Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Resource Wars Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby I_Like_Plants » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 17:39:23

And my friends don't have any fucking idea.

A notable piece of wisdom from one of them, I'm not sure if I was able to keep the astonishment off of my face when I heard this one, that "If we conserve our energy and resources, we'll have energy and resources saved up, that we can use for big projects" and then I think he went on to babble about abiotic oil.....
I_Like_Plants
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3839
Joined: Sun 12 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby NEOPO » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 17:41:10

it is good to not be alone indefinately with one's own thoughts.
thank you plants.

Did you vote no PMS?
If so then thank you also as I sometimes wonder about you and that clears at least one thing up, for now! :-D

Am I alone with the war protest feelings or am I simply unable to perceive the method of other peoples war protest madness?
Like this thread - if PMS is sincere then it is a form of protest.

I still prefer to drop the robert zimmerman or rage against the machine bombs and then run away like a kid who just lit an M80 :)
Bob Dylan's MASTERS of WAR
<scurries and takes cover>
It is easier to enslave a people that wish to remain free then it is to free a people who wish to remain enslaved.
User avatar
NEOPO
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun 15 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: THE MATRIX

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 17:50:08

You folks who vote no, would you do that if you knew that your loved ones would die? This is what I'm trying to get at. It's just hypothetical. NEO, if your children would meet a horrible death of bloated stomachs and starvation depending on your vote, if you could prevent that by killing people in foreign lands, would you do it or let your children die?
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby NEOPO » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 18:16:31

Come on man - you dance around my tough questions so allow me to dance around this one? please? :)

In this hypothetical scenario is this foreign culture sustainable and we not?
Which one has the best chance of survival if the other is knocked off?

These kind of questions pop into my head preventing me from saying yes.
It is easier to enslave a people that wish to remain free then it is to free a people who wish to remain enslaved.
User avatar
NEOPO
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun 15 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: THE MATRIX

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Chaparral » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 18:27:14

We deserve what we got coming. I know that I am 1/300,000,000th of We and have benefited greatly. I fed at the trough long enough and am still at it, engorging my fat face with the processed entrails of a slaughtered planet and slaughtered peoples. The Mandarins that I love to hate will continue the slaughter and I will continue to slurp up the stream of slop as it slides down the trough, even as I slowly disconnect myself from the "grid". About the only thing I can do is try and eat less and less of it, still my rippling chubs of wealth are my jewelery: made of the flesh of others in distant lands, seasoned with the spice of burnt forests and ruined topsoil and cooked in the broth of financial vaporware.

To paraphrase the War Nerd: Massacres are paying my mortgages dude! Massacres are buying me enough time to get outta Dodge and onto that farm at the edge of that college town. Guess it's time to stop singing.

Mind you, just because I have my proportionate share of responsibility and realized that massacres made me wealthy doesn't mean I plan on giving it all away to the poor. Au contraire, I plan on surviving all this: this camel isn't going to try and pass through the eye of the needle. Guilt does not lay everyone equally low and I will still employ absolutely every means at my disposal to ensure that to the best of my ablility, I am one of the ones still standing. To come full circle in answering the OP, I'd rather the nation engage in voluntary powerdown but since it probably won't, I as an individual or with a small collective of like minds will do what I have to do. None will give up their ghosts in the name of justice or morality. I and we shall continue to condemn Leviathon for doing exactly what I and we are premeditatedly doing as individuals.
User avatar
Chaparral
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun 14 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dead civilization walking

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 18:28:08

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NEOPO', 'C')ome on man - you dance around my tough questions so allow me to dance around this one? please? :)
dance if you like, but I'm presenting a hypothetical that has a strong chance of becoming reality.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby NEOPO » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 19:18:33

<does the "neopo">

Since the elitist have used the "us versus them" tool to control us ad infinitum I must ask how may this scenario come about?

Right now it seems it is us versus them and that we are already collective saying kill them for oil.
Please explain to the class how this could be turned around to where it is them killing us instead.

I am sorry but all my spidey senses tell me that "24", this thread and some other odd threads are just an extension of Elitism.
As I said to AP, all programs know they are programs but not all agents know they are agents and programs can become agents quickly.

Chaparell - one question for you please, when you say that none will give all for justice etc etc do you mean none of the "300" million or none of all the worlds people because I think I could compile a long list of peoples who indeed appeared to give all for these principles.
It is easier to enslave a people that wish to remain free then it is to free a people who wish to remain enslaved.
User avatar
NEOPO
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun 15 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: THE MATRIX

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby PenultimateManStanding » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 19:30:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NEOPO', '
')Right now it seems it is us versus them and that we are already collective saying kill them for oil.
You are dancing the NEO, but not answering my question. I'm not asking the collective, I'm asking you. Your kids die or some other kids die in some other part of the world. How do you choose? Don't dodge this, it's a hypothetical question and I would like your direct answer.
User avatar
PenultimateManStanding
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11363
Joined: Sun 28 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Neither Here Nor There

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Chaparral » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 20:29:53

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NEOPO', 'C')haparell - one question for you please, when you say that none will give all for justice etc etc do you mean none of the "300" million or none of all the worlds people because I think I could compile a long list of peoples who indeed appeared to give all for these principles.


Now that you mention it, so can I. Perhaps it would be better to say that the vast majority will not lay down their lives for principle. In the face of an overwhelmingly strong state, with nothing to lose by killing dissidents, Satyagraha, martyrdom or other things may not be so effective. In a declining empire, where the control of the elites would start to weaken or if the elites were to fragment, such heroism may indeed buy time for the extant generation. I'm assuming that the elites are in charge, don't give a damn about the planet, powerdown or other peoples' futures and wish only to hold on to their power as the world slides down Olduvai Gorge.

If the "paradigm" is the enemy and some of the elites recognize that, and are willing to power down, then perhaps the equation would change and a few principled individuals could move nations (with tacit consent of at least "some of the authority").

In the scenario that PMS puts forth, I suspect there would be significantly fewer willing to sacrifice themselves or their children based on principle. Keep in mind that I am hewing strictly to PMS's parameters and discounting powerdown, Uppsala depletion protocols etc etc. I am also assuming a populace that is as gg3 states "this world oriented" as opposed to being "next world oriented" but even then, heavenly reward would probably provide a greater impetus to self-sacrifice than a Kantian appeal to duty or a purely secular appeal to justice.


Ooooh! "300" million was a bad farking number to use (I was thinking the US pop. Fark! Now that I think about it, there may be more to that movie timing and title than meets the eye. Those pretty wheat fields of Sparta were tended by slaves you know. It could be argued that the Spartans were the elites where the graphic novel and the movie conveniently left the real source of labor in that society unmentioned.....food for thought. The clash of the 300 was merely a clash of elites? Where the lot of the slaves would remain unchanged? Oh, the layered possibilites!

WRT to "24", I don't own a TV and AFAIC, that show is no reason for me to buy one.
User avatar
Chaparral
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Sun 14 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Dead civilization walking

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Jack » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 21:38:21

I voted to nuke them.

Though I prefer a generous application of I-131, or perhaps smallpox. Less damage to infrastructure.

8)
Jack
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4929
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Specop_007 » Wed 04 Apr 2007, 21:50:00

Do we have to wait until we really need the resources?
"Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the
Abyss, the Abyss gazes also into you."

Ammo at a gunfight is like bubblegum in grade school: If you havent brought enough for everyone, you're in trouble
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby cynicalheretic » Thu 05 Apr 2007, 01:12:04

I want world war 3
cynicalheretic
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 594
Joined: Thu 02 Nov 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby NEOPO » Thu 05 Apr 2007, 01:58:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PenultimateManStanding', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('NEOPO', '
')Right now it seems it is us versus them and that we are already collective saying kill them for oil.
You are dancing the NEO, but not answering my question. I'm not asking the collective, I'm asking you. Your kids die or some other kids die in some other part of the world. How do you choose? Don't dodge this, it's a hypothetical question and I would like your direct answer.

<does his best joe pesci impersonation>
Ok ok ok ok so suppose the worlds gonna blow up and we only have one spaceship for say 1000 people ok?
<gets the funny feeling this was a movie plot>
So who to save?
Since I feel me and mine are far superior to lets say someone like Specops squishy headed mutant children I would say save us yet if it were my kids with the squishy heads then I would want specop and his kind to go :-D

Its a stupid question PMS as you know I couldnt kill my kids and that the other person and even myself would have to die before I could allow that to happen and we cant freakin help it cause like the male prostitute says we are hard wired that way now go watch some more 24 and reveal more to us about the inner working of the neocon mind :)

Thank you Chapparel and sorry as everyone over generalizes sometimes and its easy to find fault nit picking like I sometimes do.
Hmm yes the "300" million connection is there.

Anyways PMS as it stands they die for our way of life so once a person understands this and decides to do nothing.....hmmm well what do you think these "sith lords" have to say for themselves besides honey get me another beer?
It is easier to enslave a people that wish to remain free then it is to free a people who wish to remain enslaved.
User avatar
NEOPO
Permanently Banned
 
Posts: 3588
Joined: Sun 15 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: THE MATRIX
Top

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Wednesday » Thu 05 Apr 2007, 02:11:41

I voted for Paraguay, except it's really Canada.

Poll needs more options.
The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself.
~Friedrich Nietzsche~
Wednesday
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 763
Joined: Wed 29 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Location: Central Texas

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby Jack » Thu 05 Apr 2007, 02:48:24

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'D')o we have to wait until we really need the resources?


No - in fact, it's a moral imperative that we not do so.

Populations increase over time. If we delay, there will be more people in the target area. Thus, we'll wind up killing more.

So to reduce the total kill factor, the sooner we do it, the better.

Call me Mr. Humanitarian. 8)
Jack
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4929
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Resource War Poll

Unread postby basil_hayden » Thu 05 Apr 2007, 11:49:11

I voted no for the following reasons:

1. Nuking "them" will only make the rich richer and never benefit me or mine. Nothing in it for me.

2. Ever since I saw a photograph of the Earth taken from space in the 1960s or early 70s, I have considered myself Human first, American second, Oakland Raiders fan third. We can't keep phucking this place up. Nuking "them" will surely have environmental consequences for "us". Nothing in it for us.

3. I'm done with the government spending my money without my permission, direction, or intention. How many more enemies can the Empire possibly make before it crumbles? Nothing in it for "them".

4. We don't need to nuke anything. Like it or not, this biofuels thing coupled with peak oil will solve the population bubble, climate change is sure to help too. When something's solved by itself, there is no guilt. The solutions are already before us.
User avatar
basil_hayden
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1581
Joined: Mon 08 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Location: CT, USA

THE Resource Wars Thread (merged)

Unread postby Zardoz » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 20:38:49

(Graeme posted this on the front page.) We all knew the oil exporters would eventually wise up and reduce their output to us oil-swilling fools, saving it for their own use, and for a future when they'll be able to get astronomical prices for it. It had to happen sooner or later, and here it is:

There has been a paradigm shift in the energy world whereby oil producers are no longer inclined to rapidly exhaust their resource for the sake of accelerating the misuse of a precious and finite commodity.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')audi Arabia's production declined 8% in 2006. This is a fact which requires interpretation, and there are two opposed views: they can't or they won't raise exports. Matt Simmons has doubts about current Saudi capacity, most prominently raised in his book Twilight in the Desert. At The Oil Drum, Stuart Staniford's analysis appears to buttress Simmons' position, but is hampered by a lack of current production data from Ghawar, which the Kingdom will not reveal. The "won't" position has gotten scant attention in the peak oil community. Al-Husseini's statement points to a fundamental reorganization of the world's future oil supply. Downstream investments in the Persian Gulf states lends support to his view that these producers will exert greater and greater control over their fossil fuel resources in the future.

This alone brings Peak Oil upon us, obviously. It makes no difference whether the peak is brought on by geological factors, or by decisions made by the producers. The top of the curve is the top of the curve, no matter what factors put us there.

I really would like to hear what Daniel Yergin would have to say in response to this.
"Thank you for attending the oil age. We're going to scrape what we can out of these tar pits in Alberta and then shut down the machines and turn out the lights. Goodnight." - seldom_seen
User avatar
Zardoz
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6323
Joined: Fri 02 Dec 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Oil-addicted Southern Californucopia
Top

Re: Paradigm shift: "Resource nationalism" cuts f

Unread postby MonteQuest » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 20:55:12

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')any in the peak oil community have not paid enough attention to so-called "aboveground" factors. The "paradigm shift" Al-Husseini speaks of is likely to forever change the world oil supply balance.


I sure gave it some thought a couple of years ago.

Oil Income and Population

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Montequest', 'S')ome countries have become almost totally dependent on income from oil. What happens to economies and social structures which have been built largely or almost entirely on the base of a nonrenewable resource like oil? This is the situation of the Persian Gulf countries of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Oman. Iran and Venezuela, with modest agricultural bases, are not quite so dependent on oil, although both countries get most of their foreign exchange from the sale of oil. Elsewhere, both Libya and Brunei are almost totally oil-dependent.

What is their long-term plan to provide for these population increases? Reduce production and raise the price so they can subsist on the revenues longer?

http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic2049.html
A Saudi saying, "My father rode a camel. I drive a car. My son flies a jet-plane. His son will ride a camel."
User avatar
MonteQuest
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 16593
Joined: Mon 06 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Westboro, MO
Top

Re: Paradigm shift: "Resource nationalism" cuts f

Unread postby cube » Wed 20 Jun 2007, 21:48:25

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Zardoz', '.')..
We all knew the oil exporters would eventually wise up and reduce their output to us oil-swilling fools, saving it for their own use, and for a future when they'll be able to get astronomical prices for it. It had to happen sooner or later, and here it is:
...
If I was a dictator of an oil rich nation I'd do the same thing too!

In fact I'd take it one step further and start building 400,000 bpd oil refineries in my country at a cost of $8 billion each. That way I can make money on BOTH:
1) production and
2) refining crude oil

oops I guess that's happening right now already http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic30012.html

What will they think of next...buy their own supertankers and get into the oil transport business? that's what I call Vertical integration :-D
cube
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3909
Joined: Sat 12 Mar 2005, 04:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron