Next up, Syria

[Driller]

MX7 said:

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Driller said:

Last time I checked Libya was 1,800,000 barrels a day and Syria only 300,000.

I doubt if they will bother going in.

How much oil did Bosnia produce?

When did the UN go in? 3 years after the conflict started, so they were really motivated weren't they?

Is it possible that they learnt that they delayed too long?

Are you sure that they really care about "learning"?

[MX7]

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Driller said:

Last time I checked Libya was 1,800,000 barrels a day and Syria only 300,000.

I doubt if they will bother going in.

How much oil did Bosnia produce?

When did the UN go in? 3 years after the conflict started, so they were really motivated weren't they?

Is it possible that they learnt that they delayed too long?

Are you sure that they really care about "learning"?

No. We like stealing oil. That's why we wouldn't go to Bosnia again. They didn't have any oil. Doh!

[Driller]

MX7 said:

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Driller said:

Last time I checked Libya was 1,800,000 barrels a day and Syria only 300,000.

I doubt if they will bother going in.

How much oil did Bosnia produce?

When did the UN go in? 3 years after the conflict started, so they were really motivated weren't they?

Is it possible that they learnt that they delayed too long?

Are you sure that they really care about "learning"?

No. We like stealing oil. That's why we wouldn't go to Bosnia again. They didn't have any oil. Doh!

Are you saying that 3 years was a reasonable time frame to react on humanitarian grounds then? I mean it doesn't exactly seem like they were really motivated.

Edited by Driller on Friday 18th November 20:41

[MX7]

Driller said:

Are you saying that 3 years was a reasonable time frame to react on humanitarian grounds then? I mean it doesn't exactly seem like they were really motivated.

No, I'm saying that there is virtually no correlation between oil and war. The cheapest oil can be obtained by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries. Ask Ken Livingstone.

[Driller]

MX7 said:

No, I'm saying that there is virtually no correlation between oil and war. The cheapest oil can be obtained by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries. Ask Ken Livingstone.

You forgot about removing the government of an oil rich country by attacking on humanitarian or "weapons of mass destruction" grounds and placing a puppet leader to get cheap oil.

[Victor McDade]

Driller said:

You forgot about removing the government of an oil rich country by attacking on humanitarian or "weapons of mass destruction" grounds and placing a puppet leader to get cheap oil.

We're not getting cheap oil from Iraq though are we. We're still paying market rate. Governments rarely profit from war. It's the private companies who go into to 'rebuild' after we've blown everything apart who do. Look at America, they are still skint partly due to the trillions spend in Iraq whereas Dick Cheney and co certainly are not.

Taxpayers money pay to destroy a nation and the private sector then comes in to clean up at rebuilding stage. Nice work if you can get it.

[Driller]

Victor McDade said:

We're not getting cheap oil from Iraq though are we. We're still paying market rate. Governments rarely profit from war. It's the private companies who go into to 'rebuild' after we've blown everything apart who do. Look at America, they are still skint partly due to the trillions spend in Iraq whereas Dick Cheney and co certainly are not.

Taxpayers money pay to destroy a nation and the private sector then comes in to clean up at rebuilding stage. Nice work if you can get it.

I never said the private sector wasn't in on it as well. As usual the two are always in it together.

I'll have to stop because I'm going to get a bit of a lefty, tin hat reputation if I'm not careful. Yeah, I know...

[MX7]

Driller said:

MX7 said:

No, I'm saying that there is virtually no correlation between oil and war. The cheapest oil can be obtained by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries. Ask Ken Livingstone.

You forgot about removing the government of an oil rich country by attacking on humanitarian or "weapons of mass destruction" grounds and placing a puppet leader to get cheap oil.

Where has that happened?

[eharding]

MX7 said:

Driller said:

MX7 said:

No, I'm saying that there is virtually no correlation between oil and war. The cheapest oil can be obtained by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries. Ask Ken Livingstone.

You forgot about removing the government of an oil rich country by attacking on humanitarian or "weapons of mass destruction" grounds and placing a puppet leader to get cheap oil.

Where has that happened?

The People's Democratic Republic of Scotland.

Whoops - bloody FTL neutrinos acting up again.

Forget I haven't said that yet.

[MX7]

ffs

[Driller]

MX7 said:

Where has that happened?

I don't think you are totally naive so you must just be being deliberately obtuse because so far in our exchanges you've given the impression that you think everyone is above board and moreover everyone plays by the rules.

Next you'll stand aghast at the suggestion that government members could give preferential treatment in return for backhanders.

[steviegunn]

MX7 said:

Melvin Udall said:

Zod said:

How much oil does Afghanistan produce for that matter?

None, but there is the pipeline...

So if a country has any association with fuel distribution, the sole reason for intervention must be due to fuel? I'd guess there's at least one pipe of some sort runs through Bosnia too, so that probably answers my question too.

Syria would be handy for a pipeline from the Northern Iraqi oil fields to the Med Coast (just saying like).

[MX7]

Driller said:

MX7 said:

Where has that happened?

I don't think you are totally naive so you must just be being deliberately obtuse because so far in our exchanges you've given the impression that you think everyone is above board and moreover everyone plays by the rules.

Don't you? Well, that's nice. On the other hand, I don't think that you have any idea what you're talking about, so you resort to the lowest common denominator because it's the easiest explanation for people like yourself.

The cheapest method of obtaining oil is by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries, and I do think you are massively naive because you think that we go to war with the likes of Shell and Esso. Look at who won the oil contrats in Iraq.

It simply isn't the way to get cheap oil. If it was, we'd be paying sod all now. Instead we impose sanction on oil rich counties in turmoil. How does that work?

So I ask you, where have we installed a puppet government for the sake of cheap oil? It's a lovely notion, but utterly false.

[Driller]

MX7 said:

Don't you? Well, that's nice. On the other hand, I don't think that you have any idea what you're talking about, so you resort to the lowest common denominator because it's the easiest explanation for people like yourself.

The cheapest method of obtaining oil is by appeasing the leaders of oil rich countries, and I do think you are massively naive because you think that we go to war with the likes of Shell and Esso. Look at who won the oil contrats in Iraq.

It simply isn't the way to get cheap oil. If it was, we'd be paying sod all now. Instead we impose sanction on oil rich counties in turmoil. How does that work?

So I ask you, where have we installed a puppet government for the sake of cheap oil? It's a lovely notion, but utterly false.

Puppet governments have always existed and will always exist for all number of different reasons of convenience. You think the aquistion of a vital source such as oil wouldn't be one of them and you also appear to think that all oil aquisition is done in a clear, open and above board manner.

You're method may be one of the cheapest but it's certinly not the only method.

You're obviously not as cynical as me.

Edited by Driller on Saturday 19th November 07:02