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.

(CBS Los Angeles 2)   If Baghdad falls, today's gas prices will "look like a bargain in a couple weeks". Happy vacation season, everyone   (losangeles.cbslocal.com) divider line 261
    More: Scary, Baghdad, head of government, KNX  
•       •       •

8658 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jun 2014 at 5:01 PM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-14 05:39:11 PM  

Red Shirt Blues: Germany lost about 10%, Japan 4%. Both were crushed.


10% is the minimum- generally the majority will need to be military-age men. Japan's kind of a special case because nukes changed the game; look what happened to Japanese culture in the wake of those. Still, if you're willing to pop a few nukes, you could get the same result with lower overall casualties.

The point is that war's not clean, and unless we're willing to get our hands really bloody, it's a bad choice. Probably a bad choice even then, but if you're aware of the costs going in and that unless you pay those costs that success is impossible, maybe we could see some alternatives on the table.
 
2014-06-14 05:39:37 PM  
"I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."
-- Dick Cheney, July 20, 2005
 
2014-06-14 05:39:51 PM  

jehovahs witness protection: Obama planned this so he can okay the Keystone pipeline and look like he's a hero.


Selling Canadian oil to China makes him a hero?
 
2014-06-14 05:39:58 PM  
Oh wow, didn't think I'd see whack job conspiracy theories with Obama in this thread but here we are. Hopefully they won't connect the dots to Benghazi
 
2014-06-14 05:41:32 PM  

Cyclometh: Unless the US is willing to commit to the kind of scale of warfare that we saw in WWII- utter devastation on a massive scale and concomitant casualties, we're just not going to have the results people seem to think we will.


In order to successfully liberate the Iraqi people, we should have killed them all. Thanks for your insight.
 
2014-06-14 05:42:53 PM  

Freschel: zerkalo: And another civil war begins. It's gonna be armagheddon, millions slaughtered

Cats and dogs living together. Mass hysteria.


Relevant
 
2014-06-14 05:43:19 PM  
Baghdad is not going to fall.  There's not that many of these guys, and can probably be handled exclusively by air.  Also, their troops probably won't all run away this time.  Maybe.
 
2014-06-14 05:43:22 PM  
If monkeys come flying out of my butt I will win the power ball

/why are we wasting time talking about very unlikely events
 
2014-06-14 05:44:08 PM  
So... they finally admit it.  And here all this time I thought it was really aboot getting rid of a dictator and freedom fries.
 
2014-06-14 05:44:52 PM  
"If Baghdad falls" is a mighty big "if."  ISIS holds Tikrit?  Does that city support the current regime, or were they more supportive of Saddam Hussein al Tikriti's regime?
 
2014-06-14 05:45:22 PM  

jaytkay: In order to successfully liberate the Iraqi people, we should have killed them all. Thanks for your insight.


You're missing the point. I'm saying that we could never have "liberated" anything or anyone unless we were willing to kill enough people to completely destroy their culture and society. The choice to go into Iraq was the wrong one because the cost of achieving the victory conditions was never considered and could never have been paid.

I'm not arguing that we should have killed more people in Iraq. I'm saying that if you look at history, it should have been clear that the only way to achieve the stated goal was to do so. And that maybe knowing that we shouldn't have tried.

Because now, here we are. And yes, I told you so.
 
2014-06-14 05:46:31 PM  

CruJones: Baghdad is not going to fall.  There's not that many of these guys, and can probably be handled exclusively by air.  Also, their troops probably won't all run away this time.  Maybe.


cdn.frontpagemag.com
 
2014-06-14 05:47:03 PM  

Cyclometh: Heh. Glad I drive a Volt. Haven't bought gas in over six months and only twice in the last year.


You buy gas in another form, so electricity, food, toiletries, etc... Goes up.
 
2014-06-14 05:48:49 PM  

Cyclometh: the stated goal was to do so.


The stated goal was liberating the Iraqis from dictatorship.
 
