The real reason why we went to war with Iraq, and why will invade Iran

[Pryderi]

Not for the weak of heart. This site is full of the best, most valuable information for the real reasons for war.


http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html

n 1971, as it became clearer and clearer that the U.S Government would not be able to buy back its dollars in gold, it made in 1972-73 an iron-clad arrangement with Saudi Arabia to support the power of the House of Saud in exchange for accepting only U.S. dollars for its oil. The rest of OPEC was to follow suit and also accept only dollars. Because the world had to buy oil from the Arab oil countries, it had the reason to hold dollars as payment for oil. Because the world needed ever increasing quantities of oil at ever increasing oil prices, the world’s demand for dollars could only increase. Even though dollars could no longer be exchanged for gold, they were now exchangeable for oil.

The economic essence of this arrangement was that the dollar was now backed by oil. As long as that was the case, the world had to accumulate increasing amounts of dollars, because they needed those dollars to buy oil. As long as the dollar was the only acceptable payment for oil, its dominance in the world was assured, and the American Empire could continue to tax the rest of the world. If, for any reason, the dollar lost its oil backing, the American Empire would cease to exist. Thus, Imperial survival dictated that oil be sold only for dollars. It also dictated that oil reserves were spread around various sovereign states that weren’t strong enough, politically or militarily, to demand payment for oil in something else. If someone demanded a different payment, he had to be convinced, either by political pressure or military means, to change his mind.

The man that actually did demand Euro for his oil was Saddam Hussein in 2000. At first, his demand was met with ridicule, later with neglect, but as it became clearer that he meant business, political pressure was exerted to change his mind. When other countries, like Iran, wanted payment in other currencies, most notably Euro and Yen, the danger to the dollar was clear and present, and a punitive action was in order. Bush’s Shock-and-Awe in Iraq was not about Saddam’s nuclear capabilities, about defending human rights, about spreading democracy, or even about seizing oil fields; it was about defending the dollar, ergo the American Empire. It was about setting an example that anyone who demanded payment in currencies other than U.S. Dollars would be likewise punished.

[TheBaldyMan]

1. No attack on Iran, not now not in the next few years.

In fact if there was an attack on Iran the US would lose control of Iraq overnight.

Not to mention that damn near every country in the world would be a no-go area for US businesses and tourists.

[Pryderi]

2. The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate “nuclear” weapo

II. Iranian Oil Bourse

The Iranian government has finally developed the ultimate “nuclear” weapon that can swiftly destroy the financial system underpinning the American Empire. That weapon is the Iranian Oil Bourse slated to open in March 2006. It will be based on a euro-oil-trading mechanism that naturally implies payment for oil in Euro. In economic terms, this represents a much greater threat to the hegemony of the dollar than Saddam’s, because it will allow anyone willing either to buy or to sell oil for Euro to transact on the exchange, thus circumventing the U.S. dollar altogether. If so, then it is likely that almost everyone will eagerly adopt this euro oil system:

http://www.energybulletin.net/12125.html

I deleted one paragraph from my first post in order to put this paragraph in. If you have the time, check out the site I'm linking.

[serryjw]

10. Since 3/20 Iran is threatening

NO Bourse yet!

[theobscure]

5. I agree that an invasion of Iran isn't possible...but what is the clear

deterrent to bombing them? It looks to me like they are going through the same machinations now as those which led to Shock and Awe in Iraq. All they need is some kind of catalyzing event. I think it would be far too risky though to try and pull off another homeland attack ala 9/11.

What I can imagine them doing is prevoking or creating some kind of event in the region involving our troops there. Some kind of attack where they can trot out "evidence" that Iran was directly responsible (a missile strike at one of our bases in Iraq, for example). Right now, any kind of intervention in Iran is precluded by fear of what that could mean for our troops in Iraq. But, if some kind of event showed that our troops were under threat from Iran anyway......You get the idea.

edited: for clarity

[Pryderi]

7. Bombing Iran may actually produce a response by Iran. Bush is already

pushing the nuclear excuse for the bombing and Iran would respond with an actual attack.

[serryjw]

9. Can't use the same one twice

They are so good on variation of the same bushit. What the fuck is a 'program'?

quote.......
This has to be combined with the 2005 U.S. State Department "FINDING. The United States judges that, based on all available information, Iran has an offensive biological weapons program in violation of the BWC."
end quote.......
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12593.htm

[TheBaldyMan]

20. Any attack on Iran would have the gravest consequences in Iraq,

think of all the Shia in Iraq, the whole south of the country would rise up most probably joined Iraqis elsewhere.

It would be madness, there aren't enough troops in Iraq with the present situation, how the hell would they be expected to cope with the whole country against them.

[theobscure]

25. since when is madness a deterrent?

Obviously in my scenario they would basically be choosing to hang the troops in Iraq out to dry. This is why they would have to provoke or create the illusion that Iran struck our troops first. Are you saying that if, for instance, an Iranian missile hit an American base in Iraq, we would do nothing? I don't agree with that; it would be exactly what our government "needs" to bring full force to bear on Iran (i.e. nuclear).

[TheBaldyMan]

26. The Iranians won't strike first, if anything does happen it will come from

the Bush administration. I think that this would push the Pentagon into open rebellion against the chickenhawks. It is not a queation of gaining political advantage, it would seriously harm US interests, put the troops in even greater peril and goes into the realms of dangerously incompetent.

