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.

(CNBC)   The collapse of Iraq would actually help the oil industry   (cnbc.com) divider line 77
    More: Ironic  
•       •       •

7101 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jun 2014 at 3:16 AM (5 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-06-20 02:30:41 AM
What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.
 
2014-06-20 03:14:46 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.


this is going to be fun.
 
2014-06-20 03:19:01 AM
Amazing coincidence!
 
2014-06-20 03:22:28 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.


That was never going to happen. Kinda like German and Japan, we're always going to be there. The difference is, Germany and Japan are worth keeping.
 
2014-06-20 03:30:01 AM
 
2014-06-20 03:32:05 AM

nijika: Amazing coincidence!


Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market eventually.
 
2014-06-20 03:32:54 AM

fusillade762: The Sunni-controlled regions of Iraq don't produce oil.

Not yet.

It has taken over oil fields in eastern Syria, for example, and according to several rebel commanders and aid workers, has resumed pumping. It has also secured revenue by selling electricity to the government from captured power plants.


is this mad max all over again ? LOL
 
2014-06-20 03:35:57 AM
Possible disruption in supply would increase demands on remaining supply;
So prices go up.

When this fight ends,  more supply and more stability in it will cause people to want to invest in oil;
So prices go up.

Then they have to switch to the winter blend and disrupt supplies;
So prices go up.

Then they have to switch to summer blends and disrupt supples;
So prices go up.

"Does anything ever cause the prices to go down?"

chavezoil.com
Huuuuur hur hur hur!
 
2014-06-20 03:37:05 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov
Damn 0bummer and his magical time machine and disguise kit!
 
2014-06-20 03:38:14 AM
So the more people die, the more oil corporations profit?
 
2014-06-20 03:38:40 AM
I live on an Air Force Reserve Base and one time a big piece of landing gear from a KC-135 was in the road near my house when I was coming home from work and there were camoflauge dudes with camouflage Humvees and a flatbed truck winching the debris and they were like "sir please you can't go over there just yet" but I'm a smart guy and a §⊙v€®e|Gn ℃¡TiZen:; and I could totally see there was just barely room for me to just go through my neighbor's yard around the crap and shimmy my Silverado into the driveway of my anonymous duplex Austin Powers-style so I revved my engine and yelled "YEEE-HAWWWW!!! POSSE COMITATUS!!!" and I totally did a bunch of sick donuts all around that army guy and then I eventually got parked enough in my driveway and went inside and got drunk and higher. army guys can't do shiat to a ¢¡\/¡|¡@|\|
 
2014-06-20 03:38:58 AM
Well, as long as those that need the help, get it. I'm cool.
 
2014-06-20 03:44:57 AM
What big daddy wants, big daddy gets. So long, Iraq.
 
2014-06-20 04:16:25 AM
Which part of Mission Accomplished is this again?
 
2014-06-20 04:20:58 AM
www.comichacksguide.com
 
2014-06-20 04:26:04 AM

SpdrJay: Which part of Mission Accomplished is this again?



img.fark.net
 
2014-06-20 04:27:08 AM

robohobo: The difference is, Germany and Japan are worth keeping.


Yeah.  Another thing, the Krauts and the Nips both had strong national identities, so when their governments surrendered, they pretty much accepted it.
 
2014-06-20 04:39:34 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.


And just like that the Obama derangement needle moves from"cut and runner" and back to "zomg Nobel peace price lol"
 
2014-06-20 05:09:15 AM

fusillade762: nijika: Amazing coincidence!

Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market eventually.


We tend to get mad about countries that nationalize their oil. Iraq under Sadaam, Libya under Gaddafi, Venezula, and Iran all spring to kind. So yeah, America might be afraid a Sunni takeover would cut into profits.
 
2014-06-20 05:56:56 AM

zerkalo: AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.

And just like that the Obama derangement needle moves from"cut and runner" and back to "zomg Nobel peace price lol"


So Obama didn't say that? You partisan farktards are amusing
 
2014-06-20 06:42:48 AM

fusillade762: nijika: Amazing coincidence!

Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market anus eventually.


Couldn't resist!
 
2014-06-20 06:52:51 AM
"If the Baghdad government can keep Sunni militants away from its oil fields, production in Iraq may actually increase-though global prices are still seen staying higher."

I have no idea what particular color of patriotic smoke you blow up somebody's ass to make them want to proudly fight and perhaps get their ass killed for something like that, but i don't think it would work on me.

"Oil police."

A junkie will bone his sainted mother up the sh*tter for one more bag of brown or another tank of 87.
 
