Tell you what. I'm a Republican. I hate Nascar. And I don't particularly care for choppers (they're too slow).

But one things for certain. If this war was for "cheaper oil", like so many liberals bitch and moan, then WHERE THE HELL IS THE CHEAPER OIL????

The point I'm trying to make, is, if the US wanted to go to war for cheaper oil, it would be far more cost effective to storm into Mexico and Venezuela, as those are two of the largest oil producing countries in the world, and they're right in our back yard. Interesting to note, BOTH of those countries produce more oil per year than Iraq. And if their productions were combined, it would be over 3 times the amount of oil that comes from Iraq.

Hmm... Cheaper to ship oil halfway around the world, or just pipe it from the south...

Hell, for that matter, we could take over Canada, and snag their 3 million barrels a day or so production, too...

And if we REALLY wanted to boost things, and HAD to take over a country in the middle east for oil, then it would be Iran, 'cause we've never liked that country, and they produce darn near twice the amount of oil that Iraq does.

Seriously, get your head out of the sand, wash up, and open your eyes. This war in Iraq was NOT about "cheaper oil".

[FYI: These numbers are based on 2002 World Oil Production Numbers, provided below:]

World Oil Production

The following is country-by-country ranking of the top oil producers in the world for the year 2002.

Country Million Barrels Per Day (2002)
United States 9.08
Saudi Arabia 8.54
Russia 7.65
Mexico 3.61
Iran 3.54
China 3.37
Norway 3.33
Canada 2.94
Venezuela 2.91
United Kingdom 2.55
United Arab Emirates 2.38
Nigeria 2.12
Iraq 2.04
Kuwait 2.02

need some econ help here then. Why is it that when OPEC gets a hair up their collective ass and decide to cut production that gas prices will jump 10-20 cents per gallon? That is a hell of a hold on our economy wouldn't you agree? This is why we have an interest in the mid east.

Seems to me we arent talking to those guys in 'just the right way'. Surely they can do better, they just havent been encouraged enough.

Yeah, we do have interest in the middle east. And yeah, it's about oil.

But Venezuela is a member of OPEC. Hell, OPEC's previous leader was from Venezuela. Mexico is not a member, but wants to be, so when OPEC cuts rates, Mexico follows along, 'cause they hope that someday they'll be invited to join in, and they don't want to piss anybody off.

But OPEC only controls somewhere around 40% of the worlds oil production. Of the top 14 oil producing countries, Iraq ONLY produces 3.6% of the output. Venezuela kicks in 5.2%, and Mexico kicks in 6.4%.

So just think, if it were really about "cheaper oil", it would be far more beneficial to take over 11.6% of the top 14 producers, verses 3.6%.

I've always thought that we should be 1)pressuring Saudi Arabia more, and 2)pressuring the living daylights out of Mexico. It's embarrassing that we have to import so much oil from the middle east, when we have so much available in our own hemisphere, from countries that aren't run by militant psychos. But everybody gets so wrapped up w/ concern of OPEC, they don't realize how much is actually available right in our own backyard.

It's a classic magician's trick... Get the crowd looking one way, so they don't pay attention to what's really going on.

I work for a gas LDC and have other interests in oil and gas so I do understand what you are talking about. Again to apply pressure to other countries we are messing in someone else's business. As we have seen they do not take kindly to our presence. Iraq was an opportunity.

But why is it that we don't use our interest in oil as leverage when countries like Mexico and others in South America are lobbying for favored nation status, "drug war" money and funds channeled through loans and other programs.

It's disghusting that under the guise of promoting democracy we consistanly give and give and give but it seems so many times the recipients of our generosity are reluctant to return the hospitality.

I think theres a reason we don't press local countries for oil. At some point, the middle east will dry up. ALL thats gonna be left will be within in easy reach of the US, not 1/2 way across the globe.

When the time comes to defend it, or take it, it will be easier to do, especially if its just south of us.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong..but this whole "Iraq doesn't produce much" isn't really an argument.

They may not produce the most, but other than Saudi Arabia, Iraq is sitting on the biggest reserve.

So technically speaking, when Venezuela and Mexico run out of oil, Iraq will still have tons to pump.

