OPEC can't keep oil price down

Rob Lister said:
Iraq really was partly because of oil, but not necessarily, completely, as a direct cause.
Click to expand...
I have always believed that oil played a big part in our intervention in Iraq. I think a valid point can be made that we didn't go to other places that coincidently didn't have oil because they didn't have oil.
 
RandFan said:
This makes no sense with your earlier claim that the Administration only cares about oil
Click to expand...
Strawman. I made no such claim. I said that it would be "simple" (lacking sophistication, naive) to assume that the Bush team - heavy with oil interests - want cheaper oil. It was mostly directed at Skeptic, a simple soul if there ever was one. For instance
You can argue whether or not he has succeeded.
Click to expand...
For the simple Skeptic, the failure to succeed is proof of lack of intention. We are more spohisticated than that. For Skeptic's benefit : The Irish team went out intending to beat Wales on Saturday, but it didn't turn out that way.
The problem is that his protectionist policies belie your premise that Bush only cares about oil ...

It does not support your premise that the Bush administration only cares about oil ...
...
Then why on earth would you claim that Bush only cares about oil. It simply does not make any sense.
...
I'm sorry but what a waste of time that was. Can't you just support your premise (prove your claim) or at the least rebut my argument?
...
You fail to make any link. You are simply stating rhetoric and then making a claim. Could you please make an argument in support of your premise?
Click to expand...
That's the strawman stuff out of the way. "Rhetoric" I have no problem with, or verbose, orotund even. I enjoy playing with words, and I'm only here for entertainment.

I'm sorry but this is incoherent. He needed business before his reelection and he needs business if he wants the Republicans to succeed.
Click to expand...
But I'm not happy with "incoherent". Protectionism is pitched strongly at labour - that's why the Democrats are so hot on it. Do I need to spell everything out?


Not a clue why you are making this argument. I don't disagree with it. It does not counter any of my arguments.
Click to expand...
It's background to my "assumption" that sectional interests can play a part in policy, under the US system of government. My main point is that the risk - or the effect, if we accept the inevitablity - is greater when one section predominates at the centre of power.

So what?
Click to expand...
So the Bush team doesn't seem to have much input from US industry, otherwise they wouldn't have tried to protect steel (a primary product in the main) at the expense of manufacturers. When they did twig, they backed off sharpish, which shows no great commitment in the first place. They probably regarded it as a vote-winner with minor relevance.

{sigh} Look, I don't like Bush's protectionist policies. I'm not arguing that they are good or bad. I point them out for one reason and one reason only. It IS clearly demonstrable that Bush cares far more about US industry and trade than oil.
Click to expand...
The Bush team clearly demonstrates a rhetorical commitment to industry, but nothing practical.

You continue to argue that the damage done to non-oil industries by a high oil price must mean that a high oil-price is not what the Bush team wants. I'm saying they might not care very much. Voters don't like high gas-prices, but who are they going to turn to - caribou-hugging Democrats? Naderistas? The French? Or people who are prepared to go and kick sand in bullies' faces out where the oil is?
 
Does anyone know what Iraqs current oil output is??? Is it better or worse than before the war? Has the end of UN restrction changed anything....

Im assuming worse cause we always here about sabatoge and infrastruture. Could that be part of the reason for higher prices.

I wish we did have lower prices. At least we coudl get somthin out of this dumb invasion.
 
Tmy said:
Does anyone know what Iraqs current oil output is??? Is it better or worse than before the war? Has the end of UN restrction changed anything....

Im assuming worse cause we always here about sabatoge and infrastruture. Could that be part of the reason for higher prices.

I wish we did have lower prices. At least we coudl get somthin out of this dumb invasion.
Click to expand...

The oil costs have less to do with oil-well supply and more to do with refinery supply. Add to that a bit of market spectulation and you've got a nice mix for the prices we're paying.

I predict the refinery crisis is going to hit us a lot harder, and faster, than any peak-oil crisis we may or may not be facing. We haven't built a refinery in, what?, thirty odd years. We've closed many. Few of those that remain can process Saudi oil (because of the sulpher content I'm told) without a very major ($billion+) upgrade.

I'm sure someone, somewhere considered building a new refinery or twenty but after seeing the hurdles and costs, as well as the low profit margin and risks, bought treasury bonds instead.
 
Tmy said:
How much does gas cost in Iraq right now?
Click to expand...

That's a good question. Is it still being rationed?

Try asking an Iraqi! You can do that now.

Here's a blog that is partly in english (and somewhat anti-american). I like it for it's title line but I haven't read much of it.

A Family in Baghdad

mother: Faiza, sons: Raed, Khalid , and Majid writing down their diaries. Father: Azzam is not interested.
Click to expand...

If you don't like that one there are probably hundreds more, with tens added to the list daily.

ETA: I couldn't find an email addy on that one quickly but I'm sure if you hunt a bit you'll find it. If not there then on one of the hundred of others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom