It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump would consider halting U.S. oil purchases from Saudi Arabia unless...

page: 3
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I'll pay more to burn that # house of Saud.

Scum of the earth.

Complain about your oil prices while these dirtbags and spreading Wahhabism and enslaving people.

Please take it and shove it up your you know what.




posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: CrazyWater
The funny and sad part is that Obama has been wanting the USA to get off of fossil fuels from the get go, promoting and wanting the US to move to more green and renewable energy sources. And all of the Republicans thought it was a bad idea.

Funny how Trump seems to think that he can do the same thing, and yet did not either see or want to see the problems that Obama had trying to get this idea out, that the country does not need fossil fuels to operate. Nor does it appear to him that if he does do as he states, the Saudi's could go to OPEC and ultimately cause a massive oil shortage in the USA by getting other countries in OPEC to join in and put the proverbial screws to the USA, in ways that I don't think that Trump is prepared for and the country is not prepared for either.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: sdcigarpig
a reply to: CrazyWater
The funny and sad part is that Obama has been wanting the USA to get off of fossil fuels from the get go, promoting and wanting the US to move to more green and renewable energy sources. And all of the Republicans thought it was a bad idea.

Funny how Trump seems to think that he can do the same thing, and yet did not either see or want to see the problems that Obama had trying to get this idea out, that the country does not need fossil fuels to operate. Nor does it appear to him that if he does do as he states, the Saudi's could go to OPEC and ultimately cause a massive oil shortage in the USA by getting other countries in OPEC to join in and put the proverbial screws to the USA, in ways that I don't think that Trump is prepared for and the country is not prepared for either.


The real reason we dont is because Obama wanted to go cold turkey and that would had instantly destroyed th eeconomy. And the US makes enough oil ITSELF OPEC cant really harm us. We have to r e open our refineries is all. w e export alot of oil as well.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: yuppa

I am pretty sure the tech they have was bought.

If we destroy all that then steal everything. That would qualify as burning and looting and deserving of the repercussions that would surely follow such tyrant-like behavior.


However we probably wouldn't dare to do that because US intelligence thinks they may have acquired nukes from Pakistan. Nuclear deterrents and all.



Look up the history of OIL production in saudi arabia. I f i am not mistaken the saudis LEASE all the equipment from the oil companies. ANyway. point is Saudi arabia is the man behind the curtain. Saudi arabia can be cut out of our budgets and military spending easily. we can still buy oil from other sources as well if need be but cut saud out.

They have links to terrorism and if it wa s not fo r th e US protection in th e gulf war would be Saddams playground. Without our support their military falls to peices within months. A embargo on good to and from saudi arabia would be best really and we woudn t need to take anything away just keep th e goods and services out.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa
The same refineries that need an overhaul, cause they are starting to be a hazard? And then there is what would be the national priority. Do you honestly think that the USA could really deal with a shortage from OPEC, even if all of the refineries are opened up and at full production? Probably not.

Here is why:

Lets say for arguments sake that Trump gets elected into office and does indeed stop all oil from the Saudi's. He believes that it would hurt them, and that could be farther from the truth. The Saudi's would turn around and sell to other countries, such as India, China and Russia, at a cheaper rate than already there, that would be a temporary fix. The Saudi's would then turn around and go into OPEC and side with Iran, and thus slow the amount of oil to the USA, forcing it to start to drill and tap into its reserves.

Now you would say that is the idea, however, the facts are this: There are only 140 refineries in the USA. Any one of them that goes down and it causes gas prices to go up, until it is repaired and returned back to working order. That could be a big problem, as many times they try to build one in an area, that does not have a refinery and there is a major battle that either stops or prevents such from happening. (The not in my back yard mentality comes into play.)

Now then there is the other small detail not mentioned and that would be the priority that such a resource would have to be distributed, and care to guess who would get the number one priority on any and all petrolium products? Lets just say it will not be the average citizen they will be down on the list. No, there will be a large percentage of that oil and fuel that goes to the US military, then the federal government, and emergency services, and the rest is then down to the average citizen.

Course there are other parts and details on the uses of oil, as there is plastics that are used, in things like a computer key board, or the cell phones that many use, carpeting, water systems (PCV pipes) bedding and then there is the medical stuff that is used, all coming from one resource, oil.

So if you think that it is such a good idea, what can you deal without? Driving? medicines? Surgery? Would you be willing to tell a diabetic that he can not have in insulin shot for a lack of syringes (Not the needle) or a lack of telecommunications equipment?



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: yuppa




Look up the history of OIL production in saudi arabia. I f i am not mistaken the saudis LEASE all the equipment from the oil companies.


I looked up their history and surprise, No they do not lease all the equipment. If you look up the history you will find even the earlier companies were not American.

Even though you moved the goal post you were still wrong.


Your suggestion that we should destroy their country and steal their resources if it was carried out would make the US more barbaric than the people you are afraid of. Even if the US did seize all their resources unless you advocate giving them to private companies then they would be US property and become a socialist program.

