Iran seizes another tanker in the Gulf 4 August 2019

originally posted by: LogicalGraphitti

originally posted by: Nyiah
Actually, we could straight up use OUR OWN EXISTING OIL OUTPUT, instead of exporting it. Yeah, real eye-opener that tidbit is -- we export quite a bit when we could be much more self-sufficient keeping it stateside for domestic sale.

Spot on. I never understood why the oil coming out of the ground in the US leaves our shores. This is why I've always been against the Keystone pipeline. It only exists so we can drain oil out of the ground and pour it into ships in New Orleans. The argument was "building the pipeline will create jobs". Well, build refineries and put them to use and you have jobs for many decades to come.

If I were president, I'd make a mandate out of it. Declare that this country will be independent of foreign oil before 2030. Let the Middle East do what they do it without us having to get involved.

If we agree on nothing else, this is where we're going to High Five each other. There is no logical reason to export several million barrels a day more than we import right back in from abroad anyway. There is no possible way anyone can legit defend that. We can be oil independent, we simply choose not to. Because selling our oil to foreign countries, and then replacing it with more foreign oil makes so much more sense, eh?

a reply to: Nyiah

I read just fine. What part of "keep our noses out of it" -- as in stay out of the region -- did you miss?

Seems like it is more UK at this time...
So , now , any more "keep our noses out of it" ?
Or , are you British ?
I would say it was a world issue
But , if the US "has to stick its nose in" I am all for it.
Illegal is illegal.
Or , do you think otherwise ?

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Nyiah

I read just fine. What part of "keep our noses out of it" -- as in stay out of the region -- did you miss?

Seems like it is more UK at this time...
So , now , any more "keep our noses out of it" ?
Or , are you British ?

The US won't stay out of the tiff, we never do. We're always involved in some capacity or another.

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: Nyiah

I read just fine. What part of "keep our noses out of it" -- as in stay out of the region -- did you miss?

Seems like it is more UK at this time...
So , now , any more "keep our noses out of it" ?
Or , are you British ?

The US won't stay out of the tiff, we never do. We're always involved in some capacity or another.

Illegal is illegal
Or , do you think it is not ?
An act of war is just that .
Or ,, are you one that would say , just let it go ?
Capturing any other countries ships is just that
An act of war.
Denying ignorance
Why ?
Sometimes it has to be done.

a reply to: Nyiah

we could've gone oil free decades ago if people weren't so afraid of nuclear power, but right now any other technology like solar and wind has the limitation of not working at night and storage technology isn't advanced enough to be used at night on a large scale and wont be advanced enough for at least a decade. so right now, no we can't go oil and coal free even if we wanted to and it's going to get worse when Europe and japan wind down use of nuclear power, along with China and India's growing use of oil and many African countries modernizing and needing oil too.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

smuggling fuel for some Arab countries".

now - pop quiz - which " arab countries " are prohibited from recieving fuel imports ? or have external tarrifs on thier fuel imports ??

anyone ????????

a reply to: Nyiah

Actually, we could straight up use OUR OWN EXISTING OIL OUTPUT, instead of exporting it.

It would not be easy to just use US oil, but I am sure it could be done and I agree it should be done.

There are different kinds (grades) of oil. The oil the US produces is not the best oil. The best oil comes mainly from the ME I believe.

That's why the US exports and imports oil. We sell the low grade oil and import the high grade oil. I don't really know all the details, but I think it has to do with the way the refineries are set up.

Looks like someone with a funny hat needs to be bitch slapped a few times.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
now - pop quiz - which " arab countries " are prohibited from recieving fuel imports ? or have external tarrifs on thier fuel imports ??

Iran are just making it up as they go along. They are just trying to provoke and if people cannot see that then they are blinkered.

No one likes Iran except Russia, Syria and Venezuela. They thrive on conflict and belligerence.

originally posted by: Nyiah
We could always, I dunno, let the ME figure their own ish out instead of putting our noses where they don't belong.
Between SA and Iran, I'd MUCH rather see SA fall, and us work toward a better relationship with Iran. The bully country that keeps giving the world Wahhabism doesn't deserve to be so high up in the ME pecking order. Letting Iran and SA tango it out themselves would be doing the entire damn world a very big favor.

