It has been asserted that we invaded Iraq because they were going to start selling oil for Euros, not dollars.

Question

So our invasion was to pre-empt that move. If this is true, then our underlying ulterior motive for visiting death and destruction on thousands of innocents, not to mention their warm 'n fuzzy despotic dictator, was to postpone the inevitable collapse of the world's 'dollar-based' economy.

Now Iran has abandoned the dollar and is selling oil for Euros.

Based on the above reasoning, do you think this leads to the inevitable conclusion that an attack on, and invasion of, Iran is next on the neo-con's agenda?

Question part II: If by some miracle Ron Paul is elected potus, and our troops are brought back home from every theatre, will we be safer, or at greater risk?
.

Answer 1

this is true. just before the war the system was going to switch over to euros. our economy is so fragile we could not let that happen.

yes - iran is next on the list. if the american public has learned anything from the last year we will not let this happen.

I hope ron paul doesnt get elected. I agree with him on some issues but not enough to vote for him. If he does get elected and bring the troops home, immediately after i think he needs to do a vigorous international campaign to repair our image and meet with various leaders and build a bridge again.

Our international standing in the world is AWFUL and we need to work very hard to repair that damage.

Answer 2

I don't believe it because our own government is pursuing policies that devalue the dollar. It does not make sense that they would pass laws and budgets that have the effect of lowering the dollar and start a war to achieve the opposite effect.

Answer 3

It has been asserted that the world was flat, slavery was OK, and Columbus discovered India. Many assertions are put forth by those who can be described by the first three letters of that word. As for Ron Paul, he should be with the rest of the libs. Withdrawing all our troops from everywhere outside conus would put us at greater risk from conventional military forces, as well as terrorists.

Answer 4

This question is redundant...satchmo said it best....knucklehead.

Answer 5

knucklehead