Topaz Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 I found an article about why the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently. in 2000 Hussein had changed from the US$$$ to the Euro and the Taliban were in the process of doing the same. Now with the US buying their oil from this area it would mean the US$ will end up less then the C$, and they didn't want the rest of the OPEC oil countries to do the same so they decided to scare the OPEC countries by going into the 2 countries and taking over then and putting some leader in that would keep the US$$ instead of the Euro. Britain, was at the end of its oil and they also didn't want the monetary value in Euros. The US is using it military to help the oil companies control the oil industry in this area. SO. this war is about oil but more about the US dollar and its value going down if the Euro is replace against the US$. Now, let say this IS the reason for going into these countries, do you thik Canada should be there now???? Quote
theloniusfleabag Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 This is an old theory, covered in other threads. Further, this isn't the right thread, really. Quote Would the Special Olympics Committee disqualify kids born with flippers from the swimming events?
Toro Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 Plus, its bizarre. Quote "Canada is a country, not a sector. Remember that." - Howard Simons of Simons Research, giving advice to investors.
Drea Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 I found an article about why the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently. in 2000 Hussein had changed from the US$$$ to the Euro and the Taliban were in the process of doing the same. Now with the US buying their oil from this area it would mean the US$ will end up less then the C$, and they didn't want the rest of the OPEC oil countries to do the same so they decided to scare the OPEC countries by going into the 2 countries and taking over then and putting some leader in that would keep the US$$ instead of the Euro. Britain, was at the end of its oil and they also didn't want the monetary value in Euros. The US is using it military to help the oil companies control the oil industry in this area. SO. this war is about oil but more about the US dollar and its value going down if the Euro is replace against the US$. Now, let say this IS the reason for going into these countries, do you thik Canada should be there now???? And Iran... http://www.countercurrents.org/iran-whitney260106.htm The Bush administration will never allow the Iranian government to open an oil exchange (bourse) that trades petroleum in euros. If that were to happen, hundreds of billions of dollars would come flooding back to the United States crushing the greenback and destroying the economy. This is why Bush and Co. is planning to lead the nation to war against Iran. It is straightforward defense of the current global system and the continuing dominance of the reserve currency, the dollar. ...has nothing to do with nuclear weapons and everything to do with the US dollar. Quote ...jealous much? Booga Booga! Hee Hee Hee
margrace Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 [ The Bush administration will never allow the Iranian government to open an oil exchange (bourse) that trades petroleum in euros. If that were to happen, hundreds of billions of dollars would come flooding back to the United States crushing the greenback and destroying the economy. This is why Bush and Co. is planning to lead the nation to war against Iran. It is straightforward defense of the current global system and the continuing dominance of the reserve currency, the dollar. ...has nothing to do with nuclear weapons and everything to do with the US dollar. This has always been the reason, the US never does anything unless there is a renumerative gain for themselves. Much as we would like to believe as they tell us it just ain't so. Quote
Toro Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 I've generally found that the people who propogate this argument are prone to wild conspiracy theories, have little understanding of capital flows, do not understand the role of reserves in central banks, and do not understand the composition and holdings of reserves. Quote "Canada is a country, not a sector. Remember that." - Howard Simons of Simons Research, giving advice to investors.
jbg Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 I found an article about why the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently. in 2000 Hussein had changed from the US$$$ to the Euro and the Taliban were in the process of doing the same. Now with the US buying their oil from this area it would mean the US$ will end up less then the C$, and they didn't want the rest of the OPEC oil countries to do the same so they decided to scare the OPEC countries by going into the 2 countries and taking over then and putting some leader in that would keep the US$$ instead of the Euro. Britain, was at the end of its oil and they also didn't want the monetary value in Euros. The US is using it military to help the oil companies control the oil industry in this area. SO. this war is about oil but more about the US dollar and its value going down if the Euro is replace against the US$. Now, let say this IS the reason for going into these countries, do you thik Canada should be there now???? Utter rubbish. If it was about oil Alberta's a far easier and less dangerous target. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jdobbin Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 I found an article about why the US went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Apparently. in 2000 Hussein had changed from the US$$$ to the Euro and the Taliban were in the process of doing the same. Now with the US buying their oil from this area it would mean the US$ will end up less then the C$, and they didn't want the rest of the OPEC oil countries to do the same so they decided to scare the OPEC countries by going into the 2 countries and taking over then and putting some leader in that would keep the US$$ instead of the Euro. Britain, was at the end of its oil and they also didn't want the monetary value in Euros. The US is using it military to help the oil companies control the oil industry in this area. SO. this war is about oil but more about the US dollar and its value going down if the Euro is replace against the US$. Now, let say this IS the reason for going into these countries, do you thik Canada should be there now???? The Taliban had driven the Afghanistan to become one of the poorest countries in the world. Even if they were thinking about trading in Euros, it seems quite unlikely that anyone would willingly invade them for that. Afghanistan was the base from which continued terrorist attacks were made on North America, Africa and the Middle East. The United Nations determined that in the aftermath of September 11, the Taliban were incapable or unwilling to bring those responsible for the attacks to justice. An ultimatum was given and ignored and the result was invasion. America's diversion to Iraq has undermined Afghanistan and probably helped allowed al Qaeda slip away to Pakistan. It has also diminished what should have been a far superior force from establishing security in Afghanistan. Having said that, I think people should remember why Afghanistan was invaded to begin with. It wasn't oil. It was continued and repeated attacks around the world. Quote
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 It was invaded for the expres purpose of getting "Bin". Their government would not hand him over so the result was invasion. The "Bin" hunt was unsuccessful and they wanted to keep up the effort so off to beat up on Iraq they went. Is it all about oil? I doubt it. I think it is all about politics working within the confines of an economy based on a military industrial complex. When you have as many people in the US emplyees in the building of arms you have to use the darned things so you order some more. Quote
jbg Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 It was invaded for the expres purpose of getting "Bin". Their government would not hand him over so the result was invasion. The "Bin" hunt was unsuccessful and they wanted to keep up the effort so off to beat up on Iraq they went. America's diversion to Iraq has undermined Afghanistan and probably helped allowed al Qaeda slip away to Pakistan. It has also diminished what should have been a far superior force from establishing security in Afghanistan. My own pet theory on Bin Laden's non-capture is that Pakistan has made it clear that country will blow if he's caught. As it is Pakistan still has some ambivalence about whether it want to be a British-style democracy (cricket is still the national sport there) or an Islamofascist state. Better a tenuous balance, with out-of-control tribal areas, than have the lowlands/coastal areas also become ungovernable. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 That would explain much wouldn't it! I can see "Bin" getting a walk out of all this. I would prefer that our American brothers find the bastard, but I would not complain if the Canucks did what the Yanks couldn't do! Quote
geoffrey Posted July 9, 2006 Report Posted July 9, 2006 Utter rubbish. If it was about oil Alberta's a far easier and less dangerous target. Bring it on! Quote RealRisk.ca - (Latest Post: Prosecutors have no "Skin in the Game") --
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.