3 ms·

> We want 'order' first, which can enable a bit of prosperity, and then the slow grind to basic freedoms, it's generally the only path. Why did you invade Iraq

> We want 'order' first, which can enable a bit of prosperity, and then the slow grind to basic freedoms, it's generally the only path. Why did you invade Iraq then plunging it into total chaos and support ISIS in Syria against the Assad regime? Why did you overthrow the Gaddafi regime in Libya. All of these actions have led to an incredible destabilization and power vaccuum in the entire region, completely destroyed the 'order' you claim you want, led to the rise of terror groups in the region and to a migration crisis of epic proportions.

post_from_work 5y ago
>>>Why did you invade Iraq then plunging it into total chaos and support ISIS in Syria against the Assad regime? Why did you overthrow the Gaddafi regime in Libya. Both of these governments were attempting to sell oil for something other than US dollars. Threats to the Petrodollar system are NOT tolerated by the Galactic Empire. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeuro https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeur... https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/CurrentAffairs/DeeperNew.html https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/CurrentAffairs/DeeperNew... https://thenewamerican.com/gadhafi-s-gold-money-plan-would-have-devastated-dollar/ https://thenewamerican.com/gadhafi-s-gold-money-plan-would-h... https://www.rt.com/news/economy-oil-gold-libya/ https://www.rt.com/news/economy-oil-gold-libya/
- jollybean 5y ago
  This is total nonsense. Iraq was already destabilized with daily NATO air missions overhead for a decade, Libya and Syria were plunged into civil war long before any kind of intervention. The Americans don't like it when you mess with their petrodollar, but they're not going to fight a war over it. FYI not answering the complicated questions about 'why USA invaded Iraq', but rather pointing out the 'Petrodollar' conspiracy is a canard. If you're looking for an indirect strategic issue to talk about you can just say 'Energy Security' was a factor, which of course it is, but it's still only one factor.
  - post_from_work 5y ago
    >>>Iraq was already destabilized with daily NATO air missions overhead for a decade Air missions which didn't prevent Saddam from switching from dollars to euros.[1] Clearly a more permanent solution was needed. General Wesley Clark stated as early as September 2001, leveraging post-9/11 sentiment, the US had decided to invade Iraq.[2] >>>Libya and Syria were plunged into civil war long before any kind of intervention The Libyan protests evolved into armed conflict/open revolt roughly around February 21st, when Qaddafi's Air Force bombed Tripoli.[3] Operation Odyssey Dawn began on March 19th, less than 30 days later.[4] In Syria, we didn't take overt interest in regime change, we merely occupied the most oil-rich portions of the country, which the central government lost control of early anyway.[5] Assad can't threaten the Petrodollar if he doesn't have oil to sell, and regime change would mean threatening Russia's access to the warmwater port in Latakia, arguably the reason Russia intervened. That would be an escalation with the Ruskies that I don't think we are prepared to risk. >>>The Americans don't like it when you mess with their petrodollar, but they're not going to fight a war over it Sure we will. Even the French will go to war to prop up the sphere of influence of their currency.[6] [1]https://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/ https://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut... [2]https://www.salon.com/2007/10/12/wesley_clark/ https://www.salon.com/2007/10/12/wesley_clark/ [3]https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Civil_War_(2011) https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Civil_War_(2011) [4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn [5] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/who-benefits-us-oil-deal-northeast-syria https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/who-bene... [6]https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
    - jollybean 5y ago
      Saddam's selling in Euro's had nothing to do with anything, and yes, there were obviously people who wanted to complete the overthrow of Saddam, which points to the obvious issue that Iraq2 was a continuation of Iraq1. Your comments about Libya are not relevant and add nothing to the argument. There was an uprising, eventually it became violent, Qaddaffi ordered an incursion into E. Libya in which he publicly declared the intention of massacre, which practically forced the hand of observing parties. We could be on one wide or the other, there were no good outcomes. Your speculation about Assad is fabricated, and historical assertions equally so. 1) The US did not 'occupy' any part of Syria. 2) Your claims about Assad's inability to sell Oil in other denominations due to his lack of control of Oil Fields is clearly disproven by the fact that he controls those areas right now, at this time. By your logic, he should be warring against the Petro dollar? The conflict in Syria has nothing to do with the Petrodollar. "Even the French will go to war to prop up the sphere of influence of their currency.[6]" Despite the obvious flaw in your premise in that the French do not have a currency , your claim is not remotely substantiated by the link you provided. You do understand that providing links to irrelevant information doesn't help your case? Stop with the fictional conspiracy fantasies and reading as evidence bits of information that have little or nothing to do with the situation.

post_from_work 5y ago

>>>Why did you invade Iraq then plunging it into total chaos and support ISIS in Syria against the Assad regime? Why did you overthrow the Gaddafi regime in Libya. Both of these governments were attempting to sell oil for something other than US dollars. Threats to the Petrodollar system are NOT tolerated by the Galactic Empire. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeuro https://www.theguardian.com/business/2003/feb/16/iraq.theeur... https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/CurrentAffairs/DeeperNew.html https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/CurrentAffairs/DeeperNew... https://thenewamerican.com/gadhafi-s-gold-money-plan-would-have-devastated-dollar/ https://thenewamerican.com/gadhafi-s-gold-money-plan-would-h... https://www.rt.com/news/economy-oil-gold-libya/ https://www.rt.com/news/economy-oil-gold-libya/

jollybean 5y ago
This is total nonsense. Iraq was already destabilized with daily NATO air missions overhead for a decade, Libya and Syria were plunged into civil war long before any kind of intervention. The Americans don't like it when you mess with their petrodollar, but they're not going to fight a war over it. FYI not answering the complicated questions about 'why USA invaded Iraq', but rather pointing out the 'Petrodollar' conspiracy is a canard. If you're looking for an indirect strategic issue to talk about you can just say 'Energy Security' was a factor, which of course it is, but it's still only one factor.
- post_from_work 5y ago
  >>>Iraq was already destabilized with daily NATO air missions overhead for a decade Air missions which didn't prevent Saddam from switching from dollars to euros.[1] Clearly a more permanent solution was needed. General Wesley Clark stated as early as September 2001, leveraging post-9/11 sentiment, the US had decided to invade Iraq.[2] >>>Libya and Syria were plunged into civil war long before any kind of intervention The Libyan protests evolved into armed conflict/open revolt roughly around February 21st, when Qaddafi's Air Force bombed Tripoli.[3] Operation Odyssey Dawn began on March 19th, less than 30 days later.[4] In Syria, we didn't take overt interest in regime change, we merely occupied the most oil-rich portions of the country, which the central government lost control of early anyway.[5] Assad can't threaten the Petrodollar if he doesn't have oil to sell, and regime change would mean threatening Russia's access to the warmwater port in Latakia, arguably the reason Russia intervened. That would be an escalation with the Ruskies that I don't think we are prepared to risk. >>>The Americans don't like it when you mess with their petrodollar, but they're not going to fight a war over it Sure we will. Even the French will go to war to prop up the sphere of influence of their currency.[6] [1]https://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut/ https://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/30/iraq.un.euro.reut... [2]https://www.salon.com/2007/10/12/wesley_clark/ https://www.salon.com/2007/10/12/wesley_clark/ [3]https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Civil_War_(2011) https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libyan_Civil_War_(2011) [4]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Odyssey_Dawn [5] https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/who-benefits-us-oil-deal-northeast-syria https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/who-bene... [6]https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/6528
  - jollybean 5y ago
    Saddam's selling in Euro's had nothing to do with anything, and yes, there were obviously people who wanted to complete the overthrow of Saddam, which points to the obvious issue that Iraq2 was a continuation of Iraq1. Your comments about Libya are not relevant and add nothing to the argument. There was an uprising, eventually it became violent, Qaddaffi ordered an incursion into E. Libya in which he publicly declared the intention of massacre, which practically forced the hand of observing parties. We could be on one wide or the other, there were no good outcomes. Your speculation about Assad is fabricated, and historical assertions equally so. 1) The US did not 'occupy' any part of Syria. 2) Your claims about Assad's inability to sell Oil in other denominations due to his lack of control of Oil Fields is clearly disproven by the fact that he controls those areas right now, at this time. By your logic, he should be warring against the Petro dollar? The conflict in Syria has nothing to do with the Petrodollar. "Even the French will go to war to prop up the sphere of influence of their currency.[6]" Despite the obvious flaw in your premise in that the French do not have a currency , your claim is not remotely substantiated by the link you provided. You do understand that providing links to irrelevant information doesn't help your case? Stop with the fictional conspiracy fantasies and reading as evidence bits of information that have little or nothing to do with the situation.