Kwanini Marekani Inapenda Vita Sana?

Mlenge

R I P
Joined
Oct 31, 2006
Posts
2,125
Reaction score
2,318
Hudhaniwa na wengi kwamba Marekani hupenda sana vita, hasa kwa nchi zenye mafuta. Vita ni moja ya mbinu za kupata uwanja wa kujigemea mafuta wapendavyo. Dhana hii inaweza kuwa yakinzana na uhalisia. Marekani haipendi vita, ndio maana wanajitahidi sana uwanja wa vita uwe ugenini.

Marekani inalinda sarafu yake ya dola (USD). Hicho ndicho kipaumbele nambari moja. Pana mstari fulani nchi isiyo na nguvu sana ikiuvuka, Marekani huingia vitani. Saddam na Ghadafi ni mfano mmojawapo. Wote hawa waliamua kuitosa sarafu ya Marekani na kuamua kutafuta mbadala.

Chukulia wewe umetengeneza printa. Wino na karatasi za kumwaga unazo. Ukiprinti vikaratasi ni kama huna gharama yoyote. Lakini vikaratasi unavyoprinti ndio vinatumika na watu wote kama njia ya kubadilishana mali zao.

Yaani mtu kalima kapata magunia ya mahindi. Anabadilishana mahindi na mtu aliye na vikaratasi ulivyoprinti. Halafu mtu huyo anachukua vikaratasi hivyo anatumia kwenye mahitaji yake mengine. Ni hivyohivyo kwa kila mtu na kwa kila bidhaa. Siku ikitokea mkulima mmoja wa mahindi akaamua kuacha kutumia vikaratasi vyako, akaanza kutumia vikaratasi vya mwingine, na kana kwamba hiyo haitoshi, akaanza kushawishi na wengine, ukiwa na uwezo utaacha kumshughulikia? Watazamaji watadhani una shida ya mahindi ya huyo jamaa. Mahindi ya nini wakati ukiyahitaji tu unaprinti vikaratasi unawagawia wenye mahindi, wanakukabidhi matani ya mahindi?

Hitimisho: Marekani haipendi vita, ndio maana haitaki vita uwanja wa nyumbani. Marekani inapambana kuhakikisha sarafu yake ndio sarafu kinara kwenye miamala yote ya maana duniani.

Angalizo: Nazungumzia kiini cha vita; sizungumzii uhalali au la wa kuingia vitani.
 
Ndugu Mlenge unaamini kwamba chanzo kikubwa cha matumizi ya mabavu ya taifa la Marekani dhidi ya mataifa mengine ni kuhakikisha sarafu yake ndiyo inakuwa nyenzo kuu ya biashara za kimataifa ???

Pili, unaposema kuilinda fedha yake ndiyo kipaumbele kikuu cha Marekani una maana kwamba siku fedha ya Marekani itakapoacha kutumika ndiyo utakuwa ndiyo mwisho wa taifa la Marekani ???
 

Ndiyo MALCOM LUMUMBA , matumizi ya nguvu nyingi ni kuhakikisha sarafu ya Marekani inasalia kuwa kinara kwenye miamala ya kimataifa. Sababu zingine huwa ni coincidental.

Ndiyo MALCOM LUMUMBA, sarafu ya Marekani ikiacha kutumika, ndio utakuwa mwisho wa Marekani as we know it.

Kumbuka, The Secret Service Marekani ilianzishwa kwa madhumuni gani. HINT: Haikuwa kulinda viongozi. Ilichukua miaka mpaka The Secret Service ilipoanza kulinda waheshimiwa. The Secret Service ilianzishwa kupambana na money counterfeiters. Currency is that important.
 
Mlenge said:
Ndiyo MALCOM LUMUMBA , matumizi ya nguvu nyingi ni kuhakikisha sarafu ya Marekani inasalia kuwa kinara kwenye miamala ya kimataifa. Sababu zingine huwa ni coincidental.
Click to expand...
Ndugu Mlenge ni lini haswa sarafu ya Marekani imeanza kutumika kama nyenzo kuu ya biashara za kimataifa na sababu gani zilipelekea hadi ikawa hivyo ??? Halafu unaposema matumizi mengine ya mabavu huwa ni "coincidental" utauweka kwenye kundi gani ule ule uvamizi mkubwa wa kijeshi uliofanywa nchini YUGOSLAVIA mwaka 1999 (Huu na ule wa Afghanistani ulikuwa unahusianaje na matumizi ya dola ya moja kwa moja) ???