The only way the ME becomes irrelevant to the US and the threat of Terrorism declines is if the US becomes energy independent and we stop F,ing with their countries and leave them to their own.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
It would be nice to not be in the pocket of Saudi Arabia. I mean they are the root of all of the worlds problems right now....9/11, San Bernanrdino, Wahabisim, Boko Harem, ISIS, Al queda, Talaban. The extremist Muslim Doctrine all goes right back to Saudi Arabia. Yet, we only talk about North Korea and Iran and Syria and Cuba as the bad guys. Or Russia.

We really are brainwashed int he usa.



posted on Mar, 28 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: sdcigarpig

Remember Solyndra? Obama tried and got burned by businesses. think Trump would allow this or the Detroit bailout? They needed money and suddenly there is Cash for Clunkers. Another business deal the current admin has lost...



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I said IF i didnt actually state it as fact. nice try. I did get you to do the research though for me. Reverse psychology is a wonderful thing i sit not?

And I didnt say STeal anything. a embargo for their terrorist ways isnt stealing from them. IF we have no things there that belong to th eUS then No problem. Although we do provide them protection an d military support. That stuff we should r e possess or stop letting them get parts and repair kits.

ALso Im not afraid of the saudis. i despise the way they run their country with a dictator family. I also never plan to take a trip there either due to personally insulting the royal family repeatedly. Thats not fear its common sense.

Saudi arabi needs regime change. syria didnt. iraq would had imploded on its own eventually.

@ sdcigarpig
Teh refineries that arent in as bad a shape as the oil companies say they are because its a excuse to hike the price. You dont actually believe them when they say they cant refine more right? They can its just not as profitable to do so yet. And we do have a 10 yr reserve o f oil so yes we can go without saudi oil until the refineries are at 100 percent again. Also the oil reserves prices will be set to prevent gouging.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 02:00 AM
link   
The US leaving NATO would start an arms race in Europe (both conventional and nuclear) that would spread to Russia the mid-east and Africa. It would give both China and Russia a chance to step into Europe and create new alliances while a new global arms race enveloped the world. With a dozen new nuclear powers on the rise the US would find itself in a world where threats both direct and indirect were everywhere. It would be seen as one the biggest blunders in world history.

As for not buying oil from the Saudis unless the send troops to fight ISIS? Is he really that stupid? ISIS is on its last legs and the last thing anybody needs is yet another player with troops in the region. The Shia backed Iraqis would blow a gasket and in Syria Assad and the Russians would go nuts. I am starting to think Trump has no idea what is going on with ISIS or that by the time the next President comes into office they will no longer exist a fighting force.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 02:10 AM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

The USA is beyond arms race with Quantum tech.

In fact guns verse money is just stupid different now.

We can create backholes and quantum bubbles specifically for new contingency plans. This is the only reason we owned nukes before, was to nuke the world if we were attacked. Now we can destroy the entire planet instead. You cannot hide in a cave from a Quantum Bubble. It destroys the entire universe.

The US also is working on a computer that causes nuclear reactions at a distance, when you just enter coordinates. If the enemy really wants to own cake, they're going to have to live with the fact we can remote detonate it.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs
I do remember those ideas, and they were not so good for the country.

But Trump's ideas are not any better, as it could really harm the US economy, and his statements should make us worried about what could happen if he gets into office. Some of those countries do not take kindly to his words, as they are insulting, and a few are already considering or have taken steps to ban him from stepping foot on their soil.



posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: imjack
a reply to: MrSpad

The USA is beyond arms race with Quantum tech.

In fact guns verse money is just stupid different now.

We can create backholes and quantum bubbles specifically for new contingency plans. This is the only reason we owned nukes before, was to nuke the world if we were attacked. Now we can destroy the entire planet instead. You cannot hide in a cave from a Quantum Bubble. It destroys the entire universe.

The US also is working on a computer that causes nuclear reactions at a distance, when you just enter coordinates. If the enemy really wants to own cake, they're going to have to live with the fact we can remote detonate it.


You go t any proof of that youre claiming? Sheesh I have SEEN black tris before so I know those are real but i have not seen anything like you suggest we have there.



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 12:37 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




NATO undermines the UN.


I am seeing signs of a possible massive shift coming here, if Trump wins, and Obama also get his spot as UN general secretary, and do a "deal" where all NATO's power is transfered to the UN, the UN could gain tremendous power under this scenario. 2017 will be an interesting year



posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: CriticalStinker




NATO undermines the UN.


I am seeing signs of a possible massive shift coming here, if Trump wins, and Obama also get his spot as UN general secretary, and do a "deal" where all NATO's power is transfered to the UN, the UN could gain tremendous power under this scenario. 2017 will be an interesting year


Obama is not taking demotion and becoming the Sec Gen at the UN. A job that has no power and is symbolic in nature. NATO can not transfer its power. It is a military alliance. The UN is not. The UN is simply an organization that allows nations to talk and act together under a single umbrella if they vote to do so.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join