How bout that oil spill down there somewhere... (Mexico Gulf, BP fucked up)

[Sean]

i can't understand wtf you are saying, speak english, i understand horsey better

through = threw 


hehaw ----    pills and budwiser

[aintitfun22]

Might as well be Walmart/Asda vs Terrorists  -

We already are reserving oil for the US for us being over there.  US wanted pipelines built in Afghanistan since late 90's but we needed a different government there and the stability through off the plans for the 2 billion dollar pipeline US energy company Unocal that was chased away by who? The Taliban.

Now that we are over there guess what? we found tons more oil under the surface and projects are back on.  so bitch please

getting rid of the taliban was hardly a bad thing........i dont think that just because we benefited and got oil from the war that it was the sole/main reason we invaded. We invaded to depose a corrupt government and to look for bin laden(in afghanistan i mean). The fact that we got oil out of it does not negate this as the primary reason we invaded.

[SLCPUNK]

548,000 Barrels of oil we take from Iraq every day.

During December 2002, the United States imported 11.3 million barrels of oil from Iraq.

(things) get secured.   like it or not Iraq hold world's 2nd largest oil reserve.

From the US Energy Information Administration:

""Iraq holds more than 112 billion barrels of oil - the world's second largest proven reserves. Iraq also contains 110 trillion cubic feet of natural gas, and is a focal point for regional and international security issues."

The most damning evidence was the secret energy task force maps forced out of Cheney's hands by the Freedom of Information act. Ironically it was a conservative watch dog group, Judicial Watch, that brought the lawsuit against Cheney. The maps showed that Cheney's task force was looking at areas of exploration, refining, drilling etc in Iraq BEFORE 911. With the maps they also found a long list of countries who were at the top of that list to do business with Saddam. Common sense would show that the only way we could get our hands on that oil was in a post sanction Iraq, which meant Saddam had to go.

After we invaded we co authored their Constitution. In that we included production sharing agreements which essentially give exploration rights to foreign companies. The oil already in use remains under the ownership of the Iraqi people. This leaves about 2/3 of Iraqi reserves open for exploration by foreign companies.

The argument that this was not for oil is difficult to swallow knowing what we know. We consume 25% of the world's oil and half our country has no interest in slowing down our consumption. Iraq has sweet crude that is easy to get to, cheap to produce and easy to exploit (no other Middle Eastern country rich in oil would ever agree to Product Sharing Agreements.) Saddam wouldn't let us in on the action, and we had exploration/refinery maps drawn up of Iraq before 911.

Sure we're not privatizing oil at this moment, but we've done the next best thing, and co-authored legislation that has us all lined up to get it once that area becomes somewhat stabilized.

[I ARE ESS]

The most damning evidence was the secret energy task force maps forced out of Cheney's hands by the Freedom of Information act. Ironically it was a conservative watch dog group, Judicial Watch, that brought the lawsuit against Cheney. The maps showed that Cheney's task force was looking at areas of exploration, refining, drilling etc in Iraq BEFORE 911. With the maps they also found a long list of countries who were at the top of that list to do business with Saddam. Common sense would show that the only way we could get our hands on that oil was in a post sanction Iraq, which meant Saddam had to go.

After we invaded we co authored their Constitution. In that we included production sharing agreements which essentially give exploration rights to foreign companies. The oil already in use remains under the ownership of the Iraqi people. This leaves about 2/3 of Iraqi reserves open for exploration by foreign companies.

The argument that this was not for oil is difficult to swallow knowing what we know. We consume 25% of the world's oil and half our country has no interest in slowing down our consumption. Iraq has sweet crude that is easy to get to, cheap to produce and easy to exploit (no other Middle Eastern country rich in oil would ever agree to Product Sharing Agreements.) Saddam wouldn't let us in on the action, and we had exploration/refinery maps drawn up of Iraq before 911.

Sure we're not privatizing oil at this moment, but we've done the next best thing, and co-authored legislation that has us all lined up to get it once that area becomes somewhat stabilized.

wow, dude, thats actually very damning, espcilly before 9/11, would it be safe to say do you think, that if 9/11 had never taken place, the iraq war would of happenned sooner?

[aintitfun22]

wow, dude, thats actually very damning, espcilly before 9/11, would it be safe to say do you think, that if 9/11 had never taken place, the iraq war would of happenned sooner?

no. the US government is not a giant corporation. We could not have invaded solely to get oil nor would we have done so. Also, just because oil is something we have gotten out of the iraq war, it does not mean we invaded for that reason. It is also not exploitation to set up contracts that once Iraq's political situation becomes stable enable it to trade its oil with easily the largest consumer of oil on the planet. that helps them also, we dont steal their oil nor do we buy it from them for unfair prices. lets not be ridiculous here, the contracts dont say "iraq must give the US oil for free and if they dont we kill all those damn arabs." That kind of mindset is what you guys have here from what I can tell(talking about I are ess and slcpunk, cant say that for everybody).

[mooney]

While im not gonna jump on conspiracy stories - though i remain cynical about anything any government tells it's public, id say the US is just that - a massive corporation. consumerism in the US is insane. That's not to say everyone else is smelling of roses but it's whole different playing field over there.

As far as oil and Iraq goes, while i dont think it was the sole purpose, i think it would be naive to think there wasnt some lingering oil based motives involved somewhere.

[mooney]

****apologies, that should read "rate of consumption in the US is insane".****

[aintitfun22]

While im not gonna jump on conspiracy stories - though i remain cynical about anything any government tells it's public, id say the US is just that - a massive corporation. consumerism in the US is insane. That's not to say everyone else is smelling of roses but it's whole different playing field over there.

As far as oil and Iraq goes, while i dont think it was the sole purpose, i think it would be naive to think there wasnt some lingering oil based motives involved somewhere.

true that the rate of consumption in the us is insane, but your terribly misguided. from what i have heard and read business ethics and political corruption tied into business ethics is much worse in many european countries and all over asia. from what I can tell anyways, europe just needs somebody to bash a whole lot of the time so they go after us when they are often responsible for doing similarly immoral things in terms of business.

[SLCPUNK]

Also, just because oil is something we have gotten out of the iraq war, it does not mean we invaded for that reason.

Nobody is claiming that is the sole reason, however considering how important it is to our lives, you'd be rather naive to think it wasn't at the top of the list. I guess you could claim it was about "Spreading freedom and bringing democracy to the Middle East." However if that were the case, then it would be tough to explain why we overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran an installed the Shah years ago (a big reason why Iran hates our guts.) Hard to swallow the BS when you look out our history in that region paired with the amount of oil our country consumes (25% globally.)

It is also not exploitation to set up contracts that once Iraq's political situation becomes stable enable it to trade its oil with easily the largest consumer of oil on the planet.

Nobody was saying that. You are creating a false argument to respond to. 

lets not be ridiculous here, the contracts dont say "iraq must give the US oil for free and if they dont we kill all those damn arabs." That kind of mindset is what you guys have here from what I can tell(talking about I are ess and slcpunk, cant say that for everybody).

I wasn't talking about what it didn't say, but rather would it did say. And what it DID SAY was pretty fucking damning.

[SLCPUNK]

wow, dude, thats actually very damning, espcilly before 9/11, would it be safe to say do you think, that if 9/11 had never taken place, the iraq war would of happenned sooner?

I don't really know, although I doubt it. I think 911 was a way to sell the occupation of Iraq to America. In fact when that happened, and people spoke up against the invasion, it was considered extremely unpatriotic. Emotions were running high and America wanted revenge, it didn't matter if Saddam was a secular dictator and Osama was a religious fanatic with no connection. People wanted blood, and imho it was a reason to address what they needed to: A regime change to get their hands on that sweet crude. Unfortunately what they thought would be a cake walk, turned out to be a fiasco instead.

[mooney]

true that the rate of consumption in the us is insane, but your terribly misguided. from what i have heard and read business ethics and political corruption tied into business ethics is much worse in many european countries and all over asia. from what I can tell anyways, europe just needs somebody to bash a whole lot of the time so they go after us when they are often responsible for doing similarly immoral things in terms of business.

there's no such thing as ethics in business, period. in Europe or elsewhere. Peronsally im more concerned with the UK than the whole of Europe anyway.

I dont think it's about pointlessly bashing the US (or anyone else - at least not personally), it's just i cant look past you guys being the worlds supr power and everyone else running around after you - namely us here, with wars and what not. Your guys wanted some war action and we went and followed a bunch of christian fundamentalists so we could maintain our "special" relationship.

[aintitfun22]

Nobody is claiming that is the sole reason, however considering how important it is to our lives, you'd be rather naive to think it wasn't at the top of the list. I guess you could claim it was about "Spreading freedom and bringing democracy to the Middle East." However if that were the case, then it would be tough to explain why we overthrew a democratically elected leader in Iran an installed the Shah years ago (a big reason why Iran hates our guts.) Hard to swallow the BS when you look out our history in that region paired with the amount of oil our country consumes (25% globally.)

Nobody was saying that. You are creating a false argument to respond to. 

I wasn't talking about what it didn't say, but rather would it did say. And what it DID SAY was pretty fucking damning.

if what it did say was so damning im interested to hear, can you give me a link? and democratically elected leaders such as the iranian shah are not actually democratically elected. iran's current leader was technically elected "democratically," but was he actually who the people would have chosen if the election wasnt corrupt? i believe there were protests about how another candidate clearly won? i put the ? because i want to confirm im right here.

[King bumb.l.foot II]

http://www.youtube.com/user/AlphaWerewolff#p/u/0/8pLrGA0hO5k

[I ARE ESS]

http://www.youtube.com/user/AlphaWerewolff#p/u/0/8pLrGA0hO5k

wow


i like turtles



its on the same level