your expert witness proves what exactly? that oil is magic?
No, it’s the primary motive for the U.S. foreign policy and has been since the Eisenhower administration.
Same difference. /sarc
do you recognise a difference between saying that the US government intervenes abroad, threatens and coerces, etc. etc. maybe its steals stuff or through force gets commodities cheap…
and saying
the dollar is backed by oil.
w/e
To the original poster: The U.S. government/the FED relies on military might to control vital resources, particularly oil. This drives up the value of USD so we can by stuff made in China; otherwise, the dollar would be worth squat.
Interesting charts:
Military spending: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=17508
U.S. dollar purchasing power: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog.php?view=17796
war is never useful ecomomic activity. does it make sence for us and japan to build two aircraft carriers and then go on simulated war and destroy those in the middle of ocean on grounds that it supports economic activity? read this example in meltdown
as far as benifit of iraq was that it provided us with future oil supply as relationships with venezuela were declining and it needed a assurance of future supply. weather it succeded of not, is another topic.
again ovearseas spending is to do with security and economics. so both have to be considered. for example as us regards iran as enemy, it may favour more intervention in that area even if it looses money (how much money must again be justified).
Certainly not the millions of innocent Iraqis who have been killed, injured, tortured and threatened. Certainly not the millions of Iraqis who have lost their property.
But who cares as long as the United States benefited! (This seems to be the mantra of the OP).
A great many Americans do not care that their government commits genocide, and many even approve of it.
It’s very sad. But it reminds us that the more power someone has, the more distorted and perverted their sense of justice is when using it.
Peace is about decentralization of power.
My question to those who propose that petroleum is the benefit… where is this petroleum? Where are the falling prices? Where is greater supply?
If the U.S. government was really interested in increasing the purchasing power parity of the dollar it would allow for businesses to compete for local sources of petrol. It would not, instead, subsidize certain companies to supposedly pump oil out of foreign countries (which we have yet to see to be done in Iraq, given that apparently most of the oil profit goes to the Iraqi government [according to the media]).
How is the dollar supported by this? What about the wanton inflation brought about by the creation of money ex nihilo to pay for these wars? Ultimately, the price we have to pay through taxes/inflation is greater than any benefit from petroleum gained through war (and which could have gained through peaceful measures, such as the elimination of the embargo).
Why would the ones in power care about the price of oil? The price of oil means nothing to you if you are the one with the printing press.
Because when oil is sold in dollars, it creates demand for the dollar. It’s that simple.
Imagine if instead of having engineers and scientists devoted to making devices that destroy lives, buildings, and capital, that they were focused on generating technologies, processes, and equipment necessary to save lives, buildings, and capital instead? The people devoted to weapons wouldn’t just evaporate into thin air, their creativity can be applied to other problems. And as such their talents would not go to waste. It would be true that the aerospace industry would have a hard time recovering, but such a recovery would be based on creating value rather than destroying the value of another person. It would lead to an economy that would last, and a social order that could match the economy as there wouldn’t be as many, if any, proxy wars.
Why ? Air travel and communication satellites are ‘real’ legitimate activities…as opposed to firebombing whole cities.
The vitality of an economy is measured via the qualitative and quantitative productive capacity of the economy. War destroys produced goods. Therefore, war damages the economy.
The producers who supply the weapons benefit, but at the expense of the rest of the people.
That doesn’t address my question. You said that our foreign wars maintains the purchasing power of the dollar, which it obviously does not.
That’s a bit difficult to believe, because there were no shortage of exporters before we invaded Iraq.