Reply #18: I think I see a way to reconcile your viewpoint and that of "Professor" [View All]

[No Exit]

This alleged professor is saying, if I read his posts (in which he insists on explaining himself only partly, at best) correctly, that the bourse could not ruin us. IOW, he is saying that the articles which say it could ruin us are wrong.

That may or may not be.

But I do believe that the neocons and other members of Bush's rich cabal thought they could lose a great deal of money when Saddam put into practice his plan of trading oil in euros instead of dollars, and I believe that they think they can lose a great deal of money if Iran does the same thing.

Hence, I do believe that the real reason for our invasion of Iraq was what your sources say it was: fear that the dollar would not be the sole oil-trading currency. And the reason for the upcoming attack on Iran is the same.

Certainly the Iraq invasion was NOT about "weapons of mass destruction" or "links to Al Quaeda", nor will the Iran invasion be about those or similar red herrings.

In early 2003, I wondered why we were really invading. Though I have no inside knowledge of our foreign affairs, I just instinctively knew that the real story was not what they were telling us.

My hope is that if anyone does lose big money when the Iranian bourse takes effect, it will be those same rich people who are currently abusing our government and our country. It stands to reason that those who have the most stand to lose the most. And in that case, the majority of us (not being gazillionaires) don't have nearly as much to worry about from Iran--which means that the majority of us should NOT sign up to help with any invasion of Iran.

Since Reagan, I've heard over and over that our little assets and well-being were inextricably tied to those of our gazillionaires. Well, I refuse to believe that any more. There is some connection, but I do not think it is absolute.