Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? " Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without Iraq, Blair would have been regarded as one of our better Prime-Ministers. " Allegedly giving Rupert's wife a thump up the knickers hasn't helped either  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without Iraq, Blair would have been regarded as one of our better Prime-Ministers. " Even with Iraq, Blair was one of the best. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? " Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey..." and was it a different Saddam who invaded Kuwait? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought that oil prices were coming down because the US was producing more thus allowing more competition against the opec leaders fixing their prices. I believe that invading Iraq has not influenced the prices.... If the prices are as a result of the invasion its taken 12 years to bare any fruit? " American internal pre Iraq war planning documents which have recently been released state that 'eventual effect of increased Iraqi production would eventually reduce world oil prices'. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought that oil prices were coming down because the US was producing more thus allowing more competition against the opec leaders fixing their prices. I believe that invading Iraq has not influenced the prices.... If the prices are as a result of the invasion its taken 12 years to bare any fruit? American internal pre Iraq war planning documents which have recently been released state that 'eventual effect of increased Iraqi production would eventually reduce world oil prices'. " which gulf War are you referring to? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey... and was it a different Saddam who invaded Kuwait?" The first gulf war, desert storm, was to free Kuwait because Kuwait has 10% of the world's oil reserves. With Kuwait Saddam temporarily had 20% of the worlds oil reserves and a strangle hold on the Wests economy. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I thought that oil prices were coming down because the US was producing more thus allowing more competition against the opec leaders fixing their prices. I believe that invading Iraq has not influenced the prices.... If the prices are as a result of the invasion its taken 12 years to bare any fruit? American internal pre Iraq war planning documents which have recently been released state that 'eventual effect of increased Iraqi production would eventually reduce world oil prices'. which gulf War are you referring to?" The most recent invasion of Iraq. The one where we were supposedly looking for WMD's. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey... and was it a different Saddam who invaded Kuwait? The first gulf war, desert storm, was to free Kuwait because Kuwait has 10% of the world's oil reserves. With Kuwait Saddam temporarily had 20% of the worlds oil reserves and a strangle hold on the Wests economy. " An interests little tidbit regarding the first Gulf War: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nurse_Nayirah | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" i think it will be seen to have been a very costly endeavour in lives and with knock on effects globally for many, many years sadly.. a 'recruiting tool' for extremism.." Both Iraq wars have proven to be exactly that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have 100% confidence they invaded for oil!. I don't think it caused extremism, I think you'll find there was dozens of extremists and terrorism before 2003.I certainly don't think it's helped, but the main instigator of extremism has always been Saudi Arabia" no one has said it did 'cause' extremism, it certainly fuelled it though.. same as internment did in NI.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have 100% confidence they invaded for oil!. I don't think it caused extremism, I think you'll find there was dozens of extremists and terrorism before 2003.I certainly don't think it's helped, but the main instigator of extremism has always been Saudi Arabia no one has said it did 'cause' extremism, it certainly fuelled it though.. same as internment did in NI.. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I have 100% confidence they invaded for oil!. I don't think it caused extremism, I think you'll find there was dozens of extremists and terrorism before 2003.I certainly don't think it's helped, but the main instigator of extremism has always been Saudi Arabia" My ex was Iraqi. According to him the extremists got a foothold in the country because of the Americans lack of security at the borders. He particularly blaimed Iran with Saudi also being mentioned. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Without Iraq, Blair would have been regarded as one of our better Prime-Ministers. Even with Iraq, Blair was one of the best."  