Rumor has it that the US Navy is considering a buildup of forces in the Persian Gulf in anticipation of a strike against Iran. The AP reports it like this: “Speaking on condition of anonymity because the idea has not been approved, [a Defense Department] official said one proposal is to send a second aircraft carrier to the region amid increasing tensions with Iran, blamed for encouraging sectarian violence in neighboring Iraq as well as allegedly pursuing a nuclear weapons program.”
Yeah, right. Don’t be fooled. Iran’s nuclear program is not a threat to the United States. Iran says their uranium enrichment is for peaceful purposes. Even if they are lying, US intelligence agencies admit that Iran won’t be capable of making a bomb for another 5-10 years.
“Encouraging sectarian violence in Iraq”? According to Bush’s own Iraq study group the majority of the violence in Iraq is being caused by Iraqis, not by foreign fighters.
So what is the real deal? Check out this headline that is running in the foreign press, and a couple of US financial outlets, but is so far being ignored by America’s mainstream media:
Iran to replace dollar with euro: “The Iranian central bank is to convert the state’s foreign dollar assets into euros and use the euro for foreign transactions.”
5 comments:
Nadir: According to the neocons that you hate, US and Iranian people make more money if each of their economies thrive, with the highest possible average incomes and lowest possible unemployment rates. What do you mean by "it's about the money"?
That US troops will go and loot other nations, transferring a limited amount of wealth from foreigners into the pockets of a few Americans, who will stuff it into their mattresses? If this is what you mean, I am certain that you are wrong.
If instead you mean, taking actions that will cause the greatest possible increase in the amount of wealth existing on this earth, and its distribution to and circulation through the most possible pockets, then sure "it's about the money." Money, after all, is merely the standard measurement for building roads, schools, cars, houses, water treatment facilities, ipods, etc. and making them available to people.
I welcome Iran to transfer to Euros, based on an economy marked by twice the inflation and unemployment. You always see the worst in any action taken by the US govt. Might you ascribe European actions as merely attempting to seduce Iran's monetary business? Might you ascribe Iran's proposed action as merely attempting to undermine the forces attempting to engender social, political, electoral, economic, and religious freedom in the area?
No, because in your book, only US govt actions are evil, and all evil traces back the the US govt.
Don't be fooled: Iran's govt isn't acting to make the best deal possible for its people. Rather it is merely taking any action to undermine the only forces working to bring freedom and prosperity to the muslim world. It's all about suppressing human rights, maintaining totalitarian control in the name of midevel religious doctrine.
I'm unaware of any claims that Iran's govt isn't fueling the Shia violent nihilism. I'm aware that "foreign fighters" play only a small role, but the Shia violent resident nihilists are getting lots of funding and weapons from Iran's govt.
So you don't believe that Iran switching to euros is a threat to the US economy? And you don't believe the US would bomb Iran for endangering the US economy?
I am unsure on both counts. But I am sure that:
1. I support the Iranian govt's right to select any currency.
2. I oppose the US govt attracting use of its currency via any means other than facilitating the best possible economic policies, which involve low and flat taxes, and a small govt.
3. US citizens rich and poor will benefit much more from a free and prosperous Iran that sells it petroleum on the open market to the highest bidder rather than a poor, unfree Iran, including one in which the US military steals its petroleum and hands it over to US corporations.
4. I do not understand why the Eruo enjoys a higher value than the dollar given that the US economy exhibits so much more strength.
Post a Comment