Jim Sinclair is a serious trader in gold and commodities, and multimillionaire, with many years of international experience. Here is his view (Reg.req.) on Iraq (corrected version):

One cannot compare Iraq to the war in Vietnam. For one thing, Vietnam was never a critical player in the oil market and the war was never underpinned by any particular religious fanaticism. The world did not turn on the success or failure of the US war effort in Vietnam.

Iraq is infinitely more serious than Vietnam ever was in my view. However, the 2300 attacks discussed [in the New York Times] can be compared to the Tet Offensive in Vietnam by the North Vietnamese. If the election outcome is interpreted as a mandate for the use of force, which will likely be the case if George Bush is re-elected, the US will most certainly react exactly as it did during the Vietnam war under General Westmorland and the administration of that era.

As I have told you before, the “war against terrorism” is a contradiction in terms. War is an action and terrorism is a strategy with no particular geographical boundaries. War simply splinters terrorism into cells with no real central command. Since all combat promotes madness on all sides, failing to understand this brings one more horrific event after another.

The war to establish democracy in the Middle East will end up destroying democracy in the West. The US is in a terrible situation in Iraq exactly where the opposing forcers want it to be. A mandate for increased use of force there will be the “coup de grace” for the US Bill of Rights and the US Constitution. The names will remain but the soul will be compromised.

I am still wondering, if the results Jim sees coming, are or are not the intended outcome. A Clean Break, not only for Israel like in the original plan, but also for the political system of the United States.