• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Military Repositions Forces in Preparation for Libya Response

USA_1 said:
The only interference I support is enforcing a no fly zone to keep his air force from bombing civilians.
Click to expand...

I'm not even sure I would support that, but this is such a quagmire waiting to happen .

USA_1 said:
Why would oil companies expand drilling now. This is the perfect crisis to increase prices and make huge profits.
Click to expand...

Yes... another person that understands economics of a cartel.

You control the supply, you can demand the price you want... and the lessons learned from Enron show that 'artificial scarcity' is good for profit margins.
 
BmanMcfly said:
I'm not even sure I would support that, but this is such a quagmire waiting to happen .

.
Click to expand...

I could also support a predator strike on Gad-daffy himself next time he shows his ugly mug..
 
Jetboogieman said:
But that's not what you gave them...
Click to expand...

We didn't give them anything. The South Vietnamese chose democracy, then asked us to help them protect it from the Communists in the North.

Are you another one of those historically challenged Libbos that think the United States invaded Vietnam?
 
StillBallin75 said:
If you think Diem was a democratic ruler, then I suggest you revisit your Vietnam history. Part of the reason we got involved in Southeast Asia, and wanted to maintain the partition, was that we knew Ho Chi Minh would have won in a real election.

But that's all water under the bridge. As for your point about the mustard gas, if Gaddafi or a third party makes a move on the mustard gas facility, we'll know about it and we have the option of taking it out with an air strike. Still no real need to get ground forces involved.
Click to expand...

I have to read up on my history? :lamo
 
USA_1 said:
I could also support a predator strike on Gad-daffy himself next time he shows his ugly mug..
Click to expand...




/facepalm




What about the innocent civillians that may be killed in such a strike? I mean you hold US troops responsible, why are you willing to send them to kill in this instance?
 
USA_1 said:
Why would oil companies expand drilling now. This is the perfect crisis to increase prices and make huge profits.
Click to expand...

oil companies always expand drilling when the prices are high.

Anyone with a little business savy wanna guess why?
 
apdst said:
We didn't give them anything. The South Vietnamese chose democracy, then asked us to help them protect it from the Communists in the North.

Are you another one of those historically challenged Libbos that think the United States invaded Vietnam?
Click to expand...

Then why would 80% of Vietnamese have voted for Ho Chi Minh if we had actually let them practice democracy?
 
apdst said:
We didn't give them anything. The South Vietnamese chose democracy, then asked us to help them protect it from the Communists in the North.

Are you another one of those historically challenged Libbos that think the United States invaded Vietnam?
Click to expand...

A: south and north Vietnam were created by the UN and the French, no one had a choice in anything :prof

B: South Vietnam was never really a democracy :prof

C: I never suggestedthe US invaded Vietnam :prof
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
oil companies always expand drilling when the prices are high.

Anyone with a little business savy wanna guess why?
Click to expand...

And they cut back drilling to push prices higher. High prices will naturally lead to increased drilling and when prices drop they will cut back production. Oil companies don't like surpluses.
Believe it or not oil companies like high prices. They are in the business to make money not supply us with cheap gas.
 
Jetboogieman said:
A: south and north Vietnam were created by the UN and the French, no one had a choice in anything :prof

B: South Vietnam was never really a democracy :prof

C: I never suggestedthe US invaded Vietnam :prof
Click to expand...

The South Vietnamese government was one of the most corrupt on earth and the French and US helped create it.
 
USA_1 said:
Then why would 80% of Vietnamese have voted for Ho Chi Minh if we had actually let them practice democracy?
Click to expand...

Because he was the only one running, perhaps? Whatcha think?

I doubt with all the murders that he ordered, over the years, that he could get 80% of the vote, unless he was the only candidate.

After he was elected, nearly a million Vietnamese immigrated south, not a good sign.

BTW, the election held in North Vietnam, only.
 
