Massive anti-war demo in Italy.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Ming
paiktis22... a lot can happen in ten years.

and are assessed Ming

Plus, we buy oil like everybody else does... at market prices.

From Iraq, the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve country, not.

The short term loss of the Iraq oil fields would jack up oil prices,

Yes according to some studies, but they wiol go down the latest within 2 years.

evening out the some of the long term costs when prices start to drop again.

not even close.

the war will cost actually nothing to you and the long (not long - medium) term benefits are huge and cannot be comapred to what you will give in 1 year.

You seem to think that we will be getting oil far below market prices if we defeat Iraq.

both london brenmt and NY oil will fall down, the prices i mean.

That isn't going to happen.

It is if you do it succesfully and unbstable parameters dont get in your way.

thats the whole point

So again, your WHOLE argument that this is about oil is just a troll and you know it.

No its not about thsi one, it is not Ming.

[Bereta_Eder]

My question is this.

if saddam goes away will it be better for iraqis?

my answer is not necessairily based on past history world experience.


your motives, yourr aimjs, and your capabilitites are known.


what is in question is the people of iraq and your uncontrolled poewr.


both of which are up for speculation.

[Ming]

paiktis22... you have repeatedly stated in this thread that is all about oil... so yes, it is a one trick troll on your part

Second, you keep implying that we will not lose money on this war. Totally incorrect. At one million per for each smart cruise missle, and the cost for other smart weapons, there is no way we can recoup the costs based soley on a "marginal" cost difference in oil 5 or so years in the future. Again, we pay market prices for oil, so your troll isn't even a good one

[DanS]

paiktis: This discussion is boring. Just do the math. Or are you unable?

[Bereta_Eder]

It is about oil. And it is not aa troll Ming.

You said that the war will cost you.

It will not, hopefully.

Its cost will be between 80 and 140 present US dolars. This cost will be eliminated within 1 to 2 years by the reapi dexploitation of iraqi oil fields anbd the contributions of your "allies".


Market oil prices will fall for you and will go through US companies if you capture Iraq.


Again this is your and european assessment.

It is not a troll and the war is only and precicely because of oil.

If Iraq wasnt the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve country you wouldnt even know here it is.


This aint no troll

[Bereta_Eder]

DanS the math has already been done by your state departnement and top european banks.


If you think you can add something then please do.

[Bereta_Eder]

whats boring is your insistance on calling borinmg wehat does not agree with you.


it is your sdtate department and top european banmks assessment.

if yopu, in your infinite investmnent and geostategic wisdom can do any better,

then please, by all means lets hear it fianlly.

[Ming]

Nahhh... DanS... he is sticking to his illogical troll. Again showing he has no clue about US politics. This is about the continued war on terrorism. While I would be the first to admit that this is a questionable choice on behalf of the Bush administration, that's what this is about. His whole doctrine right now is an anti terrorism war. This is just the continuation of it... right or wrong.

[Bereta_Eder]

I;d say that Bush is uising the terrorism issue Ming.
for oil.


I will not say im 100% sure Iraq has no weapons oif mass destrcution, buit the timing is impecable, nevertheless.

[Bereta_Eder]

even if he had, to throw them against the US would suicidale anyway.


this simply doesnt hold water , tha sadam will have and use WMD.

[Ming]

He is using the war on Terrorism just like any other US politician would... to stay in office.

His strategy is working well... as evidenced by the results of the mid term elections. The Dems went down in defeat big time, and much of it can be attributed to fighting Bush on the issue of the war on terrorism.

You just don't understand how simplistic US politics are. Don't waste your time looking for ulterior motives... it's politics, and that's all it is.

[Bereta_Eder]

I wil not diagree nor will i say that US excels in simple politics,


in much smaller scale just look ath greece embergo against fyrom.

but i will say no more cause its not for the presnt time although i have a clear opinion based on facts.




what i say is that it is sure about US politics (same as greece and other counttries) the brave leader to protect us etc etc bull****.


but it is also about oil.


Ming, the US will get a very nice deal if Iraq was ruled by a proUS regime.

and the war can be succesful if some unstable parameters do not happen.

[Ming]

Well... any deal would be a better one than we have now

But again, you assume that we will get lower than market rates from a pro US regime... it isn't going to happen. We pay market prices from all the pro US regimes in the middle east now... it isn't going to be any different in Iraq...

This is all about staying in office and keeping the Repubs in power... it's not about oil.

[Bereta_Eder]

Its is also about oil

maybe more about oil


hear this Ming.



Oil reserves exploited buy the US during a proi US iraq regime will incrasde dramatically.


the poil prices will fall and the ones who will benefit the most will be US oil companies who eill get the deeals for exploration/ exploitationo of iraqi fields if iraw is uner US pro regime.


tis is your assessment. and that of top euro Tw@ats also .

[Ming]

Well duh... since we really aren't getting any oil from Iraq now, I guess even an idiot can speculate that we will be getting more oil from them in the future if there is a pro US regime in charge...

You also seem to be ignoring OPEC. They can start placing restrictions on oil production to keep oil prices at the current level. It's not in their interest to watch oil prices fall, so you can bet your sweet life they will respond in some form or fashion.

So yes, you are wrong. It's all about politics, not economics... and so far so good, it worked for Bush and the Repubs, so he sees no reason to change his strategy at this point.