Larry Becraft
Is This the Real Reason for War in Iraq?
Fri Aug 5, 2005 14:01
64.140.158.36

Is This the Real Reason for War in Iraq?
http://home.hiwaay.net/~becraft/IraqWarFRN.pdf

It will not come as news to anyone that the US dominates the world
economically and militarily. But the exact mechanisms by which American
hegemony has been established and maintained are perhaps less well understood
than they might be. One tool used to great effect has been the dollar, but its
efficacy has recently been under threat since Europe introduced the euro.
The dollar is the de facto world reserve currency: the US currency accounts for
approximately two thirds of all official exchange reserves. More than four-fifths
of all foreign exchange transactions and half of all world exports are
denominated in dollars. In addition, all IMF loans are denominated in dollars.
But the more dollars there are circulating outside the US, or invested by foreign
owners in American assets, the more the rest of the world has had to provide the
US with goods and services in exchange for these dollars. The dollars cost the
US next to nothing to produce, so the fact that the world uses the currency in
this way means that the US is importing vast quantities of goods and services
virtually for free.
Since so many foreign-owned dollars are not spent on American goods and
services, the US is able to run a huge trade deficit year after year without
apparently any major economic consequences. The most recently published
figures, for example, show that in November of last year US imports were worth
48% more than US exports1. No other country can run such a large trade deficit
with impunity. The financial media tell us the US is acting as the ‘consumer of
last resort’ and the implication is that we should be thankful, but a more
enlightening description of this state of affairs would be to say that it is getting a
massive interest-free loan from the rest of the world.
While the US’ position may seem inviolable, one should remember that the
more you have, the more you have to lose. And recently there have been signs of
how, for the first time in a long time, the US may be beginning to lose.
One of the stated economic objectives, and perhaps the primary objective, when
setting up the euro was to turn it into a reserve currency to challenge the dollar
so that Europe too could get something for nothing.
This however would be a disaster for the US. Not only would they lose a large
part of their annual subsidy of effectively free goods and services, but countries
switching to euro reserves from dollar reserves would bring down the value of
the US currency. Imports would start to cost Americans a lot more and as
increasing numbers of those holding dollars began to spend them, the US would
have to start paying its debts by supplying in goods and services to foreign
countries, thus reducing American living standards. As countries and businesses
converted their dollar assets into euro assets, the US property and stock market
bubbles would, without doubt, burst. The Federal Reserve would no longer be
able to print more money to reflate the bubble, as it is currently openly
considering doing, because, without lots of eager foreigners prepared to mop
them up, a serious inflation would result which, in turn, would make foreigners
even more reluctant to hold the US currency and thus heighten the crisis.
There is though one major obstacle to this happening: oil. Oil is not just by far
the most important commodity traded internationally, it is the lifeblood of all
modern industrialised economies. If you don’t have oil, you have to buy it. And
if you want to buy oil on the international markets, you usually have to have
dollars. Until recently all OPEC countries agreed to sell their oil for dollars only.
So long as this remained the case, the euro was unlikely to become the major
reserve currency: there is not a lot of point in stockpiling euros if every time you
need to buy oil you have to change them into dollars. This arrangement also
meant that the US effectively part-controlled the entire world oil market: you
could only buy oil if you had dollars, and only one country had the right to print
dollars - the US.
If on the other hand OPEC were to decide to accept euros only for its oil
(assuming for a moment it were allowed to make this decision), then American
economic dominance would be over. Not only would Europe not need as many
dollars anymore, but Japan which imports over 80% of its oil from the Middle
East would think it wise to convert a large portion of its dollar assets to euro
assets (Japan is the major subsidiser of the US because it holds so many dollar
investments). The US on the other hand, being the world's largest oil importer
would have, to run a trade surplus to acquire euros. The conversion from trade
deficit to trade surplus would have to be achieved at a time when its property
and stock market prices were collapsing and its domestic supplies of oil and gas
were contracting. It would be a very painful conversion.
The purely economic arguments for OPEC converting to the euro, at least for a
while, seem very strong. The Euro-zone does not run a huge trade deficit nor is
it heavily endebted to the rest of the world like the US and interest rates in the
Euro-zone are also significantly higher. The Euro-zone has a larger share of
world trade than the US and is the Middle East’s main trading partner. And
nearly everything you can buy for dollars you can also buy for euros - apart, of
course, from oil. Furthermore, if OPEC were to convert their dollar assets to
euro assets and then require payment for oil in Euros, their assets would
immediately increase in value, since oil importing countries would be forced to
also convert part of their assets, driving the prices up. For OPEC, backing the
euro would be a self-fulfilling prophesy. They could then at some later date
move to some other currency, perhaps back to the dollar, and again make huge
profits.
But of course it is not a purely economic decision.
So far only one OPEC country has dared switch to the euro: Iraq, in November
20002,3. There is little doubt that this was a deliberate attempt by Saddam to
strike back at the US, but in economic terms it has also turned out to have been a
huge success: at the time of Iraq's conversion the euro was worth around 83 US
cents but it is now worth over $1.05. There may however be other consequences
to this decision.
One other OPEC country has been talking publicly about possible conversion to
the euro since 1999: Iran2,4, a country which has since been included in the
George W. Bush’s ‘axis of evil’.
A third OPEC country which has recently fallen out with the US government is
Venezuela and it too has been showing disloyalty to the dollar. Under Hugo
Chavez’s rule, Venezuela has established barter deals for trading its oil with 12
Latin American countries as well as Cuba. This means that the US is missing out
on its usual subsidy and might help explain the American wish to see the back of
Chavez. At the OPEC summit in September 2000, Chavez delivered to the
OPEC heads of state the report of the 'Interrnational Seminar on the Future of
Energy’, a conference called by Chavez earlier that year to examine the future
supplies of both fossil and renewable energies. One of the two key
recommendations of the report was that ‘OPEC take advantage of high-tech
electronic barter and bi-lateral exchanges of its oil with its developing country
customers’5, i.e. OPEC should avoid using both the dollar and the euro for many
transactions.
And last April, a senior OPEC representative gave a public speech in Spain
during Spain’s presidency of the EU during which he made clear that though
OPEC had as yet no plans to make oil available for euros, it was an option that
was being considered and which could well be of economic benefit to many
OPEC countries, particularly those of the Middle East6.
As oil production is now in decline in most oil producing countries, the
importance of the remaining large oil producers, particularly those of the Middle
East, is going to grow and grow in years to come7.
Iraq, whose oil production has been severely curtailed by sanctions, is one of a
very small number of countries which can help ease this looming oil shortage.
Europe, like most of the rest of the world, wishes to see a peaceful resolution of
the current US-Iraqi tensions and a gradual lifting of the sanctions - this would
certainly serve its interests best. But as Iraqi oil is denominated in euros,
allowing it to become more widely available at present could loosen the dollar
stranglehold and possibly do more damage than good to US economic health.
All of this is bad news for the US economy and the dollar. The fear for
Washington will be that not only will the future price of oil not be right, but the
currency might not be right either. Which perhaps helps explain why the US is
increasingly turning to its second major tool for dominating world affairs:
military force.
REFERENCES
1. Anon., ‘Trade Deficit Surges to a Record High’, Reuters, (January 17, 2003),
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/4970891.htm
2. Recknagel, Charles, ‘Iraq: Baghdad Moves to Euro’, Radio Free Europe
(November 1, 2000),
http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2000/11/01112000160846.asp.
3. Anon., ‘A Look At The World's Economy’, CBS Worldwide Inc., (December
22, 2000),
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/12/22/2000/main259203.shtml.
4. Anon., ‘Iran may switch to euro for crude sale payments’, Alexander Oil and
Gas, (September 5, 2002), http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntm23638.htm
5. Hazel Henderson, ‘Globocop v. Venezuela’s Chavez: Oil, Globalization and
Competing Visions of Development’, InterPress Service, (April 2002),
http://www.hazelhenderson.com/Globocop%20v.%20Chavez.htm
6. Javad Yarjani, ‘The Choice of Currency for the Denomination of the Oil Bill’,
(April 14, 2002),
http://www.opec.org/NewsInfo/Speeches/sp2002/spAraqueSpainApr14.htm
7. The Association for the Study of Peak Oil, Newsletter 26, (February 2003),
http://www.asponews.org.
FURTHER READING
William Clark, ‘The Real Reasons for the Upcoming War With Iraq: A
Macroeconomic and Geostrategic Analysis of the Unspoken Truth’, (January
2003), http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html
=======================

Subject: Re: "Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War,"
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:15:52 EST
From: NANSINGS@aol.com
To: APFN@apfn.org


Based on "insider" information, 10/03/03, there is a 'cache of jewels' pipeline involving Iraq, between Lebanon and Syria, that includes nuclear and biological weapons. (About August 20th our black ops found a pair of dirty nuke devices and a cache of biological and nuclear weapons.) "Black Ops are continuing to work on the whole matter," per the "insider."

