If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Pravda)   World Oil Exchanges Burning Up   (english.pravda.ru) divider line 165
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1092 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Oct 2002 at 9:27 PM (11 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



165 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2002-10-18 09:31:40 PM
You don't say.
 
2002-10-18 09:32:14 PM
pretty crappy articles tonight.
 
2002-10-18 09:32:27 PM
If man didn't feel the need to stuff oil into every little thing, it wouldn't be so expensive.
 
2002-10-18 09:33:02 PM
One can now understand the USA's wish to destroy Hussein's regime in Iraq and to gain unrestricted access to Iraqi oil.

I never thought I'd live to see the day when Pravda is the only media outlet willing to tell the truth about something.
 
2002-10-18 09:33:27 PM
What ever happened to the war VS. terror. This "war" has just evolved into a war VS cheap oil.
 
2002-10-18 09:37:37 PM
Loverboy586 This "war" has just evolved into a war VS cheap oil.

"That's all the war was EVER about, fat greedy American republican fascist pigs getting their money-grubbing hands on cheap oil for their big gas-guzzling SUVs by killing innocent Iraqui women and babies!!!"
</democrats and basically the rest of the world>
 
2002-10-18 09:39:32 PM
nonono, loverboy, this war has never been anything but "war FOR cheap oil"
 
2002-10-18 09:39:35 PM
Loverboy,

Sorry to burst your bubble, but, ultimately, American Foreign (and Domestic) policy is about money, or as they like to put it "our economic self-interest".
 
2002-10-18 09:43:32 PM
MorteDiem: So you're saying that the claims of altruistic motives are merely a transparent scheme to drum up support from an ignorant gullible public? That doesn't sound very likely to me!
 
2002-10-18 09:44:50 PM
This is what disgusts me most of all about the buildup to war -- all the cynical flag-waving "we're doing it to prevent another 9/11" BS. What we're actually doing is something quite simple -- beating up the unpopular kid and taking his bike.

Now maybe we really need his bike and yeah, he really is a little weenie, but let's be honest about it. if we're gonna be bullies, we might as well be macho enough to admit it.
 
2002-10-18 09:45:02 PM
Not to threadjack, but the police found a white truck with shell casings at a rental agency in Dulles.

The only problem is that all of the links to the major news sites have been submitted. Apparently, they give the new stories the same URL at CNN, Yahoo, Googlenews, etc.

Oh, well........it just means that the story might not show up on Fark for a while :)
 
2002-10-18 09:45:13 PM
Blow up all the freaking oil. If something big has to happen, let it happen as soon as possible.

I mean, no.
 
2002-10-18 09:47:33 PM
Loverboy586, where do you work? Does your company depend on gas and oil? If not, do your customers?

I think it's time to get over the notion that defending world interests like oil and the American economy is a bad thing. Say what you want about the big bad terrible Americans, but when it comes down to it we are just making a living.

1) Due to geography, we are far more dependent on cars than the rest of the industrialized world.

2) A good part of the "rest of the world" depends on our foreign aid.

If terrorists blow up the American and British oil wells in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, it will cause a global depression. And, at the same time, not many other countries are willing to do anything about it. So, here we are. What would you have us do?

I personally would get some binding agreements with Norway, Russia, Venizualla (I know its spelled wrong), and Mexico, open ANWR, and tell the middle east to fark off. Then I would cut off all aid to the region including Isreal. Europe can go fark themselves as well, because they are depending on us to make sure the Saudi oil keeps flowing. The truth is that we don't need the Middle East oil, and it causes us a lot of problems.

It takes some balls to do what GW is doing, but it would take even more balls to do what I propose.
 
2002-10-18 09:48:03 PM
Allow me to clarify. The links were submitted a while ago, before this development. The new article has the same URL as the old articles.
 
2002-10-18 09:49:32 PM
Oh come on you morons. If we wanted to get cheap oil we'd open up ANWR or invade Canada, ya tards. Any military action against Iraq would cost more money than our government could ever get from kickbacks from corporations to gobble up Iraqi oil wells. Use your damn common sense.

The first sentence of this article was hilarious.