(And by the way...why the HELL was this thread brought back from the dead?)

Sorry guys i was out in the pole barn revving up my custom "Chopper". I don't have time to go to the reference section and use the microfische machine and look up useless oil statistics. The mullet is growing out nicely right now it just looks like a rat tail, but given a couple of months i'll look like i'm from Louisville.

I'm almost half-way through my republican transformation. Just need to sign up for the Nascar DirectTV package. Is that a tax write off by the way?

LOL George I see you are from nothern Kentucky. Good luck with the mullet

Wow a 51% majority! All those big fucking states don't add up to shit. That's like saying all 200 people in Wyoming voted for Bush so we'll color a state red to make it look more impressive. You should take a course in human geography, maybe you would then understand that it's about population DENSITY. Maybe if you got out of the trailer park more and no i'm not talking about Nascar races or Bush "book burnings".

Not to point out the obvious but ya, all ya need is 51% for a majority. Maybe you should take a course in American History, that map points out exactly why bush won. It's about the states with smaller population density having a say in who wins. Maybe you should try a trailer park out, seems like it would fit you. :rolleyes:

You know, you should really convince the people in your own home city/county, that they don't "add up to shit".

Hamilton, Bulter, Warren, and Clermont Counties (aka, Cincinnati Metro Area) all went for Bush.

http://www.cincinnati.com/election2004/countybycounty.html

Quit whining and being a sore loser. The majority of people around you voted for Bush...

Heck, blast Louisville all you want, but this city went for Kerry...

Fucktard.

Good God, you people are still arguing about the map?

Why don't we go smaller...let's go with just property owners.

I'm pretty sure Ted Turner voted for Kerry, so we should color a HUGE portion of Montana blue. He is the largest land owner there next to the government. (He's also the largest landowner in New Mexico...so color a big portion there blue, too.)

...shaking head...

I've posted it before and I'll post it again:



Just let it go, folks.

Check page 18 for some more relevant maps that I posted and 2001Frontier agreeing that his map (the one you quoted) shows "jack shit."

“Extremism is so easy. You’ve got your position, and that’s it. It doesn’t take much thought. And when you go far enough to the right you meet the same idiots coming around from the left.”---Clint Eastwood, Time Magazine, February 28, 2005, pg 64.

Funny how where there's a larger mass of people voting, how it goes blue. How do you explain that?

People in big cities are stupid, and the Dems got the minorities fooled.

This coming from someone who lives in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area.

Let's think about this:

Bush gets the blue-collar folks up in arms by being against gay marriage, by being against the rich elitists in the "big cities" with their "high-falootin'" ideas, education, and attitudes, and by getting the religious right on his side by promoting himself as anti-abortion.

So, what's the first thing he does after getting elected? Starts talking about privitizing social security, which was NEVER debated during the election. What does privitizing social security do? Well, it takes money out of YOUR pocket, and puts it into Wall Street...which basically means Joe Blue Collar is giving part of his paycheck right back to those rich elitists on Wall Street that Bush got Joe Blue Collar all pissed off about in the first place.

Those people in the red states, who you claim to be so much smarter than people living in cities, voted for a Wall Street wolf in Christian clothing.

Enjoy working until you're seventy. You voted for it.

Now, I'll ask you again. WHO is stupid?

That has to be the dumbest argument you have ever come up with. How exactly is putting my money into an account I control taking money out of my pocket?

I live in the suburbs bitch!

Because whenever you get large groups of people together, they start to believe they can vote themselves all sorts of rights and priviledges. The democrats understand this and play to it. Its quite simple really, even for a socialist to understand.

It's amazing how some people are still arguing about the maps, and what they do, or do not show...

Look, Bush won the popular vote. He won the electoral college vote. That's 2 for 2. He didn't win on a plurality, he won a majority. If you don't like how the system works, too bad. If you don't like it that Bush won, too bad. If you're still arguing that "51% of the people were/are stupid", too bad. Look, it's over.

It's time to stop whining about the election, and move on. The simple fact is, Bush won a majority, he won the electoral college, and a little over 51% of the voters in this country want him in there. That's more than any other candidate, and that's just the way it is.