The reasons that we went war...

[Guest bengalrick]

"If that is the truth, and it was told...Would it be something that people would disagree with?"

since you put this as a hypothetical, i'll gladly submit my answer... no i wouldn't disagree... but i know this is a loaded question, b/c it will just fall back to "greed americans" but of course, i would want my gov't to protect our economy and our dollar... BUT, as conservative as i may be, there is no way in hell i would support a war for those reasons... that is ludicris and the notion that we are fighting for oil, which in turn will help our dollar, is also ludicris imo... turning back the clock to before the iraqi war, we had a lot of things on our minds... we were still fighting intensly in afghanistan, and to thwart our efforts for only the purpose of money, just doesn't make any sense to me... to use billions, upon billions of dollars, to save americans 0.50 cents at the pumps, just doesn't cut it as a reason for war... we felt a threat (imo) and the intelligence (shitty, i'll admit) was pointing towards getting rid of saddam...

btw stanley, i am also for social security, whether you believe me or not... i feel the system has done us good up till now, and should be used as
1. disability (but we have to be more vigilant in not giving 18 year olds w/ a sore back, disability for the rest of their lives, and tell them if you work, you won't get this free money)
2. for those that choose to continue to put money in the program, and not personal accounts...

my point is (and being in finances, you know this) i can make much, much more money off of my personal account over the course of 40 years... also, if the stock market did crash (heaven forbid) its my money that is being lost... my responsiblity... if SS falls (as the program stands now) the whole US is going to be rioting in front of the white house, and i'll be the loudest one...

i feel the pros far outweigh the cons, b/c of the reasons above, and also it would create real wealth for everyone... the poor would actually get... richer that hasn't been said is so long, it doesn't make sense for some reason...

[Jamie_B]

BZ,

The thing that doenst make any sence to me about this theroy is that if we are so dependent on oil, one would think the oil producing nations would be falling over themselves to supply it and would be doing the deals with the US espesally if the dollar is currently stronger than the Eruo.

So far as protecting our economic intrests of course I want us to do that, but Im not sure I buy that war is a sound option.

[Homer_Rice]

All of this is interesting and informative reading. I'll add a few observations, in no particular order, but from a "big picture" perspective:

Economy--By 1970, the US economy was in shambles. The August 1971 float of the dollar was the key response to that period of crisis. Since then, we have systematically disintegrated our economy until now, when it's time to pay the piper. Consider the economic events of the last 35 years as isolated moments in a process, as the trajectory of an arc, and the devolution of our economy over the past 35 years ought to be more apparent. I'll just list a few of the mini-processes within this larger context: petrodollars/eurodollars, oil crisis of 74; the usurious Volcker period; the destruction of the steel industry and the decline of manufacturing; the leveraged buyout and junk bond mania; the Latin American debt crisis, the looting and destruction of the Savings and Loan industry; the stock market crash of 87; for our Canadian friends--Campeau in the late 80s; NAFTA; the fictitious new economy bubble of the 90s; the Asian and Russian crises, as well as LTCM and hedge fund speculation; Barings; currently, the trade deficit and the worldwide impact of a weakened (and unsupported) dollar in a world economy that is dependent upon the dollar in the wake of the 1971 float.

Not a pretty picture seen in this light. I'm doing this off the top of my head, so I'm sure I'm forgetting equally important inflections on this overall process. Consider some of the effects: a declining living standard for the average family; a lack of investment in basic infrastructure insufficient to even replace old plant, much less to improve plant with new technology; health care gone to hell since the advent of the early 70s HMOs; the list goes on...

Geopolitical-- In periods with this kind of economic devolution, raw materials "grabs" become the vogue. Look at Middle Eastern and Central Asian events from that perspective, as well as Africa and Latin America. Think of Halford Mackinder's notions about Eurasia during the late 19th c, then compare to the more recent Brzezinski's "Grand Chessboard."

When things fall apart, the world gets a lot less peaceful and the urge to use brute force to achieve ends tends to override diplomacy.

Is this war about oil? Yes, but only partly so, in the context of raw materials holdings and control. Is it about reshaping the world in the post Cold War environment? Yes, partly so. Is it about the economic tsunami that's coming down the pike? Yes, partly so.

So, view this current admin's goals and maneuvers in this context. Who is shaping medium to long-term policy? Towards what end(s)? Most important, is this the kind of future you want for your kids?