Dear Sirs, I am a fairly new customer, and bought a subscription for 2 years, and already I am VERY pleased with the result. My first trade was in IDEV at $0.96, which I sold out at $1.70, you can do the math :-) 10 days later. This trade put me in a very nice financial situation for accumulating my new trades, this is a big THANK YOU, I will recommend you to anyone I know. (You are welcome to post this if you like).

• Past Entries
• November 2008
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
• December 2007
• November 2007
• October 2007
• September 2007
• August 2007
• July 2007
• June 2007
• May 2007
• April 2007
• March 2007
• February 2007
• January 2007
• December 2006
• November 2006
• October 2006
• September 2006
• August 2006
• July 2006
• June 2006

Blog [ RSS Feed ]

Penny Stocks, Politics, and WW3

March 28th, 2007

Ahmadinejad, Iran's president, may have pushed the world further towards conflict with something his nation recently did - and I am not talking about the detainment of the 15 Royal Navy soldiers.

For investors in penny stocks, this blog entry is meant to illustrate why you may want to look into:

• penny stocks in oil exploration and production
  
• military technology penny stocks
• homeland security penny stocks
  

The real concern for nations that are 'unfriendly' with Iran, is that the Iranian shipyards have begun pumping out submarines.

This puts the enemies of Iran in a very precarious position, as even the United States army has admitted it's limitations in tracking and defending from underwater vessels.

This also opens Iran up to close-proximity access to most nations on earth, via international water treaties.

There should have been no surprise that as soon as Iran began making their submarine production public, the western allies (U.S., U.K.) immediately established a pretext for escalation. That pretext was to run British navy personnel along the edge, and perhaps inside the Iranian territorial waters. These Navy officers were not backed up by any significant firepower, and were reportedly taken without much commotion.

Consider that the Royal Navy had not gone anywhere near Iranian territorial waters previous to the submarine production. Their first move was a standard 'victim' play, basically having a handful of troops detained, which is always a good way to garner international and home-based political support for military action.

Let me put it another way. If the U.K. and/or U.S. decided that it was unacceptable for Iran to have submarines in global waters, the first step before military strikes is to have the world's support. Here's how you get it:

1. send patrol boats along or into Iranian waters.

2. wait for Iranian response (they capture or kill your troops)

3. in public, go through conventional political channels

4. behind the scenes, load the waters with aircraft carriers and submarines, mobilize for strikes

This is the first time the U.S. has had 2 aircraft carriers in the gulf since 2003.

Going back a few months, the world watched when Israel pushed into Lebanon so hard, even after it seemed clear that security had been restored. I'll tell you why they were so aggressive - it was training. Lebanon's landscape is very similar to Iran's, the weaponry is Iranian made, the fighters are Iranian trained, the tactics are similar. It was a practice run, preparing Israel's IDF for a possible attack into Iranian territory.

Now, if you are truly preparing for war, it is important politically to look like you are not. That is why, after all this time, you suddenly see Olmert and Abbas agreeing to meet. Strange timing I would say.

If Iran or Israel wants a conflict, it may or may not come to pass. However, if the U.K. or U.S. wants one, which the Iranian submarine production ensures that they do, then start getting ready for a big one.

The wildcard in all of this, of course, is the biggest importer of Iranian oil. That would be China.

Choose a city, any city, anywhere in the world. China has the ability (I.C.B.M. style) to wipe that off the map within 90 minutes of now, if they see so fit. In other words, the allied powers can not overlook the Asian nations' wishes.

I will admit one thing - this is not a conflict for the U.N. That would be like asking you great grandmother to keep an eye on your drug-addicted teenage triplets.

Based on historical wars and the sparks that set them off, and based on probabilities, the answer to this issue will be force, unfortunately. This will not be good.

See my related Blog on Mideast Turmoil

See my related Blog on Oil Prices and Conflict