Oil Monopoly

[KobraKaine]

What do you guys think about the Arab oil monopoly in the Middle East?  Do you think it's fair that they can influence the global economy so much?  Do you think their monopoly should be broken?  If yes, how?  If no... why not?

[gareth]

Im not sure I under stand your question. Are you implying that we should steal the arabs oil to stop them having a monopoly on it?

somewhat related, this is kindoff cool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6616651.stm

[Seffylight]

Oh, come on. If you aren't dunking Oreos in milk, then you're supporting terrorism. Simple as that.

[KobraKaine]

Im not sure I under stand your question. Are you implying that we should steal the arabs oil to stop them having a monopoly on it?

somewhat related, this is kindoff cool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6616651.stm

I'm not really implying anything.  I'm curious what the people on this site think about it all.

[Anansi-Sama]

Well, life isn't fair, so the notion that the Arab having oil is unfair is irrelevant.  Some areas of the world have resources others don't.  You either submit to the terms of the person distributing the resource, or you develop your own, alternate resource.  So if people would like to stop depending on Arabian oil, people should work hard and develop an alternate fuel, like hydrogen cells or something.  Also, places like Alaska also have massive oil reserves.  Wacko environmentalists (the operative part of the word being "mental") are the reason we can't touch it.

[The MC Horton Crankfire]

Also, places like Alaska also have massive oil reserves.  Wacko environmentalists (the operative part of the word being "mental") are the reason we can't touch it.

Because we can do whatever we want to the earth and we won't ever have consequences and everything will always be just dandy.

Right?

[KobraKaine]

Also, places like Alaska also have massive oil reserves.  Wacko environmentalists (the operative part of the word being "mental") are the reason we can't touch it.

Because we can do whatever we want to the earth and we won't ever have consequences and everything will always be just dandy.

Right?

Absolutely right.

[Lucifer]

Hydrogen cells are not fuel only a transport device for energy.  You lose energy in the end.  Now hydro electric and solar there is a nice option.  Especially considering if the US put as much money as they have on the war into solar they would have an energy surplus right now.

[sleekslacker]

What do you guys think about the Arab oil monopoly in the Middle East?  Do you think it's fair that they can influence the global economy so much?  Do you think their monopoly should be broken?  If yes, how?  If no... why not?

This question fails by itself, and thus collapse under it's own weight. Do you think it's fair that I have more money in my bank account than you ?

[Taiyo.uk]

Ultimately the economies of most (if not all) industrialized nations are largely dependent on the oil industry. Changing from an oil economy to a solar/wind/biomass/insert-your-favorite-fuel-here economy isn't going to happen until oil becomes too expensive to extract. It is only after that point that the alternatives are likely to become economically viable.

The "monopoly" spoken of here is a side effect of this. The industrialized nations need oil, and it just happens to be under the middle east. That's also their main source of income.

It's similar to the gas supply in the UK. We used to be an exporter when the North Sea reserves were plentiful, but now that they're depleted we are now a net importer from Russia and Kazakhstan*. It's estimated that it won't be long before 60% of our electricity will be generated at gas-fired power stations. The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

Currently the fuel reserves just happen to be located far away from the largest consumers. It is understandable that people will try to take advantage of this.

* http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html

[f0rqu3]

yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

[KobraKaine]

Ultimately the economies of most (if not all) industrialized nations are largely dependent on the oil industry. Changing from an oil economy to a solar/wind/biomass/insert-your-favorite-fuel-here economy isn't going to happen until oil becomes too expensive to extract. It is only after that point that the alternatives are likely to become economically viable.

The "monopoly" spoken of here is a side effect of this. The industrialized nations need oil, and it just happens to be under the middle east. That's also their main source of income.

It's similar to the gas supply in the UK. We used to be an exporter when the North Sea reserves were plentiful, but now that they're depleted we are now a net importer from Russia and Kazakhstan*. It's estimated that it won't be long before 60% of our electricity will be generated at gas-fired power stations. The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

Currently the fuel reserves just happen to be located far away from the largest consumers. It is understandable that people will try to take advantage of this.

* http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html

Thank you for your intelligent and well researched reply.

yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

f0rqu3, are you taking notes?  Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

[Plague Bringer]

What do you guys think about the Arab oil monopoly in the Middle East?  Do you think it's fair that they can influence the global economy so much?  Do you think their monopoly should be broken?  If yes, how?  If no... why not?

This question fails by itself, and thus collapse under it's own weight. Do you think it's fair that I have more money in my bank account than you ?

Not if he works his ass off and you sit around all day flaming random people.

[f0rqu3]

Ultimately the economies of most (if not all) industrialized nations are largely dependent on the oil industry. Changing from an oil economy to a solar/wind/biomass/insert-your-favorite-fuel-here economy isn't going to happen until oil becomes too expensive to extract. It is only after that point that the alternatives are likely to become economically viable.

The "monopoly" spoken of here is a side effect of this. The industrialized nations need oil, and it just happens to be under the middle east. That's also their main source of income.

It's similar to the gas supply in the UK. We used to be an exporter when the North Sea reserves were plentiful, but now that they're depleted we are now a net importer from Russia and Kazakhstan*. It's estimated that it won't be long before 60% of our electricity will be generated at gas-fired power stations. The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

Currently the fuel reserves just happen to be located far away from the largest consumers. It is understandable that people will try to take advantage of this.

* http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html

Thank you for your intelligent and well researched reply.

yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

f0rqu3, are you taking notes?  Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

I wont write your essay for you. do your homework on your own please

[Plague Bringer]

Ultimately the economies of most (if not all) industrialized nations are largely dependent on the oil industry. Changing from an oil economy to a solar/wind/biomass/insert-your-favorite-fuel-here economy isn't going to happen until oil becomes too expensive to extract. It is only after that point that the alternatives are likely to become economically viable.

The "monopoly" spoken of here is a side effect of this. The industrialized nations need oil, and it just happens to be under the middle east. That's also their main source of income.

It's similar to the gas supply in the UK. We used to be an exporter when the North Sea reserves were plentiful, but now that they're depleted we are now a net importer from Russia and Kazakhstan*. It's estimated that it won't be long before 60% of our electricity will be generated at gas-fired power stations. The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

Currently the fuel reserves just happen to be located far away from the largest consumers. It is understandable that people will try to take advantage of this.

* http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html

Thank you for your intelligent and well researched reply.

yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

f0rqu3, are you taking notes?  Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

I wont write your essay for you. do your homework on your own please

f0rqu3, vcxzet, please shuttup

because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

[f0rqu3]

Ultimately the economies of most (if not all) industrialized nations are largely dependent on the oil industry. Changing from an oil economy to a solar/wind/biomass/insert-your-favorite-fuel-here economy isn't going to happen until oil becomes too expensive to extract. It is only after that point that the alternatives are likely to become economically viable.

The "monopoly" spoken of here is a side effect of this. The industrialized nations need oil, and it just happens to be under the middle east. That's also their main source of income.

It's similar to the gas supply in the UK. We used to be an exporter when the North Sea reserves were plentiful, but now that they're depleted we are now a net importer from Russia and Kazakhstan*. It's estimated that it won't be long before 60% of our electricity will be generated at gas-fired power stations. The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

Currently the fuel reserves just happen to be located far away from the largest consumers. It is understandable that people will try to take advantage of this.

* http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872966.html

Thank you for your intelligent and well researched reply.

yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

f0rqu3, are you taking notes?  Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

I wont write your essay for you. do your homework on your own please

f0rqu3, vcxzet, please shuttup

because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

why dont you write your own words ... I'm sick of you writing +1 -1 everywhere ... what about using something other than num pad

[KobraKaine]

F0rqu3, I'm going to have to ask you to either get on topic or leave this thread.

[f0rqu3]

F0rqu3, I'm going to have to ask you to either get on topic or leave this thread.

you are the one taking it to other directions ...

Code: [Select]

f0rqu3 wrote:
yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

KobraKaine wrote:
f0rqu3, are you taking notes? Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

so please stop trying to flame ppl in your non sense threads

[sleekslacker]

Regarding the OP and my previous post, I wasn't flaming him. This question is just not valid. Thus I gave the analogy : Do you think it's fair that I have more money in my bank account than you ? I didn't take your money. It has been of an amount more than in your account since forever. So is that fair ?

[Plague Bringer]

F0rqu3, I'm going to have to ask you to either get on topic or leave this thread.

you are the one taking it to other directions ...

Code: [Select]

f0rqu3 wrote:
yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

KobraKaine wrote:
f0rqu3, are you taking notes? Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

so please stop trying to flame ppl in your non sense threads

On the contrary, he is telling you to get on topic.

Shut. The. Fuck. UP.

Holy shit, you are really pissing me off with your idiocy, drop it.

Sorry for taking the thread this way, Kaine. Just trying to help, really.

[f0rqu3]

F0rqu3, I'm going to have to ask you to either get on topic or leave this thread.

you are the one taking it to other directions ...

Code: [Select]

f0rqu3 wrote:
yes steal arabs and extract oil from their body

KobraKaine wrote:
f0rqu3, are you taking notes? Because I'm getting REALLY sick of your shit-spam.

so please stop trying to flame ppl in your non sense threads

On the contrary, he is telling you to get on topic.

Shut. The. Fuck. UP.

Holy shit, you are really pissing me off with your idiocy, drop it.

Sorry for taking the thread this way, Kaine. Just trying to help, really.

be civil ... if you dont have real words, dont type. insulting is not a good way of communication

[sleekslacker]

but.. but... helping your clan bro is a good way to communicate your love for each other !

reminds me of bro rape.. eww.

[Plague]

Ah yes, pick on the Arabs because really it's their fault right?  :roll:   Reminds me of how the Germans reacted to Jewish shop keepers who, although inflation was the real culprit, were vandalized and eventually killed for selling goods at the only price they could make a profit.  

The larger issue is more closer to home.  If you want lower gas prices, start bitching at all the major oil refineries and distributors.  Exxon Mobile just recently made record profits of any US business in history(http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11098458/).  Gee, how the hell did that happen?  Its not those sneaky Arabs, its the gas corporations.

I would feel more secure if the public sector were to take over complete or almost complete petroleum production.  Hopefully it would lower the price of gas and other products made from petroleum.

Oh, and to be on topic, I like my Oreo's plain thank you.

[Stof]

Kids, kids, kids. Stop all the flaming please or there will be some drastic cuts in the number of posts in that thread.

What do you guys think about the Arab oil monopoly in the Middle East?  Do you think it's fair that they can influence the global economy so much?  Do you think their monopoly should be broken?  If yes, how?  If no... why not?

Well, before Oil was what it was to a modern industrialised country, nearly all wars (read, all wars that didn't revolve around religion) were for the control of water. Different times for different priorities. Anyway, that specific point will soon be moot since Oil has to go sooner or later. Sooner if possible.

Im not sure I under stand your question. Are you implying that we should steal the arabs oil to stop them having a monopoly on it?

somewhat related, this is kindoff cool:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6616651.stm

Bush is already stealing the arab's oil. I defy anybody here to say with conviction that oil wasn't one of the major reasons for liberating irak

Well, life isn't fair, so the notion that the Arab having oil is unfair is irrelevant.  Some areas of the world have resources others don't.  You either submit to the terms of the person distributing the resource, or you develop your own, alternate resource.  So if people would like to stop depending on Arabian oil, people should work hard and develop an alternate fuel, like hydrogen cells or something.  Also, places like Alaska also have massive oil reserves.  Wacko environmentalists (the operative part of the word being "mental") are the reason we can't touch it.

Some say that the USians are holding up on their own oil reserves so that they can start using them when the global price of the oil would have skyrocketed. Environmental concerns are just the icing on the cake, or to be exact, a perfect alibi as to why they don't make use of their oil

[Lobster]

Alberta = new "Saudi Arabia"

http://www.energy.gov.ab.ca/89.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Oil_Sands
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQyRx8M9BZo Sands oil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_jOBURovPM Alberta 2020

[tomek-k]

The Grassy Nollingtons out there could claim that Russia (who controls the large valves in the supply to much of Europe including the UK) could monopolize our gas supply.

heh. that institution of Russia IS going to monopolize the gas supply (to all Russians out there: notice that I wrote "institution" so I _don't_ mean Russians as a nation!!)
It can't control other countries by military power any more, so they look for other ways (Ukraine, Belarus, Latvia and recently Estonia - Russian companies cut (in some cases temporarily) their gas/oil supply for those countries because those countries don't do what Putin says...).
Taiyo.uk don't forget that 15 years ago there was a country called USSR and Putin once said that fall of this country (and, as a result, widely understood freedom for milions of people) was the greatest disaster of XX century.

As for Arabian oil - I don't know the subject so well, but I think it is possible that they try to monopolise the oil industry, but if they do then it has only an economical background (like in case of Microsoft's monopoly), contrary to Putin's political and ideological reasons. So it's not that bad in case of Arabs - they have their oil and they sell it on their conditions. As someone said here before - if you want to be independent on their oil then develop alternate source of energy (same as - if you don't like Microsoft's produtcts then just don't use them).

[KobraKaine]

Well, before Oil was what it was to a modern industrialised country, nearly all wars (read, all wars that didn't revolve around religion) were for the control of water. Different times for different priorities. Anyway, that specific point will soon be moot since Oil has to go sooner or later. Sooner if possible.

You make an excellent point.

Bush is already stealing the arab's oil. I defy anybody here to say with conviction that oil wasn't one of the major reasons for liberating irak

You're joking right?  The ONLY reason the war in Iraq is as unpopular in the United States as it is, is due to the fact that the war (and conflict in general) in the Middle East is driving UP oil costs.  Anyway, if oil is what we were after, we would've gone after Iran or Syria.  Iran because we hate them for overrunning our embassy years ago, and because it's proven that they are trying to develop nuclear technology, and Syria because they are smaller and have been pissing our allies (Israel) off for the longest time.

Iraq would be the last choice to attack for oil due to it's (former) Shi'ite majority.  Obviously taking Saddam out was going to cause a lot of religious war as the much larger Sunni factions (aided by the other Muslim countries surrounding them) tried to regain the upper hand.

We took him out #1 because we thought he had nukes.  (and he may well have had some.)  #2 because he had committed atrocities against his own people and we weren't going to let another "mini-stalin" get away with genocide.

[Xonya]

It is western countries who gave them power, if they really even have so much power. We could have started to use non-oil power f. ex. for car long time ago, but there is too much money involved.

Really, no one who really cares about this world should buy hybrid car. Pollutions are cut and you support alternative business; no more money for billionaires. But I am afraid that big companies will buy these stuff also...

Megacorporation stuff suxx for long term development........

[f0rqu3]

We took him out #1 because we thought he had nukes.  (and he may well have had some.)  #2 because he had committed atrocities against his own people and we weren't going to let another "mini-stalin" get away with genocide.

#1 no he never had nukes and where are those missiles anyway? where did he hide em lol.
america attacked iraq because it is easy to get and it has great oil resources
it is easy to invade because it doesnt consist of one nation but many nations that hate each other

#2 it wasnt a genocide. if you are a dictator and ppl starts to take action against you. they need to be punished that is how things work. his country his rules. why dont america bother with those poor countries with no oil  :wink:

and america cant invade iran or syria because those ppl will protect their country at all cost. worst america can do is air attacks.

oh and btw jews own america if you dont know
(once they owned germany)

[Stof]

You're joking right?  The ONLY reason the war in Iraq is as unpopular in the United States as it is, is due to the fact that the war (and conflict in general) in the Middle East is driving UP oil costs.

Plans don't always work as expected

Anyway, if oil is what we were after, we would've gone after Iran or Syria.  Iran because we hate them for overrunning our embassy years ago, and because it's proven that they are trying to develop nuclear technology, and Syria because they are smaller and have been pissing our allies (Israel) off for the longest time.

Iraq would be the last choice to attack for oil due to it's (former) Shi'ite majority.  Obviously taking Saddam out was going to cause a lot of religious war as the much larger Sunni factions (aided by the other Muslim countries surrounding them) tried to regain the upper hand.

We took him out #1 because we thought he had nukes.  (and he may well have had some.)  #2 because he had committed atrocities against his own people and we weren't going to let another "mini-stalin" get away with genocide.

Correction, you took him out because you though it would have been a good way to secure some oil for later, AND because you had some "good reasons" to show the public opinion.

Although I must had that saying he might have some nukes holds 0 credibility now. It was already far fetched before the invasion but now it's plain lunacy to still hold to that belief.

Now, I won't get more into that. I have made my points and I got nothing worth as a reply. I'll just leave that for all to see:

http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/player.jhtml

Besides, it's funny