2014-06-20 07:12:01 AM

fusillade762: nijika: Amazing coincidence!

Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market eventually.


So what you're really trying to say is that any hindering of the development of automobiles that run on something other than gasoline is actually helping to ensure the ISIS may have access to billions in oil profits?
 
2014-06-20 07:21:07 AM
what?

So kerry, obama and Biden have been lying to us all this time?

Unbelievable!
 
2014-06-20 07:31:40 AM
So, Jimmy Carter was right.
 
2014-06-20 07:47:54 AM
The collapse of *civilization* would help the oil industry.  Doesn't mean it's necessarily a good thing.
 
2014-06-20 07:48:21 AM

Semantic Warrior: fusillade762: nijika: Amazing coincidence!

Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market eventually.

So what you're really trying to say is that any hindering of the development of automobiles that run on something other than gasoline is actually helping to ensure the ISIS may have access to billions in oil profits?


Well sure but also the house of Saud.
 
2014-06-20 07:57:07 AM
Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.

img.fark.net
 
2014-06-20 08:00:53 AM
Was the Obvious tag too blind to find this thread?

/Potential disruptions in the supply chain of commodities with inelastic demand always increases prices.
 
2014-06-20 08:01:01 AM
That's not a soaker hose, moran.
 
2014-06-20 08:07:08 AM

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.

[img.fark.net image 299x168]


Except that all goes to China.
 
2014-06-20 08:13:41 AM

ransack.: I live on an Air Force Reserve Base and one time a big piece of landing gear from a KC-135 was in the road near my house when I was coming home from work and there were camoflauge dudes with camouflage Humvees and a flatbed truck winching the debris and they were like "sir please you can't go over there just yet" but I'm a smart guy and a §⊙v€®e|Gn ℃¡TiZen:; and I could totally see there was just barely room for me to just go through my neighbor's yard around the crap and shimmy my Silverado into the driveway of my anonymous duplex Austin Powers-style so I revved my engine and yelled "YEEE-HAWWWW!!! POSSE COMITATUS!!!" and I totally did a bunch of sick donuts all around that army guy and then I eventually got parked enough in my driveway and went inside and got drunk and higher. army guys can't do shiat to a ¢¡\/¡|¡@|\|


Did the bass just drop? ;b
 
2014-06-20 08:20:34 AM
I mean, Obama was going to pull out, but his hands are tied on this one. This is about democracy, human rights, stopping mass murder and ensuring Iraq can stand on its own.

/ b u l l shiat
 
2014-06-20 08:21:50 AM

Semantic Warrior: fusillade762: nijika: Amazing coincidence!

Not really. I mean, if the Sunni's take over all of Iraq's oil fields what are they going to do? Cap them? Set them alight? Pump the oil into the sea? No, of course not, they're going to sell it. One way or another that oil hits the market eventually.

So what you're really trying to say is that any hindering of the development of automobiles that run on something other than gasoline is actually helping to ensure the ISIS may have access to billions in oil profits?


Nice.  However the same could be said for anyone opposed to fracking.  Also I also heard on NPR this morning that anyone opposed to fracking is a shill for Russian oil interests.
 
2014-06-20 08:25:46 AM
So does Iraq's collapse mean The Surge was a failure or is it still considered a success?
 
2014-06-20 08:49:09 AM
Man, that 0bama makes me sick. Why can't we get back to having a President who controls the internal politics of every country on earth, and prevents them from having civil wars? Reagan sure didn't let shiat like this happen in Lebanon, or Ireland, or Angola, or Nicaragua, or Afghanistan, or Guatemala, or the Falklands, or Ethiopia, or Sri Lanka, or Sudan, or Yemen, or Peru, or Liberia.
 
2014-06-20 08:51:36 AM

socoloco: I mean, Obama was going to pull out, but his hands are tied on this one. This is about democracy, human rights, stopping mass murder and ensuring Iraq can stand on its own.

/ b u l l shiat


Y'all are aware, right, that Obama actually DID pull out all U.S. military forces (other than embassy guards, and private contractors working for the Iraqis), three years ago? And that's he's looking to send a few advisers and drop some bombs? We're not actually going back into Iraq, W-style.
 
2014-06-20 09:07:32 AM
Oil companies are make money regardless, there is no losing scenario.
 
2014-06-20 09:10:08 AM

robohobo: AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.

That was never going to happen. Kinda like German and Japan, we're always going to be there. The difference is, Germany and Japan are worth keeping.


We kept a presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea after our wars in those places and they have become affluent first world countries, valuable allies and have enjoyed uninterrupted peace.

