Masochistic Perceptions, Trials and Truths

These are my cyberfied cerebral synapses ricocheting off reality as I perceive it: thoughts, opinions, passions, rants, art and poetry...

Saturday, February 18, 2006

A Perspective on the U.S. Invasion of Iraq


I’ve been reading Future: Tense by Gwynne Dyer recently and he presents a very interesting perspective on the U.S. led invasion of Iraq. Let me just put a disclaimer that this is my paraphrasing on Dyer’s book and I’d recommend that you read it.

In a nutshell, Dyer points out that when the Cold War ended the world was left with one superpower and the best chance in our History to move toward a one-world U.N. style of government. This created a problem for the United States in that its mighty arsenal and economic super power influence was directly related to people seeing the United States as a safe and stable economic haven for investments, supported further by the fact that the U.S. Dollar was the reserve currency utilised worldwide. The situation is as fragile as investors simply investing elsewhere, and, perhaps, moving to the Euro as the International currency of choice. Dyer describes it as such: “In mid 2004, the total amount of foreign money invested in the United States in forms that could be sold off fairly quickly was $8 trillion.” Should something like this transpire, by day two the Dollar would be worth half of its original value the day previously. Certainly we can see the Euro taking the charge as of late, threatening the Dollar. Dyer’s comments illustrate the effect the takeover of the Euro may have.

So, using Dyer’s line of thought, America did what it had been doing since the end of the Second World War through to the late 1980’s – make it appear as there is an International boogeyman out there and thus cause the Free world to come running to America the Policeman. Certainly the “Axis of Evil” tone of George W. Bush’s speeches resonate of Ronald Reagan in the early 1980’s. America has gone on to do what is described as “theatrical micro-militarism” to make it appear that the U.S.A. is shouldering the burden of defending the world from chaos.

9/11, Dyer argues, presented the springboard necessary to began the path that George Bush has taken Americans, and the world, down. Dyer states that 9/11 was an inevitable historical occurrence, but questions the existence of substantial sleeper cells waiting to claim it’s next victims. Dyer quotes the U.S.’s own figures in that “only 625 people, the vast majority of them non-American, were killed by ‘international terrorism’ in 2003, down from 726 people worldwide in 2002: about two people a day, far fewer than die from dog bites.” Judging by these stats, I think fears of an Islamic Talibanisation of the world is unlikely. Research and compare the number of murders in America versus the number of soldiers killed in Iraq for a perhaps even more alarming statistic.

Dyer continues along the lines that Kosovo, Afghanistan and Iraq are all small theories, again supporting the international police image, coupled with Cold War style rhetoric. America doesn’t need to invade places like Iraq for control of the oil as it would be cheaper to purchase it over the free market than it is to pay for a war which can not be one (the Americans can go home whereas the Iraqi’s ARE home and, like Vietnam, such wars are impossible to win). There is also a suggestion that Saddam Hussein was looking at utilising Euros as opposed to Dollars for oil sales which sparked the American war machine. This makes sense. Should Iraq, followed by the Saudi’s move toward the Euro, then it facilitates what I presented earlier.

So, where does this leave us? Dyer reasons that if the Americans pull out of Iraq in the next year or so then we can salvage the position our world was in back in 1990 when the Soviet Union collapsed. If the Americans prolong their stay in Iraq and possibly move elsewhere, then we will be in a very dangerous position.

3 Comments:

  • At 6:06 PM , Blogger jolly jolie said...

    Thank you for commenting on my blog

     
  • At 8:07 PM , Blogger auntiegrav said...

    Dyer's book sounds interesting. Have you read "The Conspirators" by Al Martin?
    Trying to put all of the machinations into a single perspective is almost impossible, but I keep trying. My bottom line is that there are things afoot which few people have the background to understand, let alone suspect without freaking out. I found my way to the blogs and conspiracies from a long, tortuous self-taught road in physics theory, looking for energy sources. What I found along the way led to books about everything from UFO's to Iran-Contra and now, 9/11. The trail follows energy and money. I cannot separate the two. The war wasn't about controlling the oil. I think it was about making it LOOK hard to get. When we really analyze the oil industry, the producing wells at $19 per bbl vs. the profitability of old wells at $60/bbl, the result is quite clear that we only needed to raise the price of oil in order to get the supply back up from various places to be able to replace Middle East oil (for a while). Somebody, I'm not saying who (but he carries a mean shotgun), has a card up his sleeve which covers any bet on the table. The move into Iraq for WMD wasn't done on fear, nor out of stupidity, but out of confidence that it was a necessary part of a bigger plan. "Conspiracy" has become the Big Red Button which shuts down all intelligent and public discussion these days. Unfortunately, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean someone ISN'T out to get you. Evolution favors the Paranoid. That's why we have religion.

     
  • At 8:46 PM , Blogger Real-E said...

    Not read the Martin book but will check it out.

    I concurr with your comments on conspiracies. People seem to confuse "conspiracy" with plain "tactics", Machieavellian or no. We can ruminate about these great secret plots, but that is the nature of ANY political/military use of intel. All international and domestic maneuvering has some aspect of cunning and underhandedness, this is not a grand plot to take over the world, but rather a matter of some form of smaller or large scale domination. Dyer's theory is most plausible and makes sense. Is it really a conspiracy or simply a manner of politiquing is up to how you see it.

     

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home