Oil....

farfromglorified

Specifics wrote:

I think you have me mixed up with someone "educated" as a "patriot". I didnt wish to discuss my disgust at the sanctimony of the American administration, or my belief that it is as much an extremist organisation as any of the "Axis of Evil" nations. Lets leave that for a different board.

You said you were "led to believe" that Al Qaeda had close ties to Iraq. Who led you to believe that and how?

Not subject to OPEC rules? Western friendly government installed? Less controlled by the west? are you now the one tryin to "sell me horseshit"?

Just because there is a western-friendly government does not mean we control their oil. Iraqi oil revenues, pre-war, were predominantely controlled by the west via the UN. Now, Iraqi oil revenues are controlled by a corrupt and hapless Iraqi government wherein the West has little operational influence.

I would "immediately" like to not be restrained by the NEED to travel to work to make money in order to feed and live. However the real world puts me in a position where i have to make such decisions based on what i can afford, which is controlled by the prices put on things by whoever does. I'm not rich, maybe you are? and maybe this is the root of the communication breakdown, because right now i dont comprehend where you are coming from.

I'm sure oil companies would also like to not be restrained by the NEED to satisfy investors in order to make money. Perhaps they're waiting for someone else to solve their problems for them too.

Specifics

Ok you win FarFrom. But just because i cant help myself, they actually need to make money in order to satisfy investors, they dont satisfy investors in order to make money.

Anyone have anything interesting on this subject?

jlew24asu

Specifics wrote:

Ok you win FarFrom. But just because i cant help myself, they actually need to make money in order to satisfy investors, they dont satisfy investors in order to make money.

Anyone have anything interesting on this subject?

would love to discuss this with you but your orginal post is so far off you wont hear any arguments otherwise.

Specifics wrote:

So, for me, we went to Iraq to free the Oil, that we all need in order to operate, from the clutches of muslim extremists (ok, to put it into the hands of British/American extremists but thats another thread possibly, about turning your back on all extremists ).

neither are true. saddam wasnt a muslim extremists, he was a saddam extremist. oil wasnt put into the hands of america/britian. Iraq controls it.

Specifics wrote:

This has to be accepted on a certain level as a legitimate reason, survival of the fittest, i can accept that.

you make it sound like Iraq is the only country in the world that produces oil. and we invaded in order to survive. are you crazy?

Specifics wrote:

And i did accept that, untill I thought about the possibility and likelyhood of they're being very successful technologies out there, that would in effect make the need for Oil obsolete, these technologies probably being held back by companies with a vested interest in keeping Oil profitable.

there are successful technologies out there. just not successful enough to replace oil. and they arent being held back by oil companies. they are being held back by lack of demand for hybrid vehicles and ability to make alternatives such as E85 distributable to all of americans. and even that is 15% gas.

Specifics wrote:

Does this then place the blood of many on the hands of the Oil companies and they're profit margins?

no. like far said, you should stop using oil. oil companies are just supplying a product that is in high demand.

Specifics

jlew24asu wrote:

would love to discuss this with you but your orginal post is so far off you wont hear any arguments otherwise.

Then you go on to discuss it with me, is that typical JLew?

jlew24asu wrote:

neither are true. saddam wasnt a muslim extremists, he was a saddam extremist. oil wasnt put into the hands of america/britian. Iraq controls it.

A Saddam Extremist? thats profound! i never expressed the opinion, i dont hold that opinion but i've already made that point clear in a previous post, research.
Iraq controls it? thats reassuring then, because that clears USA/Britain of harbouring any desire to control it for themselves and totally negates it as a reason for military action ( thats sarcasm ; sarcasm = meaning exactly the opposite to what you say)

jlew24asu wrote:

you make it sound like Iraq is the only country in the world that produces oil. and we invaded in order to survive. are you crazy?.

Do have no ability to read between the lines? when i said survival of the fittest i didnt mean we needed it to survive but im really not gonna explain that one. ( i wonder if this will be the only quote you reply to?)

jlew24asu wrote:

there are successful technologies out there. just not successful enough to replace oil. and they arent being held back by oil companies. they are being held back by lack of demand for hybrid vehicles and ability to make alternatives such as E85 distributable to all of americans. and even that is 15% gas.

I can only apologise, i didnt realise that America's infrastructure was so backward that they can only distribute Oil over the entire country. You really think that this is the only alternative? then i have nothing to say. ( ah, maybe you can just quote this one)

jlew24asu wrote:

no. like far said, you should stop using oil. oil companies are just supplying a product that is in high demand.

I use my vote to elect people who i think will get me closer to the possibility of living my life to my ideals. I have to work to live. If they cannot do this then i have to do what i have to do. If im going to take action it will be to do more than use my bike more.

Dont forget the smarmy comment in your reply, you let me down on this one :-)

jlew24asu

Specifics wrote:

Then you go on to discuss it with me, is that typical JLew?

just trying to get some intelligence out of you. I'm always up for a good challenge.

Specifics wrote:

A Saddam Extremist? thats profound! i never expressed the opinion, i dont hold that opinion but i've already made that point clear in a previous post, research.
Iraq controls it? thats reassuring then, because that clears USA/Britain of harbouring any desire to control it for themselves and totally negates it as a reason for military action ( thats sarcasm ; sarcasm = meaning exactly the opposite to what you say)

guess I should have researched for 15 posts. my bad. and yes Iraq controls Iraqi oil

Specifics wrote:

Do have no ability to read between the lines? when i said survival of the fittest i didnt mean we needed it to survive but im really not gonna explain that one. ( i wonder if this will be the only quote you reply to?)

I'm trying my best. your superior knowledge memorizes me.

Specifics wrote:

I can only apologise, i didnt realise that America's infrastructure was so backward that they can only distribute Oil over the entire country. You really think that this is the only alternative? then i have nothing to say. ( ah, maybe you can just quote this one)

its not only America's infrastructure. trying to distribute a new resource to tens of thousands of gas stations doesnt happen overnight.

sure there are more alternatives, I used one as an example for the sake of the argument.

Specifics wrote:

I use my vote to elect people who i think will get me closer to the possibility of living my life to my ideals. I have to work to live. If they cannot do this then i have to do what i have to do. If im going to take action it will be to do more than use my bike more.

love to know what that is. probably nothing. but hey, you can always talk a big game.


there isnt much point in debating this with you. you dont understand the oil market. but hey, please feel free to insert some witty comments.

Specifics

I am defeated.

I dont have an indefatiguable stamina for talking absolute rubbish. Maybe i would have to sing the national anthem every morning to build up my stamina.

Damn you love to try though!!

Dont be confused by the above comment, i dont respect that.

Its the main problem with a lot of Americans attitudes, that they love the effect of their own voice above actual empathy for a situation or real intelligence, that i suspect will mean the disastrous effects of the attempted "American Empire", thankfully, will survive for only a tiny fraction of the effects of the great visionary empires of the past.

Just one thing:

JLew24ass wrote:

its not only America's infrastructure. trying to distribute a new resource to tens of thousands of gas stations doesnt happen overnight.

sure there are more alternatives, I used one as an example for the sake of the argument.

One example doesnt even nearly satisfy the argument, in fact it shows total ignorance of the whole point.

jlew24asu

Specifics wrote:

Just one thing:



One example doesnt even nearly satisfy the argument, in fact it shows total ignorance of the whole point.

never said it did. just trying to dumb it down for you.

jeffbr

Specifics wrote:

I am defeated.

You may want to try The Porch or All Encompassing Trip forums on this board. They may be better suited to your style. Especially if you're not interested in vigorous debate, but rather are seeking empathy and affirmation.