What's at stake, what is to be gained?

[NorCalBdyBldr]

For those that want more than the typical American public's 12 year old level understanding of what the war in Iraq is REALLY about and what the pro's and con's are of Bush's dangerous gamble, I would strongly recommend this article at:

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html

I have to admit that I was at first a bit suspicious as I suspected it was going to be some left wing propaganda but was quite surprised at how well it described things and is fairly balanced in its portrayal of the current situation. What is described is very consistent with information that I have seen and heard as well but is rarely encountered outside of certain circles and is presented in an analysis for more general understanding that I haven't seen before for topics of this type. It is probably one of the best synopsis of the current geo political and geo economic situation I have read. It discusses what is at stake and what could be gained or lost by Bush's gamble. It is not easy reading and is long as the reasons behind invading Iraq are not so simplistic and have absolutely NOTHING to do with establishing democracy there or even weapons of mass destruction. For all of us that think Bush is stupid, it will also open your eyes to the complexity of the situation and that he DOES in fact understand it and is not stupid as is commonly believed because of his poor abilities in public speaking. He is taking a gamble to preserve the U.S. status quo that could very well backfire and bring about the very situation that he is attempting to avoid which could lead to the collapse of the U.S. dollar and trigger a major world wide depression. I think it should be MUST reading for everyone and then you can decide for yourself if you think that he is being reckless or taking a worthwhile gamble. It also lets you understand what "they" are talking about when they say there are serious structural problems in the U.S. economy. If you want to read more, there are excellent references included. If you truly believe the war is about weapons of mass destruction or to "democratize" Iraq or have a simplistic notion that it is entirely an "oil grab" you are probably not capable of understanding this article or able to understand wide spread cause and effect situations that people at high levels ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO UNDERSTAND and DO. So time for all to grow up and get a glimpse into the world and how it really operates--the world that the media cannot report and does not attempt to believing it is far too complex for the average American to comprehend. This one is long but worth it and is certainly NOT for people that can only get your news in two second sound bytes or have the attention span of a nat!

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

This is from the article:

"The Federal Reserve's greatest nightmare is that OPEC will switch its international transactions from a dollar standard to a euro standard. Iraq actually made this switch in Nov. 2000 (when the euro was worth around 82 cents), and has actually made off like a bandit considering the dollar's steady depreciation against the euro. (Note: the dollar declined 17% against the euro in 2002.)

Old news.

If you think that is the only reason that we are doing this, then you are underestimating the complexity of the situation.

The writer is seeking to utilize people's relative non-understanding of international economic policy to sound the anti-Bush alarm. For example, this totally ignores the willingness of european investors to yank their money out of their countries and put it here due to our comparably favorable tax climate.

Worth a read though.

 

[NorCalBdyBldr]

"If you think that is the only reason that we are doing this, then you are underestimating the complexity of the situation. "

I

 

[NorCalBdyBldr]

"If you think that is the only reason that we are doing this, then you are underestimating the complexity of the situation. "

I was not intending to give the impression that the reasons given in the article are the ONLY reasons. Mainly I was putting it forth as one of the better attempts to explain some of the complexities of the situation and try to elevate the discussion on here a little above remarks like Bush is stupid, or let's kick some Iraqi ass, or the war is to democratize Iraq (which is mainstream media junk to "simplify" things for low level lack of comprehension and people that can't focus for more than three seconds on a topic). Personally, I don't agree with a lot of what Bush is about. Ideologically, we come from different camps. But that is my opinion. Others would strongly disagree. As always there are many ways to accomplish specific objectives. Some may be better than others but often that is not "known" except in hindsight type speculation. As with all proposed "solutions" there are also many new problems that come about. Those are the pros and cons to consider and try to anticipate so they can also be dealt with later. Sometimes a situation just becomes damage control too.

However, the man is NOT stupid even though he SOUNDS stupid in the way he talks and some of the things he says. He may be abrasive and lack the finess of his father in international politics though. How it all pans out remains to be seen. Also like ALL articles, there is a bias. It is a good read though because it does attempt to explain some of the complexities pretty well and maybe would give some people a little more appreciation that there is MUCH more than meets the eye in these types of situations. I also get worn out at the simplistic black versus white or good vs evil "morality" that is always affixed to everything as if that has anything to do with reality and depending on who you are speaking with, morality is slippery because it is all a matter of subjective beliefs that sometimes leaders don't have the luxury of entertaining. There was a very good reason why the Emperor Constantine waited until his death bed to be baptised and accept Christianity--he knew that as the Emperor of Rome, that he would have to make many ruthless decisions that the Christian belief would prevent him from making.

The truth is that if nothing is done or the wrong approaches are taken to resolve a problem and the economy does in fact collapse, I am sure people won't care about the morality of events that were taken or not pursued when they are homeless and out of work. They will just be screaming. It will have no relevance. A disasterous world economic collapse could even be the very thing that would invoke martial law in order to prevent widespread public unrest and worse. So there is much at stake.

