Following up from yesterday’s post, I wanted to point out that this analysis seems to pull together bits of outline I had been reading other places, and adds considerable detail that rings true for me.
In particular, it’s a good look at what it was like from Iran’s position during the supposedly “successful” attack last summer versus the failed attempt over the past few weeks. Those espionage regime-change methods failed because the majority of the Iranian population have no complaints with the government. They were unhappy with the inflation of their currency, but not with the government itself.
The surprising detail was the shorting of Iran’s currency abroad; I hadn’t been aware of that. It shows once more how you should not trust a currency exchange system controlled by your enemies. The system demands entirely too much vulnerability as the price for cooperation in trade. Iran would do well to back their currency with something that does not respond to price manipulation schemes. I wouldn’t recommend precious metals, because that’s a huge target for manipulation schemes, but something like commodities or even water.
For example, tying a currency to water makes the population focus on something truly essential in that part of the world, something already quite valuable. It would spur investment in harvest and storage, becoming the supplier of a commodity that other countries nearby lack. It’s value is already rising globally.
I’m sure there are a thousand reasons it might not work well, but remaining vulnerable to sworn enemies is not a viable option. The US is vulnerable, as well, though the US dollar has penetrated much wider and farther than Iran’s currency. Still, Trump is making enough enemies to encourage the whole world to get out from under the dollar. This is a part of what will plunge the US into imperial collapse.
