doctor robbins

I disagree. I think most dinar investors are somewhat confused about the subject. All you have to do is listen to how excited they get when reading re-denomination articles or listen to gurus talking about the CBI removing the zeros.

Any trade conducted with Iraq for dinars today would just be conducted with the new dinar. It doesn't mean that the current dinar won't be demonetized.

You raise some interesting points. You're right about the specific wording. Maybe I should have elaborated. There were a few hundred military advisers after the troop withdrawal. It wasn't the 10-20,000 that the Defense Department recommended but given the political climate in the US and Iraq it wasn't likely that Bush could have struck a better arrangement. There were too many abuses by US troops for the Iraqis to grant immunity and the American people were tired of the war and wanted out, which is one of the reasons Obama was elected. The main point that I was addressing is that this video clip of Bush was from 2007 when he was promoting his surge policy. A year later the surge had gone so well Bush felt comfortable signing the SOFA agreement for a pullout by the end of 2011. This is what Bush said when he announced the SOFA agreement in November of 2008. If FOX News is suggesting that Bush wanted to stay and fight but Obama pulled all the troops out and now all hell is breaking loose they are completely misrepresenting what happened. Personally I feel that Bush was pushing to get this done prior to the 2008 election in an effort to steal some of Obama's thunder and maybe help the Republicans keep the White House, but the Iraqis weren't willing to cooperate. Whether that's the case or not Bush did sign an agreement that was carried out during the Obama administration. Also, many of the Iraqis who joined ISIS did so because of the shortsightedness of the CPA in their de-baathification of the Iraqi military, and Obama had nothing to do with that.

Unfortunately Bush also signed the SOFA agreement in 2008 agreeing to have all US troops out by 2012.

I don't think that's the same girl. The voices don't sound the same.

The story of the Ferguson shooting wasn't driven by the media. It was driven by the riots that came after the shooting. If there were riots and looting and tanks in the streets of Salt Lake City I'm sure the media would be there, too.

Not really. The IQD is a different currency from the Saddam dinar. It's tightly managed to keep the auction price near the market value. It would be disastrous for their economy if they allowed it to climb back to $1 or more.

The value fell due to hyperinflation in the 80s and 90s. The rate was arbitrarliy set by Saddam Hussein at over $3.00 when the value had actually dropped as low as 3000:1. When Saddam was removed the CPA oversaw the replacement of the Saddam dinar with the IQD at around 1500:1. It wasn't a controlled drop by any bank. It was a valuation based on the market value at the time.

The UK and Canada have a parliamentary system which allows every group to have some representation. The US has a winner take all system which means that the smaller groups have no representation. If your party's candidate gets 49% of the vote but another party's candidate gets 51% your party gets no voice. That's why Sharia Law is not an issue in the US like it is in the UK and Canada. Until the Muslim population in the US is large enough to get the majority of the popular vote they won't be able to control legislation.

The caption under the photo of Ronald Reagan says "Ronald Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen Commanders at the White House in 1985". Notice it says "Afghan" not "Arab". The Mujahideen were Afghani and Al Qaeda is Arab. Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan. The "Sleeping with the Devil" article claims that "Zbigniew Brzezinski admitted on CNN that the U.S. organized and supported Bin Laden and the other originators of “Al Qaeda” in the 1970s to fight the Soviets", but when I clicked on the links there was no such admission. The statement that "Israel and the U.S. CREATED Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda" is wrong. Israel may have inadvertantly created Hamas by attempting to balance the power against the PLO, but they didn't create Hezbollah. Hezbollah was formed in response to Israel's attacks on the PLO in Lebanon. And they certainly didn't create Al Qaeda. In fact the article doesn't even make that claim anywhere after the title. And the US didn't create any of those organizations either. We funded and trained Afghanis in their war against the Soviet Union, and members of Al Queda showed up and fought alongside the Afghanis, but we didn't create Al Qaeda. Bin Laden created Al Qaeda in 1988 at the end of the Afghanistan/Soviet war. I'm not saying that the US and Israel haven't made some bad choices when it comes to fighting these organizations, but that's a far cry from actually creating those organizations.

I did click on his links and look through them. Some of them were 9/11 truther sites so I don't consider them credible. One of them was from Alex Jones' site, and I consider him a lunatic. In that story Rand Paul and Hannity just discussed our foreign policy in Syria and Iraq, and Paul didn't say anything about the US backing ISIS as thegente claimed. Some of the articles were just talking about Qatar and Saudi Arabia backing rebels in Syria. That doesn't prove anything about the Mossad. Some of the links said that Obama had the CIA train moderate rebels in Syria, which isn't news to most people. Nobody is arguing that the US didn't support moderate rebels. The point of contention is the article that claims Snowden's documents prove that ISIS' leader was trained by the Mossad. I think it's much more likely that this article was put out by Iran as propaganda to turn Muslims against ISIS because they will think that Israel is backing them. Iran is mostly Shia and ISIS is Sunni so they would have an agenda to stop support for ISIS.

Doesn't it bother any of you that this story came from an Iranian news site that also reported that Snowden documents prove extraterrestrial intelligence has been driving our foreign policy since 1945?

I clicked on the link that thegente gave us at the beginning of his post and read through the comments. One of them gave a link to the Iranian site and said that they also did a story on Hitler and aliens. I googled it and found the story. So it looks like the two stories came from the same site, which tells me that the Snowden Mossad story isn't very credible. Yes I did look into the Liberty story. You might be right about that. I haven't decided yet.

The story appears to have originated in an Iranian newspaper called FARS. http://arabic.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=9303226106 Here's another Snowden story published by FARS. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13921021000393

The USS Liberty was ruled a friendly fire incident and Israel not only apologized for it but they compensated the victims' families with millions of dollars in 1960's money. The US has killed allies in similar incidents in wartime. I can't see any scenario where Israel would gain anything by knowingly attacking an American vessel.