There is nothing to be gained in widening the conflict.

[theobscure]

27. what is to be gained in widening the conflict is the same thing that..

was to be gained by starting the conflict. American empire.

Also, since when is putting our troops in peril of great concern to them? They were sent in undermanned, under-equipped and under false pretenses. They have been willfully exposed to the affects of depleted uranium since the first Gulf War. Do I need to go into what happens when they become veterans?

The only concern they have regarding widening the conflict and putting the troops in further peril is a matter of public relations. Casting Iran in the role of provocateur would be all they need to handle that concern to most Americans.

[TheBaldyMan]

29. The won't be enough troops on the ground to hold onto an empire.

Also certain things are different today, Bush doesn't have 90%+ approval and is becoming more mired in scandal with every day that passes. The Armed Forces are already at full stretch.

Bush can sabre rattle all he wants because he isn't going to do anything else. Not as much as a bombing raid against Iran. Any aggression against Iran will end up with Iran gaining and the US losing.

That isn't empire building it's the reverse, it would be a humiliating defeat for the US and the immediate fall of the Bush regime. Compare it to the ports deal, the Bush admin doesn't even care what their core support thinks any more and they alienated a lot of FReeper types.

It would also piss off the Saudis if Bush did something that played into Iranian hands. He might not care about what America thinks but he is very considerate when it comes to the House of Saud.

[WinkyDink]

28. There ya go, being "rational" and all. They make their OWN reality!

[welshTerrier2]

3. yes, and no ...

the currency issue and the Iranian oil bourse seem to have been clear motivators for bush's invasion of the Middle East ... Iran is definitely next (probably via bombings) ...

but i think your arguments understate the importance of oil and corporate profits ... the oil industry has been reporting all-time record profits since the US invaded Iraq ... the lion's share of these profits have been directly traced to market instability in the M.E. ... industry profits are approaching the $100 billion mark ...

i just posted this in another thread but thought it was worth repeating here:

"Additionally, the IMF has demanded that the Oil Ministry remove price-supports for the highly-subsidized Iraqi domestic supplies. This has only increased the public’s outrage with the ongoing occupation. The IMF authorized a loan of $685 million to Iraq in December with the predictable “vice-like” provisions that require Iraq to follow its structural adjustment programs. In effect, these provisions put Iraqi resources under the direct control of transnational corporations who can decide the terms under which those resources are sold."

also check out this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=41161

[Pryderi]

4. True, oil profits are at record levels but if the dollar becomes the 1930s

German mark, what good is it?

[C_U_L8R]

6. I think they (we) intend to occupy

an entire swath of the Middle East from the Mediterranean (Lebanon/Syria)
to the Arabian Sea (Afghanistan / Pakistan). We often hear the Bush-Fuehrer and
his snarly sidekick speak of their "PLAN".. though they never say WHAT their plan
actually is. Well right now we have Iran covered on two fronts... and though we
heard much about it yet.. but Syria is pretty well covered as well.

Just imagine you're an oil man for a second.... this would be your pipe dream.

Empire.

[Pryderi]

8. What would the economic repurcussions be if all M.E. nations traded euros

for oil?

[serryjw]

11. Depends are whom gets on the band wagon

It ain't good and Bushit & Co know it

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

[Redstone]

12. Oh, goody. Let's go WAY BACK into conspiracy-theorist Valhalla,

and dig up the old "it's all about the GOLD" conspiracy theory.

That ought to be fun.

Redstone

[Pryderi]

13. Ok. What do you believe the reason we invaded Iraq to be?

[Redstone]

14. Because bush and them wanted to. Pretty simple.

Redstone

[Lexingtonian]

15. Vanity, a power trip, the fun of looting.

The usual reasons pirates do what they do.

[Pryderi]

16. Redstone and Lexingtonian, those are worse than conspiracy theories.

[Lexingtonian]

17. Uh, why?

Perchance you imagined adults were actually in charge?

[ladjf]

18. I don't believe that the U.S. will attack or invade Iran.

[dailykoff]

19. That might explain why the Iraqi currency was abolished

and recently replaced with an American-sponsored one.

[solinvictus]

21. Don't forget..

it would also be another punitive proxy war for Israel's benefit since both Iran and Iraq have been on their short list for years.

[OregonBlue]

22. Read in the Jerusalem Post or Dawn, the Pakistani English daily,

that the Saudis are considering replacing the dollar with Euros. I didn't understand the significance then but this explains it.

[4dsc]

23. The writing's on the wall

If I recall, the same circumstances that led us to war with Iraq are now being set in motion with Iran. Yet we sit here collectively on our hands will watch it come about!!

I wonder what happened to my nation!!

[OregonBlue]

24. Ditto! When will we start marching. I did it during Vietnam but this

time around I feel helpless. Is there a Dem out there that will finally rouse us out of our apathy?

[ProudDad]

30. You hit the nail on the head

That's also why they hate Hugo Chavez and actively tried to overthrow his government.


On edit: This bunch of fascists in Wash. DC is fucked-up crazy enough to drop a nuke on Tehran and get away with it...

[paparush]

31. Bush** Co equating Iran with Japan in WWII

Are these crazy-ass motherfuckers really trying to equate Iran with Japan in WWII to try to justify utilizing nukes?

Somebody (military) needs to address these Washington criminals with extreme prejudice.