1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Oil Conspiracy debunked? Puppet government theory debunked?

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by Andy, Feb 11, 2009.

  1. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Iraq Cancels Six No-Bid Oil Contracts


    Now wait a second...

    I thought Iraq was a puppet? I thought this was all about oil? I thought Bigoil controlled the whole thing? I thought we owed all of Iraq!

    Oh wait I never thought that, only wacky leftists thought that. This just proves them wrong.... again...

    No surprise... moving on.
     
  2. Bunz

    Bunz New Member

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,215
    Likes Received:
    14
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Alaska
    Umm...Andy,
    The cancelling of these deals come from American pressure. Not only was Shumer involved, but so was Condi Rice/Bush Administration. They said no to those contracts and the Iraqis, wisely abliged. It was a bipartisan effort!

    While there is more to invading Iraq than oil(none of which is justified in my eyes), the Iraqi government is as free to do whatever they like as long as it doesnt contradict American influence and wishes, especially when it comes to our own American domestic political gain.

    So, puppet government, yes still, to a point.
    Oil being a key component, yes to a point.
     
  3. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...........

    :rolleyes:

    As usual....the DEMS came-thru..........again.....​

     
  4. pocketfullofshells

    pocketfullofshells Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2008
    Messages:
    12,009
    Likes Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    land of 10,000 lakes and 2 senators again
    Its nice to see the Iraq government being more responsible with government contracts then the Republican white house. Odd that they cancelled the contracts only after Bush was out? almost like he was the reason they kept them before....
     
  5. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wait'll the personal-opinions (of him) start pouring-out....once they're sure he no-longer has access to the Launch-Codes!! ​
     
  6. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What??? You joke... What evidence do you have of this? The Iraqis claimed that the reason they canceled the deal was because the contract talks to work out the details had taken too long, to complete the work required in the one year time frame given.

    That said, they signed a deal with China!!

    Now let me get this straight... our main purpose was oil, and their government is our puppet, so they sign a deal with arguably our enemy China, and sold their oil contracts to Chinese oil companies, instead of our own. We're getting zero oil, and they are signing deals with opposing nations... Now what am I missing here?

    What the heck is this? Like watching a hurricane come in while the news guy says "Clear Sunny and 95!" Do tell... what color is the sky you YOUR world?
     
  7. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Actually, that article was old. It was from September in 2008. We've just had some many liberal idiots spouting oil conspiracy crap for so long, that no one bothered to check as see if any of our oil companies actually got any contracts.

    The answer is they didn't. But of course reality doesn't bother liberal idiots.
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The truth remains that the sole reason we invaded Iraq was to prevent Saddam Hussein from diverting our share of Iraqi crude to China, as he was planning to do, when after the sanctions that were about to end would then allow him to choose new trading partners.

    The reality of this was all over the media back then ... how soon we forget ... especially when the President demands that we do.

    Had we allowed Saddam to do as he was planning, the loss of that irreplaceable light sweet Iraqi crude, crude that accounted for nearly 20% of the foreign crude refined in California alone, would have spiraled us into a depression.

    GWB and the gang decided that it was better to predictably slaughter Iraqis, in the hundreds of thousands, the median age of whom ended up being 8 years old, then for America and its industrialized allies to be flung into a depression while China received the oil it needed to go with its steel, thereby increasing its millitary might.

    Thus our military became murderous henchmen in the heist of Iraq's oil distribution rights under the cover of numerous red herrings from the right and cynical excuses from the left.

    What happens from there is irrelevant to the fact of what happened.

    Eventually Iraqis will stop hiding their heads up the ass of religion ...

    ... And retribution will occur.

    The only question left unanswered is the nature of that retribution.
     
  9. Sihouette

    Sihouette Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Oh my goodness, where to start?
    :rolleyes:
    Here's what you're missing: Bushco strove like the half-witted madmen they are to install their puppet regime in Iraq. And then plunged our economy into a depression as a result of that expensive, blundering and stupid prostitution of our national values: democracy and freedom...which was the exact opposite of what they set out to install in Iraq.

    Funny thing is...

    Iraq actually picked up on the democracy and freedom part in spite of Bushco's best efforts to keep that from happening. So when China came along and offered more money for the oil, they sold to the highest bidder. Surely the GOP can understand that line of thinking..?

    Oh what a tangled web they wove when for oil and money they had strove.

    And now, Obama left with the mess they made struggles to save our very nation. And the GOP DARES to stand and criticize him, and worse, are actually impeding top economic advisor's advice to restore our economy (our national security).

    Al Qaida could not hope for a better ally. Maybe Bin Laden is renting a condo from Rush Limbaugh. Why wouldn't I be surprised to find that out?

    "opposing nations" eh Andy? You're calling China an opposing nation? Ask BigRob, he thinks going into collosal debt (and implied subserviance therefore) to communist China is A-OK for our nation. I do not. I suppose he thinks that's OK since the gargantuan screw-up of his beloved leadership put us in a position to have to subjegate ourselves to a communist nation. Better than admitting they're wrong and going to trial for it..

    That's the essence of what's going on. We as a nation are being asked to implode from within rather than try our war criminals. We all are lining up to perish, America itself, to keep a handful of sheisters from going to jail. How will prosecuting them save us? By dismantling the cronies of the GOP just in time to keep them from filibustering us into oblivion...at the direction of their as-yet unthroned maestro Rush-Limbaugh. You expose the dark nasty secrets of the GOP and their base will run away, they will lose their power and we will regain our nation. A new GOP can then be born from those ashes, returning to their old value system of loving America and all she stands for....instead of trying to destroy her for personal gain.

    Those who laud themselves as defenders of "our nation's values" are actually some of the worst worst worst traitors this nation has ever seen..
     
  10. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We were not buying oil from Iraq prior to 2003. In fact, the biggest purchasers were through the UN's oil for food programs, which also was one of the biggest scandals if you remember.

    Crude oil is sold on a commodities market. That's one of the reasons the oil embargo of the 70s had zero effect. If they refuse to sell to a US purchasers, a French one will buy it, and sell it to us. Same oil, same market, same ship even. A middle east oil seller has no more control over where the oil goes, and we do when the sun will come up.

    And then apparently decided it would be great being flung into a depression while China recieves oil it needed to go with it's steel, thereby increasing it's military might. At least if you assume your original theory was accurate, then this must be accurate too, which makes no sense, but logic was never a concern in conspiricy world.

    So the goal was a heist of oil distribution rights, which we didn't get. So the whole point was to do something we didn't do. Another brilliant theory.

    Right...
    About as logical as jump off a cliff to figure out how long it will take you to reach the moon.
     
  11. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Please explain how a mere $800 Billion, over the past 6 years, where we've had budget of over $18 Trillion, is going to plunge us into a depression? More over, please explain how Obama's $1 Tillion in a single year from a pork bill is not going to send us into a depression, when your theory is the $800 Billion over 6 years did?

    Really... so what evidence do you have that Bush tried to prevent them from making their own choices? Funny, I seem to remember quiet a few things from the very start, that showed them making their own choices. Further, if Iraq is a puppet, then they would never have even a chance at making their own choices. So maybe they are not, and never were, eh?

    Oh my goodness! From the side that claimed dissent was patriotic! Now... how dare we point out the stupidity of your conspiricy claims! How dare we make the point that $800 billion over 6 years is not worse blowing of cash than $1 Trillion in one year! Good grief! How dare we make logical intelligent points!

    Because you jumped off the looney left deepend again, and are as fruity as ever.

    I sniped the rest of your attacks on Bigrob, and laughable assertions of nuttyness.
     
  12. Sihouette

    Sihouette Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    1,635
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Q: What do Rush Limbaugh (and his GOP faithfuls) and Al Qaida have in common?

    A: They've both openly declared, in a time of our national crises, that they want our leadership to fail.

    :cool:
     
  13. Chip

    Chip New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    420
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are in error with sentence one ... making sentence two meaningless within the context of my previous point that the U.S. had been receiving Iraqi crude prior to 2003.

    Here is proof that the U.S. received Iraqi crude prior to 2003. Be sure to see the percentage breakdown at the bottom -- that's just for 2002 alone.

    Getting the facts straight helps to make you believable.



    Your statement here contains a glaring error of prediction.

    If Saddam refused to sell to a US purchaser and sold our equivalent amount of oil to China, then, what with the huge resulting scarcity of oil available to be remarketed to the U.S., those others Saddam did sell to would still have to sell to their regular customers or suffer perhaps the loss of their licences in some countries, be forced to sell to their countrymen in others, and those who did manage to escape penalties would start a bidding war that would skyrocket the price of crude to the winner beyond retail sellable margin.

    The recession-depression was guaranteed, one way or the other, by the diversion of U.S. Iraqi crude to China.

    And, by the way, Saddam could indeed most certainly choose new trading partners once the sanctions against him doing so expired ... and they were about to expire ... when we invaded.


    Erroneous, meaningless, nonsensical, reply indicates incomprehension of straightforward presentation being replied to.


    Correct premise, false conclusion.

    The goal was to steal Iraq's oil distribution rights so that Saddam would be unjustifiably deprived of his freedom of choice right to sell Iraqi crude to whomever he wished (divert U.S. Iraqi crude to China) once the sanctions ended.

    The goal was to steal Iraq's oil distribution rights so that we could CONTINUE to receive our pre-invasion share, according to the sanctions, of our Iraqi crude, even after those sanctions had expired.

    It appears your compulsion to be condescending prevents your from gathering and perceiving the facts.


    Meaningless. Irrelevant.

    The truth remains that no matter what is happening now, no matter how what is happening now is supposedly perceived, the reality of America's murderous heist of Iraq's oil distribution rights remains the truth.

    I find it interesting that Iraq is planning to sell to Chinese distributors.

    The retribution may have begun.
     
  14. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Funny. I remember the entire left half of the country doing that for the last 4 years. You have something in common with Al Qaeda too apparently. Sort of like how the left was against torture, just like Al Qaeda was against us torturing their people (but them on ours). Al Qaeda was also against us helping Iraq, just like the left. Al Qaeda was also against the patriot act making it harder for them to carry out attacks, just like the left. Al Qaeda and the left have many more things in common.

    You should be more careful making comparisons that paint yourself in a bad light.
     
  15. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    You are correct. I had thought prior to the war there was a sanction against US purchase of Iraqi oil.

    However, I did a little more digging, and discovered something even better.
    [​IMG]

    http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/hist/mttimiz1a.htm

    What I get from this is that, we have purchased far more oil from Iraq, than we are currently. In fact, the biggest increase in oil purchased from Iraq, came during the Clinton years. I can only assume that is when the Oil-for-Food program started. Unless you know differently.

    However this still doesn't support the conspiracy theory, since we were getting tons of oil, in fact the largest recorded shipments of oil, prior to the war. So it doesn't make sense.


    You do not understand what a commodities market is. That's ok, most don't.

    In a commodities market, vast amounts of raw goods, change hands very quickly, and in a short amount of time. There are three groups of people for nearly every market. The Buyer, the Seller, and the Trader. Commodities Traders can be from any country, but has little effect on where the commodity goes.

    For example, a commodity Trader from Burma purchases one tanker from Brazil, filled with oil, roughly 2.2 Million barrels of oil. Now once that ship leaves the dock, what control does Brazil have over that commodities Trader in Burma? Zero. Then the Trader sells the oil to the US or whomever.

    This is what happened in the 70s during the Arab Oil Embargo. Although the Arab countries refused to sell their oil to US Traders, the Trades they did sell them too, simply sold it here anyway. If they sold it to Germany, and the Germany Trader sold it here, it didn't make a difference.

    Similarly, the contracts to Chinese commodity traders, will not even show up on the oil radar. The Chinese traders will sell it on the open market, just like all the other Traders. We will purchase it through them, or through who they sell it too.

    Funny how I used YOUR logic, and you correctly identified it as being "erroneous, meaningless, nonsensical, reply indicates incomprehension".

    YOU are the one who claimed that Bush attacked Iraq in order to prevent the U.S. going through an economic downturn, and China from getting oil contracts.

    Yet that is exactly what happened. So in your view, Bush must have changed his mind and decided that we needed and economic downturn and China to get oil contracts. But like you said, that doesn't make sense. Why? Because your whole stupid theory doesn't make sense.


    But I just proved conclusively, we didn't steal his oil distribution rights. Opps.

    But I just showed the figures that prove we are not "receiving our pre-invasion share". We got more oil prior to the war, than after.

    Just like your whole theory. It doesn't fit the facts. It doesn't make sense. It isn't logical. Moving on...
     
Loading...

Share This Page