"Our" boys in Syria.

[nicolas10]

Fracking will just destroy the area. If you don't like N Dakota go for it... But after that the region is a desert shithole.

Nic

[nicolas10]

The sad fact is that helping muslims is a thankless no win situation. Might as well not waste the time.

We are not "helping" them we are screwing them and putting them in the hands of religious fanatics as we did in Libya. With friends like NATO you wish you had enemies instead.

Nic

[callmeslick]

Fracking will just destroy the area. If you don't like N Dakota go for it... But after that the region is a desert shithole.

Nic

true, but then again, you sit in a nation surrounded by nuke plants. Best option? Sand or glass, your choice.

[Pudfark]

talk to an oil guy....the N.Dakota crude would cost a fortune to extract, and then another forture to get to a refinery.

Talk to a Canadian guy...they are making a killing off of oil and fracking it to boot..

[callmeslick]

talk to an oil guy....the N.Dakota crude would cost a fortune to extract, and then another forture to get to a refinery.

Talk to a Canadian guy...they are making a killing off of oil and fracking it to boot..

slightly different geology, and the stuff is still dirty from those sand extractions. Also, they have shipping available and if the GOP has their way, we will pay a good chunk of the costs for a pipeline south(even though the refineries at present can't handle the shit).

[Pudfark]

one more thing, Pud......part of my reluctance to urge a push for domestic short term production is this: China, India and other parts of southeast Asia have very rapidly expanding economies. They are starting to guzzle gasoline and oil. Given that supply is finite, sitting on our reserves, while pouring government subsidies into replacement technologies/energy sources strikes me as wise long term planning. Why? First off, we will be in position to utilize the new energy when supplies dwindle, reducing pressures into war or other costly actions to protect short supply. Second, all that expensive US crude will become highly profitable. Watch that North Dakota, or other similar geologies, closely. They might be sinking a bunch of holes, but I'll bet they cap 95% of them off, until it's worth their while to bring it up and sell it. By that time, you won't want to be running a diesel engine and I'll have long since swapped out my two oil burners(yes, even in VA you need heat every so often, and in Delaware, a bit more, even though both spots are hot more than really cold).

We have the oil, the capability and the technology to develop it. We have oil in abundance. Why are you so interested in saving it to be resold for a large profit in the future? How would that concept benefit the average American now or then.
We need cheap energy, whose source we control. Not foreign oil and all the bullshit that goes with it, not to mention the outflow of cash to buy it. Affordable alternative energy does not exist at this time. So, common sense suggests that we use what we have, our own uninterruptable supply of oil. We use it now. Our oil is cheaper than their oil. Why? Because a hell of a lot of it is on Federal Land owned by all of us.

Some day Slick...we gotta get together for a lite libation...and agree to only talk about fishing...

[callmeslick]

We have the oil, the capability and the technology to develop it. We have oil in abundance. Why are you so interested in saving it to be resold for a large profit in the future? How would that concept benefit the average American now or then.

first off, we(nobody) has oil in abundance, when you look at the consumption curve 10 years out. How does my way of thinking benefit the average American? By avoiding a world in which everything that we now take for granted by way of energy and petroleum based products(read plastics) is either gone or priced out of their reach in a decade or two.

We need cheap energy, whose source we control.

we need girls with big tits serving us martinis and crab cakes......just because we need it, doesn't mean it happens in the real world, Pud. This is a global economy, and unless someone figures out a whole new source of power, there just isn't that much by way of cheap, controllable energy. Luckily, for Americans, we DO have huge reserves of natural gas, at some environmental cost, but we still have far too much transportation, electric production and manufacturing dependant on crude oil.

Affordable alternative energy does not exist at this time. So, common sense suggests that we use what we have, our own uninterruptable supply of oil. We use it now. Our oil is cheaper than their oil. Why? Because a hell of a lot of it is on Federal Land owned by all of us.

what we have to do is think further into the future. We better, because our major competitor is. The US developed solar technology, but what country pumps the most government cash into it? China. So, now, guess who owns the solar manufacturing market? That is long-term, global thinking......something the US used to do, before everyone got greed happy.

Some day Slick...we gotta get together for a lite libation...and agree to only talk about fishing...

well, you'll have to come north, because I'll be damned if I want to step foot into Texas.

[nicolas10]

We have the oil, the capability and the technology to develop it. We have oil in abundance. Why are you so interested in saving it to be resold for a large profit in the future? How would that concept benefit the average American now or then.
We need cheap energy, whose source we control. Not foreign oil and all the bullshit that goes with it, not to mention the outflow of cash to buy it. Affordable alternative energy does not exist at this time. So, common sense suggests that we use what we have, our own uninterruptable supply of oil. We use it now. Our oil is cheaper than their oil. Why? Because a hell of a lot of it is on Federal Land owned by all of us.

The road to 911 by Peter Dale Scott details 50 years of US policies in the middle east, and he makes a very good case showing that the increase in crude oil was decided by the US so that the militaro-industrial complex could find customers after the termination of the vietnam war. Basically it's: "OK you increase the price of oil and in turn you buy our weapons, & you still have some change left for bitches & and palaces". The US growth in the sixties & seventies was mainly thanks to the weapon's industry, and after the war ended the prospect of the arms manufacturers looked bleak to say the least.

This reminds me of my recent post about the everincreasing role of Lockheed Martin in all areas of american life

Connect the dots, as some conspiracysts would say.

Nic

[Pudfark]

Quote:
Some day Slick...we gotta get together for a lite libation...and agree to only talk about fishing...


well, you'll have to come north, because I'll be damned if I want to step foot into Texas.

I guess we'll have to meet in a foreign country....How about New Orleans?
Food supposed to be good there, martinis cold and dry...bring beads.
Have fish pictures...
Who knows...maybe Rugg could make the trip? If he's off the no fly list

[fatman]

How about you two just meet in Cali