Ndiyo MALCOM LUMUMBA, sarafu ya Marekani ikiacha kutumika, ndio utakuwa mwisho wa Marekani as we know it.
Click to expand...
Nadhani unaangalia mambo kwenye kurunzi ndogo, Marekani kama taifa limeanza kuwa kubwa hata kabla sarafu yake haijaanza kutumika kama nyenzo kuu ya biashara za kimataifa. Kiufupi Marekani limekuwa taifa lenye nguvu kubwa ya kimanunuzi duniani ukilinganisha na mataifa mengine (Purchasing Power Parity) mwaka 1872, ambapo ni miaka 42 kabla ya vita ya kwanza ya dunia na miaka 72 kabla ya vita ya pili ya dunia.

Kabla ya kuibuka kwa dola kulikuwa na Paundi (Pound-Sterling) ya Muingereza ambayo ilianza kuanguka baada ya vita ya kwanza ya dunia. Lakini kuanguka kwa Paundi hakukuashiria kuanguka kwa Uingereza ambayo iko mpaka leo hii. Labda unielezee ulikuwa unamaanisha nini unaposema kwamba "Itakuwa mwisho wa Marekani as we know it" ???

Nashangaa ulivyoleta The Secret Service ili kujenga hoja yako, lakini bado hujanishawishi kwasababu hichi chombo kilianzishwa mwaka 1865, kipindi ambacho sarafu ya Marekani haina nguvu yoyote ile. Kikubwa zaidi ambacho unasahau kuangalia ni kwamba chombo hichi kinafanya kazi ndani ya mipaka ya Marekani tu. Sasa labda uniambie kinahusikaje na matumizi ya dola kama nyenzo kuu ya biashara za kimataifa huku duniani ???

Jambo la mwisho la kukumbusha: Kila nchi duniani hulinda sarafu yake, hivyo hakuna ajabu yoyote Marekani kulinda sarafu yake. The Secret Service imeanzishwa mwaka 1865 baada ya vita ya wao kwa wao (The American Civil War). Lengo kuu lilikuwa ni kupambana na ubadhilifu (siyo wa pesa peke yake) ndani ya Marekani uliochochewa sana na madhara ya vita. Sasa unapozungumzia biashara za kimataifa kutumia dola halafu hapohapo unazungumzia The Secret Service unanifanya nashindwa kukuelewa. Labda unidadavulie kwa undani ulikuwa unamaanisha nini ndugu Mlenge .
 

Uvamizi wa Yugoslavia na Afghanistan sina mengi ya kuusemea kwa sasa, zaidi ya kwamba, when all is said and done, rasilmali ni kiini.

Potential for a Mining Boom Splits Factions in Afghanistan

Pipeline Politics: Oil, Gas And The US Interest In Afghanistan

Why is NATO at war with Yugoslavia? World power, oil and gold (socialists, but still... )

Yes, It Was About Oil


The Secret Service imetajwa kwa vile ilianzishwa kwa ajili ya kulinda integrity ya sarafu ya Marekani. Hii ni kusisitiza umuhimu wa kulinda sarafu dhidi ya matatizo anuai, ni toka zamani. Kwa kuwa rasilmali (hasa mafuta na gesi) ni kipitishio muhimu cha uimara wa sarafu ya Marekani, hupelekea Marekani kuchukua hatua za kijeshi ili kulinda maslahi yake ya ki-sarafu.

Petrodollar recycling - Wikipedia

Uzi huu ni nadharia tu kiongozi MALCOM LUMUMBA ; karibu kuiboresha kwa kuikosoa nadharia hii au kuangalia iwapo inaelezea baadhi ya matukio muhimu duniani.
 
Bwana Mlenge nimesoma hizo nakala zote ulizoziweka hapa lakini bado sijaona ni wapi wameonesha moja kwa moja ni jinsi gani Marekani imepata faida za kiuchumi kama ambavyo unadai na kusema "Yes, It was about oil". Unapojenga hoja yoyote ni lazima utuwekee mifano halisi na vielelezo. Sasa utakuwa umetusaidia sana kama utatuwekea mifano halisi ya makampuni ya kimarekani ambayo yamepata tenda za mafuta kwenye jamhuri za Yugoslavia ya zamani, maana kwenye hizo nakala ulizoziweka sijaona mfano hata mmoja wa jinsi Marekani inanufaika na mafuta.

Bwna Mlenge bado unachanganya mambo, unanitajia The Secret Service chombo ambacho kinafanya kazi ndani ya mipaka ya Marekani pekee, lakini bado hujanielezea ni jinsi gani The Secret Service inafanya kazi ya kuhakikisha sarafu ya Marekani inakuwa ndiyo nyenzo kuu ya biashara ya dunia.

Pili, nakubaliana kabisa na wewe unaposema dola ndiyo kipitisho muhimu cha uimara wa dola ya Marekani lakini bado naomba unielezee kivipi fedha ya makaratasi (Fiat Money) ambayo haina dhahabu nyuma yake (Money Not Backed by Gold) inaimarishwa na biashara ya mafuta peke yake. Maana umeizungumza hii mada kana kwamba biashara ya mafuta ndiyo chanzo kikubwa cha mapato ya nchi ya Marekani na dunia kwa ujumla, na hii ndiyo biashara pekee inayotumia sarafu ya Marekani (Hili halina usahihi sana).

Petrodollar recycling - Wikipedia
Click to expand...
Uzi huu ni nadharia tu kiongozi MALCOM LUMUMBA ; karibu kuiboresha kwa kuikosoa nadharia hii au kuangalia iwapo inaelezea baadhi ya matukio muhimu duniani.
Click to expand...

Nimesoma hii nakala ya Wikipedia uliyoniwekea hapa, lakini nachelea kusema haina utoshelevu wowote wa kitaalamu (Not Comprehensive Enough) kwasababu ni hatari sana kusema kwamba chanzo cha vita zote za Marekani ni mafuta peke yake "The Cause of America's military offensive". Huu ni mtazamo finyu sana wa dunia (Parochial Outlook of World Affairs) maana kuna biashara kubwa sana hapa duniani zaidi ya mafuta ambazo zinategemea matumizi ya dola, lakini ndugu yangu Mlenge hili hujaliangalia kabisa.

Umeangalia upande mmoja wa shilingi ambao ni uuzaji wa bidhaa (The Export of Merchandise), na kusahau kwamba sehemu kubwa ya uchumi wa Marekani na dunia ni uuzaji wa huduma (Services Market) ambapo kwa sehemu kubwa bara la Amerika ya Kaskazini ndiyo linaongoza dunia.
 
You are raising quite a number of valid observations, MALCOM LUMUMBA ; and probably the Dollar-War-Linkage theory needs to be reevaluated.

Just to put records right the theory does not mean every war the US participates can singularly be explained by this theory. Nor does it mean for it to be valid, some US company must get some deals after a war.

IMHO, US is still the winner when nations trade with the US, and more importantly, amongst themselves using US$.

The US gets its US Dollars through such means as Quantitative Easing; and uses it to get hard, cold resources such as oil, gas, minerals, rare earths and all such nice goodies. They'd be fools to simply let it go.
 
Mlenge said:
You are raising quite a number of valid observations, MALCOM LUMUMBA ; and probably the Dollar-War-Linkage theory needs to be reevaluated.
Click to expand...
Indeed, Mr Mlenge it has to be reevaluated. Traditionally the wealth of a nation has always been measured in terms of gold (Bullions) and not currency. The Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944, proved that the world hasn't rid itself of centuries old mercantile practice.

Just to put records right the theory does not mean every war the US participates can singularly be explained by this theory. Nor does it mean for it to be valid, some US company must get some deals after a war.
Click to expand...
Theories will always be tentative, and it's imperative that we both agree in this. I was appalled when you made an assumption that all American wars are motivated by Imperial Ambitions (The Dollar to be precise), this is incorrect. But since you saw wisdom in the inaccuracy of your early assumptions, as a fellow erudite and scholar, on this strand I rest my case.


Now I finish by sharing my little understanding with regards to The Dollar Diplomacy since 1944:
A United States dollar is a major means of exchange underlying all international trade. It is both a commodity and a means of exchange. Nations would have to buy a dollar as "commodity" so as to trade in international markets by turning it into a means of exchange, such is a unique attribute of the United States Dollar. Strategically, it is American Banks that trade in dollars in international markets, therefore their competitive edge is unparalleled: With this, all roads lead to the Federal Reserve.

