|
Post by fretslider on Apr 6, 2010 22:22:55 GMT
I believe the war was planned after Saddam Hussein announced he would send money to the families of suicide bombers, who attacked Israel. Very shortly after Hussein's announcement all the concocted stories of weapons of mass destruction were spread by the US government. No, Anna, although that seems like a pretty convincing fig leaf. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "would cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar at the time.
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Apr 7, 2010 0:38:06 GMT
Anna - I too believe that the weapons of mass destruction news release was just a red herring. The Bush and Blair administrations really wanted to just get rid of Saddam and have UN troops on the ground in the region.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 7, 2010 8:21:15 GMT
No, Anna, although that seems like a pretty convincing fig leaf. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "would cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar at the time. absolutely fret...oil....the euro v dollar an unjustified war with nothing what ever to do with national security..terrorism..removing a vivious dictator or bringing democracy ;D etc etc democracy ;D the bigest load of bull..
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 7, 2010 11:12:16 GMT
No, Anna, although that seems like a pretty convincing fig leaf. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "would cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar at the time. absolutely fret...oil....the euro v dollar an unjustified war with nothing what ever to do with national security..terrorism..removing a vivious dictator or bringing democracy ;D etc etc democracy ;D the bigest load of bull.. That's right, mouse. They could have used Clinton's tagline.... "It's the economy, stupid"!
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 7, 2010 13:06:36 GMT
I believe the war was planned after Saddam Hussein announced he would send money to the families of suicide bombers, who attacked Israel. Very shortly after Hussein's announcement all the concocted stories of weapons of mass destruction were spread by the US government. no hon. as i posted at the opening of this thread, the war was planned back in 1997
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 7, 2010 13:10:06 GMT
absolutely fret...oil....the euro v dollar an unjustified war with nothing what ever to do with national security..terrorism..removing a vivious dictator or bringing democracy ;D etc etc democracy ;D the bigest load of bull.. That's right, mouse. They could have used Clinton's tagline.... "It's the economy, stupid"! except that it wasn't. had it been to benefit the economy, a case could have been made for the invasion. however, it was solely to benefit a few corporations such as haliburton and exxon mobil. the lunatics never had any concern for benefiting the real people
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 7, 2010 13:25:39 GMT
That's right, mouse. They could have used Clinton's tagline.... "It's the economy, stupid"! except that it wasn't. had it been to benefit the economy, a case could have been made for the invasion. however, it was solely to benefit a few corporations such as haliburton and exxon mobil. the lunatics never had any concern for benefiting the real people absolutely....come one come all noses in the trough..well only if your face fits of course
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 7, 2010 14:04:11 GMT
The economy is to a large extent in the hands of the few.
The possibility of the euro's becoming the first international reserve currency is now widely debated among economists. Alan Greenspan gave his opinion in September 2007 that the euro could indeed replace the U.S. dollar as the world's primary reserve currency. He said it is "absolutely conceivable that the euro will replace the dollar as reserve currency, or will be traded as an equally important reserve currency." Additionally, there has been suggestion that recent weakness of the US dollar might encourage parties to increase their reserves in euro at the expense of the dollar. In the second term of 2007, euro as a reserve currency had reached a record level of 25.6% (a +0.8% increase from the year before) - at the expense of US dollar, which dropped to 64.8% (a drop of 1.3% from the year before). By the end of 2007, shares of euro increased to 26.4% as the dollar slumped to its lowest level since records began in 1999, 63.8%.
The war may have grabbed some oil, but it has not stopped the march of the euro. It may be that the Greeks and Portuguese could hold it back a little, but the real problem for the US is its entanglement with China. China is probably regretting its huge holdings, but has to see it through.
That is the context, now.
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Apr 7, 2010 15:44:30 GMT
I believe the war was planned after Saddam Hussein announced he would send money to the families of suicide bombers, who attacked Israel. Very shortly after Hussein's announcement all the concocted stories of weapons of mass destruction were spread by the US government. no hon. as i posted at the opening of this thread, the war was planned back in 1997 Hi Jumbo! There are secret plans in the US Pentagon to invade Cuba, North Korea, Iran and even friendly nations such as Canada. These plans mean nothing, unless they're suddenly implemented. Again i remember very vividly that the weapons of mass destruction red herring-that all of us see as bogus- only became a public issue after Saddam made payments such as these to the families of suicide bombers in 2002 and the Iraq invasion came on March 20, 2003. www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Apr 7, 2010 15:51:24 GMT
I believe the war was planned after Saddam Hussein announced he would send money to the families of suicide bombers, who attacked Israel. Very shortly after Hussein's announcement all the concocted stories of weapons of mass destruction were spread by the US government. No, Anna, although that seems like a pretty convincing fig leaf. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "would cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar at the time. Again i think oil was only a secondary interest in the invasion of Iraq! Saddam's signed his own death sentence when he gave money to the families of suicide bombers.www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 7, 2010 17:13:13 GMT
no hon. as i posted at the opening of this thread, the war was planned back in 1997 Hi Jumbo! There are secret plans in the US Pentagon to invade Cuba, North Korea, Iran and even friendly nations such as Canada. These plans mean nothing, unless they're suddenly implemented. Again i remember very vividly that the weapons of mass destruction red herring-that all of us see as bogus- only became a public issue after Saddam made payments such as these to the families of suicide bombers in 2002 and the Iraq invasion came on March 20, 2003. www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html those are contingency plans drawn up by the military in the event it ever became necessary. the pentagon had nothing to do with the plans for the invasion of iraq until dumbya and the fools had conjured up the lies about the wmds. it is all there in pnac. the vision is american control of the world, but it had to begin with control of iraq, and go from there. of course, billy kristol and the gang didn't expect it to take ten years and still have nothing. that kind of dampens their hallucinations a bit
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 7, 2010 17:14:38 GMT
The economy is to a large extent in the hands of the few. The possibility of the euro's becoming the first international reserve currency is now widely debated among economists. Alan Greenspan gave his opinion in September 2007 that the euro could indeed replace the U.S. dollar as the world's primary reserve currency. He said it is "absolutely conceivable that the euro will replace the dollar as reserve currency, or will be traded as an equally important reserve currency." Additionally, there has been suggestion that recent weakness of the US dollar might encourage parties to increase their reserves in euro at the expense of the dollar. In the second term of 2007, euro as a reserve currency had reached a record level of 25.6% (a +0.8% increase from the year before) - at the expense of US dollar, which dropped to 64.8% (a drop of 1.3% from the year before). By the end of 2007, shares of euro increased to 26.4% as the dollar slumped to its lowest level since records began in 1999, 63.8%. The war may have grabbed some oil, but it has not stopped the march of the euro. It may be that the Greeks and Portuguese could hold it back a little, but the real problem for the US is its entanglement with China. China is probably regretting its huge holdings, but has to see it through. That is the context, now. that is just cause and effect. as the dollar depreciates against the euro, of course more people are going to scoop up euros.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 7, 2010 21:19:02 GMT
No, Anna, although that seems like a pretty convincing fig leaf. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "would cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar at the time. Again i think oil was only a secondary interest in the invasion of Iraq! Saddam's signed his own death sentence when he gave money to the families of suicide bombers.www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html Anna Hussein wasn't making the gesture for nothing and it wasn't really aimed against the west. "There were 23 families on hand to take President Saddam's money. Those honoured included a Palestinian policeman and a host of young men who sought glory in a largely futile death. Few had succeeded in sacrificing Israeli lives with their own. Before the cheques were given out there was an hour-long rally in support of the Iraqi leader's generosity The audience was expected to show its gratitude with a rallying cry for the Iraqi leader. Most people cheered the vitriolic denunciations of America and Israel. Only a few showed any great enthusiasm for the hate figure of the hour." - 2003 This exercise was for 'domestic purposes'
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Apr 7, 2010 21:35:55 GMT
Again i think oil was only a secondary interest in the invasion of Iraq! Saddam's signed his own death sentence when he gave money to the families of suicide bombers.www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48822,00.html Anna Hussein wasn't making the gesture for nothing and it wasn't really aimed against the west. "There were 23 families on hand to take President Saddam's money. Those honoured included a Palestinian policeman and a host of young men who sought glory in a largely futile death. Few had succeeded in sacrificing Israeli lives with their own. Before the cheques were given out there was an hour-long rally in support of the Iraqi leader's generosity The audience was expected to show its gratitude with a rallying cry for the Iraqi leader. Most people cheered the vitriolic denunciations of America and Israel. Only a few showed any great enthusiasm for the hate figure of the hour." - 2003 This exercise was for 'domestic purposes' Any financial support for terrorism by the leader of some nation will lead to consequences. I'm sure a lot of things happened behind the scenes after Hussein made this gesture and the final decision to start the war was one of them.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Apr 7, 2010 21:48:42 GMT
Any financial support for terrorism by the leader of some nation will lead to consequences. Not always, Anna.... "In many Irish bars and events throughout the US for decades there were people raising money for the "cause". Sometimes it was for "the children of Ulster" but one was always wondering where the money really went. Rarely in US media did you ever read about anger from the UK over this flow of money. Did you ever think how we felt about it? I've found it fascinating to watch how quick the US was at calling on the world to cut off terrorist funding after 9/11, yet itself allowed funding of Irish terrorists for so long. " I'm afraid your country is one of the worst offenders.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 7, 2010 23:02:07 GMT
Any financial support for terrorism by the leader of some nation will lead to consequences. Not always, Anna.... "In many Irish bars and events throughout the US for decades there were people raising money for the "cause". Sometimes it was for "the children of Ulster" but one was always wondering where the money really went. Rarely in US media did you ever read about anger from the UK over this flow of money. Did you ever think how we felt about it? I've found it fascinating to watch how quick the US was at calling on the world to cut off terrorist funding after 9/11, yet itself allowed funding of Irish terrorists for so long. " I'm afraid your country is one of the worst offenders. you beat me too it fret...it caused a great deal of harm to the way people thought about america and americans...it wasnt only financial suport either but political suport as well
|
|
|
Post by DAS (formerly BushAdmirer) on Apr 8, 2010 1:31:06 GMT
Here is my take on the Iraq invasion. Oil had nothing to do with it. WMD had nothing to do with it. GW Bush personal agenda to 'get Saddam' was not in play.
We had declared war on militant Islam. That's not a country but a movement that exists mainly in the middle east. Our real need was to get our military into the region, clear out the Taliban, and confront Iran (the worst of the worst regimes in that region). Saddam had been spending his oil riches on military equipment for years. His military had grown to be the world's fourth largest. He had a history of beligerance toward his neighbors. He harbored terrorists and he supported them with large payments to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He was a real for-sure bad guy. The strategists figured that we could take out Saddam, take out the Taliban, and have large concentrations of NATO troops on two of Iran's borders. They weren't sure how this would all play out but that seemed like real genuine and significant forward progress. They were correct.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 8, 2010 8:13:15 GMT
so to confront iran- irak gets invaded...right to clear out the taliban they invade irak and afghanistan and play into the hands of those who love death more than life through out the the islamic world .....that is about the most inept excuse of inept planning i have heard
those who planned it were far from correct they were wrong on all counts and frankly could run a booze up in a brewery..but have made wonderful proffits
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Apr 8, 2010 11:56:50 GMT
Here is my take on the Iraq invasion. Oil had nothing to do with it. WMD had nothing to do with it. GW Bush personal agenda to 'get Saddam' was not in play. We had declared war on militant Islam. That's not a country but a movement that exists mainly in the middle east. Our real need was to get our military into the region, clear out the Taliban, and confront Iran (the worst of the worst regimes in that region). Saddam had been spending his oil riches on military equipment for years. His military had grown to be the world's fourth largest. He had a history of beligerance toward his neighbors. He harbored terrorists and he supported them with large payments to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He was a real for-sure bad guy. The strategists figured that we could take out Saddam, take out the Taliban, and have large concentrations of NATO troops on two of Iran's borders. They weren't sure how this would all play out but that seemed like real genuine and significant forward progress. They were correct. you get to be right with the fact that sadaam had been buying military equipment from the u.s. for years. of course, your outright lie about him harboring terrorists totally discredits everything else you said anyway. nonetheless, even though nothing you're trying to claim has an iota of a basis in reality, if it did, the fools were definitely NOT correct in any way, shape, or form. the proof is in the pudding laddie
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Apr 8, 2010 17:20:10 GMT
he was also buying from russia..france and korea
|
|