its recommendations on a new strategy in Iraq last week, called for a five-fold increase in the number of military trainers and advisers from 4,000 to 20,000


Search for Iraq strategy produces more questions than answers - Source

Iraqi Dinar News Article List

Iraqi Dinar News - Search for Iraq strategy produces more questions than answers , SafeDinar.com

not so sure that this was a error...who knows only time will tell