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey..." Do you think that was what we went in for? Halabja happened in 1988. Some months later Leon Brittan was photographed shaking Saddams hand. No one gave a shit about the Kurds then. Nor during the first Gulf War where Bush Snr encouraged them to rise up with a hint that the Americans would support them in overthrowing Saddam. But instead they left them to be slaughtered. Many fled to the mountains. And it was the Kurds who found Saddam. But the Americans took credit for that. Finally, no one else but the Kurds have managed to push Isis back without Western help. And yet thet still don't have their own country. They do not describe themselves as Arabs (they become offended if it's suggested). They have their own language, culture and history. Had we supported them they would have gotten rid of Saddam. There would have been no second Gulf War and no extremism as we have now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey... Do you think that was what we went in for? Halabja happened in 1988. Some months later Leon Brittan was photographed shaking Saddams hand. No one gave a shit about the Kurds then. Nor during the first Gulf War where Bush Snr encouraged them to rise up with a hint that the Americans would support them in overthrowing Saddam. But instead they left them to be slaughtered. Many fled to the mountains. And it was the Kurds who found Saddam. But the Americans took credit for that. Finally, no one else but the Kurds have managed to push Isis back without Western help. And yet thet still don't have their own country. They do not describe themselves as Arabs (they become offended if it's suggested). They have their own language, culture and history. Had we supported them they would have gotten rid of Saddam. There would have been no second Gulf War and no extremism as we have now." Very good post. The only part of it I question is the last sentence. Extremism existed before the second gulf war, I do agree it has fuelled recruitment dramatically. I also think the US would have had a second gulf war whomever was in power in Iraq if they threatened the oil supply. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I've always believed the main reason for the Iraq war was Iraqs oil fields and recently released documents in the US as much as confirms that for me. The need to secure the flow of Iraqi oil on western terms has come at a huge price in blood, money, and aspects of our security. The results are now starting to filter through. Dramatically increased capacity is decimating oil prices and giving the west the double whammy of cheap secure energy whilst kicking the Russian Bear in the balls at the same time by forcing down one of its main revenue earners, oil. Although the leaders at the turn of the millennium who invaded Iraq cannot admit it for political reasons, they probably now feel vindicated and successful because we now have secure cheap oil. How will history judge them? Very badly. A lot of people have got very rich off the war. Heard that the Bush family are major players in Texaco. Blair is also extraordinarily rich. Strange that. Not to mention the Zionist influence in the power brokers behind Bush The war continues to haunt us, I think. Saddam Hussein might have been demonised in the West, despite being our ally when Khomeini was knocking around, but he is revered by Muslims for giving state education and medical care to the populace. Without the war, would we be seeing the sort of things we have seen in France, for example? Shame about Saddam gassing his own people, but hey... Do you think that was what we went in for? Halabja happened in 1988. Some months later Leon Brittan was photographed shaking Saddams hand. No one gave a shit about the Kurds then. Nor during the first Gulf War where Bush Snr encouraged them to rise up with a hint that the Americans would support them in overthrowing Saddam. But instead they left them to be slaughtered. Many fled to the mountains. And it was the Kurds who found Saddam. But the Americans took credit for that. Finally, no one else but the Kurds have managed to push Isis back without Western help. And yet thet still don't have their own country. They do not describe themselves as Arabs (they become offended if it's suggested). They have their own language, culture and history. Had we supported them they would have gotten rid of Saddam. There would have been no second Gulf War and no extremism as we have now. Very good post. The only part of it I question is the last sentence. Extremism existed before the second gulf war, I do agree it has fuelled recruitment dramatically. I also think the US would have had a second gulf war whomever was in power in Iraq if they threatened the oil supply. " Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. " I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. " Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"what I don't understand its why so many Muslims seem to forget that NATO and the UN went to war on their behalf in the Balkans. Was that war anything to do with oil?" What does that have to do with Iraq? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" 5 will get you 10 that in a few months due to pressure by oil companies in the states, they will go crawling back to the Saudis pleading for them to cut supply, and what will the Saudis be asking for this time!" BAE Typhoons to keep the US in jobs and peace among men  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Iraq is made up of roughly 60% Shi'a 30% sunni and 10% sunni Kurds, bearing in mind were in the middle of a Muslim Shi'a/sunni civil war, I don't think the place would have been peaceful either way unless Saddam had stayed, as he was so brutal he kept warring tribes at some sort of peace. The Americans knew that after gw1 bush, Cheney, rumsfeld are all on tape (pre 911) stating that the reason they didn't take out Saddam is that they wouldn't have a clue how to keep the peace!... Fast forward 10 years and at the behest of Saudi Arabia (who buy billions of us armaments) the plan is hatched to destabilise Iraq, Iran and Syria the strong hold of Shi'as for Saudis long term goal of Muslim religious domination. Where did the majority of the al qaeda terrorists come from? Saudi Arabia. Where do the majority of the crazed imams come from, Saudi Arabia. Who pays for 10 million state sponsored copies of the Qur'ans to be printed