Jetboogieman said:
A: south and north Vietnam were created by the UN and the French, no one had a choice in anything :prof

B: South Vietnam was never really a democracy :prof

C: I never suggestedthe US invaded Vietnam :prof
Click to expand...

The South Vietnamese could have migrated north, yet the opposite took place.
 
USA_1 said:
And they cut back drilling to push prices higher. High prices will naturally lead to increased drilling and when prices drop they will cut back production. Oil companies don't like surpluses.
Click to expand...

No, they cut back production to raise prices. Production and drilling are two different animals.

Believe it or not oil companies like high prices. They are in the business to make money not supply us with cheap gas.
Click to expand...

Drilling a well costs money. The oil companies have to see a return on the money they spent drilling that well. You understand how that works, right?
 
apdst said:
The South Vietnamese could have migrated north, yet the opposite took place.
Click to expand...

That was due to the fact that many of thosewho stayed in the South were catholic and wanted to avoid religious persecution (Ngo was a very devout catholic) :prof
 
apdst said:
No, they cut back production to raise prices. Production and drilling are two different animals.



Drilling a well costs money. The oil companies have to see a return on the money they spent drilling that well. You understand how that works, right?
Click to expand...

I know and an increase in drilling now will do nothing to effect current prices or make up for Libyan oil.
When prices are low drilling is curtailed. When prices are high excess profits are used to increase drilling.
Oil companies do not increase drilling to reduce prices. That's what you guys seem to ignor.
 
USA_1 said:
I know and an increase in drilling now will do nothing to effect current prices or make up for Libyan oil.
When prices are low drilling is curtailed. When prices are high excess profits are used to increase drilling.
Oil companies do not increase drilling to reduce prices. That's what you guys seem to ignor.
Click to expand...

New finds will have a positive impact on future prices, i.e. speculation. Not drilling sure as hell isn't going to lower prices, nor is it going to put more tax revenue in the government's pocket.

Want more tax revenue? Let people go back to work.
 
Jetboogieman said:
That was due to the fact that many of thosewho stayed in the South were catholic and wanted to avoid religious persecution (Ngo was a very devout catholic) :prof
Click to expand...

Not to mention they didn't want to get caught up in the communist purges going on in the North, regardless of their religion.
 
StillBallin75 said:
There's a difference between responding to a crisis and unilaterally invading, AND SUBSEQUENTLY OCCUPYING FOR HALF A DECADE, another country because you feel like it. For the record I don't think we should do anything more than enforce a no-fly zone. As ugly as things may be on the ground, we don't know how much uglier they might get if you start throwing in a foreign force into the mix.
Click to expand...
And... Jet...

You folks seem to have forgotten he was in violation of his post Gulf War agreement to disarm for 12-years. Fact is Clinton should have walked in and removed his ass, but Clinton was too concerned about poll numbers and his legacy... the idiot. Instead he let the corrupt UN become even more corrupted, to the point Saddam probably believed he had enough people in his pocket.

It wasn't unilateral... but if we had to do it unilaterally... so what? And we did go to the UN for a 17th UN resolution.

.
 
apdst said:
Not to mention they didn't want to get caught up in the communist purges going on in the North, regardless of their religion.
Click to expand...

No doubt, but that's not the issue here...

Ngo and all following governments were not democratic... :prof
 
apdst said:
New finds will have a positive impact on future prices, i.e. speculation. Not drilling sure as hell isn't going to lower prices, nor is it going to put more tax revenue in the government's pocket.

Want more tax revenue? Let people go back to work.
Click to expand...

Not really. Temporary artificial shortages have a bigger impact on price.

Oil companies decide for themselves how much drilling they do. There are millions of acres with proven reserves where they could drill if they want. Their analysts determine where and when drilling is the most profitable. Government does not determine drilling, just where it can't be done.
Some of you seem to think if every square inch was opened up to drilling that oil companies would drill with wreckless abandon and drive prices down so you only have to pay 50 cents a gallon. Oil companies set drilling to maximize profits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom