Sportbike World banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,362 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Many people have beliefs as to why we are in Iraq and these other oil-bearing countries. My idea is this...



THE EURO!...You see the American dollar use to be one of the strongest forms of currency in the world, and comparable to the Japanese Yen. Now with the current exchange rate of the Euro it would cost the U.S. a lot more to purchase foreign oil at the current currency rate exchange. Makes sense to seize the oil fields then to pass 30-40 % inflation on to the U.S. consumer.

I am not much into politics, or foreign policy. I dont follow the news (too depressing), but this just makes sense to me, and may have already been stated in one form of media coverage or another. If I am off base then give CONSTRUCTIVE critisicm as to why.
:2cents:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
That crossed my mind, too. I posted something to that effect about a year ago in one of the "Saddam's an evil man" and "we're taking them democracy" threads.

It was not stated in so many words but in light of some of the first hand accounts of cabinet meetings in Paul O'Neill's book, it crossed my mind. I never bought the simplicity of ANY of the excuses used, but that has peaked my curiousity. Still don't know for sure, that reason or any other. His book is well worth a read though, on Iraq and many other topics.

What got you asking?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,474 Posts
The consumer's cost of fuel has risen a fairly small amount compared to what the cost of a barrel of crude has over the last 2-3 decades. Since the war shit started crude prices have doubled and we are paying 20-30 percent more. Don't forget that there is more to the cost at the pump than just the price of a barrel of crude too. It isn't that simple. More things have gone up. For one insurance rates at high risk facilities such as refineries has gone up. The medical insurance rates have risen drastically also. It all just kind of snowballs. The insurance companies have taken advantage of 9/11 in a big way and it is total bullshit the way they have done it.

You can turn the other way and deny our dependence on foreign oil all you want. It's not going to change anytime soon. Too damn many tree huggers and the folks making the laws love driving around in their nice luxury cars, SUVs and private planes. It is a problem that both freaking partys are feeding. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
I don't think that's the point of the discussion. At least for me it's not.

There are some who feel, with possibly some truth to it, that our currency and position as the world "leader" is being threatened and that includes, by the European Union. The strength of the Euro, our trade deficits with Europe, as well as world wide give some creedence to the thought.

For me, it surfaced as one of Saddam's games during the "Oil For Food" program, when he said he wanted his payments in Euros instead of dollars. That certainly was gamesmanship on his part, but how much? There certainly was discussion on the matter and I think it was France, but maybe some others, who got a little ego boost out of it, and with some of the international currency issues, it's not so far fetched as it once would have been. If you look at the Asian countries collectively, then the EU, then the US, then our deficits (what we owe) to both of them, we're NOT in the driver's seat as we once were and as many of our ill-informed citizens continue to believe. And I DON'T mean military. You don't control the world that way.

It was that and the follow up discussions with economists, ambassadors, and others, on some very real situations that we are in with our deficits, then Bush's (to me) unexplained dismissal and ignorant treatment of our historic European allies, that make me start wondering if maybe THAT'S what it's all about. This first occurred to me a little over a year ago but was only my own musings based on various things I learned. I don't know, haven't formed a final opinion, but haven't dismissed that possibility either. Conspiracy theorists can go crazy with this stuff but I'd be curious if there's any more real solid info on the subject.

Funny thing, and why I asked Maley what got him interested, is that I didn't read anything with this specific conclusion but came upon it myself as different facts surfaced in widely varying sources and topics, that suddenly struck me as possibly related. Apparently it did someone else too, or maybe there's more real information out there on the topic. I'd be curious to hear.

.... and this is the "STUFF" I talk about as being REAL IMPORTANT while we get fed the bones like constitutional ammended gay bashing and flag burning that is SUCH a NO NEVER MIND in the big picture. There's real things to worry about and be informed about. Bush's and Kerry's extensive military carreers ain't one of them. THIS IS! Whether or not it's why we're at war, it's a VERY REAL issue that will effect us and our kids and it's not easy to get a thorough news report on it. We're too busy with the stupid shit, thinkin' we're all informed.:( :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,474 Posts
Dad said:
I don't think that's the point of the discussion. At least for me it's not.

There are some who feel, with possibly some truth to it, that our currency and position as the world "leader" is being threatened and that includes, by the European Union. The strength of the Euro, our trade deficits with Europe, as well as world wide give some creedence to the thought.

For me, it surfaced as one of Saddam's games during the "Oil For Food" program, when he said he wanted his payments in Euros instead of dollars. That certainly was gamesmanship on his part, but how much? There certainly was discussion on the matter and I think it was France, but maybe some others, who got a little ego boost out of it, and with some of the international currency issues, it's not so far fetched as it once would have been. If you look at the Asian countries collectively, then the EU, then the US, then our deficits (what we owe) to both of them, we're NOT in the driver's seat as we once were and as many of our ill-informed citizens continue to believe. And I DON'T mean military. You don't control the world that way.

It was that and the follow up discussions with economists, ambassadors, and others, on some very real situations that we are in with our deficits, then Bush's (to me) unexplained dismissal and ignorant treatment of our historic European allies, that make me start wondering if maybe THAT'S what it's all about. This first occurred to me a little over a year ago but was only my own musings based on various things I learned. I don't know, haven't formed a final opinion, but haven't dismissed that possibility either. Conspiracy theorists can go crazy with this stuff but I'd be curious if there's any more real solid info on the subject.

Funny thing, and why I asked Maley what got him interested, is that I didn't read anything with this specific conclusion but came upon it myself as different facts surfaced in widely varying sources and topics, that suddenly struck me as possibly related. Apparently it did someone else too, or maybe there's more real information out there on the topic. I'd be curious to hear.

.... and this is the "STUFF" I talk about as being REAL IMPORTANT while we get fed the bones like constitutional ammended gay bashing and flag burning that is SUCH a NO NEVER MIND in the big picture. There's real things to worry about and be informed about. Bush's and Kerry's extensive military carreers ain't one of them. THIS IS! Whether or not it's why we're at war, it's a VERY REAL issue that will effect us and our kids and it's not easy to get a thorough news report on it. We're too busy with the stupid shit, thinkin' we're all informed.:( :)
I see. Very good points. Does turning more of the US control over to the UN make things better? That is basically what Kerry and his boys want. Clinton was the same way. They push toward a combined union. That is dangerous in my opinion.

As for the last paragraph you wrote. I agree 100%. I think most of the shit(gay marriage, abortion, military records, etc.) they discuss is trivial compared to the real issues at hand.

What historic allies are you referring to that we dismissed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
RCjohn said:
I see. Very good points. Does turning more of the US control over to the UN make things better? That is basically what Kerry and his boys want. Clinton was the same way. They push toward a combined union. That is dangerous in my opinion.
It's what we're told all of the time by those who have a high and mighty view of their/our position in the world but I think that's a leap that doesn't pass muster. Working with the world community to try to get a consensus on things is plain old smart. It DOESN'T mean you forfeit your sovereignty and as far as Clinton goes, there's a perfect example of the truth being different from the perception. Bosnia and Kosovo were attempted through the UN but not accepted. We (Clinton) went in ourselves. I also think there's a lot more intrigue to that, including a "winked" blessing by most of our European allies, but that's too big to discuss here.

No candidate I know of will forfeit our sovereignty in the final analysis but they SHOULD attempt to have a worldwide way of meeting on world issues and dealing with them. That's the smart way to do it and most successful with the least pain when it works. That's been the UN, with all of its problems.

I think we were near to just such a resolution, cumbersome as it may have been, with the Iraq situation. By our forcing it on the table at the UN, getting sanctions passed, even if it was more than the impatient could stand, we were effectively tieing Saddam up which met the immediate concern, and getting closer to the coaltion that we should have had to get to the final resolution that was really needed. I sincerely believe that by now, we would have had Saddam gone, a laudible goal, and it would have been by their people (the Kurds maybe?), some other group in their society, or more likely, by a TRUE "Coalition of the Guys With Troops, International Importance, and Money", not a "coalition of the willing". It would have been an easier pill to swallow for the Arab world, our allies, and a lot less costly to the US, in dollars, lives, and ways we still don't know. What we did and how we did it, especially the urgency, makes NO SENSE to me..... unless the war had a whole different agenda piggybacked on it... to me, the point of the thread.

If the UN's not working, fix it or come up with a new one that gets everybody at the table. Call it what you will but DON'T chuck that one in the basket without a better plan to get to that end. If it's THAT END that's bothering you, then we disagree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,474 Posts
Dad said:
It's what we're told all of the time by those who have a high and mighty view of their/our position in the world but I think that's a leap that doesn't pass muster. Working with the world community to try to get a consensus on things is plain old smart. It DOESN'T mean you forfeit your sovereignty and as far as Clinton goes, there's a perfect example of the truth being different from the perception. Bosnia and Kosovo were attempted through the UN but not accepted. We (Clinton) went in ourselves. I also think there's a lot more intrigue to that, including a "winked" blessing by most of our European allies, but that's too big to discuss here.

No candidate I know of will forfeit our sovereignty in the final analysis but they SHOULD attempt to have a worldwide way of meeting on world issues and dealing with them. That's the smart way to do it and most successful with the least pain when it works. That's been the UN, with all of its problems.

I think we were near to just such a resolution, cumbersome as it may have been, with the Iraq situation. By our forcing it on the table at the UN, getting sanctions passed, even if it was more than the impatient could stand, we were effectively tieing Saddam up which met the immediate concern, and getting closer to the coaltion that we should have had to get to the final resolution that was really needed. I sincerely believe that by now, we would have had Saddam gone, a laudible goal, and it would have been by their people (the Kurds maybe?), some other group in their society, or more likely, by a TRUE "Coalition of the Guys With Troops, International Importance, and Money", not a "coalition of the willing". It would have been an easier pill to swallow for the Arab world, our allies, and a lot less costly to the US, in dollars, lives, and ways we still don't know. What we did and how we did it, especially the urgency, makes NO SENSE to me..... unless the war had a whole different agenda piggybacked on it... to me, the point of the thread.

If the UN's not working, fix it or come up with a new one that gets everybody at the table. Call it what you will but DON'T chuck that one in the basket without a better plan to get to that end. If it's THAT END that's bothering you, then we disagree.
12 years of his shit wasn't patient enough? Although I think we made a mistake going in when we did. I feel we should have just went in immediatly and screw the UN or we should have waited a little longer to get everything in place. 12 years of Saddam's bullshit was enough for me either way.

I personally am afraid of the left turning over our soverienty to the UN. It isn't that simple but it is something I think some of them would like to do. There aren't enough there to make it happen anytime soon but if we don't keep our eyes and ears open it will happen. Hell the UN already holds the liens to much of our public lands. Granted it doesn't mean alot currently since it's not like they can come and take it.

Of course as you know, I work for the government so I don't trust a damn thing they tell us(either party). If the public only knew a fraction of what goes on with the government they would shit themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
RCjohn said:
12 years of his shit wasn't patient enough? Although I think 12 years of Saddam's bullshit was enough for me either way.
I measured it in threat, not years.;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,849 Posts
RCjohn said:
Well see, there you go. Always using the wrong ruler. :D
Hey Maley...you really stirred some shit up on this one:laughing: :thumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,230 Posts
RCjohn said:
Well see, there you go. Always using the wrong ruler. :D
:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,362 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
sisqo said:
Hey Maley...you really stirred some shit up on this one:laughing: :thumb:

Its true what they say," You have to break a few eggs to make a good omelet."

Dad to answer your question about why I started this thread, and why I suddenly "woke up." is this.

A pair of blue jeans.:confused:

Confused yet? I will explain. I was stationed over seas for a year back in 2000. I remember how strong the American dollar was in comparison to the Deutch Mark. Bosnia for example had as many as 20 different forms of currency over the course of the conflict, and only the mark came out as being widely accepted.

I bought things overseas for a quarter of what I would have spent here, and it was a good time for this U.S. soldier.

So here in 2004 I go with my ex wife to the mall here in Colorado Springs. She has just returned from Holland, visiting relatives, and she was telling me about this pair of Aeropastle jeans that she bought there. The exact pair of jeans that was on the rack in front of me now. She paid roughly 50 euros for them in Holland, but spent more there than if she had paid the sale price of 29.95 here in the states. She said that eating out in restaurants over there was expensive as well.

I realized that its not so much expense as it is lack of buying power for the US dollar.


1,000.00 EUR
Euro = 1,268.80 USD
United States Dollars
1 EUR = 1.26880 USD 1 USD = 0.788145 EUR

Above is the current Euro to US dollar conversion as of this post day. A single dollar is only worth .79 cents if you went to Europe.

Does anyone else find something extemely unnerving about this


:confused:

At this rate our grand children will get to see what a third world country looks like because they will be living in one.:2cents:
If you look at the Asian countries collectively, then the EU, then the US, then our deficits (what we owe) to both of them, we're NOT in the driver's seat as we once were and as many of our ill-informed citizens continue to believe. And I DON'T mean military. You don't control the world that way.
No you dont. Its like going into Citibank with an Uzi and telling the cashier that you dont feel like paying your damn Visa bill.:laughing:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,474 Posts
maley2000 said:
Its true what they say," You have to break a few eggs to make a good omelet."

Dad to answer your question about why I started this thread, and why I suddenly "woke up." is this.

A pair of blue jeans.:confused:

Confused yet? I will explain. I was stationed over seas for a year back in 2000. I remember how strong the American dollar was in comparison to the Deutch Mark. Bosnia for example had as many as 20 different forms of currency over the course of the conflict, and only the mark came out as being widely accepted.

I bought things overseas for a quarter of what I would have spent here, and it was a good time for this U.S. soldier.

So here in 2004 I go with my ex wife to the mall here in Colorado Springs. She has just returned from Holland, visiting relatives, and she was telling me about this pair of Aeropastle jeans that she bought there. The exact pair of jeans that was on the rack in front of me now. She paid roughly 50 euros for them in Holland, but spent more there than if she had paid the sale price of 29.95 here in the states. She said that eating out in restaurants over there was expensive as well.

I realized that its not so much expense as it is lack of buying power for the US dollar.


1,000.00 EUR
Euro = 1,268.80 USD
United States Dollars
1 EUR = 1.26880 USD 1 USD = 0.788145 EUR

Above is the current Euro to US dollar conversion as of this post day. A single dollar is only worth .79 cents if you went to Europe.

Does anyone else find something extemely unnerving about this


:confused:

At this rate our grand children will get to see what a third world country looks like because they will be living in one.:2cents:

No you dont. Its like going into Citibank with an Uzi and telling the cashier that you dont feel like paying your damn Visa bill.:laughing:
Silly boys, we aren't going to go to World Bank with an Uzi. We are going to go with submarines, aircraft carriers and one bad assed gang of soldiers. :D We just have to wait until this terrorist thing is over. :eek: Oh wait, terrorism will never stop so we will just use part of the ground forces at the teller window. :D
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top