• 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!

Fossil fuel companies believes in manmade global warming

Bergslagstroll said:
Yes, and we have lived with the problems that west dependence of cheap oil from the Middle East causes for a long time. For example, western countries support of the overthrow of the democratic Iranian government in the 1950’s, that lead to the brutal Shah regime supported by western countries. The first oil crisis and after that the Iran revolution. The Gulf War, 9/11, the Iraq war and now ISIS.
Click to expand...

Middle East oil has very little to do with the West's problems in the Middle East.

[h=3]The Roots of Muslim Rage[/h]pages.pomona.edu/~vis04747/h124/readings/Lewis_roots_of_muslim_rage.pdf



by B Lewis - ‎Cited by 119 - ‎Related articles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.The Roots of Muslim Rage. Lewis, Bernard. The Atlantic ...
 
Jack Hays said:
Middle East oil has very little to do with the West's problems in the Middle East.

[h=3]The Roots of Muslim Rage[/h]pages.pomona.edu/~vis04747/h124/readings/Lewis_roots_of_muslim_rage.pdf



by B Lewis - ‎Cited by 119 - ‎Related articles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.The Roots of Muslim Rage. Lewis, Bernard. The Atlantic ...
Click to expand...

Naivety on full display...
 
Media_Truth said:
Naivety on full display...
Click to expand...

Actually it's your lack of knowledge of history that's on display. The linked article was written in 1990 by Bernard Lewis, regarded by many as the greatest western scholar of Islam.
 
Jack Hays said:
Actually it's your lack of knowledge of history that's on display. The linked article was written in 1990 by Bernard Lewis, regarded by many as the greatest western scholar of Islam.
Click to expand...

Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User's Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ar-oil-resources-energy-peak-scarcity-economy

The Iraq War was only partly, however, about big profits for Anglo-American oil conglomerates - that would be a bonus (one which in the end has failed to materialise to the degree hoped for - not for want of trying though).

The real goal - as Greg Muttitt documented in his book Fuel on the Fire citing declassified Foreign Office files from 2003 onwards - was stabilising global energy supplies as a whole by ensuring the free flow of Iraqi oil to world markets - benefits to US and UK companies...
 
Media_Truth said:
Dr Nafeez Ahmed is executive director of the Institute for Policy Research & Development and author of A User's Guide to the Crisis of Civilisation: And How to Save It among other books.
https://www.theguardian.com/environ...ar-oil-resources-energy-peak-scarcity-economy

The Iraq War was only partly, however, about big profits for Anglo-American oil conglomerates - that would be a bonus (one which in the end has failed to materialise to the degree hoped for - not for want of trying though).

The real goal - as Greg Muttitt documented in his book Fuel on the Fire citing declassified Foreign Office files from 2003 onwards - was stabilising global energy supplies as a whole by ensuring the free flow of Iraqi oil to world markets - benefits to US and UK companies...
Click to expand...

If The Guardian is the best you can do then you lose. Fact is no US oil company took any Iraqi oil. Of course everyone wants stable energy supplies, but that was an argument against the war, not for it. And Muslim rage is rooted elsewhere, as already shown. QED
 
Jack Hays said:
If The Guardian is the best you can do then you lose. Fact is no US oil company took any Iraqi oil. Of course everyone wants stable energy supplies, but that was an argument against the war, not for it. And Muslim rage is rooted elsewhere, as already shown. QED
Click to expand...

You should study the Project for a New American Century, PNAC, founded by Wolfowicz, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others. They talk about global domination, oil control, etc, well before Cheney was Vice President. You are so blinded by your Right rhetoric that you couldn't see the truth if it knocked you on your forehead. The Iraqi Oil War cost the US $6 Trillion. I'm sure you'll be writing a thread next week about the EVILs of the renewable energy tax rebates, which is a pittance next to this OIL WAR.
 
Media_Truth said:
You should study the Project for a New American Century, PNAC, founded by Wolfowicz, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others. They talk about global domination, oil control, etc, well before Cheney was Vice President. You are so blinded by your Right rhetoric that you couldn't see the truth if it knocked you on your forehead. The Iraqi Oil War cost the US $6 Trillion. I'm sure you'll be writing a thread next week about the EVILs of the renewable energy tax rebates, which is a pittance next to this OIL WAR.
Click to expand...

It would be irresponsible not to worry about maintaining oil reserves
 
Jack Hays said:
Exxon's position has not changed. And Climategate was (and remains) a real scandal, whitewashing notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

Why did Exxon Mobile cast so much doubt about climate change in the communication to the public if they all along believed in manmade global warming?

Also, if Exxon Mobil all along believed in manmade global warming. Why did they then give money to members of Congress and a corporate lobbying group that denied climate change?

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...mobil-gave-millions-climate-denying-lawmakers

Also, even if the fossil fuel companies now openly acknowledge manmade global warming they still spend money on obstructing policies that would address climate change.

Oil companies including Exxon and Shell spent £81m 'obstructing' climate laws in 2015, NGO says | The Independent

The “climategate” was not ”whitewashed”. That the fake scandal got a lot of media coverage and cast a lot of doubt about manmade global warming right before the climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. While the disovery that it was a fake scandal got a lot less coverage and then first after the conference.

Remember back to November 2009 just before the world climate conference in Copenhagen. The talks were meant to help the world move toward a more unified and comprehensive climate policy.

Instead the words on everybody’s lips were those contained in a tome of emails leaked from the University of East Anglia in Britain. They suggested climate scientists had cooked the books in favour of their own hypotheses...

Royce notes the reports that cleared the scientists have received far less coverage in the media than the original allegations. “This lack of proportionality means the claims of ‘prosecution’ are better known the ultimate verdict of ‘not guilty’”.
Click to expand...

Also the scientists involved in the so called “scandal” was clear by several committees.

https://web.archive.org/web/2014103...-srv/politics/documents/final_report_penn.pdf

UK 'Climategate' inquiry largely clears scientists

Scientists' 'Climategate' e-mails 'just discussions' - BBC News

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/u-s-scientists-cleared-in-climategate-1.1031242

Also, if manmade global warming is one great conspiracy the people that oppose it must be extremely incompetent. Take for example that the fossil fuel companies with their vast resources can’t uncover the conspiracy but instead they now publicly acknowledge manmade global warming. Or that you have some that oppose manmade global warming that use illegal methods like hacking servers, but still can’t unmask the “great conspiracy”.

Also, you under eight years had a Bush government that was skeptical against manmade global warming but with all the resources of the American government couldn’t unmask the “great conspiracy.” You also today have both a Republican president and a Republican congress and they are not either able to unmask “the great conspiracy.”
 
Jack Hays said:
Middle East oil has very little to do with the West's problems in the Middle East.

[h=3]The Roots of Muslim Rage[/h]pages.pomona.edu/~vis04747/h124/readings/Lewis_roots_of_muslim_rage.pdf



by B Lewis - ‎Cited by 119 - ‎Related articles
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.The Roots of Muslim Rage. Lewis, Bernard. The Atlantic ...
Click to expand...

Iran had a secular and democratic government in the 1950’s. That it was the overthrow of that government and brutal oppression under the Shah that created the path for the Iranian revolution and the fundamentalist Iranian government.

Also, according to Obama and Al Qaida American troops in Saudi Arabia was a big reason for 9/11. No matter if you believe that reason, you still have a Saudi regime that impose an extremist and fundamentalist interpretation of Islam there the Saudis that oppose it openly is sentenced to horrific punishments. While at the same time the regime invites “infidel warriors” to protect the “holy land”. That it easy to see that this combination of both extrem fundamentalism and hypocrisy can lead to hatred and conflicts.

Also with the chaos after the Iraq war, Iraq became a training ground and recruitment ground for terrorist from all over the world.
 
Media_Truth said:
You should study the Project for a New American Century, PNAC, founded by Wolfowicz, Cheney, Rumsfeld and others. They talk about global domination, oil control, etc, well before Cheney was Vice President. You are so blinded by your Right rhetoric that you couldn't see the truth if it knocked you on your forehead. The Iraqi Oil War cost the US $6 Trillion. I'm sure you'll be writing a thread next week about the EVILs of the renewable energy tax rebates, which is a pittance next to this OIL WAR.
Click to expand...

Oil was no part of the decision to invade Iraq, and proof of that is easy. Despite years in military control of the country, we took none.
 
Wasn't it Cheney who said that the oil would pay for the war?
 
Jack Hays said:
Oil was no part of the decision to invade Iraq, and proof of that is easy. Despite years in military control of the country, we took none.
Click to expand...

LOL. You can always tell a liberal, but you can't tell him much.

We invade Iraq. Saddam Huseein'ss regime is destroyed. Paul Bremer and the CPA now rule the land . The oil is now there for Halliburton's taking .MwwHAHAHAHAH , evil master mind Dick Cheney's plan has come to fruition. But then....wait.....they have elections. OMG ,did Cheney not think this through??
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Why did Exxon Mobile cast so much doubt about climate change in the communication to the public if they all along believed in manmade global warming?

Also, if Exxon Mobil all along believed in manmade global warming. Why did they then give money to members of Congress and a corporate lobbying group that denied climate change?

Also, if manmade global warming is one great conspiracy the people that oppose it must be extremely incompetent. Take for example that the fossil fuel companies with their vast resources can’t uncover the conspiracy but instead they now publicly acknowledge manmade global warming. Or that you have some that oppose manmade global warming that use illegal methods like hacking servers, but still can’t unmask the “great conspiracy”.

Also, you under eight years had a Bush government that was skeptical against manmade global warming but with all the resources of the American government couldn’t unmask the “great conspiracy.” You also today have both a Republican president and a Republican congress and they are not either able to unmask “the great conspiracy.”
Click to expand...

There's no evidence Exxon "cast doubt."

No one alleges conspiracy, just career protection and uncritical acceptance of orthodoxy.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
The “climategate” was not ”whitewashed”. That the fake scandal got a lot of media coverage and cast a lot of doubt about manmade global warming right before the climate conference in Copenhagen in 2009. While the disovery that it was a fake scandal got a lot less coverage and then first after the conference.



Also the scientists involved in the so called “scandal” was clear by several committees.
Click to expand...

There was nothing fake about Climategate, and yes, the scandal was whitewashed by those committees.
 
Bergslagstroll said:
Iran had a secular and democratic government in the 1950’s. That it was the overthrow of that government and brutal oppression under the Shah that created the path for the Iranian revolution and the fundamentalist Iranian government.

Also, according to Obama and Al Qaida American troops in Saudi Arabia was a big reason for 9/11. No matter if you believe that reason, you still have a Saudi regime that impose an extremist and fundamentalist interpretation of Islam there the Saudis that oppose it openly is sentenced to horrific punishments. While at the same time the regime invites “infidel warriors” to protect the “holy land”. That it easy to see that this combination of both extrem fundamentalism and hypocrisy can lead to hatred and conflicts.

Also with the chaos after the Iraq war, Iraq became a training ground and recruitment ground for terrorist from all over the world.
Click to expand...

The Shah would have come to power in Iran regardless of what the US did or did not do. What has been forgotten is that his regime was among the Middle East's most progressive at that time.

[h=3]What Really Happened in Iran | Foreign Affairs[/h]https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/middle-east/2014.../what-really-happened-iran



by R Takeyh - ‎2014 - ‎Cited by 1 - ‎Related articles
Jun 16, 2014 - What Really Happened in Iran. The CIA, the Ouster of Mosaddeq, and the Restoration of the Shah. By Ray Takeyh ...


 
KLATTU said:
LOL. You can always tell a liberal, but you can't tell him much.

