What's new

This should improve Hillary's chances in 2016...

Ms Tree said:
Your argument to allow more drilling was to reduce the cost of oil.  Most of what I have read says that oil has to stay at $100+ a barrel for the oil companies to be happy.  If the oil companies start producing here in the US, OPEC would drop their production to maintain the cost.  According to this Business Week article Canadian oil has to trade $65 to remain profitable and it seems to be stuck below that amount.  The article claims that the pipeline would be a temp fix to help get the oil cost UP it would soon max out capacity and the cycle would start over.
 
The article seems to indicate that the pipeline is a pipe dream in terms of any benefits.
The bottom line is this. the Oil is going to be produced! It will, and is, being transported to our southern States! Between the U.S. and Canada, we have as much oil as OPEC!  Would you rather have that oil transported through your town by train, or truck, and maybe have people killed, and have those trains and trucks poluting the invirorment, or put people to work to build a pipeline to transport that oil? Russia's weak point is that it is highly dependant on it's revenue generated by it's oil exports. We can trump that by offering an alterative source at a compenative price! So way not take that bone away from them?   https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0LEV1uxc1ZT9SsAvMlXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTB0Yjkwb3VoBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDM3MF8x?_adv_prop=image&fr=yfp-t-671-s&va=oil+train+derailment+north+dakota
 
AP Reporter Grills State Dept's Psaki To Name One Accomplishment From Clinton-Run Initiative.



The QDDR he mentions is the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, a self-audit by State every four years of its long-term goals abroad and how its doing in meeting them. The very first QDDR was published in 2010 after it was ordered by . . . . Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

It's 3 AM.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
delldude said:
 
Who fostered the lie?
 
Bush?
 
Both Houses?
 
World leaders?
 
It was proven there were WMD in Iraq.
 
“Bush Didn’t Lie, Even If Some People Did Die.”
 
That would be the Bush Administration that cherry picked information that suited them and ignored information that did not.  And as we all know in the end it was his decision so mentioning congress or other world leaders is rather pointless. 
 
southwind said:
Halabja chemical attack
 
The attack killed between 3,200 and 5,000 people and injured 7,000 to 10,000 more, most of them civilians.[1][2] Thousands more died ofcomplicationsdiseases, and birth defects in the years after the attack.[3] The incident, which has been officially defined as an act ofgenocide against the Kurdish people in Iraq,[4] was and still remains the largest chemical weapons attack directed against a civilian-populated area in history.[5
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack
 
Guess using a gas that kill thousands, is not considered a WMD!
 
 
And what did the US do about it.  Not a damn thing.
 
MCI transplant said:
The bottom line is this. the Oil is going to be produced! It will, and is, being transported to our southern States! Between the U.S. and Canada, we have as much oil as OPEC!  Would you rather have that oil transported through your town by train, or truck, and maybe have people killed, and have those trains and trucks poluting the invirorment, or put people to work to build a pipeline to transport that oil? Russia's weak point is that it is highly dependant on it's revenue generated by it's oil exports. We can trump that by offering an alterative source at a compenative price! So way not take that bone away from them?   https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=A0LEV1uxc1ZT9SsAvMlXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTB0Yjkwb3VoBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2JmMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDM3MF8x?_adv_prop=image&fr=yfp-t-671-s&va=oil+train+derailment+north+dakota
 
You are forgetting this little organization called OPEC.  In the highly unlikely event that drilling in the US would affect oil prices to the point it hurt Russia OPEC countries would act,  After all, low oil prices that would hurt Russia would hurt them as well.  
 
The only way to realistically hurt them in that department is to not buy their oil.  Since we only buy a small percentage of our oil from them not doing so would have much of an affect on Russia.  The only way to do that is to get the Europeans to act.  Oh, and don't forget China.
 
777 fixer said:
 
That would be the Bush Administration that cherry picked information that suited them and ignored information that did not.  And as we all know in the end it was his decision so mentioning congress or other world leaders is rather pointless. 
 
LOL....just like you're doing.
 
Pointless to the point of following the law and going to war.
 
Like I previously said, they found WMD's dude...LOL
 
Ms Tree said:
 
Bull
 
 
Now, however, with the end of the winter in sight, refinery output is expected to slow down as refiners conduct typical seasonal maintenance. Even refiners that are up and running sometimes reduce production at this time of year. They’ll soon switch to making more expensive summer gasoline that is formulated to meet clean air rules, and they don’t want to be stuck with unsold winter gas.
That reduced production depletes supplies and causes gas prices to rise as the U.S. driving season approaches.
There are a few twists this year that could send prices higher than forecasters expect, though, especially in certain markets.
Three crucial refineries that serve the Northeast have maintenance already underway or scheduled soon, according to Kloza. Delta Air Lines’ facility in Trainer, Pa., is finishing up maintenance and is expected to be back on line in a couple of weeks, according to analysts. The Philadelphia Energy Solutions refinery in Philadelphia is also undergoing maintenance, and the giant Irving refinery in New Brunswick, Canada, is expected to go offline at the end of February, analysts say. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/02/14/higher-gas-prices-are-on-the-way-heres-what-you-need-to-know/
 
delldude said:
 
LOL....just like you're doing.
 
Pointless to the point of following the law and going to war.
 
Like I previously said, they found WMD's dude...LOL
 
History is full of examples of things that were "legal" that turned out to be disastrously wrong.  Gulf of Tonkin ring a bell?  One could write a book on the subject but I think you get the point.
 
777 fixer said:
 
History is full of examples of things that were "legal" that turned out to be disastrously wrong.  Gulf of Tonkin ring a bell?  One could write a book on the subject but I think you get the point.
 
Totally different scenarios.
 
My point is Bush followed the law and got permission from Congress.....you attempt to make issue like he was some rogue hell bent and above the law......you just can't deal with that.
 
delldude said:
 
Totally different scenarios.
 
My point is Bush followed the law and got permission from Congress.....you attempt to make issue like he was some rogue hell bent and above the law......you just can't deal with that.
 
How is it different?  The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution gave LBJ congressional authorization to use military force in Vietnam.  Sound familiar?
 
777 fixer said:
 
How is it different?  The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution gave LBJ congressional authorization to use military force in Vietnam.  Sound familiar?
 
Gulf of Tonkin = shots fired
 
We were attacked by Hussein with WMD?
 
delldude said:
 
Gulf of Tonkin = shots fired
 
We were attacked by Hussein with WMD?
 
Similar in the sense that both conflicts were signed off on by Congress.  Both were based on things that turned out not to be true.  In the case of the Tonkin resolution it was based in part on an indecent that did not take place.  The preceding incident was relatively minor.  Both turned helped lay the ground work for a huge mess which we are still paying for today.  And will be for some time to come.
 
777 fixer said:
 
Similar in the sense that both conflicts were signed off on by Congress.  Both were based on things that turned out not to be true.  In the case of the Tonkin resolution it was based in part on an indecent that did not take place.  The preceding incident was relatively minor.  Both turned helped lay the ground work for a huge mess which we are still paying for today.  And will be for some time to come.
 
LOL.....there were WMD's found......duh
 
delldude said:
 
LOL.....there were WMD's found......duh
 
You mean the 53 pre-1991 munitions that included inert mustard gas that was of no use offensively?  Is this what 4000+ Americans and over 100,000 Iraqi's died for?  Along with billions of dollar spent on it?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top