War for Oil.

macgyver06

any people still disagree?

macgyver06

how much are 3000+ lives....about 65 cents a gallon.

King George

thankyougrandma

War for oil doesn't exist, the real official name is war on terror...

macgyver06

Evil deeds do not prosper; the slow man catches up with the swift.
-Homer


Force is all-conquering, but its victories are short-lived.
Abraham Lincoln (1809 - 1865)

One need not be a chamber to be haunted;
One need not be a house;
The brain has corridors surpassing
Material place.
Emily Dickinson (1830 - 1886)

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
-Mahatma Gandhi

world

If we didnt have oil, our economy would crash and more people would die then 3000.

sponger

icarus wrote:

we already have oil, whats your point?

what's yours?

Gary Carter

icarus wrote:

we already have oil, whats your point?

what he means is that this war wasnt bout oil, simple enough for u to understand

sponger

icarus wrote:

what's yours?

Can never have too much oil.

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

Can never have too much oil.

Might wanna spend more time and resources on coming up with plan B considering plan A is inevitably going to expire and cause these huge problems when it does. There's no avoiding it. You don't spend money on building ski resorts when you know it's going to stop snowing there in the near future.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

You don't spend money on building ski resorts when you know it's going to stop snowing there in the near future.

Of course. No one is arguing with that. But, the US is only doing what any other country in the world would do if it had the capability.

Last Exodus

I dont know about you all, but im paying almost 3 bucks a gallon. So where's all this oil we conquered?

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

Of course. No one is arguing with that. But, the US is only doing what any other country in the world would do if it had the capability.

It's time we started acting a bit more evolved and intelligent and thought long term instead of quick buck.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

It's time we started acting a bit more evolved and intelligent and thought long term instead of quick buck.

Yeah, but how long term can we think while being practical?

We might lose a few thousand more guys in Iraq, but it is going to ensure that this nation remains inudstrially dominant for years to come. It also ensures that our competitors remain not so dominant.

If someone comes along and invents a practical alternative fuel, then who is going to say no to that? Well, maybe the oil companies will buy the patent and stick it in a sock drawer, but that's another problem.

Like I said, it's what any other nation would do if they had the capability. You talk about foresight, but that foresight comes a huge cost to now for the US.

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

If someone comes along and invents a practical alternative fuel, then who is going to say no to that? Well, maybe the oil companies will buy the patent and stick it in a sock drawer, but that's another problem.

That's THE problem. Too much resistance towards alternatives that are already out there, IMO. This should be a democracy not just lip service and the general popualtion wouldn't be ok with sending their young people to bomb and destroy other countries for economic reasons...especailly not the poor whose kids are the ones going.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

That's THE problem. Too much resistance towards alternatives that are already out there, IMO. This should be a democracy not just lip service and the general popualtion wouldn't be ok with sending their young people to bomb and destroy other countries for economic reasons...especailly not the poor whose kids are the ones going.

Right, they wouldn't be OK with it. But, that's only because they don't understand the severity of the situation. They don't understand that our wonderful world of $3/gallon and affordable plane tickets would disappear until these "alternatives" really became a practical alternative.

Even the slightest increases in oil prices has staggering effects on our economy, and even the slightest hint of limited oil resources has a staggering effect on oil prices.

It's true that alternative fuel acceptance and development is being stunted by unseen forces, but that's the reality of the situation. We could change it, but there's no guarantee that change would take place fast enough to negate our need to ensure adequate oil resources.

Like I said, it's what any other country would do if it had the capability.

Abookamongstthemany

sponger wrote:

Right, they wouldn't be OK with it. But, that's only because they don't understand the severity of the situation. They don't understand that our wonderful world of $3/gallon and affordable plane tickets would disappear until these "alternatives" really became a practical alternative.

Even the slightest increases in oil prices has staggering effects on our economy, and even the slightest hint of limited oil resources has a staggering effect on oil prices.

It's true that alternative fuel acceptance and development is being stunted by unseen forces, but that's the reality of the situation. We could change it, but there's no guarantee that change would take place fast enough to negate our need to ensure adequate oil resources.

Like I said, it's what any other country would do if it had the capability.

I personally don't care about what others would do. I like to pull for what's right. It's pointless other than to line the pockets of some to keep milking this dying cow instead of spending the money on getting a new one. It's people's lives we're destroying.

sponger

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I personally don't care about what others would do. I like to pull for what's right. It's pointless other than to line the pockets of some to keep milking this dying cow instead of spending the money on getting a new one. It's people's lives we're destroying.

good for you then, abook. I don't know what country you live in, but if it is not the US, then I would expect you to have the same feelings of disappointment and hostility for your own government as well.

My point is that if you want to change the world, then you have to change yourself first. This means no more driving internal combustion engine and no more going on vacation via a jet plane that runs on fossil fuels.

gue_barium

sponger wrote:

Right, they wouldn't be OK with it. But, that's only because they don't understand the severity of the situation. They don't understand that our wonderful world of $3/gallon and affordable plane tickets would disappear until these "alternatives" really became a practical alternative.

Even the slightest increases in oil prices has staggering effects on our economy, and even the slightest hint of limited oil resources has a staggering effect on oil prices.

It's true that alternative fuel acceptance and development is being stunted by unseen forces, but that's the reality of the situation. We could change it, but there's no guarantee that change would take place fast enough to negate our need to ensure adequate oil resources.

Like I said, it's what any other country would do if it had the capability.

Tough shit. Where's American self-reliance and ingenuity? That's our trademark. Where's your patriotism? Do you care? You seem to be aware enough of the government to inflect a casual concern at an oil market scheme, but you seem to shrivel at the idea about being a part of a solution to it.

sponger

gue_barium wrote:

Tough shit. Where's American self-reliance and ingenuity? That's our trademark. Where's your patriotism? Do you care? You seem to be aware enough of the government to inflect a casual concern at an oil market scheme, but you seem to shrivel at the idea about being a part of a solution to it.

Again, this is a message that you should be reciting while standing in front of a mirror.

The only difference between you and me on this issue is that I don't pretend to care. It's easy to stand around and talk about change and to point fingers at what is wrong. Anyone can do that.

At no point did I say things should be the way they are. I'm saying that war is the best action at this point in time for the sake of economic stability for the US.

"War for oil" sounds like such an ugly statement, but if you live in the US, then you are a part of it. I doubt you live without oil.

Some of you "idealists" think you're so intelligent and worldly, but you're just as much a part of the hypocrisy as anyone else -even moreso by pretending to be to not be a part of it.

gue_barium

sponger wrote:

Again, this is a message that you should be reciting while standing in front of a mirror.

The only difference between you and me on this issue is that I don't pretend to care. It's easy to stand around and talk about change and to point fingers at what is wrong. Anyone can do that.

At no point did I say things should be the way they are. I'm saying that war is the best action at this point in time for the sake of economic stability for the US.

"War for oil" sounds like such an ugly statement, but if you live in the US, then you are a part of it. I doubt you live without oil.

Some of you "idealists" think you're so intelligent and worldly, but you're just as much a part of the hypocrisy as anyone else -even moreso by pretending to be to not be a part of it.

That is a truly /ignorant/cowardly/apethetic[choose one] point of view. No one is suggesting a complete oil shutdown, but there have been alternatives to our consumption for more than 50-60 years. The old boy oil network are the orchestrators of this war and of the oil dependent nature in which we live. They're the ones perpetrating this oil way of life, and nobody else. You happen to be one of the one's who believes the bullshit.

sponger

gue_barium wrote:

You are a true /ignorant/coward/apethetic[choose one]. No one is suggesting a complete oil shutdown, but there have been alternatives to our consumption for more than 50-60 years. The old boy oil network are the orchestrators of this war and of the oil dependent nature in which we live. They're the ones perpetrating this oil way of life, and nobody else. You happen to be one of the one's who believes the bullshit.

Uh, no, I have in this thread paid lip service to the fact that alternative fuel development has been stunted by the oil industry as well as other forces.

Look, do you own a hybrid car? No? Then you've nothing to say.

Does your heater run on solar power/electricty? No? Then you've got nothing to say.

Again, since you don't seem to comprehend plain english very well: Because of circumstances that are beyond our control at this time, war for oil is the best solution for this country's energy and economic needs.

You can either admit that, or you can keep passing yourself off as holier than thou without having a leg to stand on in terms of the issue at hand.

Again, the only difference between you and me on this issue is that you're all talk and no walk, and I'm just no walk. You're like a meat eater who calls for vegetarianism.

gue_barium

sponger wrote:

Uh, no, I have in this thread paid lip service to the fact that alternative fuel development has been stunted by the oil industry as well as other forces.

Look, do you own a hybrid car? No? Then you've nothing to say.

Does your heater run on solar power/electricty? No? Then you've got nothing to say.

Again, since you don't seem to comprehend plain english very well: Because of circumstances that are beyond our control at this time, war for oil is the best solution for this country's energy and economic needs.

You can either admit that, or you can keep passing yourself off as holier than thou without having a leg to stand on in terms of the issue at hand.

Again, the only difference between you and me on this issue is that you're all talk and no walk, and I'm just no walk. You're like a meat eater who calls for vegetarianism.

I've been riding a bike for the past three years.

I've lived in a tent for 2 of the last 3 years, bathed in the river.

sponger

gue_barium wrote:

I've been riding a bike for the past three years.

I've lived in a tent for 2 of the last 3 years, bathed in the river.

Natrual gas powered public transportation , if available in your area, would have been sufficient.

Last Exodus

gue_barium wrote:

You are a true /ignorant/coward/apethetic[choose one]. No one is suggesting a complete oil shutdown, but there have been alternatives to our consumption for more than 50-60 years. The old boy oil network are the orchestrators of this war and of the oil dependent nature in which we live. They're the ones perpetrating this oil way of life, and nobody else. You happen to be one of the one's who believes the bullshit.

and IM the one getting lectured by the mods?

gue_barium

Last Exodus wrote:

and IM the one getting lectured by the mods?

I'm attacking a point of view rather than the person himself. He PM'd me and challenged my challenge of cowardice. If anything, that's the way it should be.
I think sometimes posters have a hard time when it comes to challenging a point of view and counter challenging it with their own point of view, especially when they feel they've been one-upped.

Last Exodus

gue_barium wrote:

I'm attacking a point of view rather than the person himself. He PM'd me and challenged my challenge of cowardice. If anything, that's the way it should be.
I think sometimes posters have a hard time when it comes to challenging a point of view and counter challenging it with their own point of view, especially when they feel they've been one-upped.

well im cool with it...im just saying

gue_barium

sponger wrote:

Natrual gas powered public transportation , if available in your area, would have been sufficient.

Well, I use the bus now and then.

The point I am making, though, is that we're not as oil dependent as some would have you believe. There are other ways to fuel our cars, and they are ignored for a reason. The reason isn't money. At least not government money.

sponger

gue_barium wrote:

I'm attacking a point of view rather than the person himself. He PM'd me and challenged my challenge of cowardice. If anything, that's the way it should be.
I think sometimes posters have a hard time when it comes to challenging a point of view and counter challenging it with their own point of view, especially when they feel they've been one-upped.

This is because you don't seem to understand that sometimes actions speak louder than words. To ignore this is to be hypocritical, and I think I've done an excellent job of pointing out the tendency for that hypocrisy to reveal itself in your posts.

sponger

gue_barium wrote:

Well, I use the bus now and then.

The point I am making, though, is that we're not as oil dependent as some would have you believe. There are other ways to fuel our cars, and they are ignored for a reason. The reason isn't money. At least not government money.

And I've never said differently.

So what exactly makes your stance on this issue any different from mine?

gue_barium

sponger wrote:

This is because you don't seem to understand that sometimes actions speak louder than words. To ignore this is to be hypocritical, and I think I've done an excellent job of pointing out the tendency for that hypocrisy to reveal itself in your posts.

Did you PM me again? Maybe I can make some sense of this post from that. BRB

gue_barium

gue_barium wrote:

Did you PM me again? Maybe I can make some sense of this post from that. BRB

"socal"?

what the hell kind of pm is that?