| THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016). |
|---|
The strike in Venezuela and Saddam and his 30-day strike. When will we learn we are too dependent? I was watching the Daily Show and Jon Stewart said it best when he made some funny yet scary remarks. In particular, DICK Cheney's connection to Iraq, when heading up Halliburton. The company, through subsidiaries, sold refining equipment to Iraq after the Gulf War to rebuild what had been destroyed. Of course Cheney's downplays this aspect while he was at the helm of the company but we expect no less. Now we want war with them. So why did Cheney and Halliburton REBUILD a country they KNEW damn well we'd go to war with????? As the Jon Stewart said "WHAT THE FUCK WERE YOU THINKING!!!!!!?????" Venezuela is the 4th largest supplier of crude to the US and the workers are on strike. Again, why are we so dependant? Congress is too pussy to pass strict MPG standards, the public too stupid and trendy to realize the problems (outside of their own bubble) with purchasing SUVs. I know oil makes so many rich, but this is becoming troublesome. They want to drill the poop our of ANWAR to so we'll have a minimal amount of oil in 10 years. wtf. |
|
|
|
|
|
Umm, a little thing we call money??? As far as ANWAR goes, MOVE THE DAMN BIRDS! This country needs oil, wether you like it or not. Buy all the electric cars you want, and we will still consume oil. Your house consumes oil. You say you have all electric? Oil helped produce that electricity. In one way or another. You think they will ever make an 18 wheeler that runs off electric? You want to know how much carbon monoxide those fuckers put out? Without them, you New Yorkers could not get your California Granola. Even if cars were to go all electric, which would be fine with me, oil will still be needed to produce these cars, and oil will still be needed to construct the electric plants that will replace the current ones. We should drill our own oil. Become self sutaining. There should be more then enough domestic oil to serve this countries need's after we switch to alternative fuel vehicles. Except once we go to electric cars, the gov wont get their energy tax...... |
If they only drill in the northwestern third of the 1.5-million-acre ANWR coastal plain geologists believe 80 percent of the oil may be located in that one-third area. |
|
this is why i view you as a redneck. you can't just move an entire ecosystem dumbass!! ANWAR would only provide a minimal amount of oil. The costs to the ecosystem far outweight the benefits to tapping the oil there. Depending on who you talk to, there is only about 3 billion to 16 billion barrels of crude there. Its probably somewhere in between which is less than a years supply, based on current consumption. Its not worth it trace. Its time to stop caving in to money grubbing oil tycoons and begin developing real, plausible alternatives, force the auto industry to make more efficient cars and modify our consumption. |
|
What's wrong with energy indepence? Our economy is strongly persuaded by the mood swings of the arab nation. If you remember, the current recession really kicked in about 2 and a half years ago, when the price of gas started going up again, because OPEC decided they were not being paid enough for the oil. What ever it takes to get that monkey off of our back. Who care's if it takes 10 years to go into production? I have been watching a program on PBS called Commanding Hights. You know what one of the major commanding hights of our economy is? guess who currently controls that? |
they have. they costs far outweight the benefits. even the governement's OWN findings say this. The Bush administration is cherry picking what facts it chooses to believe, naturally those to support its cause. Im all for energy independence, complete and total independence...but destroying such treasures lands under the guise of "independence" is bullshit. it wont solve short or long term problems with energy. the goal here trace is to be progressive, learn from out past mistakes and become more efficient peoples. the wise learn from history. how many ecosystems must we destroy before we go "shit...what were we thinking?" "Who care's if it takes 10 years to go into production?" Because in ten years time the situation with OPEC and Iraq could be totally different, technology could make the oil driven market far different than what it is now. THINK man! We have the potential to be better than our predecessors if we pay attention to history! "What ever it takes to get that monkey off of our back" NO! not WHATEVER it takes. Thats a fucked up view to take man. |
Um, it was the same ten years ago as it is today.. |
|
especially if we go to war with Iraq. |
To say that we need to do whatever it takes for us to get ecological freedom isn't fucked up. And if comparing to history isn't a good basis for a sound policy, then what is changing your current course of action based on history? Same thing. No one can predict the future, so if one man can use history as a basis for his argument then why can't the other? Give me a break already. |
There is no tenable argument against that. It's pretty black and white. I challenge anyone to argue against that. A viable alternative is a hydrogen energy infrastructure, sustained by fuel cells and electrolysis of hydrogen from water. We can still use petroleum for lots of other uses, just not energy. |
|
ecological destruction to maintain America's high energy consumption is not really debatable. It has happened, its right in front of you. Just tour the destroyed habitats of Lousiana for example. All the petroleum companies all along the Mississippi river and delta have dealt an environmental catastrophe to the point that even humans can't live in some areas. We don't need to consult the historians. You don't do "whatever it takes" to acheive independence because that opens the door for corruption, damaging and fucked up policy to make a quick buck. Which is EXACTLY what the ANWAR drilling project is all about. Its not going to SOLVE our energy problems. Don't be foolish!! Hell, Cheney opened the DOOR to do business with Iraq, of all places, under his watch at Halliburton. How much more of an unscrupulous individual does he need to be to convince you that people take advantage? Fuck would that fall under supporting terrorism???? NO!!!! You don't go at it with a "whatever it takes" mentality. Thats irresponsible and negligent! I didnt say anything about "comparing" history eri. I said LEARNING from history. There is a difference. otherwise theres no sense in what you said eri. |
Unless you're thinking of tossing napalm at me, that is. |
This is an old debate. It has been tossed around for decades. No one that I know of denies that we need to find an alternative. What should be done is reduce our dependency on foreign oil, today. How can that be done? Biofuels. Biofuels are liquid transportation fuels made from plant matter instead of petroleum. Ethanol and biodiesel—the primary biofuels today—can be blended with or directly substitute for gasoline and diesel, respectively. Use of biofuels reduces air toxics emissions, greenhouse gas buildup, dependence on imported oil, and trade deficits, while supporting agriculture and rural economies. If you were to mix the biofuels with what we can extract domestically, then our international dependency is reduced. And, for the record, as far as the Middle East, same shit, different leaders and decades. that crap has been going on for the past 55 years, in one form or another. statiscally, yes we will probably be in the same predicament in 2012 unless we change our dependency. Much easier to do that then force the auto industry to change all automotive products, tell everyone in the US that they have to buy a new non-fuel powered vehicle, and tell Texaco, Shell, Arco, etc that they need to find a new business. |
|
|
The argument isn't exactly news. People have been debating this and other similar issues for quite a while. If you have all of the answers, then do something about it, but I bet you will find that in the end, you don't know it all, or even as much as you think you do. Open your eyes without spin for once and what others say may actually make sense, whether you agree with them or not. By the way, doing whatever it takes, can be done with thought and brains and consideration and planning. Oh, and nothing is guaranteed to be without corruption or fucked up policy to make a buck. Whether you think or say whatever it takes doesn't decide whether or not these things will be involved. |
"If we didn't need so much Mideast oil for these losers' mobile living rooms, Osama, Saddam and friends would probably be looking for work as goatherds. You wanna be patriotic? Shove that flag up your ass and get on the bus." |
I like the mom's who are saying they need it for all of their kids. There are plenty of vehicles to move the family around that are much more economical and ecologically safe than an SUV. My mothers barely seats 5, and that is if it is all kids in the back seat squished together. There is a lot to be said for public transportation. My cousin uses it all of the time and saved the environment a lot (you would agree if you saw her poor car that just needs to be blown up). The system out there does everything for her except take her daughter to and from her grandparent's. That would be the only thing she can't do on the train lookin things they have out there. |
spunk. you got to do better than this. Moreover trace. Do you know whats happening in Venezuela? I don't think it will continue but again is another spotlight on US vulnerability. So because we are vulnerable oil-wise, Im failing to see why destroying one of the last untouched habitats this country has, especially since what we have is already in bad shape for oil that probably wouldnt last us but a few years (max) makes sense. Where's the logic in this? The logical thing to do is use our economic power and technology to develop and implement alernatives as antigone has pointed out. Not "MOVE THE DAMN BIRDS". Sheeeeeeesh man. Thats not progress! |
Just take their asses over. (btw, any one of you who thinks I'm serious.... Go suck on a fat donky cock.) |
1. Highly renewable. 2. Most vehicles manufactured today can burn the biofuel mix. 3. We can use wheat, soy, or corn, which can be produced here in the states, giving our farmers a much better market. 4. The biofuel can be sold by the farmers to any refinery here in the states who would simply convert the refineries from oil refineries to fuel processing plants. 5. Emissions are much lower from biofuel or biomass then petroleum. 6. Middle east dilema not a concern to our economy, just our safety. What I do not get is why we have done it already. And Hal, I have thought pretty much the same thing. Fuck Iraq and Isreal and Palestine. We are over there in Saudi Arabia busting our asses helping protect them (yes, to protect our interests. Our men and women are out there, in the "Sand Box" as they call it. Our women are forced to dress like them when they are off duty, and sometimes when they are on duty. We are there best customers. We are there helping protect them. We buy fuel from them to use to protect them. And we are still kissing their asses. We should take Afganistan over, make it an annex of the US, build bases there, and create a new ecomony.We should knock Sharon out of power and make isreal an annex of the US (it really is already). We just do not have the guts |
listening to people talk and argue, even when i agree with them, makes me profoundly sad. we are all so pathetic. |
|
|
|
Whaddya think droop? Do you want a little poky pony? |
|
|
We do need to really look into alternative fuel and lose our dependence on the middle east for our energy resources. I think that this is a given. Do they make all electric minivans yet? |
you bought that hook line and sinker. we there for strategic geopolitical reasons. Some say that we didnt take out Saddam when we had the chance so we could use the guise of "protection" to stay there. the goal trace is to put a US Air Base on every continent. Make us within striking distance of anybody and everybody within a moments notice. Now, in addition to S. Korea and Japan. We now have our wares in Georgia, a couple of the "stans" in addition to Afghanistan. Lower Asia. Check. Saudi Arabia doesnt need our "protecting" nor do they really want it . |
we have airbases in turkey. we don't need saudi arabia. this isn't the 90's, man. we were using US airbases to launch missions against afghanistan. |
however.... the b-1s came from a small British island in the Indian ocean. We used, I think Uzbekistan, or is Tajikistan's airbases to launch air raids. They only used US airbases to launch b-2s because there isnt any other facility in the world that can house those things. Saudi Arabia, if Im not mistaken, is the closest we can get to Africa without carriers. |
The idea behind the B-2 is they can live state side and strike anywhere in the world without having to land at an international base. Eskan Village in Saudi is capable of housing one, in fact, they just finished testing a mobile shelter for them. |
|
|
although, i do miss watching the b-2's.... |
|
|
its old. i cant begin to guess how many god damn tourist snapshots and home videos im in, simply by walking down the street. it gets very very very old. |
|