Threatening Petroeuro?

[Grammatron]

That's not how it works. As long the Dollars are in foreign Hands - and please explain to me why it matters if these are Chinese or Fidschi-Hands - the Dollars value doesn't change because it's foreign owner.

None of that makes any sense unless you stripped this paragraph of a book worth of context.

The dollar value changes based on the demand for a dollar which in turn is based on the demand for US goods and services. And even that is a gross oversimplification.

 

[Oliver]

So let me see if I have your argument so far:

US is destabilizing its ties with Iran so it will be angry and in turn switch to petro-Euros to hurt US which then US will use as excuse to invade Iran to force them to switch to petro-dollars. Only US can not do this because it lost a lot of sympathy when it invaded Iraq for the same reasons.

Let me know if I missed something.

You're missing nothing here - besides the fact that we're speculating here since none of us is Member of the US-Security council or a leading Member of the CIA. You know what speculation is about, don't you?

 

[Grammatron]

You're missing nothing here - besides the fact that we're speculating here since none of us is Member of the US-Security council or a leading Member of the CIA. You know what speculation is about, don't you?

Making up crap that sounds like a conspiracy theory on an internet forum?

 

[Nitpick]

"vertrauensbruch [eng?]"

breach of confidence/faith/trust I'd say (and Leo agrees )

 

[Oliver]

Making up crap that sounds like a conspiracy theory on an internet forum?

Look, Grammatron. We all know by now that you're not interested to find answers. So you're showing the "Woo card" instead to those who are really interested about this topic. That's pretty okay for me. But since you're not interested in this topic by doing some homework for your own, I see no reason to reply to your derails any further.

And you may include the fact that I gave your posts attention nevertheless - until now.

 

[Oliver]

breach of confidence/faith/trust I'd say (and Leo agrees )

Thank you, Rheinländer.

 

[danielk]

Well, then I have to ask: Why did they switch back to Dollars anyway if it doesn't serve their or Opec's interests?

It does serve their interests - and Iraq's interests, too, I might add.

To me this sounds exactly like a purpose - even if I'm not able to estimate how big the financial difference is for Opec or America.

Oliver, the economic advantages would have to be large enough to justify a big-honking expensive war with thousands of dead American soldiers. Not to mention Iraqi deaths and alienating the international community. As far as I know Iraq still hasn't reached the level of oil extraction it had before the war. It's like Silverstein's fantastic insurance scam that loses him money. Now you're probably going to say that the war effort didn't work out as the US thought it would. But it would have meant an expensive occupation even if everything had worked out as planned. If you want to show that the US anticipated a monetary net win larger than zero, you're invited to do the math.

And even if you could prove that the US was dumb enough to think they would make money out of this war, why do you believe they would repeat the same mistake with Iran? After all they already got burned once, public opinion is against more military adventures, and Iran is a much tougher enemy than Iraq was. It doesn't add up.

 

[Oliver]

It does serve their interests - and Iraq's interests, too, I might add.

Oliver, the economic advantages would have to be large enough to justify a big-honking expensive war with thousands of dead American soldiers. Not to mention Iraqi deaths and alienating the international community. As far as I know Iraq still hasn't reached the level of oil extraction it had before the war. It's like Silverstein's fantastic insurance scam that loses him money. Now you're probably going to say that the war effort didn't work out as the US thought it would. But it would have meant an expensive occupation even if everything had worked out as planned. If you want to show that the US anticipated a monetary net win larger than zero, you're invited to do the math.

And even if you could prove that the US was dumb enough to think they would make money out of this war, why do you believe they would repeat the same mistake with Iran? After all they already got burned once, public opinion is against more military adventures, and Iran is a much tougher enemy than Iraq was. It doesn't add up.

My understanding of this Mess in Iraq would be - if the Dollar-Issue had something to do with it, that a Trillion-Dollar War is a very small amount compared to a 100-Trillion-Dollar loss when the Dollar collapses.

But again: I still don't know if the Euro-Thingy is an issue at all. Maybe. And I also don't know if the invasion of Iraq was just a "Warning" to others.

We don't know the real intentions: The WMD's were a lie and the Terrorists are in Afghanistan. You don't believe that American Strategists are complete Nut-Jobs, do you?

 

[danielk]

Your prediction lacks. You forgot that America already lost a lot of sympathy.
To invade Iran would be a major "vertrauensbruch [eng?]". That's indeed a major hurdle, isn't it?

Oliver, what the bloody hell are you talking about!? Do you know what a prediction is? I came up with one in order to test your hypothesis!

I thought you have a better comprehension regarding foreign politics. And this isn't meant as a "Beleidigung (Insult)".

 

[Oliver]

Oliver, what the bloody hell are you talking about!? Do you know what a prediction is? I came up with one in order to test your hypothesis!

Please ask your question again - and maybe in German, too. It's nearly three a clock in the morning and I'm really tired as hell.

 

[danielk]

My understanding of this Mess in Iraq would be - if the Dollar-Issue had something to do with it, that a Trillion-Dollar War is a very small amount compared to a 100-Trillion-Dollar loss when the Dollar collapses.

But we already showed you that the Dollar wasn't going to collapse just because of Iraq switching its oil trade to Euros.

But again: I still don't know if the Euro-Thingy is an issue at all. Maybe. And I also don't know if the invasion of Iraq was just a "Warning" to others.

Yes and no. The invasion demonstrated that the US are willing to use military force to remove a dictator defying the international community. On the other hand it greatly helped Iran.

We don't know the real intentions: The WMD's were a lie and the Terrorists are in Afghanistan. You don't believe that American Strategists are completely Nut-Jobs, do you?

No. I believe they're trying to do just what neo-conservatives always wanted to do: Stopping the realpolitik of pandering to dictators and exerting American influence in order to shape the world in a way favorable to American interests. That's it, roughly.

 

[danielk]

Please ask your question again - and maybe in German, too. It's nearly three a clock in the morning and I'm really tired as hell.

OK, tomorrow if I find the time.

 

[Oliver]

But we already showed you that the Dollar wasn't going to collapse just because of Iraq switching its oil trade to Euros.

Yes and no. The invasion demonstrated that the US are willing to use military force to remove a dictator defying the international community. On the other hand it greatly helped Iran.

No. I believe they're trying to do just what neo-conservatives always wanted to do: Stopping the realpolitik of pandering to dictators and exerting American influence in order to shape the world in a way favorable to American interests. That's it, roughly.

Okay. Here's a "Woo-Idea" for you while I go to bed now:

What if America is concerned about the real threat of Inflation?
What if Iraq was a warning to others who are threatening the Dollar?

Auch die Absicht Saddam Husseins, künftig nur noch den Euro anstelle des Dollars als Zahlungsmittel für Öllieferungen zu akzeptieren, soll nach der Petrodollar-Theorie maßgeblich die Kriegsentscheidung beeinflusst haben. Wären andere Länder diesem Beispiel gefolgt, so hätte dies fatale Konsequenzen für die USA gehabt. Im Mai 2003, nach dem Sieg der USA, verabschiedete die OPEC einen förmlichen Beschluss, die Ölrechnungen auch zukünftig in Dollar abzurechnen.

Source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begr%C3...tergr.C3.BCnde

Okay, enough woo for today - Good night, everybody...

 

[danielk]

Look, Grammatron. We all know by now that you're not interested to find answers. [remainder of paragraph full of insults stripped]

Oliver, you have no grounds whatsoever to lash out at others like that. Wer im Glashaus sitzt... you know what I mean.

 

[Grammatron]

Look, Grammatron. We all know by now that you're not interested to find answers. So you're showing the "Woo card" instead to those who are really interested about this topic. That's pretty okay for me. But since you're not interested in this topic by doing some homework for your own, I see no reason to reply to your derails any further.

And you may include the fact that I gave your posts attention nevertheless - until now.

Dude, you that's not cool. You just broke every irony meter in the North America. Those cost good petro-dollar...I mean dollars.

I gave you an answer to every question you asked, which you then promptly and rudely ignored and proceeded to either make a wild and baseless comment or ask the same question again.

So, if you want to continue talking about things you don't understand or refuse to understand by all means.

 

[Matteo Martini]

No, no - this has nothing to do with any Kurds or the former Iraqi executive branch. It's about the possible chance that the invasion of Iraq may had something to do with the dollars value.

If this is the case, it also may be a reason for intervening in Iran. I guess you know from US-military interventions in the past, that most of them had nothing to do with freedom and other fairytales like that since the CIA never had problems to support the ugliest Dictators as long they were "staying the US-Course".

Did you find some articles about that in your national press?

I agree with you.
My point was, that, whatever was the reason the led the US to invade Iraq, that does not take away the crimes that Saddam Hussein did, do you agree?

 

[rtalman]

So let me see if I have your argument so far:

US is destabilizing its ties with Iran so it will be angry and in turn switch to petro-Euros to hurt US which then US will use as excuse to invade Iran to force them to switch to petro-dollars. Only US can not do this because it lost a lot of sympathy when it invaded Iraq for the same reasons.

Let me know if I missed something.

You missed 9/11 being a false flag to justify going into Iraq.

 

[NoZed Avenger]

Edited and Deleted.

Why bother?

 

[Oliver]

I agree with you.
My point was, that, whatever was the reason the led the US to invade Iraq, that does not take away the crimes that Saddam Hussein did, do you agree?

Of course I agree with that. But if you ask me which Politician is doing the biggest crimes, I 'm not that sure who to pick. Saddam wasn't the worst one.

[kidding] After all, Bill O'Reilly is the worst person in the world. [/kidding]

 

[Oliver]

Once again you ran around the point.

Answer my question, I'm trying to explain things to you: Can you buy goods with dollars in your neighborhood?

Yes. I could go to the next Airport Tax-free Shop or the next US-Base (With a German Military Pass) and get rid of my dollars - for example.