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

Originally Posted by shotgunsusie

this statement has been made more than once by the iraqi govt. can those who keep suggesting such a small revaluation of the dinar expand on how you perceive the neighboring countries being par with iraq will go? are the neighboring countries going to devalue to meet iraq?

Without trying to explain what is, is like one of our former US presidents, I think that when viewing the Iraqi neighborhood there are more neighbors than just Jordan. Yes it is true that Jordan has an exchange rate of 1.40+, Kuwait is 3.20+, Bahrain is ? (I believe it is over 1.00 memory just winked out on me). These countries are neighbors and they are all above 1.00 usd exchange rate. However other neighbors to include Syria, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Isreal etc all have exchange rates somewhere around .20 - .30 usd.

Our desire would obviously be for the r/v to be the higher rate of Jordan which also happens to be one of Iraq's main trading partners. But, there are more countries in the neighborhood then just Jordan. By having to start somewhere to be on par with its neighbors why do we automatically default to one of the higher ones, ie Jordan? The thought is you have to crawl before you walk, walk before you run etc.

There is a possibility that they would start parity with the less expensive neighbors and then move up from there would you agree? If not could you direct me to the news article that would seem to indicate they are going for the Jordian rate right off the bat? And in case you are wondering, I can't direct you to a news article that emphatically states they are going to start off with the lesser rate ie Saudia Arabia. Mine is just an opinion based on what I have read here in the forum.

The way I look at it is if I am wrong and it r/vs at 1.47+, then I may need to be resessitated from passing out with shock and joy at our incredible good fortune. If I am right and it r/vs at .30, then I will still be joyfull and not disapointed. The other way however, I for one if I was counting on 1.47+ from the onset, and found it to be .30 instead, I might be disapointed (but still happy).

I can't speak for others but for myself I would rather set the bar lower in the beginning and reach it or exceed it then to set it too high, miss it and become disapointed. Either way, so long as it r/vs in a big way (.30 or higher) I will be very happy.

But just to set the record straight, if it does start at .30 I am hopefull that it won't stay there for long and will continue to increase in value as time goes on reaching past $3, $4, or who knows how high it can really go? We all know the value is there, it just depends on the Iraqis and the rest of the world ( NWO ) how high they will let it go. IMO

worf

Originally Posted by paynes1

This is where Bush is called on by Jaaafari to implement a Marshall plan for Iraq. Jaffari also called on the International community for assistance and this led to the International compact.

MOSAIC: World News from the Middle East June 24, 2005 - Google Video

More proof of the Marshall Plan in first 5 min of video.

Thank you so much Paynes1

This was a great video piece I very much enjoyed it. I especially liked when President Bush said that there was no timetable to pull out as that would give the terrorist the time frame they could wait it out. I am going to go and reread the Marshall Plan but when I read it the first time which was about a month back I believe it stated it would need to be revalued before signing the Compact or putting the Compact into play.

Again thank you for this video.

Dinar-Excited

Originally Posted by worf

Without trying to explain what is, is like one of our former US presidents, I think that when viewing the Iraqi neighborhood there are more neighbors than just Jordan. Yes it is true that Jordan has an exchange rate of 1.40+, Kuwait is 3.20+, Bahrain is ? (I believe it is over 1.00 memory just winked out on me). These countries are neighbors and they are all above 1.00 usd exchange rate. However other neighbors to include Syria, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Isreal etc all have exchange rates somewhere around .20 - .30 usd.

Our desire would obviously be for the r/v to be the higher rate of Jordan which also happens to be one of Iraq's main trading partners. But, there are more countries in the neighborhood then just Jordan. By having to start somewhere to be on par with its neighbors why do we automatically default to one of the higher ones, ie Jordan? The thought is you have to crawl before you walk, walk before you run etc.

There is a possibility that they would start parity with the less expensive neighbors and then move up from there would you agree? If not could you direct me to the news article that would seem to indicate they are going for the Jordian rate right off the bat? And in case you are wondering, I can't direct you to a news article that emphatically states they are going to start off with the lesser rate ie Saudia Arabia. Mine is just an opinion based on what I have read here in the forum.

The way I look at it is if I am wrong and it r/vs at 1.47+, then I may need to be resessitated from passing out with shock and joy at our incredible good fortune. If I am right and it r/vs at .30, then I will still be joyfull and not disapointed. The other way however, I for one if I was counting on 1.47+ from the onset, and found it to be .30 instead, I might be disapointed (but still happy).