and distributed, Saudi Arabia. When they traced the money used for the 911 hijackers where did it lead Pakistan and Saudi. Bin ladens family are prominent Saudis with business connections all over the "west". The west loved and supported the Arab spring until it broke out in Bahrain and was brutally put down by Saudi troops driving mile after mile of American Bradley armoured vehicles... It's funny how it got 5 minutes on the bbc news but mostly just because it stopped the grand Prix!! I've already wrote previously on the al- yamamah arms deal and the missing billions that was siphoned off by the Saudi,Bandar bin sultan who has openly said on tape that he wishes to remove all the Shi'a, his money was traced to mujahedeen, Taliban,al qaeda, Isis boko haram and all the others between. But just like arresting bankers for fraud and charging politicians for tax evasion.... Your not likely to see any Saudi "baddies" anytime soon. In fact on a foot note it was rumoured a few years back that the Saudis had fallen out with Obama over his climb down with Iran and their nuclear programme.... Ever wondered why there now being so down right mean to us fracking companies driving them into the ground with cheap oil. 5 will get you 10 that in a few months due to pressure by oil companies in the states, they will go crawling back to the Saudis pleading for them to cut supply, and what will the Saudis be asking for this time!" Very good post, the only part I disagree with is the last paragraph. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"what I don't understand its why so many Muslims seem to forget that NATO and the UN went to war on their behalf in the Balkans. Was that war anything to do with oil? What does that have to do with Iraq?" nothing! Just an aside! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp" Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Spot on mate, I was there and the first lot to cross the border from Kuwait, our mission "to secure the gas and oil separation plants" Nick named "the Crown Jewels" Nuff said " You fought in Gulf War I? In 1990/ 1991? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" 5 will get you 10 that in a few months due to pressure by oil companies in the states, they will go crawling back to the Saudis pleading for them to cut supply, and what will the Saudis be asking for this time! BAE Typhoons to keep the US in jobs and peace among men "I don't think Bae Typhoons are made in the US? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Spot on mate, I was there and the first lot to cross the border from Kuwait, our mission "to secure the gas and oil separation plants" Nick named "the Crown Jewels" Nuff said You fought in Gulf War I? In 1990/ 1991?" Second pal was a school for the first as you can tell by my age | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea?" Neither N Korea and Saddams Iraq had the capability to launch any WMDs which would threaten the West in any way whatsoever. It was all lies then and it is still lies now. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea?" Why would we? North Korea wasnt and isnt at this moment gassing neighbouring countries and yes he is a bloody lunatic with some nasty stuff at his disposal BUT if it did kick off it would be good night Nurse in two weeks max because dictators survive on the fear factor | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Iraq is made up of roughly 60% Shi'a 30% sunni and 10% sunni Kurds, bearing in mind were in the middle of a Muslim Shi'a/sunni civil war, I don't think the place would have been peaceful either way unless Saddam had stayed, as he was so brutal he kept warring tribes at some sort of peace. The Americans knew that after gw1 bush, Cheney, rumsfeld are all on tape (pre 911) stating that the reason they didn't take out Saddam is that they wouldn't have a clue how to keep the peace!... Fast forward 10 years and at the behest of Saudi Arabia (who buy billions of us armaments) the plan is hatched to destabilise Iraq, Iran and Syria the strong hold of Shi'as for Saudis long term goal of Muslim religious domination. Where did the majority of the al qaeda terrorists come from? Saudi Arabia. Where do the majority of the crazed imams come from, Saudi Arabia. Who pays for 10 million state sponsored copies of the Qur'ans to be printed and distributed, Saudi Arabia. When they traced the money used for the 911 hijackers where did it lead Pakistan and Saudi. Bin ladens family are prominent Saudis with business connections all over the "west". The west loved and supported the Arab spring until it broke out in Bahrain and was brutally put down by Saudi troops driving mile after mile of American Bradley armoured vehicles... It's funny how it got 5 minutes on the bbc news but mostly just because it stopped the grand Prix!! I've already wrote previously on the al- yamamah arms deal and the missing billions that was siphoned off by the Saudi,Bandar bin sultan who has openly said on tape that he wishes to remove all the Shi'a, his money was traced to mujahedeen, Taliban,al qaeda, Isis boko haram and all the others between. But just like arresting bankers for fraud and charging politicians for tax evasion.... Your not likely to see any Saudi "baddies" anytime soon. In fact on a foot note it was rumoured a few years back that the Saudis had fallen out with Obama over his climb down with Iran and their nuclear programme.... Ever wondered why there now being so down right mean to us fracking companies driving them into the ground with cheap oil. 5 will get you 10 that in a few months due to pressure by oil companies in the states, they will go crawling back to the Saudis pleading for them to cut supply, and what will the Saudis be asking for this time! Very good post, the only part I disagree with is the last paragraph. " . Well at first it would seem a bit crazy, but if you think about it the US fracking boom of the last 4 years is probably the only thing keeping America from recession, they've ploughed billions into it, the average price of fracked oil to produce in the US costs about 75 bucks a barrel.. That's too produce, that means right now there losing 30 dollars on every barrel there bringing up. And they've got billions ploughed into it. They need that price higher even more than Russia need it, and the only way it go back up quickly is for a Saudi supply cut back, that's what's known as having the Americans by the bollocks and their squeezing.... The real question is what do you think there'll ask for off the people they've got by the bollocks | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I do not believe for one minute that you can draw any conclusion from a momentary drop in the price of crude oil as deriving from the war of 10 years ago. If the price remains low for some time it is due to over production ....possibly manipulated by anti Russian interests....IMHO" I draw conclusions from a number of different sources. Because of the post war mess Iraq had its first full year of 'efficient' unrestricted oil production in 2012. Production has increased year on year and it will become one of the biggest producers of crude oil in the world second only to Saudi Arabia. Prior to the second gulf war Iraq was facing crippling sanctions and was only permitted to sell small volumes of oil. No market can have such a significant increase in its core product without it having a dramatic effect on price. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I do not believe for one minute that you can draw any conclusion from a momentary drop in the price of crude oil as deriving from the war of 10 years ago. If the price remains low for some time it is due to over production ....possibly manipulated by anti Russian interests....IMHO I draw conclusions from a number of different sources. Because of the post war mess Iraq had its first full year of 'efficient' unrestricted oil production in 2012. Production has increased year on year and it will become one of the biggest producers of crude oil in the world second only to Saudi Arabia. Prior to the second gulf war Iraq was facing crippling sanctions and was only permitted to sell small volumes of oil. No market can have such a significant increase in its core product without it having a dramatic effect on price. " . Even more importantly it's very cheap to produce oil 6-10 dollars and it uses very little itself so it exports massively. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"But isn't drawing conclusions from a momentary price drop a little like a knee jerk. My point is simply that we cannot draw conclusions until the price remans low and all factors....including those we may not be able to currently see......are considered in their entirety. I do not think that anyone can properly analyse what is happening to the oil market while it is still so volatile. " The conclusion we CAN draw is that the oil price IS volatile and that to rely on it to support an economy is folly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea? Why would we? North Korea wasnt and isnt at this moment gassing neighbouring countries and yes he is a bloody lunatic with some nasty stuff at his disposal BUT if it did kick off it would be good night Nurse in two weeks max because dictators survive on the fear factor" Because just like Iraq Bush specifically stated that he would stop them aquiring nuclear weapons. North Korea have been attacking neighbouring countries without apparent cause. Your suggestion of two weeks has no merit. Before the North Koreans became a nuclear power, American war planners estimated it would cost the lives of at least 100,000 US troops to change their regime by force. That, China and the fact that they have no oil is closer to the reason they have been left alone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea? Why would we? North Korea wasnt and isnt at this moment gassing neighbouring countries and yes he is a bloody lunatic with some nasty stuff at his disposal BUT if it did kick off it would be good night Nurse in two weeks max because dictators survive on the fear factor Because just like Iraq Bush specifically stated that he would stop them aquiring nuclear weapons. North Korea have been attacking neighbouring countries without apparent cause. Your suggestion of two weeks has no merit. Before the North Koreans became a nuclear power, American war planners estimated it would cost the lives of at least 100,000 US troops to change their regime by force. That, China and the fact that they have no oil is closer to the reason they have been left alone." Sorry but which neighbouring countries? Its on the border of south Korea and the next closest is japan followed by China | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Iraq is made up of roughly 60% Shi'a 30% sunni and 10% sunni Kurds, bearing in mind were in the middle of a Muslim Shi'a/sunni civil war, I don't think the place would have been peaceful either way unless Saddam had stayed, as he was so brutal he kept warring tribes at some sort of peace. The Americans knew that after gw1 bush, Cheney, rumsfeld are all on tape (pre 911) stating that the reason they didn't take out Saddam is that they wouldn't have a clue how to keep the peace!... Fast forward 10 years and at the behest of Saudi Arabia (who buy billions of us armaments) the plan is hatched to