We invade Iraq. Saddam Huseein'ss regime is destroyed. Paul Bremer and the CPA now rule the land . The oil is now there for Halliburton's taking .MwwHAHAHAHAH , evil master mind Dick Cheney's plan has come to fruition. But then....wait.....they have elections. OMG ,did Cheney not think this through??
Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct. Allawi was aligning himself with the West, and giving up 64% of Iraqi oil reserves to Western development:

Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi provides the Supreme Council for Oil Policy with a set of guidelines upon which the council is to base its petroleum policy. According to the guidelines, fields currently in production should continue to be developed by the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC), but development of all other fields should be contracted to private oil firms through production sharing agreements (PSAs). Eighty oilfields are known to exist in Iraq, but only 17 of them are currently being developed. Under the policy advocated by Allawi, the remaining 63 would be operated by the oil companies. New fields, according to Allawi, should be developed exclusively by the private sector. [DEUTSCHE PRESSE-AGENTUR (HAMBURG), 9/13/2003; AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, 9/26/2003; MUTTITT, 2005] One critic of this proposed policy will later note that since Iraq’s 17 known fields “represent only 40 billion of Iraq’s 115 billion barrels of known oil reserves, the policy to allocate undeveloped fields to foreign companies would give those companies control of 64 percent of known reserves. If a further 100 billion barrels are found, as is widely predicted, the foreign companies could control as much as 81 percent of Iraq’s oil; if 200 billion are found, as the Oil Ministry predicts, the foreign company share would be 87 percent. Given that oil accounts for over 95 percent of Iraq’s government revenues, the impact of this policy on Iraq’s economy would be enormous.” [MUTTITT, 2005] Another one of Allawi’s recommendations is that the INOC should be partially privatized. Allawi also feels that Iraqis should avoid spending time negotiating with the oil companies, and instead agree to whatever terms the companies will accept, with a possibility of renegotiating the contracts at a later date.

But then later...
February 6, 2007: Head of Federation of Oil Unions in Basra Condemns Proposed Oil LawEdit event
Hasan Jum`ah `Awwad al-Asadi, head of the Federation of Oil Unions in Basra, condemns the draft oil law (see January 16, 2007) and argues that Iraqis are fully capable of managing their own industry. “They have the experience in the field and the technical training, have overcome hardships and proven to the world that they can provide the best service to Iraqis in the oil industry,” he says. “The best proof of that is how after the entry of the occupying forces and the destruction of the infrastructure of the oil sector the engineers, technical staff and workers were able to raise production from zero to 2,100,000 barrels per day without any foreign expertise or foreign capital. Iraqis are capable of further increasing production with their present skills. The Iraqi state needs to consult with those who have overcome the difficulties and to ask their opinion before sinking Iraq into an ocean of dark injustice. Those who spread the word that the oil sector will not improve except with foreign capital and production-sharing are dreaming. They must think again since we know for certain that these plans do not serve the sons and daughters of Iraq.”

The rest is history. OOPs - $6 Trillion down the drain!

Iraq under US Occupation: Production Sharing Agreements
 
Media_Truth said:
You are absolutely correct. Allawi was aligning himself with the West, and giving up 64% of Iraqi oil reserves to Western development:

Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi provides the Supreme Council for Oil Policy with a set of guidelines upon which the council is to base its petroleum policy. According to the guidelines, fields currently in production should continue to be developed by the Iraq National Oil Company (INOC), but development of all other fields should be contracted to private oil firms through production sharing agreements (PSAs). Eighty oilfields are known to exist in Iraq, but only 17 of them are currently being developed. Under the policy advocated by Allawi, the remaining 63 would be operated by the oil companies. New fields, according to Allawi, should be developed exclusively by the private sector. [DEUTSCHE PRESSE-AGENTUR (HAMBURG), 9/13/2003; AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, 9/26/2003; MUTTITT, 2005] One critic of this proposed policy will later note that since Iraq’s 17 known fields “represent only 40 billion of Iraq’s 115 billion barrels of known oil reserves, the policy to allocate undeveloped fields to foreign companies would give those companies control of 64 percent of known reserves. If a further 100 billion barrels are found, as is widely predicted, the foreign companies could control as much as 81 percent of Iraq’s oil; if 200 billion are found, as the Oil Ministry predicts, the foreign company share would be 87 percent. Given that oil accounts for over 95 percent of Iraq’s government revenues, the impact of this policy on Iraq’s economy would be enormous.” [MUTTITT, 2005] Another one of Allawi’s recommendations is that the INOC should be partially privatized. Allawi also feels that Iraqis should avoid spending time negotiating with the oil companies, and instead agree to whatever terms the companies will accept, with a possibility of renegotiating the contracts at a later date.

But then later...
February 6, 2007: Head of Federation of Oil Unions in Basra Condemns Proposed Oil LawEdit event
Hasan Jum`ah `Awwad al-Asadi, head of the Federation of Oil Unions in Basra, condemns the draft oil law (see January 16, 2007) and argues that Iraqis are fully capable of managing their own industry. “They have the experience in the field and the technical training, have overcome hardships and proven to the world that they can provide the best service to Iraqis in the oil industry,” he says. “The best proof of that is how after the entry of the occupying forces and the destruction of the infrastructure of the oil sector the engineers, technical staff and workers were able to raise production from zero to 2,100,000 barrels per day without any foreign expertise or foreign capital. Iraqis are capable of further increasing production with their present skills. The Iraqi state needs to consult with those who have overcome the difficulties and to ask their opinion before sinking Iraq into an ocean of dark injustice. Those who spread the word that the oil sector will not improve except with foreign capital and production-sharing are dreaming. They must think again since we know for certain that these plans do not serve the sons and daughters of Iraq.”

The rest is history. OOPs - $6 Trillion down the drain!

Iraq under US Occupation: Production Sharing Agreements
Click to expand...

What point do you think you're making?
 
Jack Hays said:
It was Rumsfeld, and he said Iraqi oil would finance Iraqi reconstruction.
Click to expand...

That's just not true. He also said that we wouldn't have to deal with the Saudi's for oil. And Cheney and Haliburton made almost $36mil from the war.
 
Parrish said:
That's just not true. He also said that we wouldn't have to deal with the Saudi's for oil. And Cheney and Haliburton made almost $36mil from the war.
Click to expand...

Please learn the facts.

Cheney's money was fixed, when he left Halliburton.

President Clinton made all the Halliburton contracts.

The one contract not bid, was because Halliburton made the Iraqi oil infrastructure and already had the blueprints and spare parts. The only competitor which was a French, that could have done so, would have had to reengineering, or but blueprints and parts from Halliburton.

Now I wonder...

Is that why the French talked Hillary and Obama into destroying Libya? Did they have the blueprints and spare parts for the Libyan oil industry?
 
Lord of Planar said:
Please learn the facts.

Cheney's money was fixed, when he left Halliburton.

President Clinton made all the Halliburton contracts.

The one contract not bid, was because Halliburton made the Iraqi oil infrastructure and already had the blueprints and spare parts. The only competitor which was a French, that could have done so, would have had to reengineering, or but blueprints and parts from Halliburton.

Now I wonder...

Is that why the French talked Hillary and Obama into destroying Libya? Did they have the blueprints and spare parts for the Libyan oil industry?
Click to expand...

$6 Trillion is a lot of money. How much of that did Cheney embezzle? Who knows? That's the incurred debt of the US, from the Iraqi War. My great grandkids will be paying that off. All in the name of OIL!
 
Media_Truth said:
$6 Trillion is a lot of money. How much of that did Cheney embezzle? Who knows? That's the incurred debt of the US, from the Iraqi War. My great grandkids will be paying that off. All in the name of OIL!
Click to expand...

Speculation is not fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom