Frank, I was not saying the invasion was in any sense good. If you think that, you didn't read my messages. I was saying Heard's reasoning does not make any sense. I define a "vulgar Marxist" as someone who has to think of an economic theory to explain anything, and does not much care whether the theory makes any sense.

Heard's explanation of the war is, and I quote, "it is about the
currency used to trade oil and consequently, who will dominate the world economically, in the foreseeable future -- the USA or the European Union." So for Heard, it's all about whether the price of oil is set in terms of Dollars or Euros. He is saying that because the price of oil is pegged in Dollars, America has a "monopoly" of oil, and that Bush wants to attack Iraq because Hussein decided to set the price of Iraqi oil in Euros. And that is the most utter and complete nonsense.

I respectfully submit that whatever the explanation behind Bush's policy is, the "currency used to trade oil" is not it. If someone were concerned about whether oil was denominated in Dollars or Euros, we would have heard about it. Having it denominated in Dollars has advantages for the United States if the Dollar declines, because it means imports are cheaper. But if the Dollar declines enough, the oil producing nations are going to change to Euros, or something else. Up to recently, the Dollar has not declined. If you can think of a single reason why the oil companies should care whether the price is set using Dollars or Euros, please explain why they should care. I cannot think of a single reason. I submit they could equally well price it in Swiss Francs. That would not give Switzerland any kind of "monopoly."

And I agree that if the United States interferes in Venezuela, it is wrong. I haven't heard from any reliable source that this is actually happening, but then, I do miss stuff. But if it is doing so, we do not need Heard's explanation. Venezuela is an important country. It is run by Chavez, who is hostile to the United States. It is close to the U.S. So if the U.S. intrigues against Chavez, that is bad, but we don't need Heard to explain the intrigue (if any).

Do you see my point.