2014-06-14 05:49:49 PM  

People_are_Idiots: You buy gas in another form, so electricity, food, toiletries, etc... Goes up.


The economy absorbs indirect costs more effectively over the other commodities I purchase. Yes, other costs go up, but when gas goes from $3.75 a gallon to $6.50 a gallon (just to give some numbers), my transportation costs don't go up by that much, nor do my other costs spike as high.

Besides which, if I drove a gas-using vehicle, I'd  still be paying extra for the gas as well as additional costs as other goods go up in price. So I'm still ahead of the game.
 
2014-06-14 05:50:24 PM  

hasty ambush: Well then Obama gets his wish, why are y'all biatchin?

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 333x400]


That would really be the best thing for this country in the long run.  Can you imagine the investment in alternative energies if fossil fuel costs tripled?  A solar panel on every house, new nuc facilities would be built, it would finally be profitable to collect the massive amount of natural gas that now is just burned in the field.  Hell, we'd be energy independent within 5 years and could be totally green within 20.  To bad the politicians don't have the guts to let it happen.
 
2014-06-14 05:50:46 PM  
Millions of people chased from their homes as an authoritarian government composed of hard-line religious fundamentalists seizes huge swaths of territory in a country recently controlled by our own military in a vicious ~5 year insurgency? "Meh"

Gas prices could be affected? "OH GOD NO WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!"
 
2014-06-14 05:50:49 PM  

jaytkay: Cyclometh: Unless the US is willing to commit to the kind of scale of warfare that we saw in WWII- utter devastation on a massive scale and concomitant casualties, we're just not going to have the results people seem to think we will.

In order to successfully liberate the Iraqi people, we should have killed them all. Thanks for your insight.


Or not try, I think is his argument.

Sounds good to me.
 
2014-06-14 05:50:58 PM  

jaytkay: The stated goal was liberating the Iraqis from dictatorship.


Actually, that's not correct. That was the post hoc justification. And even if it were, it's been unsuccessful and only looks to get worse.
 
2014-06-14 05:54:53 PM  

BigLuca: hasty ambush: Well then Obama gets his wish, why are y'all biatchin?

[1.bp.blogspot.com image 333x400]

That would really be the best thing for this country in the long run.  Can you imagine the investment in alternative energies if fossil fuel costs tripled?  A solar panel on every house, new nuc facilities would be built, it would finally be profitable to collect the massive amount of natural gas that now is just burned in the field.  Hell, we'd be energy independent within 5 years and could be totally green within 20.  To bad the politicians don't have the guts to let it happen.


Minus the nukes and natural gas...

/here is your wind farm kit citizen.
 
2014-06-14 05:55:44 PM  
I really, really wish Obama would step up to the podium and say:

"Know what? We tried. We farking tried. It's come to the point that the United States has two options now...one, we turn Iraq into a glass parking lot, but we're not doing that. Our only other option is to bring everyone home. That's what we're doing. I'm sorry for the people that sided with us, but we honestly can't afford to police your country anymore, especially when a lot of the population sides with power-hungry assholes who are smart enough to make race and religion their bread and butter. If that's what you want, that's what you get.

"I get it, WE get it. You don't want us here. We're leaving. Good luck, you'll need it."
 
2014-06-14 05:55:50 PM  

Nemosomen: "If Baghdad falls" is a mighty big "if."  ISIS holds Tikrit?  Does that city support the current regime, or were they more supportive of Saddam Hussein al Tikriti's regime?


Baghdad might not fall, but it might need to be renamed "Mogadishu North".

jaytkay: The stated goal was liberating the Iraqis from dictatorship.


The "stated goal" was to eliminate Iraq's nonexistent WMDs.
 
2014-06-14 05:56:00 PM  
Iraq was under the power of a greedy dictator for years, gas prices were cheap and stable ($1.29-1.39 from the 80s - early 2000s)
We took over Iraq, gas prices went up to unprecedented highs (remember, most gas pumps were, by design, incapable of registering more than $1.99 a gallon?)
Iraq achieved "independence," gas prices stayed up.
Iraq has issues again, gas prices go up.
Something doesn't quite add up here.