"Islamic terrorists have reached Saudi Arabia."
 
2002-10-18 09:54:19 PM
ChadManMn then why doesn't the government just come out and say. "Ok, yeah we are going to attack Iraq to secure the oil there because if we don't we will be in a whole world of shiat." Why don't we just come out and say it? I mean holy shiat I would be behind something like instead of this stupid bullshiat about "weapons of mass destruction"... I mean if we were really after weapons of mass destruction then why aren't we invading North Korea... we KNOW that they have nukes and the means to deliver them at long ranges.

Is it too much to ask not to have the government blowing smoke up our collective asses?
 
2002-10-18 09:54:28 PM
If we wanted to get cheap oil we'd open up ANWR or invade Canada, ya tards.

The oil cos. are on record that opening up ANWR is economically unfeasible. The costs to extract the oil would be far too high for them to make a profit.

Iraq is an ideal target because the oil has been located, wells have been drilled and facilities are in place.

BTW, nice coversation style you got there. I'm betting you're the star of your junior high debate team.
 
2002-10-18 09:55:54 PM
Bbcrackmonkey yes, but drilling ANWR or invading Canada would not be popular. Dropping bombs on a bunch of brown people in Iraq though pans out much better in the opinion polls.
 
2002-10-18 09:57:15 PM
Tree_of_Woe, oh bullshiat. That must be why they lobbied like farking crazy to open up ANWR.

Pretty much every country on earth that has oil already has oil wells drilled and facilities in place. Think here please, think.

Next thing you know Vietnam was really about Nike sweatshops.
 
2002-10-18 09:57:52 PM
It takes some balls to do what GW is doing

No it doesn't. Takes no balls at all. Beat up a nation without a real military and take their oil? Yeah, shades of Churchill.

What would take balls would be for W to tell the people who installed him in teh White House to fark off, and develop fuel cell technology and renewable power resources. Then we can tell Saudi Arabia and Exxon to piss off at the same time.

My breath ain't being held for that one, though.
 
2002-10-18 09:57:57 PM
The first sentence of this article was hilarious.

"Islamic terrorists have reached Saudi Arabia."


that definately caught me off gaurd, also he saying things like "It seems that the image of this country as the most respectable and stable Arab country was shaken a lot yesterday."

jesus christ, is this guy retarded or something 15 19ths of the hijackers were saudi arabian, im sure he prolly beleives the whole 9/11 thing was just a zionist conspiracy though.
 
2002-10-18 09:58:25 PM
Right Code, because Americans hate brown people. Whenever brown people die me and every American I know personally take time out of our busy schedules of greed and consumerism to laugh at those silly brown people.
 
2002-10-18 09:58:35 PM
Loverboy: yeah they are waging war against cheap oil

....er....
 
2002-10-18 09:58:46 PM
DamnCrackMonkey;

The government cares not for kickbacks, it's the taxpayers money they are spending.

All "they" care about is lining their pockets when they get out of office, or, while they are still incumbent.

Wind, tides, solar.
All free for the picking but corporate interests can't make as much off of them.
 
2002-10-18 09:59:22 PM
This sick war is not just about oil, it's also:

1)Geostrategic advantage~ The US Empire has already made its initial move against Afganistan, as brilliantly planned out by Zbignew Brezinski, former Carter Administration Nat Sec Advisor, who described The Plan in great detail in his land-mark book, "The Grand Chessboard". The geostrategic imperative is to flank against China and Russia.

Now that the US Empire is securely in Afganistan, it can easily hold off China from getting the oil themselves, not to mention keep China in check geographically.

2)Oil~ No doubt.

3)The FRN (Federal Reserve Note)~ the financial system is close to the point of collapse, thanks to the Federal Reserve System of F.R.A.U.D. (Federal Reserve Accounting Units of Dollars). The US Empire desperately needs the oil money to stave off the collapse by dramatically lowering the cost floor of bringing that oil into the US Empire's homeland, the land of the greed, home of the slaves. Well over a half a trillion--500 *billion* bucks goes overseas to buy all that oil; to capture some of that money is the aim of the Empire, as it is all tapped out in other ways of making/stealing money.

4)Israel~ They're a **big** problem. Israel has already gone into Iraq and plan on capturing their own oilfields in a double-cross against their dumb sugar daddy. Don't believe it? Search: "Operation Shekhinah" and see for yourselves. Zionism is a **big** problem for us here in America, both the slave persons and the free Sui Juris People. Huge problem. Those Zionist bastards (*not* the Jewish people) own and control America. No joke.
 
2002-10-18 09:59:57 PM
We have the technology right now to cut our dependance on oil by more than 50% in the next four years... if we simply placed the investment in the technology. We could take the money that we are putting towards bombing the shiat out of Iraq and put into these technologies and tell the Middle East to go have circle jerk with their camels.

And you know doing that would not risk our soldier's lives, and it wouldn't piss off the muslim extremists. Hey, win-win situation.
 
2002-10-18 10:00:04 PM
What were the 2 last countries we bombed the shiat out of? Lesse here, Afghanistan. Brown people? Yup. Serbia, brown people? Serbia was full of brown people, right? Right?
 
2002-10-18 10:00:07 PM
As it became known, a conspiracy by Islamic radical terrorists was unveiled in Saudi Arabia yesterday. Oil prices went up right after that piece of news.

"In the experimental control universe, no conspiracy was unveiled. Oil prices still went up."

Islamic terrorists have reached Saudi Arabia

When did they leave?
 
2002-10-18 10:00:22 PM
1) prevent WMD
2) Liberate Iraqi people
3) provide catalyst for democracy in mid-east
4) Get cheap, reliable oil
5) money from oil sales goes to developing iraqi infrastructure

.......OH NO
 
2002-10-18 10:00:49 PM
Bbcrackmonkey:

Oil Cos. Largely Silent on Alaska

Wed Apr 17, 4:58 PM ET
By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - Despite intense lobbying over oil drilling in an Arctic wildlife refuge, big oil companies largely have kept silent, their attention on exploration elsewhere.

The oil industry long has sought to drill for the billions of barrels of oil beneath the refuge in Alaska's northeastern corner. But drilling supporters complain privately that large oil companies have not pushed aggressively to open the site to development.

An industry insider, speaking on condition of anonymity, acknowledged that for many of the large companies, the refuge is only one place to find oil and that there are many fields around the world where development would come more cheaply and with less political trouble.

----------------------------------

Enough thinking for ya?
 
2002-10-18 10:01:22 PM
Bbcrackmonkey: Installing a friendly dictator in Iraq would allow the US to control the stability of the Middle East. I assume you don't think the Saudi government is being propped up by the US for any other reason than it being a perceived stabilizing factor?
Stability in the region equals acceptable oil prices, so in the end economic interests are at stake.

And yes, the remarks about Saudi Arabia being "respected" and invaded by terrorists, rather than a breeding ground for them, were hilarious :)
 
2002-10-18 10:01:52 PM
hehehe Bbcrackmonkey its a line from George Carlin... "the one thing the US is great is bombing brown people"
 
2002-10-18 10:02:02 PM
Tarzan, I think your tinfoil beanie needs refolding.
 
2002-10-18 10:03:36 PM
hey, here's another one crackmonkey:


Slick Oil:
What the industry really wants. And it isn't ANWR.

By Natasha Hunter
Web Exclusive: 4.2.02

In a recent New York Times article, oil company execs admit the venture is scientifically uncertain and will be plagued by expensive lawsuits from environmental groups. As Gerald J. Kepes, managing director for exploration and production issues at the Petroleum Finance Company, a Washington consulting firm for oil companies, told the Times in early March, "It's not clear that this is quite the bonanza some have said."

So the main reason Big Oil is panting around the bargaining table may be to snap up the billions in industry tax breaks that always get tossed around when Congress designs energy legislation.
 
2002-10-18 10:03:38 PM
And anyway it's not "about oil"

if America wanted cheap oil they could just drop the sanctions you dumbasses
 
2002-10-18 10:04:01 PM
OrphanedWombat, if we wanted a friendly dictator in Iraq we would have never made Saddam into our enemy in the first place.
 