It is an interesting read because I don't think most people even slightly grasp the complexities of things or understand the danger of the current economic situation or any of the structural instabilities, politics, etc. As always, I have yet to see any ONE article that can even begin to explain "everything." I do think it is straight forward enough though that a thinking person can get past the author's bias and draw some of their own conclusions.

It also allows the reader to understand why many of the EU nations did not see this particularly as a move in their favor and were not particularly onboard even though they are our traditional allies. In the end, nations do tend to look out for their own interests. Only a fool would not understand this. Diplomatically, I do not think diplomatically it was handled well by the Bush team but then again, due to the approach put forth, I am not sure that it could have been either. Time will determine if he made a good move or not and history will bear that out.

 

[DcupSheepNipples]

Under simple terms all of this falls under the battle for GNWO control! But most people are unable to understand this aspect of Human Nature!

 

[HumorMe]

It was a very, very long read but a good one at that.

While the author makes many good examples, it's my personal belief that this view is just another piece as to why we are bombing Iraq. Maybe there is a lot of truth in what he writes about but it's not the whole picture.



Time will tell who is right and who is wrong.

Good read and thanks for sharing.

 

[ariolanine]

Good article. I'm still not sure why it matters what the standard is. If the US is the largest consumer of crude oil in the world, why would a euro standard have any affect on us?

 

[DealsMorte]

The way I view it is pretty simple. No matter what the real reasons are behind the war (and we will never know unless we can read policy makers minds). The world will be a better place with one less mass murdering sicko in power of a country. I think we can all agree on this.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

I was not intending to give the impression that the reasons given in the article are the ONLY reasons. Mainly I was putting it forth as one of the better attempts to explain some of the complexities of the situation and try to elevate the discussion on here a little above remarks like Bush is stupid, or let's kick some Iraqi ass, or the war is to democratize Iraq (which is mainstream media junk to "simplify" things for low level lack of comprehension and people that can't focus for more than three seconds on a topic).

Thanks for the clarification. In the first post you made, you said "what this war is REALLY about". It is far beyond this.

However, the man is NOT stupid even though he SOUNDS stupid in the way he talks and some of the things he says. He may be abrasive and lack the finess of his father in international politics though. How it all pans out remains to be seen. Also like ALL articles, there is a bias. It is a good read though because it does attempt to explain some of the complexities pretty well and maybe would give some people a little more appreciation that there is MUCH more than meets the eye in these types of situations.

His public speaking is improving. Early on he was a poor communicator. he has improved considerably. he is probably of above average intelligence.

I also get worn out at the simplistic black versus white or good vs evil "morality" that is always affixed to everything as if that has anything to do with reality and depending on who you are speaking with, morality is slippery because it is all a matter of subjective beliefs that sometimes leaders don't have the luxury of entertaining.

I get sick of it too.

There was a very good reason why the Emperor Constantine waited until his death bed to be baptised and accept Christianity--he knew that as the Emperor of Rome, that he would have to make many ruthless decisions that the Christian belief would prevent him from making.

This is a gross and misleading oversimplification, if not an outright lie. In 337, when Constantine died, the Christian belief system was nothing like it is today. In 325, Constantine presided over the Council of Nicaea, where he basically invented the precursor of modern Christianity, utilizing a lot of the tenets of something called Mithraism, which was very popular among the Roman Army. (Virgin birth was central to Mithraism, for example)

Hence the phrase, "Roman Catholic Church".

It was also Constantine that invented the symbolism of the cross. The IHS on priestly vestments is a link to Constantine's IN HOC SIGNO VINCES" vision. (By this sign conquer).

Constantine was baptized only in order to perpetuate his belief system. But all that is kind of irrelevant.

The truth is that if nothing is done or the wrong approaches are taken to resolve a problem and the economy does in fact collapse, I am sure people won't care about the morality of events that were taken or not pursued when they are homeless and out of work. They will just be screaming. It will have no relevance. A disasterous world economic collapse could even be the very thing that would invoke martial law in order to prevent widespread public unrest and worse. So there is much at stake.

Yep. Any student of history has seen it before.

It is an interesting read because I don't think most people even slightly grasp the complexities of things or understand the danger of the current economic situation or any of the structural instabilities, politics, etc. As always, I have yet to see any ONE article that can even begin to explain "everything." I do think it is straight forward enough though that a thinking person can get past the author's bias and draw some of their own conclusions.

It also allows the reader to understand why many of the EU nations did not see this particularly as a move in their favor and were not particularly onboard even though they are our traditional allies. In the end, nations do tend to look out for their own interests. Only a fool would not understand this. Diplomatically, I do not think diplomatically it was handled well by the Bush team but then again, due to the approach put forth, I am not sure that it could have been either. Time will determine if he made a good move or not and history will bear that out.

Quality articles are always welcome.

 

[NorCalBdyBldr]

"Thanks for the clarification. In the first post you made, you said "what this war is REALLY about". It is far beyond this."

LOL, oh yeah, that was just a journalistic type "attention getter" to see if I could get some people to read something this long but fairly interesting. So you caught me cold as I took some "liberties" too........I have probably been hanging around some marketing friends of mine a bit too much.......LOL