As far as the yahoos taking over cities there, there are relatively few roads between cities. As the "militants" are a bunch of towelheads riding around in Toyota pickups, why can't we, or the Iraqi army for that matter, just bomb or blockade the main highways leading into Baghdad? If the militants can't get there they can't take anything over. Blast 'em into the stone age like we did to Saddam's army when they were fleeing Kuwait during Desert Storm.

Better yet, go high tech and use an EMP weapon to disable the pickups!
 
2014-06-14 05:57:27 PM  
Oil prices are part of a big game being played by rich assholes.  They reflect the emotions of investors and not the actual state of the world.

The US imports over double the amount of petroleum from Canada than it does from the next highest source - Saudi Arabia.  Iraq doesn't even factor into the numbers.  Only about 13% of America's oil actually comes from the Middle East.

People have this impression that all the oil comes from the ME, and that if some Saudi or Iraqi guy has a bad day he can fark over the entire country with a phone call.  That is exaggerated.   I would say people should be more worried about gas prices when a Canadian hockey team loses a game, or when moose stampedes damage the oil facilities.
 
2014-06-14 05:59:49 PM  
So, the war really WAS for oil....
 
2014-06-14 06:00:21 PM  

Laobaojun: Which is absolute profiteering bull crap, as only 3% of US oil is imported from Iraq.
Farking treasonous, self-serving actions by the US oil industry.


Oil industry?
You mean all of the commodities speculators on Wall Street are actually Oil Company employees?
Learn something new every day.
 
2014-06-14 06:03:52 PM  

Raoul Eaton: Ooooooh!  An Analyst predicted something!!  He must be right, then!!!  Everyone run for cover!!!!


Well, we'll see how much market panic this creates, then we can determine how good of an analyst he is.
 
2014-06-14 06:05:11 PM  

destrip: Iraq was under the power of a greedy dictator for years, gas prices were cheap and stable ($1.29-1.39 from the 80s - early 2000s)
We took over Iraq, gas prices went up to unprecedented highs (remember, most gas pumps were, by design, incapable of registering more than $1.99 a gallon?)
Iraq achieved "independence," gas prices stayed up.
Iraq has issues again, gas prices go up.
Something doesn't quite add up here.

As far as the yahoos taking over cities there, there are relatively few roads between cities. As the "militants" are a bunch of towelheads riding around in Toyota pickups, why can't we, or the Iraqi army for that matter, just bomb or blockade the main highways leading into Baghdad? If the militants can't get there they can't take anything over. Blast 'em into the stone age like we did to Saddam's army when they were fleeing Kuwait during Desert Storm.

Better yet, go high tech and use an EMP weapon to disable the pickups!


I didn't know Tom Clancy was a Farker.
 
2014-06-14 06:06:00 PM  

jaytkay: Cyclometh: the stated goal was to do so.

The stated goal was liberating the Iraqis from dictatorship.


For a long time the stated goal was standing up the Iraq army so we could get the hell out of there.  That's why it baffles me when John McCain calls the surge a victory.
 
2014-06-14 06:06:34 PM  
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-06-14 06:08:42 PM  

Laobaojun: Which is absolute profiteering bull crap, as only 3% of US oil is imported from Iraq.
Farking treasonous, self-serving actions by the US oil industry.


By US, do you mean world wide? Or will US gas prices be the only ones rising?
 
2014-06-14 06:09:16 PM  

rikkards: But yet the majority of oil imported into the US comes from Canada.


dilbert.com
 
2014-06-14 06:09:30 PM  

Pattuq: Oil prices are part of a big game being played by rich assholes.  They reflect the emotions of investors and not the actual state of the world.

The US imports over double the amount of petroleum from Canada than it does from the next highest source - Saudi Arabia.  Iraq doesn't even factor into the numbers.  Only about 13% of America's oil actually comes from the Middle East.