We didn't leave a presence behind in Vietnam or Iraq and, well, they are not doing quite so ducky.
 
2014-06-20 09:19:41 AM

SlothB77: robohobo: AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.

That was never going to happen. Kinda like German and Japan, we're always going to be there. The difference is, Germany and Japan are worth keeping.

We kept a presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea after our wars in those places and they have become affluent first world countries, valuable allies and have enjoyed uninterrupted peace.

We didn't leave a presence behind in Vietnam or Iraq and, well, they are not doing quite so ducky.


Korea, Germany and Japan were completely pacified, with governments that wanted (and still want) our military presence there to protect them from their neighbors. Vietnam and Iraq, not so much. Despite what Noam Chomsky thinks, we actually do pay some attention to sovereignty and international law when it comes to basing U.S. troops around the world. If Bush or Obama had been able to persuade Maliki to sign a SOFA agreement, we'd still have troops in Iraq (not a lot, but enough to prevent ISIS shenanigans). We need to put the blame where it belongs, and Maliki is No. 1 on that list. That's why the Iraqis are now coming to a consensus on dumping his sorry ass.
 
2014-06-20 09:27:07 AM

SlothB77: robohobo: AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there.

That was never going to happen. Kinda like German and Japan, we're always going to be there. The difference is, Germany and Japan are worth keeping.

We kept a presence in Japan, Germany and South Korea after our wars in those places and they have become affluent first world countries, valuable allies and have enjoyed uninterrupted peace.

We didn't leave a presence behind in Vietnam or Iraq and, well, they are not doing quite so ducky.


Germany and Japan became affluent countries in spite of USA, not because of.

And to preempt any other historical revisionion. Germany didn't get any Marshall help till after the fact. Before that they had their scientists and patents stolen, and their industry dismantled.
 
2014-06-20 09:32:36 AM
There could be unicorns shiatting rainbows in a peace-filled Middle East & we'd still be paying $$$ to fill the tank.
 
2014-06-20 09:38:32 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: What's ironic is that we're setting ourselves up for a longterm presence in Iraq when this President campaigned on getting us out of there. we were told invading Iraq wasn't about oil.


FTFY.
 
2014-06-20 09:43:17 AM

fusillade762: The Sunni-controlled regions of Iraq don't produce oil.

Not yet.

It has taken over oil fields in eastern Syria, for example, and according to several rebel commanders and aid workers, has resumed pumping. It has also secured revenue by selling electricity to the government from captured power plants.


Great news. An army of people so extreme that even al Qaeda doesn't want them, with a big funding source.
 
2014-06-20 09:44:22 AM

Muta: So does Iraq's collapse mean The Surge was a failure or is it still considered a success?


Regardless of its success or failure, The Surge was criminality bordering on treason, since it involved handing truckloads of cash to terrorists "non-uniformed militias" who'd been shooting at our guys.

Material support for terrorism:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2339A
 
2014-06-20 09:56:45 AM

Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.


img.fark.net

The goal of Keystone XL is exporting fuel to Europe and Latin America.

Which decreases the supply in the US.

I wonder why that message hasn't spread among conservatives?
 
kab
2014-06-20 10:02:55 AM

jaytkay: I wonder why that message hasn't spread among conservatives?


Because it created tens of jobs.
 
2014-06-20 10:07:44 AM

jaytkay: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.

[img.fark.net image 299x168]

The goal of Keystone XL is exporting fuel to Europe and Latin America.

Which decreases the supply in the US.

I wonder why that message hasn't spread among conservatives?


Because their ringleaders will never hand down the talking points memo informing them of this fact.
 
2014-06-20 10:12:10 AM

jaytkay: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.

[img.fark.net image 299x168]

The goal of Keystone XL is exporting fuel to Europe and Latin America.

Which decreases the supply in the US.

I wonder why that message hasn't spread among conservatives?


And China. Keystone XL has nothing to do with supplying the US with oil or lowering US gas prices. It has everything to do with oil company profits and fungible fungibs fungibing onto tanker ships and going by-by.
 
2014-06-20 10:29:26 AM

jaytkay: Dr.Mxyzptlk.: Or maybe ,just maybe, we could get oil from the friendly Canadians ,and our own underdeveloped fields.

[img.fark.net image 299x168]

The goal of Keystone XL is exporting fuel to Europe and Latin America.

Which decreases the supply in the US.

I wonder why that message hasn't spread among conservatives?

But according to the map, everyone will have to drive to Texas to get gas.
 
Displayed 50 of 77 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report