Answering your original question: We
have already done this and are still
trying to take permanent control of the
Iraqi's oil. There's multi-millions still
left in the ground for us to steal.At what price per barrel should USA actually invade and take control of the oil supply!?!?!?
We just need to open ANWAR for drilling that would solve our problems
30 dollars ago
I don't think fighting wars is the solution,look at how much oil/energy is used to do this.Not to mention the lives of our soldiers and any civilians,but then again maybe killing people off is the plan..
Cause look how well it has worked out for us thus far!
OMG LETS ALL USED CAPS TO SHOW EVERYONE HOW UNHINDGED WE ARE!!!%26gt;!%26gt;!%26gt;!%26gt;??
As the world heads towards mercantilism, the price will grow exponentially.
That is why we should be investing in alternative energy sources YESTERDAY!
As a conservative who believes in free trade, I do not support invading countries to get prices lowered. Wars cost too much, and it isn;t free trade, if supply and demand cannot determine pricing.
I'M CONFUSED. I THOUGHT THIS WAR WAS FOR OIL?
does price really matter
Whatever it was when we invaded Iraq!
Well, we know THAT doesn't work, don't we. Why do you think the wingnut in the White House invaded Iraq? It was for control of the oilfields....so far, that ain't workin', is it.
The US does not need to take control of the oil supply and it will not try. The beauty of capitalism is that once the cost of oil goes above the cost of alternative fuels, we will start using alternative fuels (because they will be cost effective, unlike they are know) and will reduce our use of oil.
The war in Iraq was never about oil, the US is not making any profit off of Iraqi oil. The Iraqi oil profits are going to the people of Iraq.
Anwar has enough oil to supply one percent of our needs for 20 years...we can barely stabilize pipelines in Iraq, what makes you idiots think we could do it anywhere else.
No comments:
Post a Comment