2002-10-18 10:05:10 PM
Code_Archeologist, I'm with you there, I wish they would all get some balls and just spell it out. It's not like we're a bunch of idiots (well maybe I am, but I think you farkers is smart)
 
2002-10-18 10:05:48 PM
5) money from oil sales goes to developing iraqi infrastructure

Un-bloody-likely. How much effort is being put into developing Afghani infrastructure? Anyone know? Somebody cut me down to size/prove me wrong/get me to put my money where my mouth is.
 
2002-10-18 10:05:50 PM
"dumbasses"...."tards"...."morons"

I just hate it when members of the Bush family log on here to debate.
 
2002-10-18 10:06:25 PM
Bbcrackmonkey~ Ok, it is clear that you have taken the blue pill--care to come up with better facts than I have? What do you have to offer that beats what I have said about it? I'm calling your bluff.

Take the red pill. You won't regret it.
 
2002-10-18 10:07:49 PM
And Bondith, how much money and effort are YOU putting towards rebuilding Afganistan? I see Americans there taking care of things and trying to get them to understand democracy, not Brits or Aussies, whichever you are.
 
2002-10-18 10:08:41 PM
if we wanted a friendly dictator in Iraq we would have never made Saddam into our enemy in the first place.

We thought we were making him into a friendly dictator in the eighties when we shipped him arms and biological weapons. it was only when he started threatening the oil supplies of the Gulf that he became an evil, evil man.
 
2002-10-18 10:08:52 PM
Tree of Woe, I'm going to assume that either you or the author of that article is completely exaggerating or taking miscellaneous quotes out of context, considering that a huge amount of oil drilling already occurs in Alaska (we have a pipeline running from Alaska into the US) and that there is a massively huge amount of oil in ANWR from all accounts. Also, it isn't as if environmentalists have better lawyers than oil companies.
 
2002-10-18 10:09:20 PM
Whatever...didn't even read the header...I just want you Farkers to know that "Soylent Green" just started.

"Wednesdays are Soylent Green days"

See you bastards in about 2 hours...

:))))
 
2002-10-18 10:10:15 PM
Bbcrackmonkey: Saddam made an enemy of the US, not the other way around. Why would the US not want a friendly dictator in place? Doesn't make sense to me... Saddam serves well as a scapegoat and distractor from domestic issues, but there are many others equally well suited for that.
 
2002-10-18 10:10:52 PM
Bondith: Afghanistan is a whole different kettle of fish to Iraq. Aghanistan is almost beyond repair and it'll take years to fix it up

Iraq on the other hand actually has Infrastructure, and an easily sellable resources (oil) that can bring in money to help develop the country
 
2002-10-18 10:11:28 PM
Chad
Canadian, actually, although Dad's Aussie and most of my ancestry is English.

I'm a starving college student. I have no money. Anyway, the point I tried to make had nothing to do with the American People giving money, it was how unlikely it was that the American Government would funnel oil profits back into Iraq.

trying to get them to understand democracy

Does that include giving weapons to warlords?
 
2002-10-18 10:11:41 PM
Tree, if he annexed Kuwait, hey, that's more oil for our friendly pet dictator. We could have just censored debate in the UN and kept Saddam on our buddy list with even MORE oil for him to export to us for covering his ass.
 
2002-10-18 10:11:53 PM
Again - its always about the liberal idea of fairness
fairness in everything at all times
America should only go to war with countries that are just as powerful as us, look like us,etc - so we can suffer just as many casualties and not look racist.

See? FAIR!!

It was Bill Maher's thesis too - how unsportsman like of us to try and limit American casualties while maximizing the enemy's

Dont you feel good being a liberal?
 
2002-10-18 10:12:11 PM
considering that a huge amount of oil drilling already occurs in Alaska

Ever looked on a map? Alaska is a very large place. Yes, drilling for oil where an infrastructure exists is affordable (e.g. Barrow). It's entirelrely another story to drill and build infrastructure in one of the most remote areas on earth. It could be done in the 50's and 60's, but todays costs make it prohibitive.


Sorry if you think the Associated Press is in on some big conspiracy to preserve caribou, but facts is facts. And you're wrong.
 
Displayed 50 of 165 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report