destabilise Iraq, Iran and Syria the strong hold of Shi'as for Saudis long term goal of Muslim religious domination. Where did the majority of the al qaeda terrorists come from? Saudi Arabia. Where do the majority of the crazed imams come from, Saudi Arabia. Who pays for 10 million state sponsored copies of the Qur'ans to be printed and distributed, Saudi Arabia. When they traced the money used for the 911 hijackers where did it lead Pakistan and Saudi. Bin ladens family are prominent Saudis with business connections all over the "west". The west loved and supported the Arab spring until it broke out in Bahrain and was brutally put down by Saudi troops driving mile after mile of American Bradley armoured vehicles... It's funny how it got 5 minutes on the bbc news but mostly just because it stopped the grand Prix!! I've already wrote previously on the al- yamamah arms deal and the missing billions that was siphoned off by the Saudi,Bandar bin sultan who has openly said on tape that he wishes to remove all the Shi'a, his money was traced to mujahedeen, Taliban,al qaeda, Isis boko haram and all the others between. But just like arresting bankers for fraud and charging politicians for tax evasion.... Your not likely to see any Saudi "baddies" anytime soon. In fact on a foot note it was rumoured a few years back that the Saudis had fallen out with Obama over his climb down with Iran and their nuclear programme.... Ever wondered why there now being so down right mean to us fracking companies driving them into the ground with cheap oil. 5 will get you 10 that in a few months due to pressure by oil companies in the states, they will go crawling back to the Saudis pleading for them to cut supply, and what will the Saudis be asking for this time! Very good post, the only part I disagree with is the last paragraph. . Well at first it would seem a bit crazy, but if you think about it the US fracking boom of the last 4 years is probably the only thing keeping America from recession, they've ploughed billions into it, the average price of fracked oil to produce in the US costs about 75 bucks a barrel.. That's too produce, that means right now there losing 30 dollars on every barrel there bringing up. And they've got billions ploughed into it. They need that price higher even more than Russia need it, and the only way it go back up quickly is for a Saudi supply cut back, that's what's known as having the Americans by the bollocks and their squeezing.... The real question is what do you think there'll ask for off the people they've got by the bollocks "You may well be right. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea? Why would we? North Korea wasnt and isnt at this moment gassing neighbouring countries and yes he is a bloody lunatic with some nasty stuff at his disposal BUT if it did kick off it would be good night Nurse in two weeks max because dictators survive on the fear factor Because just like Iraq Bush specifically stated that he would stop them aquiring nuclear weapons. North Korea have been attacking neighbouring countries without apparent cause. Your suggestion of two weeks has no merit. Before the North Koreans became a nuclear power, American war planners estimated it would cost the lives of at least 100,000 US troops to change their regime by force. That, China and the fact that they have no oil is closer to the reason they have been left alone. Sorry but which neighbouring countries? Its on the border of south Korea and the next closest is japan followed by China" South Korea. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Generally, the Kurds have been more tolerant of different creeds compared to the rest of the Middle East. Yes there may have been extremism but it would not have been so rampant as there would have been better security and more control at the borders. I personally think that it would be better in the long run if Iraq did not exist but was split three ways. Radical, I know, but had the west not originally created Iraq it probably wouldn't exist. Iraq is but a name given to a land, The people in that land would be the same people. Yes we shouldn't be there and yes Blair is a war criminal who should be brought to task but the fact remains that Saddam was one evil sociopath who needed putting down Gimp Was Saddam any worse than the leader of North Korea at the time? Bush called them part of his 'axis of evil'. They too were developing WMD's at the time. Why do you think we didn't go into North Korea? Why would we? North Korea wasnt and isnt at this moment gassing neighbouring countries and yes he is a bloody lunatic with some nasty stuff at his disposal BUT if it did kick off it would be good night Nurse in two weeks max because dictators survive on the fear factor Because just like Iraq Bush specifically stated that he would stop them aquiring nuclear weapons. North Korea have been attacking neighbouring countries without apparent cause. Your suggestion of two weeks has no merit. Before the North Koreans became a nuclear power, American war planners estimated it would cost the lives of at least 100,000 US troops to change their regime by force. That, China and the fact that they have no oil is closer to the reason they have been left alone. Sorry but which neighbouring countries? Its on the border of south Korea and the next closest is japan followed by China South Korea. " . The north Koreans have nuclear capability to reach south Korea, Japan and China, so your asking why isn't America worried that north Korea might bomb their three biggest rivals!. I think the US stance would be different if those missiles could reach California! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