I can't speak for others but for myself I would rather set the bar lower in the beginning and reach it or exceed it then to set it too high, miss it and become disapointed. Either way, so long as it r/vs in a big way (.30 or higher) I will be very happy.

But just to set the record straight, if it does start at .30 I am hopefull that it won't stay there for long and will continue to increase in value as time goes on reaching past $3, $4, or who knows how high it can really go? We all know the value is there, it just depends on the Iraqis and the rest of the world ( NWO ) how high they will let it go. IMO

worf

Originally Posted by whatever
I'm no economist, mind you. I look at it like this: CBI is selling off a ton of their currency. Now, whether it's 2 trillion or 5 trillion, at the end of this 'Walmart special' on dinar, what's really left? Less currency to go around. Well, that's great in the short term microeconomic picture (less dinar in circulation, ergo less inflation because there's just less script to go around). But that does nothing for creating jobs, fixing homes, providing education, safety, and overall, a higher standard of living, now does it? (BTW I love your thought provoking posts Wm Knowles). Tell me if I'm wrong here, but one reason why Iraq has been able to stave off total collapse is because alot of transactions are still done in DOLLARS!? How the hell long can THAT go on? Mr. Knowles, I hope what we're seeing here with the massive currency sell-a-thon isn't a plan to create a Lorenz curve (if I remember back to Econ 101 or was it 102? 25 years ago) whereby Iraq becomes a country of have's and have not's, and nobody in the middle? Because that is exactly where it will be headed unless the dinar is R/Vd to parity with neighboring countries such as Jordan, and their biggest export is a nitrate/phosphorus based fertilizer?? Nothing else makes sense to me in a country as oil laden as Iraq. And they don't have another 3 years to get it done either. The American people, who are basically funding this little reconstruction and seeing their standard of living decrease day by day, won't stand for it much longer. Then again, maybe that's a good thing.

Originally Posted by shotgunsusie

they probably had figured in these debts as taken care of now they can be taken from the list. im sure had some agreements on these but wanted signatures. yes i think the debt has played a part in the delays. besides that, they cant revalue until they make sure to get all these agreements for the debt relief tied up. they dont want to have countries renegging on them.

I could be wrong but I believe the Country's you named with a low rate like Saudi is because they are not internationally traded which would keep the rate a lot lower than it should be JMO.

Also they do stated Jordan when they make these statements I would think it was for a reason also JMO.

Dinar-Excited

Originally Posted by Wm.Knowles

I understand there has been several disagreements about how much money is in circulation. Even using the largest numbers, a large significant amount of dinar has been removed from the economy. Should not last long. I just don't think that after this intervention they wil return to a "business as usual' position. An RV of 1345 will only encourage many others (including myself) to continue to buy dinar. I think they want to eliminate the speculators, so they can't return to normal, the dinar needs to be more expensive, i.e. an RV. Thank You.

Mr. Wm. Knowles I have a question. With all of the predictions and all the dinar being taken out of circulation with the auctions I would like to ask you a question and if you don't feel comfortable answering that's okay, i understand,but if you would give us your thoughts on what range(high / low) you believe this will r/v at and approximately what time frame, it would be appreciated. Your predictions are not written in stone and we won't hold you to them, just your opinion,Thanks.

Originally Posted by Dinar-Excited

Originally Posted by whatever
I'm no economist, mind you. I look at it like this: CBI is selling off a ton of their currency. Now, whether it's 2 trillion or 5 trillion, at the end of this 'Walmart special' on dinar, what's really left? Less currency to go around. Well, that's great in the short term microeconomic picture (less dinar in circulation, ergo less inflation because there's just less script to go around). But that does nothing for creating jobs, fixing homes, providing education, safety, and overall, a higher standard of living, now does it? (BTW I love your thought provoking posts Wm Knowles). Tell me if I'm wrong here, but one reason why Iraq has been able to stave off total collapse is because alot of transactions are still done in DOLLARS!? How the hell long can THAT go on? Mr. Knowles, I hope what we're seeing here with the massive currency sell-a-thon isn't a plan to create a Lorenz curve (if I remember back to Econ 101 or was it 102? 25 years ago) whereby Iraq becomes a country of have's and have not's, and nobody in the middle? Because that is exactly where it will be headed unless the dinar is R/Vd to parity with neighboring countries such as Jordan, and their biggest export is a nitrate/phosphorus based fertilizer?? Nothing else makes sense to me in a country as oil laden as Iraq. And they don't have another 3 years to get it done either. The American people, who are basically funding this little reconstruction and seeing their standard of living decrease day by day, won't stand for it much longer. Then again, maybe that's a good thing.