Have a goodnight Mr Mlenge, It is always nice having you around, Be blessed!
 
MALCOM LUMUMBA said:
...I was appalled when you made an assumption that all American wars are motivated by Imperial Ambitions (The Dollar to be precise), this is incorrect. ...
Click to expand...

Looks like phrasing of the original post appears to make readers see that it was meant all American wars were caused by the quest to maintain the relevancy of the Dollar. That would have indeed been extreme, and as you say, appalling, supposition. The theory generalizes American wars, and by no means suggests ALL wars conform to the provisions of this theory. Apparently, the theory explains Gaddafi, Saddam, many other US foreign wars.

As science goes, when we discard one theory, usually we do so by replacing it with a better or otherwise alternative theory. What would that theory be? Nature hates vacuum, so in absence of another theory, we may have to make do with the Petrodollar Wars Theory for the moment, if for anything, it is parsimonious.
 
Mlenge said:
The theory generalizes American wars, and by no means suggests ALL wars conform to the provisions of this theory. Apparently, the theory explains Gaddafi, Saddam, many other US foreign wars.
Click to expand...
Like I said refuted earlier, your theory is not comprehensive because it imprecise, not supported by tangible facts and parochial. Imprecise because both Saddam and Gaddafi have been at war with America more than twice, which time in history are you referring to Mr Mlenge ???

Not, supported with tangible facts because it falls short of short of examples and figures to demonstrate that it was oil that took America to war with Iraq and Libya at the first place. Without examples and figures I would still call your so called "Petrodollar Theory" a mere reactionary opinion trying to discredit those who calls America a Belligerent and a War-Mongering Nation.

And lastly, It is parochial because it gives a purview of the world in narrow periphery, especially when you claim that with the end of dollar's primacy then it will be the end of America as we know (Post #3). There's more to America's economy than the dollar, it has always been like that and still it remains like that now. America was already a great power before the Bretton Wood Convention of 1944 which made the dollar an official foreign reserve currency.

A lesson from Imperial Germany (1871-1918): One can be a great-power without making use of her currency "A Deutsche- Gold Mark" a major means of international trade. Germany deposed the British empire as the manufacturing hub of the world in 1900. Or what do you mean when you say "The End of America as we know " ???
 

Your posts use quite a number of straw-men arguments: you insinuate the arguments, and attack them as if they were the original subject of discussion. Probably we can now agree to disagree: I stand by the original post, and the theory it puts forward.

I rest my case.
 
Since you have iced the conversation, I will end it here. Thou to my unspeakable dismay I must say : Ten years (10) now as an avid scholar of International Relations and Diplomacy, All I expected was facts and figures, not empty words cunningly twisted in a cocoon of fancy English. You propose a theory, support it with facts, this will pave way for a Hegelian Dialectic.

Have a wonderful time Mr Mlenge.
 

Thank you for noting my English as fancy. I should be proud. In my case, I am differently versed with International Relations; mostly by using sources of knowledge different from classroom. So, I may not have a US Congress Resolution number that puts America to wars of protecting their currency, for I doubt such a thing exists, but the various publicly-available sources of information, of various reliability. Post #5 contained a few of such sources (they are not endorsed by any Ministry of Foreign Affairs, obviously), but at least they say the thesis of this thread: The United States do go to wars to protect their currency. I leave you with some more, hoping they count. While this currency-linkage-to-war-theory may or may not be part of the International Relations and Diplomacy scholarship aligned to your tastes, MALCOM LUMUMBA , it appears to be floating around for quite some time.

Some links and pertinent quotes (Some formatting Emphasis may be added):


Not Oil, But Dollars vs. Euros

"World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of the world produces things that dollars can buy..."
Click to expand...

https://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~norman/CurrentAffairs/DeeperNew.html


The world is attached to a currency that one country can produce at will. This means that – in addition to controlling world trade – the United States is importing substantial quantities of goods and services for very low relative costs.
Click to expand...

19. U.S. Dollar vs. the Euro: Another Reason for the Invasion of Iraq - Top 25 of 2004
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…