The real reason behind all this gubbins with Iran?

Read this. It's quite scary and VERY plausible.

http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/jun05/jun05page1011.html

Happy birthday, man!

Oh, yeah. P.S. Is it just me, or do socialists/communists never seem happy with anything the United States does?

It's almost as if they're desperate for democracy to fail.

Ermmm thanks Gnu Odor. I'm just in pre-production on 'Smokey and the Bandit: The Early Years'. It's a prequel.

And yip, Gnu Odor, I was uncomfortable with quoting from a socialist site thingy, but the content was more readable than the other ones. It was in a two-page spread in 'The Times' recently, which is far from socialist, but unfortunately I couldn't find the link on the net.

Ignore the headers and just read the content!

You post, I read. It is the way of NOOL.

You expect us to read all that shit- quicker to read the truth in da Sun

These people that write this crap dream up this stuff while watching CNN on their couch stuffing their faces with potato chips.

These people have not BEEN to the middle east. The biggest misconception is when people put themselves in the Iraqis shoes, thinking "well if I was an Iraqi this is how I would react". I worked with 30 Iraqis in Ramadi on a daily basis for 9 months, so close they were like family while I was out there. . .and I still have a hard time understanding their decision-making process.

Want to know more truths about Iraq, ask me, I'll be glad to answer. I've been there, I've seen more than most, and my answers are based on firsthand knowledge, not lazy-boy concepts.

JHC

Bush PAH, so Americans can have Nukes but no one else can - Now that's the democracy they talk about.

well of course the americans aint going to be too pleased about a country that has declared america as its sworn enemy and servant of the devil,getting its hands on a nuke. just another lazy jurno piece that hasnt shed any light on a single thing. and is it too far of a leap to think that these people(irainian gov)wouldnt slip one to one of their mates??? muslims seem to need very little these days to get themselves smacking their foreheads and screaming in outrage and it takes only a bit more to get them in kill mode. so yeah if i was in the american gov id be doing everything in my power to stop them getting what is a very terrible weapon indeed. that same rag would probally berate bush if a nuke was let off in the states,saying "why didnt he do more","he must have known"ect you all know the drill. socialists? what a joke.

Hmmmm... seems like some of you didnt read the article or get the point.

In a nutshell, it's about various countries changing their trading systems in oil, from the petro-dollar to the Euro, and the catastrophic effect this could have on the US economy. Saddam started doing this from the late nineties (as an aside).

Since this article was written, China and Russia are doing half their oil trade in Euro's, Venezuela (the 4th largest oil exporter) has switched completely, and Iran has set a new date of March 20 this year for doing the same.

Now get back to the point!

Didn't miss the meaning of the article. But as alot of articles, it states that the US's real reason for Iraq is oil, and everything else is a sham. There is alot more to Iraq than oil, that is not to say oil has nothing to do with the war, but that it is the sole purpose for us being there is bogus. There is also alot more to Iran than oil as well. N. Korea was called an "axis of evil" by Bush as well, and that has something to do with oil as well? Of course not.

The thing is people want conspericy theories, it makes them feel like victims "in the know". It's a way for people to feel clever, that they understand the real motives while all the other "idiots" are following the a sham.

To understand why Iran is dangerous is to understand the Middle East cultures. The people do not understand what it is to have a "future". I went through this with the Iraqis I worked with. I ask them what they want for their future and their answers were "a beer", "some food", "sex". In all my time their they could not grasp building for thier future. Everything is decided for them. Emums (their priests and clan leader) decide how they feel on issues. What ever their Emum says, they follow. What I foundis that the Emums are very curropt. Their opinions are based on the highest bidder, or how they can attain more power, even if it put the people they lead in danger. Also the middle East does not know how to drop grudges. Grudges over there are horrible, everyone will keep them for generations, to the piont where they hate someone with every ounce of their being but they can't explain why. Anyone who thinks our systems of government are corrupt, need to travel there. Religon, government, oil, and money are so intertwined over there that it's a mess.

Trust me when I say, Iran is dangerous, and not because it is going over to the Euro. But yet we are in politically correct world where you can't call a duck, a duck.

JHC

So you're saying we should attack any country we think might be potentially dangerous, or not think the same way we do?

I'm struggling to see how 'the mentality of people in Iraq' has anything to do with this thread.

There's two BIG lists of dangerous countries.

The one on the left is countries without oil reserves.

The one on the right is countries with oil reserves using the Euro as a dealing currency or planning to in the near future.

Looks like we are going down the one on the right, first.

Well oil does have something to do with it. When you bring up the two counties of threats I assume Iran and N. Korea, there is a BIG difference. N. Korea has China behind it, and that would be UGLY. Plus the N. Koreans are brainwashed unbelivably to anything Kim wants them to do, add China in the mix and that would be a bloody war, and what would we gain for our loss? Bad relations with China?

My link to the people of Iraq is that Iran is not much different, most of the Middle East uses the same structure. Now that Iraq is in turmoil, and a possible American Ally if the government gets off the ground, now is the time for Iran to attack. The Iran/Iraq war was ugly. Iranwants revenge, and it also believes it should control Iraq. So how does this matter for us? If it took over Iraq, it would control a good amount of the world's oil. with oil comes money, and Iran wants control of the Middle East. Iran has already had many ties with terrorist attacks since the 80's, put more money in their hands and things get uglier for Western countries. And this thought that it's about the US, well just look at this whole thing over the cartoons lately. They are attacking Holland!!! What possible threat do they pose???? The thing is everyone is under the belief that we can live peacefully if we leave the Middle East alone. But the Middle East doesn't want to live peacefully, they want blood and lots of it. . .and worse off most of the population there doesn't really know why!!!

Unlike what the article says, Iran won't be a match for the military just as Iraq wasn't (Iraq was the number three military power when they were attacked, behind the US and China). Occupying three countries would be quite burdening and doubt it's going to happen.

JHC

Ok, so we're gonna take out Iran cos it might take out Iraq?...

Wow.. who's the next fish that might swallow them both, cos we might have to take them out after Iran.

I'm not concerned about Muslim mentalities etc. I was hoping someone would come on and explain the impact of taking dollars out of circulation in terms of oil transactions worldwide. The way I see it, that's gonna be a HUGE amount of money, and that money won't be returned in terms of spending on US products/services etc, it will be spent in the European community, and make the Euro by far the biggest trading currency in the world. However way I look at it, that's going to severely dent the US economy, unless something drastic is done about it.

Now can we get back to the topic?

68 Pontiac

Please explain why America is in Iraq !

And really, I can't believe the thing about Iraq being the third biggest military power

That has to be some sort of CNN spin, or perhaps they counted in the 'weapons of mass destruction' that um are still to be accounted for.

What about Russia, Japan, France, UK, Israel, North Korea to name just a few?

But the Middle East doesn't want to live peacefully, they want blood and lots of it. . .and worse off most of the population there doesn't really know why!!!

I see you really believe what you see on TV

^5's Diggy Mike

To address that economic angle in the "article", (as someone who has a fair bit of a background in economics and commodity trading), the benefit to the US of trading in US dollars for energy is vastly overstated, and a new bourse wouldn't do much to affect the American economy even if it were trading in euros - in fact, if the euro depreciates against the dollar then, it stands to benefit the US, by lowering its cost of energy. Also, if Iran breaks out its oil seperate from the commodity exchanges of London and NY, then it has to sell in a much more volatile (price-wise) market with fewer buyers, or enter long-term contracts directly with oil buying nations, like China or India, which then brings it own complications. Plus, Iran would be much more easily manipulated in the market (i.e. boycotted) - they cannot sell their oil through seller's brokers and hide the fact they are selling into a market if they were on their own. The real reason the dollar is so supreme in international trade is the fact that people want to own American dollars (and dollar-denominated instruments like US Treasury bonds)- it is the safest and most liquid investment you can make. The dependence on oil hasn't been a boon to American economic strength but a drag, and has kept the dollar weaker than it would be otherwise. Whoever wrote the article is engaging in very wishful thinking - but I think history has proved socialists know very little about economics. I think they should be much more worried about a cabal of muslim extremists having the nuclear bomb. I know I am. Now, on to the three worst bands thread....

Ahhh.. at last. A reasoned answer from a person with some grasp of economics.

Fair points, I guess, but two things i might add:

This isn't just an Iran thing; the current tide is to switch, it appears. The month that China switched half of its oil-buying to Euros coincided with a 19% drop in the US monthly economic figures.

Obviously, world oil reserves are depleting, with a best estimate of 50 years left. Imagine the economic power of being in control of those oil reserves in the last stages of depletion, over a Western world full of oil-dependent nations.

68 Pontiac wrote:

And this thought that it's about the US, well just look at this whole thing over the cartoons lately. They are attacking Holland!!! What possible threat do they pose????

Its actually Denmark. I think there is an anti-bacon thing going on there too.

For all the innocent people the Americans have killed , I shed a tear

Shakin' Baker wrote: Also, if Iran breaks out its oil seperate from the commodity exchanges of London and NY, then it has to sell in a much more volatile (price-wise) market with fewer buyers, or enter long-term contracts directly with oil buying nations, like China or India, which then brings it own complications. Plus, Iran would be much more easily manipulated in the market (i.e. boycotted)

Surely its only a change in currency?.. Are you trying to say the London and NY can't trade in euros?. Besides, why would any oil buying nations boycott them for trading in Euros?.. Venezuela don't seem to have a problem.

"Digital Mike Binoche" wrote: For all the innocent people the Americans have killed , I shed a tear

I hope you got a bumper box of tissues from Tescos, Mike.

Ummm, I believe what I see on TV???

I'm talking from actual firsthand knowledge, not what the tv says. Actually the TV is so full of it on our progress in Iraq. We are alot further ahead than journelists would lead us to believe.

Like I said in my first post, after 9 months of being as close as family to many Iraqis, I still have a very difficult time understanding their decision making. The average Westerner wants to live in peace, not all cultures live that way. . .which is the major disconnect that makes the Middle East difficult to understand. We see EVERY life as important, but the Middle East societies do not veiw their own lives as we do. They live moment to moment, not looking towards their future.

Difficult and far fetched? I agree, but this is our issue over there.

JHC

68 Pontiac wrote: Ummm, I believe what I see on TV???

I'm talking from actual firsthand knowledge, not what the tv says. Actually the TV is so full of it on our progress in Iraq. We are alot further ahead than journelists would lead us to believe.

Like I said in my first post, after 9 months of being as close as family to many Iraqis, I still have a very difficult time understanding their decision making. The average Westerner wants to live in peace, not all cultures live that way. . .which is the major disconnect that makes the Middle East difficult to understand. We see EVERY life as important, but the Middle East societies do not veiw their own lives as we do. They live moment to moment, not looking towards their future.

Difficult and far fetched? I agree, but this is our issue over there.

JHC

Still missing the point I see, Pontiac.

OK, fuck it.. Let's bomb them all

"Digital Mike Binoche" wrote: Bush PAH, so Americans can have Nukes but no one else can - Now that's the democracy they talk about.

Get right on that list of countries you'd like to have nukes. Iran apparently.

And, no, I've decided I'm not ignoring the source of the original link.

I do wish all the socialists/Marxists/communists would at the least be more open about their sponsorships of these things.

Some chick from "World Can't Wait" was interviewed on the radio the other day. "So, you want Bush and Cheney to step down. Does that mean you want the Speaker of the House to be president?" "No. We have different opinions on that. I don't want there to be a president." See, she's only 20 or so, but has been a communist for two years and thinks China under Mao was the bee's knees. Heaven on earth.

Same shit with their local rally here. Hammer and Sickle badges everywhere. Another radio interview with another pot-banger. "What kind of government do you want?" "We don't think there should be a government."

Same shit with all these protests by International ANSWER, which is just a really thin veneer on the Workers World Party. Check all the WHOIS records on every single one of these goddamn "peace" movements.

World Socialist Movement? Um, no thanks. Me and my vote and my freedom of speech and my .44 Ruger say no fucking way.

i can't be arsed looking up the article. but from what you have said, i think i have heard this theory before.

1. the usa is running up huge budget deficits.
2. it is in part financed by oversees demand for the us dollar.
3. demand for us dollar falls.
4. the value of the us dollar falls
5. the usa has huge problems in financing its budget.
6. taxes and interest rates would have to rise dramaticly in the usa, causing a major recession.

have i got it right?

unfortunatly if this were to come to pass the whole world economy would be stuffed (in recession), as the usa is still the largest economy, and importer of goods.

I you, 68 Pontiac.

I'm off to bed, but first a mighty American fuck you to Diggy Mike.

Seriously.

Your claim to shed tears for a select subset of innocents says all I need to hear.

Gnu Odor wrote: [And, no, I've decided I'm not ignoring the source of the original link.

I do wish all the socialists/Marxists/communists would at the least be more open about their sponsorships of these things.

OK here's another less digestible non-Socialist link for you. As I said I'd thought I'd go for the one that is easier to read. Shame some couldn't even manage that, or read past the source!

http://politicalphysics.com/node/1333

I'm sure I can find a right wing one if you want. There's 380,000 hits on google, to choose from.