IF it would only be that simple , the world needs the the Strait of Hormuz , 25 % of our consumed oil passes through that area and 1 third of our liquified natural gas.

Any conflict in that immediate vicinity would put huge pressure on the world economy , wich draws in other nations currently neutral to this situation.

a reply to: paraphi

Who is provoking who here? I am digging into the memory banks to recall which country started this oil tanker seizure show in the first place....

a reply to: LookingAtMars

I wonder if it has something to do with how much pollution is created from refining the low grade crude versus the high octane stuff. We could build the refineries here state side but their profits would be massively reduced complying with EPA standards.

There is also the great scam of the accounting books which hide massive amounts of profit so taxes and royalties can be avoided. Us shipping our oil somewhere else to be processed and importing sweet crude sounds very corrupt. Time to see if I can find those articles again on this scam.

Any word yet on which country the tanker was from?

originally posted by: Lysergic
Looks like someone with a funny hat needs to be bitch slapped a few times.

What you say?

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
Now reports a Iranian fighter jet has crashed in the gulf.

Crashed or downed?
www.reuters.com...

Iran said on Sunday that one of its fighter jets had crashed in the southern province of Bushehr because of technical problem, the semi-official Mehr news agency reported, adding that two people onboard the jet were safe.

Trying to fly a plane whose wing was clipped off by a missile would be a technical problem lol.

originally posted by: ClovenSky
Who is provoking who here? I am digging into the memory banks to recall which country started this oil tanker seizure show in the first place....

Iran is provoking by illegally seizing tankers. Sure, if they are illegally transporting oil then fine; but are they? The Iranians have been a bit unspecific. The UK had just cause to seize and Iranian tanker en route to Syria, in contravention to international sanctions.

Here is one article on how shipping companies use 'flag of convenience to avoid paying their fare share.

Tankers’ Use of Liberian Registry Aids Ship Concerns on Tax and Pay

BOSTON, Dec. 30—In less than 30 years, the African nation of Liberia, which has no natural harbor, has become the possessor, on paper, of the largest merchant fleet in the world.

And because Liberian corporate law, which was written with American aid, does not require the recording of the ownership of holdings, interest in Liberian corporations can be used to hide money from the tax collector.

The one I am probably thinking of was from a podcast stating the games they play with crucial conversion from oil into a usable product, the profits derived from that conversion and then most important part, hiding those revenues from taxation.

One thing I am sure of, we are not being told the entire story here.

a reply to: ClovenSky

I wonder if it has something to do with how much pollution is created from refining the low grade crude versus the high octane stuff. We could build the refineries here state side but their profits would be massively reduced complying with EPA standards.

There is also the great scam of the accounting books which hide massive amounts of profit so taxes and royalties can be avoided. Us shipping our oil somewhere else to be processed and importing sweet crude sounds very corrupt. Time to see if I can find those articles again on this scam.

There are a lot of refineries in the US.

List of oil refineries

The high grade crude is used to produce a lot more than just gasoline. Everything from plastic to meds is made from it. Most synthetic things are made from oil. It really is unreal all the items we need oil to produce in the modern world.

ETA - Thanks for finding and posting that link ClovenSky.

originally posted by: TheGreazel
IF it would only be that simple , the world needs the the Strait of Hormuz , 25 % of our consumed oil passes through that area and 1 third of our liquified natural gas.

Dealing with Iran in the Strait is good practice if/when China decides to take over shipping routes through the South China Sea. Iran is just a nuisance and not worth going to war over. China on the other hand...

a reply to: Agit8dChop

if the tankers are not U.S. ships why should the U.S. care?
other nations are just as capable of taking care of their own.
unless i missed it, the U.S. has not had any shipments delayed, captured, or sunk.
from the information i have seen so far, the U.S. has no business sending troops there.