I could be wrong but I believe the Country's you named with a low rate like Saudi is because they are not internationally traded which would keep the rate a lot lower than it should be JMO.

Also they do stated Jordan when they make these statements I would think it was for a reason also JMO.

Dinar-Excited

Thanks I appreciate your reply. I would love to be wrong in my lower r/v amount... prove me wrong..... Please???

worf

Originally Posted by worf

Without trying to explain what is, is like one of our former US presidents, I think that when viewing the Iraqi neighborhood there are more neighbors than just Jordan. Yes it is true that Jordan has an exchange rate of 1.40+, Kuwait is 3.20+, Bahrain is ? (I believe it is over 1.00 memory just winked out on me). These countries are neighbors and they are all above 1.00 usd exchange rate. However other neighbors to include Syria, Saudia Arabia, Iran, Turkey, Isreal etc all have exchange rates somewhere around .20 - .30 usd.
Our desire would obviously be for the r/v to be the higher rate of Jordan which also happens to be one of Iraq's main trading partners. But, there are more countries in the neighborhood then just Jordan. By having to start somewhere to be on par with its neighbors why do we automatically default to one of the higher ones, ie Jordan? The thought is you have to crawl before you walk, walk before you run etc.

There is a possibility that they would start parity with the less expensive neighbors and then move up from there would you agree? If not could you direct me to the news article that would seem to indicate they are going for the Jordian rate right off the bat? And in case you are wondering, I can't direct you to a news article that emphatically states they are going to start off with the lesser rate ie Saudia Arabia. Mine is just an opinion based on what I have read here in the forum.

The way I look at it is if I am wrong and it r/vs at 1.47+, then I may need to be resessitated from passing out with shock and joy at our incredible good fortune. If I am right and it r/vs at .30, then I will still be joyfull and not disapointed. The other way however, I for one if I was counting on 1.47+ from the onset, and found it to be .30 instead, I might be disapointed (but still happy).

I can't speak for others but for myself I would rather set the bar lower in the beginning and reach it or exceed it then to set it too high, miss it and become disapointed. Either way, so long as it r/vs in a big way (.30 or higher) I will be very happy.

But just to set the record straight, if it does start at .30 I am hopefull that it won't stay there for long and will continue to increase in value as time goes on reaching past $3, $4, or who knows how high it can really go? We all know the value is there, it just depends on the Iraqis and the rest of the world ( NWO ) how high they will let it go. IMO

worf

Iran's exchange rate is even more pathetic than Iraq's. They recently made big $ oil deals with Russia and China too.

Reuters
Nov 20 2006 18:28

BRUSSELS, Nov 20 (Reuters) - Norway's Statoil <STL.OL> is in talks about developing oilfields with government officials in Iraq and the Kurdish north but needs to see greater stability before getting involved, a senior executive said on Monday.

"We have discussions with different levels of government in Iraq," including the Kurdish Regional Government (KRG), said Peter Mellbye, the head of Statoil's international exploration and production.

"The Kurdish region has very significant potential," he said. Mellbye added that the company was concerned about safety in Iraq and was watching the political process develop there.

Rising sectarian violence across the country has made it hard for international companies to safeguard their workers, although the Kurdish region in the north is less troubled.

Statoil has no operations in the country. Other large international producers are also positioning themselves to invest in Iraq's oil sector as they wait for politicians to hammer out an investment law to provide the legal framework for their involvment.

Small Norwegian independent oil producer DNO <DNO.OL> was the first western company to begin exploration in Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003. DNO aims to begin output early next year under a production sharing deal with the KRG.

Iraq's central government has questioned the validity of the deal as it vies with regional governments over control of oil revenue and authority to sign development deals.

Keywords: ENERGY STATOIL IRAQ

Reuters
Nov 20 2006 19:22

BAGHDAD, Nov 20 (Reuters) - Iraqi President Jalal Talabani will visit Tehran this weekend for a long-planned bilateral summit with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, his spokesman said on Monday.

Spokesman Kameran Qaradaghi denied reports that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad might also be present at the talks on Saturday and Sunday.

"This is a two-way bilateral summit. There was no invitation for a three-way summit. This was never an issue," he said. "This invitation by the Iranian president is not new."

He said the talks would be wide-ranging.

Talabani's visit follows one by Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki in September, when he won a pledge of support for his new government, which is battling a three-year-old Sunni insurgency and raging sectarian violence between Sunnis and Shi'ites.

U.S. and Iraqi officials have accused Iran of supporting insurgents and Shi'ite militias blamed for much of the communal bloodshed that has raised the spectre of civil war.

The weekend summit comes amid increased talk of diplomatic efforts to involve Iraq's neighbours Syria and Iran in finding a solution to Iraq's crisis.

In the first visit by a Syrian minister since the U.S.-led invasion in 1993, Syria's foreign minister held talks in Baghdad on Monday with Iraqi leaders. He pledged to cooperate with Baghdad in stabilising the country.

In Damascus a Syrian official with knowledge of the president's schedule, asked whether Assad would join Talabani and Ahmadinejad in Tehran, said: "There are no plans for such a (tripartite) summit."

In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman Tom Casey voiced U.S. scepticism that any meeting between Iran, Syria and Iraq could help to reduce the violence and said similar meetings in the past had not resulted in that happening.

"In those contacts, we have seen public statements from the Iranian government, expressing their desire to reduce the violence and to respond positively to the situation in Iraq," Casey told reporters in Washington.

"As I've said, unfortunately, those positive statements -- and this applies to the case of Syria as well -- have not been backed up by actual, concrete steps," he said.

Keywords: IRAQ IRAN

WORLD VIEW
EU to launch negotiations on trade and cooperation pact with Iraq
Associated Press WorldStream
Nov 21 2006

BRUSSELS, Belgium_The European Union will open negotiations on a new trade and cooperation pact with Iraq on Monday aiming to bolster stability and to protect and attract investors to the war-scarred nation.

EU spokeswoman Emma Udwin said, however, that the talks were expected to last for years because of Iraq's current inability to meet stringent EU trade standards and the continuing instability.

"We happen to hope that, by the time the negotiations are complete, that we will be looking at a security situation which is more favorable," Udwin said.

Monday's first round of talks will be launched by EU External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner and EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson with Iraqi deputy prime minister Barham Salih.

Mandelson said in a statement that the opening of the talks would form the basis for EU-Iraq ties and marked a "part of Iraq's difficult road to stability."

The pact, once agreed, will be the first contractual agreement between Iraq and the 25-nation bloc, which has committed to helping reconstruction efforts without sending troops.

The EU was deeply divided over the U.S.-led war in Iraq, launched in March 2003.

The bloc has already granted Iraq preferential access to European markets and supports Iraq's bid to join the World Trade Organization.

The trade and cooperation agreement would cover trade in goods and services and extend EU cooperation into such areas as human rights, anti-terrorism, energy, nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the environment and customs issues, EU officials said.

A key part of the talks also aims to ensure European business and investors get a "minimum level of predictability, transparency and legal certainty" if they chose to operate in Iraq, an EU statement said.

The closer ties will also offer Iraq more aid to fight poverty and funding to boost trade standards.

Udwin said the EU was the first international organization to open such talks with the new Iraqi government, and also offered Baghdad a chance to learn from such complex trade negotiations.

Launching of the talks on closer ties was dependent on the formation of a new Iraqi government earlier this year.

The European Commission has sent €720 million (US$920 million) in reconstruction aid since 2003, focusing on funding restoration of basic services like water, education and electricity and on boosting better government administration.

The EU's executive office has also recently opened a delegation office in Baghdad to boost bilateral EU-Iraqi relations.

TEHRAN, Nov. 20 (UPI) -- Iran will pull $1 billion from its oil stabilization fund to help reconstruct western Iraq.

The state-run Mehr News Agency in Tehran reports the money has been allocated and will be dispersed for reconstruction efforts among five provinces in the western part of the country.

Reconstruction in Iraq has been slow since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion. The state of health care and education is still behind pre-war levels, as is oil production and the stability of electricity.

The Kermanshah, Ilam, Kordestan, Khuzestan and West Azarbayjan provinces will each receive $200 million.

An Iranian official said the funding could increase.

United Press International - Energy - Iran to Iraq: $1B in oil funds to rebuild