People have this impression that all the oil comes from the ME, and that if some Saudi or Iraqi guy has a bad day he can fark over the entire country with a phone call.  That is exaggerated.   I would say people should be more worried about gas prices when a Canadian hockey team loses a game, or when moose stampedes damage the oil facilities.


eh?
 
2014-06-14 06:09:54 PM  
Gas prices go too high, people quit using as much, demand and prices go down.  Demand stays up,  Saudis open up the taps little after a call from the US, and Strategic Oil Reserve lets go of a little, prices come down. Destroying the world economy with too high of fuel prices is not going to happen.
 
2014-06-14 06:10:12 PM  
For all those talking about how the US is a net exporter of oil:

You're  technically correct (the best kind?) but failing to take into account that our refineries- which produce gasoline- are not typically set up or designed to refine the type of oil we produce domestically.

We export it because we can't refine it cheaply here. We could retool the infrastructure to do so but that comes with its own costs.

So for now we're still very much dependent on oil from foreign sources for our fuels.
 
2014-06-14 06:11:56 PM  

jaytkay: "I think they're in the last throes, if you will, of the insurgency."
-- Dick Cheney, July 20, 2005


At the time they were.

But since we're posting snippy quotes, how about a few that are more relevant?

"I am very optimistic about -- about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. "
- Joe Biden, On CNN, February 2010

"Al Qaeda has been decimated"
- Barack Obama, Nov. 1 2012
 
2014-06-14 06:13:30 PM  

RanDomino: Nemosomen: "If Baghdad falls" is a mighty big "if."  ISIS holds Tikrit?  Does that city support the current regime, or were they more supportive of Saddam Hussein al Tikriti's regime?

Baghdad might not fall, but it might need to be renamed "Mogadishu North".


It definitely won't fall. ISIS only has a few thousand men and they're overstretched already. The reason all the other cities "fell" is because a significantly larger (30K soldiers) and better equipped (tanks, air power) Iraqi security force was also majority Sunni, and not the least bit interested in fighting to support a corrupt and sectarian shiate government in Baghdad. (Imagine that those wacky Tea Party "we're gonna go arrest Obama" movements was making its way through Texas: the Texas National Guard would be far more likely to clear the road to DC for them than they would be to fight them.)

On the other hand, Baghdad is in a majority Shia area, and the able-bodied Shia men there will have no reluctance to defend the city vigorously. Ultimately, we're going to wind up with the sort of Sunni/Shia partitioning that we should've done in the first place
 
2014-06-14 06:13:48 PM  

Saturn5: rikkards: But yet the majority of oil imported into the US comes from Canada.


Scott Adams is pretty smug for someone who doesn't grasp the concept of supply and demand.
 
2014-06-14 06:14:29 PM  
On the plus side, the USA, Canada, the UK, and Mexico can ease any drops in Saudi production. OPEC  is weaker than it used to be for this reason. Iran might be willing to produce and export more, possibly Venezuela and Nigeria might cheat a bit, Russia will do as it pleases for fun and profit.

Not shown: China. It can run its production on coal and increasingly solar, wind, gas, and nuclear power so it can throw in its massive weight to prevent its best customers from slipping into recession at tremendous risk and cost to itself. Chin is expected to become the largest global economy in the world this year or next at the latest.

Don't panic. Keep calm and look into alternative transportation.
 
2014-06-14 06:14:55 PM  
"A fighter using a loudspeaker urged the people to join the militant group "to liberate Baghdad and Jerusalem," according to CBS News. "

/shiatstorm in process
 
2014-06-14 06:20:04 PM  
Uzzah:
On the other hand, Baghdad is in a majority Shia area, and the able-bodied Shia men there will have no reluctance to defend the city vigorously. Ultimately, we're going to wind up with the sort of Sunni/Shia partitioning that we should've done in the first place

You seem knowledgeable, so let me ask you a question.  What are the odds Iran would get involved?  I mean, if the Sunni uprising actually did threaten Baghdad, wouldn't they step in?
 
