Iraqi oil: Once seen as U.S. boon, now it's mostly China's

page: 7
13
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 





China is getting the majority of the oil? Tell me Neo will the United States ever benefit at all from this?


No because:


China has a growing population of over 1.3 billion people; therefore they rely heavily on other states for resources, such as oil.


en.wikipedia.org...

Iraqi oil going to China is for China and no one else it is not going to go back out to the market, it is for Chinas consumption,.


China's oil relationship with other countries has shifted from that of a world exporter to that of a world importer. T


Oh and lose the condescension it's unbecoming.


edit on 28-3-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 



The U.S. will benefit if China or anyone else can get Iraqi’s huge reserves developed and onto the market, he said. Since oil is a global commodity, he said, more oil on the market brings down prices. “Energy security is about not only the availability of the resource but also about the cost,” Luft said. “Anything that brings down global oil prices is positive for U.S. energy security.”


Therefore you're disputing the article you actually posted and the very premise of your thread.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





Iraqi oil going to China is for China and no one else it is not going to go back out to the market, it is for Chinas consumption,.


So you're saying the article you posted is incorrect?



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





Oh and lose the condescension it's unbecoming.


I'm certainly not being condescending. I'm merely pointing out the absurd flaws in your thread which uses the very article you're now disputing.

Are you arguing with other members or yourself?



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Thought it was rather clear what is being disputed "war for oil" even tho China is getting pretty much it all doesn't matter.

Clearly anyone who doesn't think the Iraq war was for oil is "absurd".
edit on 28-3-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





Thought it was rather clear what is being disputed "war for oil" even tho China is getting pretty much it all doesn't matter. Clearly anyone who doesn't think the Iraq war was for oil is "absurd".


So you've failed to answer my question and are just repeating the same things you've been saying for several pages even though I've clearly pointed out the flaws in your argument using the SAME article you posted and was using as the basis for your argument.

You did the exact same thing in this thread regarding Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 


So then why is the US not importing all of Iraq's oil?

Come on now that is why we went there so why are we not getting it?

News flash posters aren't the topic here Iraqi oil going to China is.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





So then why is the US not importing all of Iraq's oil? Come on now that is why we went there so why are we not getting it? News flash posters aren't the topic here Iraqi oil going to China is.


Hellooo?

I've already posted this from the article Neo.

Here the top of page 6.


Iraq remains highly unstable in terms of security, infrastructure and politics. Chinese state-owned oil companies appear more willing to put up with that than Americans are.



The war devastated Iraq’s oil industry, as kidnappings, sabotage and attacks on infrastructure made it virtually impossible to do business.


Again from YOUR article. I don't wish to be rude, but you're making yourself look a tad foolish here...



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kram09
reply to post by neo96
 



The U.S. will benefit if China or anyone else can get Iraqi’s huge reserves developed and onto the market, he said. Since oil is a global commodity, he said, more oil on the market brings down prices. “Energy security is about not only the availability of the resource but also about the cost,” Luft said. “Anything that brings down global oil prices is positive for U.S. energy security.”


Therefore you're disputing the article you actually posted and the very premise of your thread.


More oil is not going on the market how many times does that have to be said eh?




So you're saying the article you posted is incorrect?


Since China does not export oil how does "more oil" get on the market???

So yeah that part is incorrect.

Happy now?



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Kram09
 



Iraq remains highly unstable in terms of security, infrastructure and politics. Chinese state-owned oil companies appear more willing to put up with that than Americans are.


So the Us is not getting Iraqi oil because people might get hurt.


The war devastated Iraq’s oil industry, as kidnappings, sabotage and attacks on infrastructure made it virtually impossible to do business.


Then that guy who set his own oil wells on fire had something to do with that

Yeah someone does look foolish there.
edit on 28-3-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


This is gonna throw a wrench in the gears of those who argued we went into Iraq for the oil...



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


One would think but read this thread from start to here did not slow them down in the least:


As recently as December 2012, Iraq provided the United States with approximately 14.3 million barrels of oil out of a total of about 298 million barrels imported, or 4.8 percent of our total imports. And as this chart indicates, we were importing the highest amount of oil from Iraq before we went to war to oust Saddam Hussein.


frontpagemag.com...



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


They're entitled to their oil was a sarcastic statement. They're not entitled to anything, and as sovereigns, the Iraqi government can expropriate whatever resources in it;s country it wishes.

The fact remains, post war the oil industry was privatized and handed over to American and British firms. However, due to events outside of America's control (i.e. the emergence of the Shi'ites as a political force and their gravitation towards Tehran) exploitation of Iraqi oil has been made far more difficult, despite the removal of Saddam Hussein.



posted on Mar, 28 2013 @ 11:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


I see your gonna go down swinging...



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07


If the american government doesn't give a rats ass about american citizens what makes you think they care more about iraqi citizens?? Come on man, sometimes you make good posts, but sometimes you can also be very gullible.


Where did I say they cared about Iraqi's more?



I suppose you think Saddam should still be in power, hey?

Regardless on "how" it was done, a madman is gone. He killed Million of his own people. Don't Assume gullibility. I am more awake then your own assumptions.....




posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 04:42 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





So yeah that part is incorrect. Happy now?


So the article you posted as the entire basis of your thread is now suddenly incorrect in a certain part?

Why? Because it doesn't correspond with your own views?

This is comedy gold...




Then that guy who set his own oil wells on fire had something to do with that Yeah someone does look foolish there.


You've just made some random irrelevant statement about some "guy." Just what are you talking about?



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 04:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





This is gonna throw a wrench in the gears of those who argued we went into Iraq for the oil...


Not really....the article posted by the OP has already been discredited but he ignored the facts for several pages and now conveniently just says that part of the article is "wrong."

Apparently just because he says so...

So at the start he was using the article for his argument and now he's against it. Seems he can't make his mind up or perhaps has no idea what he's talking about.



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


So I'll assume you agree with the OP in stating the war had nothing to do with oil?

Do you believe the stated claims from the Bush administration? Was the war really about Weapons of mass destruction, the endangerment of the Kurds? Considering as well that the cost of the Iraq war alone exceeded $2 trillion since it's inception and more than 3,000 American lives, more than 100,000 civilian Iraqi lives, was it justified?

www.reuters.com...

Please share with us your postion Xcathdra.



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bozzchem
 


US is a very big country. Organizing people takes large amount of money in addition to large number of people.

The money is controlled by the elite who are aligned with the current political system.

So you can see how difficult it is to bring peaceful change.

Empires have fallen or have re-constructed violently almost always. That is what history tell us.

I doubt US will see any revolution. The people who are expecting it are deluding themselves.



posted on Mar, 29 2013 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by bozzchem
reply to post by neo96
 



My hat is off to the Icelandic people for their courage and resolve. The American people are too tied up in their distractions to realize that they are now enslaved. To even attempt to enlighten one is like trying to convince a drunk that they've had one too many. The course has been started and must complete itself.
edit on 27-3-2013 by bozzchem because: (no reason given)


Or you know, the difference might be that there are a little over 300,000 people who live in iceland, and more than 300 MILLION that live in the US. The US population is over ONE THOUSAND TIMES GREATER than iceland. If you had one thousand icelands, combined the entire population, it would still be less than the US.

The more people you have the more complex things get. The more difficult it is for a population to act in a cohesive manner. There is just to honest way at all to compare two countries so very different.





new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join