IRAN: Trump's war?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 16:14
VIEWED: 23215
PAGE 13 of 42

PREV PAGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT PAGE

JONGSSTRAW

Monday, June 24, 2019 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
War with Iran, okay, sure. There's not much else on tv worth watching now except for maybe the ladies' FIFA World Cup which has had a few exciting moments, like the O.T. Penalty Kick win for Norway over Australia yesterday.

That was awesome. People who say penalty shootouts are boring or just luck, have no idea what it would be like to have to take that walk from the midfield to the penalty spot with 750 million plus people watching around the world - not to mention your teammates 50 feet away. You only have to see how Aussie's star player totally choked on her penalty kick attempt to know it's more than luck.

Penalty shootouts are awesome. Almost had another one today, but France scored against Brazil in the closing minutes of extra time.

1KIKI

Monday, June 24, 2019 4:35 AM

Trying to wrap my mind around the whole 'petrodollars' thing, because there seem to be several separate points of instability.

Quote:
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/072915/how-petrodollars-af
fect-us-dollar.asp

After the collapse of the Bretton Woods gold standard in the early 1970s, the United States struck a deal with Saudi Arabia to standardize oil prices in dollar terms. Through this deal, the petrodollar system was born, along with a paradigm shift away from pegged exchanged rates and gold-backed currencies to non-backed, floating rate regimes.

Through this framework of economic cooperation and, more importantly, petrodollar recycling, the U.S. managed to influence Saudi Arabia to persuade the other members of Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to standardize the sale of oil in dollars. In return for invoicing oil in dollar denominations, Saudi Arabia and other Arab states secured U.S. influence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict along with U.S. military assistance during an increasingly worrisome political climate that saw the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the fall of the Iranian Shah and the Iran-Iraq War. Out of this mutually beneficial agreement, the petrodollar system was born.

The petrodollar system elevated the U.S. dollar to the world's reserve currency and, through this status, the United States enjoys persistent trade deficits and is a global economic hegemony. The petrodollar system also provides the United States’ financial markets with a source of liquidity and foreign capital inflows through petrodollar "recycling." However, an explanation of the effects of petrodollars on the U.S. dollar requires a brief synopsis of the history of the petrodollar.

Well, as I puzzle through this - the US needs the petrodollar to keep its dollar value afloat. As long as other countries need US dollars to buy global oil, they will willingly buy US bonds and accept US dollars in exchange for goods. That keeps the dollar at high value.

I think the agreement between the US and SA (with SA bringing OPEC along) all held together as long as SA was a top, cheap producer. SA could use its ability to capture market share, to bludgeon the others into accepting and keeping the petrodollar. The threat of being punished by the SA oil juggernaut kept other OPEC countries from defecting.

"It's a great life if you don't weaken." But the end was foretold in the initial conditions. SA has weakened. Its fields are played out and expensive to extract. Others with newer, more pristine fields can be poised to write their own rules.

So the US has to enforce the petrodollar with its military, by destroying other oil producers' capacity.

That makes sense.

Now, how to write the City of London into this.

1KIKI

Monday, June 24, 2019 4:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
"You can't do a damn thing about war and you know it."

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
You can't even quote YOURSELF correctly. How stupid is that?

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
It wasn't SUPPOSED to be a direct quote, you dumb ass.

You mean you can't defend your original argument, so you have to change it? How stupid is that?

BTW, this is your original and very stupid argument for why you don't track a candidate's position on war:

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I don't really look at a candidate's ideas about war because **IF** war happens nothing I say or do will matter a damn.

So, you don't care **IF** a candidate wants to start wars? You know, so you can avoid having to mutely endure those wars once they start?

Do you not know what 'planning ahead' means?

And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
tic tac

WISHIMAY

Monday, June 24, 2019 7:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yanno, secretly prowar but too much of a coward to take a position.

WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU AND THE PEOPLE YOU KNOW THAT YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO ARE "PRO-WAR"?????

Seriously, even the nuttiest gun nuts here wouldn't be pro-war unless we were the victims of a large scale attack FIRST. Americans are inherently narcissists, most other countries don't even fucking REGISTER on their tiny little brainz.

15+ years this place has been here and you still don't have a single iota how people ACTUALLY work. We can't take care of the people and infrastructure WE HAVE, we definitely aren't starting wars for expansion purposes and even the dumbest here know you go starting something with someone you pay the price with a generation of kids...

You are just a nutjob. Nothing you have ever said makes a whiff of goddamned sense.

WISHIMAY

Monday, June 24, 2019 8:07 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
You mean you can't defend your original argument, so you have to change it? How stupid is that?

Do you not know what 'planning ahead' means?

I boiled my position down so that even YOU could get it. *Facepalm. Well, I was proven wrong about something today...

You idiots keep thinking you can avoid wars based on candidates positions in PEACETIME??? How stupid do you have to be to not understand that people's reactions to aggressors are incalculable????

NO ONE knows how they will react to ANYTHING, let alone large scale violence and terrorism.

There is not a single candidate who would NOT recommend retaliatory action. Even if they SAY they probably wouldn't- THEY PROBABLY WOULD....Because....PEOPLE.

You two are just pointless harpies, emotionally masturbating to the word WAR so you can feel important.

1KIKI

Monday, June 24, 2019 8:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
we definitely aren't starting wars

What do you call Afghanistan, a place that had nothing to do with 9/11? What do you call Iraq, a place that didn't pose a threat to us at all, let alone attack us 'first'. What do you call Libya? Or Syria?

We don't start wars?

I'll make a deal with you - if you stop posting really stupid things, I'll stop pointing out how stupid you are.

And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
tic tac

1KIKI

Monday, June 24, 2019 8:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I boiled my position down so that even YOU could get it.

No, you CHANGED your position because your original one was so stupid even you couldn't defend it. Here it is, again, to refresh your memory.

Quote:
Originally posted by WISHIMAY:
I don't really look at a candidate's ideas about war because **IF** war happens nothing I say or do will matter a damn.

And you have yet to either defend or explain yourself about THAT statement.

So, you don't care **IF** a candidate wants to start wars? You know, so you can avoid having to mutely endure those wars once they start?

Do you not know what 'planning ahead' means?

And if democrats don't do anything different, how are they any better?
tic tac

SIGNYM

Monday, June 24, 2019 1:31 PM

Quote:
I boiled my position down so that even YOU could get it.

Hmm... maybe your "position" is so stupid NOBODY "gets it".

Quote:
You idiots keep thinking you can avoid wars based on candidates positions in PEACETIME???

Wait! Wha..?
You think we're in PEACETIME?? Jimminy crimminy, TWIITCHY, how stupid do YOU have to be not to notice the multiple wars THAT WE STARTED and which are STILL CONTINUING TODAY.

Quote:
How stupid do you have to be to not understand that people's reactions to aggressors are incalculable????

Wait! Wha..???
You think we're reacting for aggressors??? How stupid do YOU have to be not to notice that NONE of the wars had anything to do with aggression against the USA? Au contraire my stupid friend! ALL of our wars were pre-planned BY US. Didn't you notice the propaganda campaigns, helpfully planted by the deep state months ahead of time to get idiots like you "on side" BEFORE the invasion?

Jezus Christos. You live in upside-down world, where aggressors are victims and victims are aggressors. No wonder you're so confused!

Quote:
NO ONE knows how they will react to ANYTHING, let alone large scale violence and terrorism.

Jeez, TWITCHY. When was the last large-scale violence and terrorism committed against the USA? 18 years ago? And you think we're still destroying nations around the world because THAT'S the problem? I guess youn really DO live with your head up your butt!

Quote:
There is not a single candidate who would NOT recommend retaliatory action. Even if they SAY they probably wouldn't- THEY PROBABLY WOULD....Because....PEOPLE.

Well, you see TWItCHY, there is YOUR problem: You see attacks when none exist.

Quote:
You two are just pointless harpies, emotionally masturbating to the word WAR so you can feel important.

Huh. Says the person who attacks people for no reason whatsoever.

TWITCHY, you're damaged goods. I suggest that you get some counseling and take care of that emotional problem because it's ruining your life, and your intellect.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876 .

WISHIMAY

Tuesday, June 25, 2019 12:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

What do you call Afghanistan, a place that had nothing to do with 9/11? What do you call Iraq, a place that didn't pose a threat to us at all, let alone attack us 'first'. What do you call Libya? Or Syria?

Thank you for making my point AGAIN. We the people didn't do those, politicians did. Many of them...And you CAN'T KNOW OR DO ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR CHOICES...and they may have reasons and intel we don't know and probably won't. Either way, NOTHING YOU DO WILL CHANGE THAT.

Especially blabbing about it constantly in a dead fansite. I mean, that'll show 'em

WISHIMAY

Tuesday, June 25, 2019 12:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

You idiots keep thinking you can avoid wars based on candidates positions in PEACETIME??? Wait! Wha..?

Oh, sure... we're technically "at war"

but it's mainly so we can keep surveillance on people who need to be surveilled. You all act like the Middle East is just misunderstood peaceful folk. Got yer heads up yer asses much?

PREV PAGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 NEXT PAGE