2014-06-14 06:20:15 PM  
Harper must be rubbing his pudgy white hands together with glee, though. Higher oil prices are great for Alberta and that is pretty much all he cares about except the Arctic, which will eventually replace Alberta's conventional oil and high cost non-conventional oil. He's an economist. A right-wing economist. A right-wing economist with the political instincts of a ruthless XIXth century plutocrat.
 
2014-06-14 06:20:49 PM  

FiggyPudding: "A fighter using a loudspeaker urged the people to join the militant group "to liberate Baghdad and Jerusalem," according to CBS News. "

/shiatstorm in process


Eh, that's just propaganda. These guys might make things a little interesting I'm Baghdad, but they won't do jack shiat about Jerusalem.
 
2014-06-14 06:22:13 PM  

zepher: "Al Qaeda has been decimated"
- Barack Obama, Nov. 1 2012


Is this incorrect?
 
2014-06-14 06:22:50 PM  

BigLuca: Uzzah:
On the other hand, Baghdad is in a majority Shia area, and the able-bodied Shia men there will have no reluctance to defend the city vigorously. Ultimately, we're going to wind up with the sort of Sunni/Shia partitioning that we should've done in the first place

You seem knowledgeable, so let me ask you a question.  What are the odds Iran would get involved?  I mean, if the Sunni uprising actually did threaten Baghdad, wouldn't they step in?


Iran is already involved.
 
2014-06-14 06:23:33 PM  

BigLuca: What are the odds Iran would get involved?  I mean, if the Sunni uprising actually did threaten Baghdad, wouldn't they step in?


Word is they already have. Not in direct combat, but Revolutionary Guard has been deployed inside Iraq in border areas "in an advisory role".
 
2014-06-14 06:23:54 PM  

oh_please: I really, really wish Obama would step up to the podium and say:

"Know what? We tried. We farking tried. It's come to the point that the United States has two options now...one, we turn Iraq into a glass parking lot, but we're not doing that. Our only other option is to bring everyone home. That's what we're doing. I'm sorry for the people that sided with us, but we honestly can't afford to police your country anymore, especially when a lot of the population sides with power-hungry assholes who are smart enough to make race and religion their bread and butter. If that's what you want, that's what you get.

"I get it, WE get it. You don't want us here. We're leaving. Good luck, you'll need it."


oh_please

thanks for the lol.  i hope you did it for teh lulz.
 
2014-06-14 06:25:02 PM  
So.. it'll be another decoration / memorial day?
 
2014-06-14 06:25:15 PM  
Hogwash, frogwash and dogwash.

Iraq is not as big an oil producer as it used to be, and plenty of other players are in the game now, notably Russia.

The USSA is a net exporter of energy thanks to the fracking you libtards hate so dearly, and no thanks to our unbeloved Luddite President.

Chill out Chicken Little, the sky is not falling.
 
2014-06-14 06:25:33 PM  

Pattuq: Oil prices are part of a big game being played by rich assholes.  They reflect the emotions of investors and not the actual state of the world.

The US imports over double the amount of petroleum from Canada than it does from the next highest source - Saudi Arabia.  Iraq doesn't even factor into the numbers.  Only about 13% of America's oil actually comes from the Middle East.

People have this impression that all the oil comes from the ME, and that if some Saudi or Iraqi guy has a bad day he can fark over the entire country with a phone call.  That is exaggerated.   I would say people should be more worried about gas prices when a Canadian hockey team loses a game, or when moose stampedes damage the oil facilities.


You do realize that the reason for this is that oil is fungible, right?  If the price of oil in Saudi Arabia plummets, we would start buying it from there, so Canada would then lower its price to whatever Saudi Arabia was charging, plus the shipping differential  (Theoretically - Oil is not perfectly fungible, and diversification of source is advantageous - which is why we don't import 100% of our oil from Canada).
 
Displayed 50 of 261 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report