• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Record profits for oil company

beds said:
And Bob, those countries are all OPEC countries, so the dismantling of OPEC must also be part of Bush's plans.

First, not all the nations who supply us OIL are members of OPEC but the 2 that I listed as examples are, and I stated as much. Second, I didn't hear anything about dismatling OPEC. All I heard was some double-speak that really said he wants us to become less dependant on about 15% of the total oil we use. (reducing 75% of 23% of the total)
 
beds said:
What alot of tripe that Neal Boortz produces. "If you criticize the multi-billion dollar war in Iraw, you're a terrorist".
This is what you said. Boortz did not say that. Please try for at least modicum of accuracy in your statements.



Do you think that environmental restrictions on refinery construction and exploration do not have an affect on supply and that OPEC alone dictates price? Not true. Our government and our so called "environmentalists" bear a large portion of the responsibility for the price of oil. OPEC is only one part of it and their part could be severely diminished if the environmentalists and government would clear the way for private industry to find solutions instead of providing impediments every step of the way.

 
Hell if you want to eliminate our need to import 75% of the mid-east oil, just open up ANWR. The enviornmentalists keep blocking that. But there is supposed to be enough oil under ANWR to achive this goal easily.

I honestly don't believe EITHER PARTY gives a rats butt about SOLVING the problem.
 
Cityboy said:
This is what you said. Boortz did not say that. Please try for at least modicum of accuracy in your statements.

Yes, I paraphrased him again. He said that Zawahri is a terrorist and, "Zawahri criticizes the war in Iraq and talks about soldiers coming home in body bags...so does the left.". My statement is a logical conclusion from:
Zawahri is a terrorist, the American left is like him, both of them criticize the war in Iraq.

The right media want to force all people who even question the war in Iraq into an anti-America pigeon hole, IMO. If it were my future generations of tax dollars, I'd be questioning it. Probably moreso if it were my son coming home in a body bag. But maybe that's just crazy terrorist thinking. :rolleyes:
 
I'll say that Bob's chart is a shocker. I had no idea that there was so much oil from the "Americas" (where I live!). The "other" category is certainly eating up a big part of the budget.

Thanks for the edumacation, Bob.
 
beds said:
The right media want to force all people who even question the war in Iraq into an anti-America pigeon hole, IMO. If it were my future generations of tax dollars, I'd be questioning it. Probably moreso if it were my son coming home in a body bag. But maybe that's just crazy terrorist thinking. :rolleyes:

That is indeed your opinion, however inaccurate; but fortunately for you, it is not your tax dollars. If it were your son in a U.S. body bag, he would have been a military member of his own volition, understanding the risks with volunteer service up front, not through any governmental draft or mandate. Canada does, however, benefit from the military strength of the United States. How so, you might ask? The simple fact that we border your nation from the south prevents Canada from having to spend much on a strong military, allowing your government to spend your massive taxes on socialized medicine and the like. Be thankful the United States is fighting the terrorists and guarding your borders every time you line up at the doctors office. It is doubtful you could afford both. :thumb:
 
I refuse to buy gas at Exxon stations because they invest 0% intro alternate fuel research and development. My preference is Shell. I fill up there no matter if they are more expensive then someone else down the block. Which is normally the case where I fill up.

Oh, I refuse to shop at Walmart too.
 
beds said:
It's actually 75% rather than 20%.


http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/ap/2006/02/01/ap2490856.html
"In his State of the Union speech Tuesday night, President Bush declared that America must break its dependence on Mideast oil. He outlined plans to increase federal spending on research into alternative motor fuels and to set "a national goal" of replacing 75 percent of the oil now imported from the Middle East. "
Don't be fooled! Only 29% of the worlds oil comes from the middle east. (which combines ALL the countries in the middle east) 19% comes from North America. 14% from eastern Europe, blah blah.

A break down by country
#1 Oil producer is Saudi Arabia
#2 Oil producer is Russia
#3 Oil producer is Norway

Here is a nice pie chart from the US Department of Energy.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/nonopec.html
 
Top