The real reason for the Iraq invasion, the US backed into a corner: inflation.

Some of you may understand this already so I just wanted to share this with the ones that don't, and offer a simple explanation. And maybe create some more discussion, I'm interested in everyones thoughts on this, and the next possible move of the US.

The dollar is the largest reserve currency, that is, countries keep trillions of it, as a "world currency", to trade it for services or goods with other countries, (and also because it used to be a stable, inflation resistant currency, but that function has been fading for a long time) especially oil.

The result of this is that other countries have to buy/exchange goods/services with dollars from the United States, in order to be able to buy services and goods from other countries, while, if the US wants to do that, all it needs to do is create dollars.

The global currency is shifting to the Euro, but the Dollar is still very strong in one area: oil. But with the global currency shifting to the Euro, oil producing countries are also slowly shifting to selling the oil with Euros. If that happens, the Dollars will become less and less useful, so all the countries that own trillions of dollars to pay for services and goods will quickly drop the Dollar, because it is not very useful anymore but also because they fear inflation, meaning their dollars becomes useless.

When that happens, there will be little demand of dollars, compared to MASSIVE increase of dollars on the market. Then, the United States economy will collapse from inflation.

Now, Saddam Hussein wanted to speed the process a bit, by selling his oil in euros instead of dollars. Iraq is among the largest of oil producers. This could have caused a domino effect among other oil producing countries.

Not only that, but the construct that I mentioned earlier, where the US only has to sit on their fat asses and create dollars, in order to pay for services/goods from other countries, collapses.

So now it can be explained that the US has spent so much money on Iraq: they are backed into a corner. The US economy is going down in the near future, there is no stopping it. If I were a US citizen I'd buy lots of gold, and/or euros.

So what will be the next logical step for the US, to ensure the value of the dollar? Or will it be just damage control?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The U.S. ruling class is divided at the moment. But, with the popularity of Obama---I should say the media image projected of Obama---among the geneal population, more and more of the elite power manipulators are coming to the conclusion that McCain is a throw-away candidate, and Obama must win. It's about public relations, deceptive tricks and outright lies, and Obama is better at it than McCain ever could be.

The Bush regime was bad at imperialism, which is what truly keeps the US economy powerful. It needs to be conducted in way that doesn't piss off the entire planet all at once. World-wide public opinion of Bush is very low and McCain is seen as an extension of the Republican's bloody leadership of the past eight years. It's too risky to place McCain in charge. Now is the time to switch card decks, it'll be the same game, just with Obama's face on the back of the cards.

That's how the U.S. ruling class fixes an economy in distress, they don't know any other way.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Underverse, your post didn't address a thing about how the US will conduct damage control. Public opinion isn't what's tanking the dollar, and it's not what will fix it.

As for the US ensuring the value of the dollar, I don't think it can, at least nowhere anytime soon. It's all damage control at this point, but I think the primary thing that needs to be done is to stop printing all the damn money, lessen the Fed's power and make it a lot more public. Unfortunately, I don't see any of that happening.

EDIT: Just want to add that I don't agree with the entire premise of s0meguy's post, just interested in answering his question.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hey ashura, and others that disagree with me, I'd like to know why.

 

I don't like to assume the motives of others based on nothing but speculation. That's fodder for conspiracy theorists. There's no hard evidence to suggest what's in your OP was the reasoning behind the Iraq war (if there is, I'm more than happy to hear it). On the other hand, there is evidence of a neoconservative ideology that desired a stronger US presence in the Middle East, and our bringing of democracy, culture and influence to that region. That ideology and a case against Iraq has existed before Bush II, was presented to us in Bush II's words and is still harped by certain influential members of the neocon movement.

That's something hard for me to place the blame for Iraq upon, compared to the speculation of your OP.

 

Well, it is simply cause and probable effect. Where did I go wrong?

 

I did not provide a detailed list of all my expectations of Obama because I think this isn't the thread for such details. I did say that Bush was bad at conducting imperialism, McCain is seen by many as an extension Bush, and that Obama is better at deceptive tricks and outright lies than McCain. This is what is required to fool and placate a world that the Bush regime has wrecklessly set on fire---literally and from a foreign policy perspective.

A near universal dislike---and in many cases, hatred---of the U.S., thanks to Bush's wreckless, arrogantly forceful and bloodly foreign policy has limited the U.S. government's ability to coerce and otherwise manipulate foreign governments and leaders. This all places a damper on U.S. imperialism and its ability to control the international flow of raw materials, especially oil, and markets.

Obama offers the appearance of a less direct reassertion of U.S. imperialsm, a guy who wants to negotiate and play statesman with the other imperialst powers abroad, and the appearance of a kinder, gentler domestic policy at home. Obama is all appearance, and that's just what the U.S. ruling class wants as a distraction while they attempt to recover from Bush's irratic and counterproductive eight-year slide into a borked U.S. economy.

That's how you do damage control on bad public opinion at home and abroad that is hampering you from doing business as usual.

 

s0meguy, you may find William Clark's paper on the same subject interesting- I posted a thread on the subject some years ago:

The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War With Iraq:
A Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth​

 

Methinks that somehow the Obama promise might not see its potential. American voters are very easily disappointed.
I mean, smiling a lot and saying intelligent stuff is all very well, but what can he really do about the economic wave? Uncle George spent all the cash, so now what? Move to a new house?

 

Its also why the war drums are beating for Iran, the threat of the Iranian Oil Bourse.


http://www.energybulletin.net/node/7707


The Iranians have been postponing it from its original start date; the war drums have been louder since it was established and thats no coincidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Oil_Bourse

 

If the OP were true, wouldn't it have just been simplier to cut a deal with Saddam? Stick with greenbacks, we'll lift the sanctions. You'll be our buddy again. The oil will flow, you'll be rolling in cash with no more weapon's inspectors or crap from the US.

 

After bombing him for 20 years and killing half a million Iraqi children through sanctions? If the shoe were on the other foot, what would the US do?

 

Why ? There was a chance he could have double crossed you, and switched to Euro's after the sanctions were lifted. Then you'd have to go in anyway.

 

What was Rummy doing in Iraq all those years ago, you suppose? And the Brits, and the French? I bet they weren't on vacation.

Saddam got quite a few perks for promising to bomb the crap out of the Iranians. Including chemical weapons, military advisors, training (for what that might have been worth), and more or less kudos, just for sitting on a few billion barrels. Now the US has got someone else sitting on them.

 

-Next logical step with dollar...

Steve Previs, a vice president at Jefferies International Ltd., explained the Amero "is the proposed new currency for the North American Community which is being developed right now between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico."

The aim, he said, according to a transcript provided by CNBC to WND, is to make a "borderless community, much like the European Union, with the U.S. dollar, the Canadian dollar and the Mexican peso being replaced by the amero."
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53124

-Maybe its all going as planned, so the "damage-control" is really "controlled damage"...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Isn't it bad for the Amero, if the US has lots of inflation?

 

-Would there be Amero with strong Dollar...?.

 

Good point. The theory is that the government is deliberately tanking the dollar so that we'll accept a new currency.

I don't generally subscribe to conspiracy theories, but the behavior of the US government suggests either incredible stupidity or a hidden agenda. Of course, government actions are almost always idiotic and counterproductive, so it's really difficult to tell.

 

How long before they try digital money? Then it's inflation at the touch of a button.

It costs money to fire up those printing presses, you know.

 

I'm pretty sure a fairly high percentage of our current money supply only exists digitally.