Interestingly enough, the Red Chinese went into Iraq before our troops arrived to accomplish what they wanted (possibly supplying weapons or helping to hide them, etc.) and thus, avoided a confrontation with the U. S.

According to the "insider," President Bush is withholding the incontrovertible evidence on WMDs found for revealing at a time of his choosing. This is mostly due to the fact that releasing the information will mean going to war with Syria, but also, its release is being timed for when it has the greatest advantage for his re-election campaign.

The "insider" claimed that when the report is released about the location and finding of WMDs, it will destroy the democratic party as we know it. This is because they've gone after Bush so relentlessly on the whole matter in an effort to instill distrust in those loyal to him, and to derail his efforts in the war, that the Democrats will end up looking very bad indeed.

Interestingly enough, regarding the year 2000 presidential race, a
Bible Code software search on the words FLA (Florida) and VOTE (Genesis 2:22 to 3:7) uncovered the following prior to the final year 2000 election results: "Nothing shall subdue the FLA 1,000 miracle votes given to Bush by God." The word "miracle" was hidden under the word "FLA."

Another search of the Code regarding George Bush, Jr., found "accepted Jesus" which verified that Gov. Bush had indeed turned his life over to God during a crisis at some prior time in his life, and therefore, was blessed by God (found in Numbers 22:38 and 23:14, Torah Code). Of course, this in itself didn't guarantee that he would win the presidency, however, another search on the words "2001" and "President" revealed that the President chosen was indeed Bush, as follows:

prayer / answer / vote / FLA/miracle / thousand / excess /
God's / chosen / president / 2001 / Bush / USA. This reads as follows:

(The) president chosen (in) 2001 (is) Bush (with/an) excess (of/a)
thousand vote(s) (in) Fla. *God's miracle answer (to) USA prayer.
Note: "Miracle" is also the transliteration of "Fla." and phonetically
spelled backwards is "thousand," two words meaning:
"Fla. miracle thousand."

*About a week after the election, CBN News - - when Bush was only a few hundred votes ahead at that point (out of approximately 100 million votes) - - reported Pat Robertson as mentioning that thousands of his listeners were fasting and praying for a Republican victory. It turned out to be an historical miracle in the making! Gore and his followers maintain the vote was stolen from him. Indeed, God had a hand in it!

On the morning of September 11, 2001, President Bush remarked on how the world had changed forever as a result of the destruction of the World Trade Center and the loss of countless lives by stating that it was the beginning of a long war between good and evil. He was right. According to the Bible Code, indications are that it was the start of a 10-1/2 year countdown, the "time and half-a-time" as prophesied in Daniel 12 of the Old Testament and in the last book of the New Testament, the Revelation to St. John who was, at the time, exiled to the island of Patmos.

The Bible Code brings a final warning to mankind. Two-thirds of mankind, though professing to believe in God, have not yet developed the godly character necessary to survive the coming destruction to much of life on planet Earth (described by most religions of the world). God prophesied that "unless those days were shortened there would be no flesh left on the face of the Earth."

The coming changes can be gradual or abrupt and catastrophic in nature depending on mankind's choices - - because God gave man free will. Consequently, if men don't change the way they deal with one another, it will most likely be the latter.

Fortunately there is hope: God states that He will intervene towards the end of the worst of the seven-year period of the greatest time of tribulation there ever has been or ever will be again on planet Earth in order to prevent not only mankinds' near total annihilation of themselves and other life forms on the earth, but also of the planet itself. - -

J. Noah, Future Prospects of the World According to the Bible Code, New Paradigm Books, 2002.
http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/11-04-03/discussion.cgi.28.html

Main Page - Saturday, 8/06/05

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]

APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES

messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)