[maverickdoc]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('alpha480v', 'F'):Not happen at all unless the draft is brought back(can't invade other countries without sufficiant troop strength.).

[Ebyss]

G : Destroy many innocent lives just so America can have more burgers, big screen tv's and SUV's.

Face it, the oil in other countries is not America's, deal with it.

[Jack]

I chose B. With some luck, we can buy time - and that will be essential.



Some things are worth it.

[DriveElectric]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ebyss', '
')Face it, the oil in other countries is not America's, deal with it.

[PK]

Yep, all paid for. But what happens to the funds after that?? Americans conveniently "lost" the bookkeeping records just prior handing over to the UN.

[Ebyss]

I'm talking about going to war over oil that isn't America's in the first place. What is America doing right now in Iraq? It may be paying for the oil (I have no evidence to say it is or it isn't), the point is though, they shouldn't be there in the first place. The country had no WMD, the war was not sanctioned by the UN, Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the attack on 9/11. There are many other humanitarian crises worldwide that America couldn't care less about, much less go to war over, so the point about liberating the Iraqi people is a tenuous one at best. America has no business going to war in Iraq. If America is not there for oil, or control of the oil, what is it there for? They are about to have a massive humanitarian crisis at home, and they know it, and still they spend their money grabbing resources that don't belong to them in the first place.

America needs to take care of it's own, and keep it's nose out of other people's business. Imagine China started telling Americans how they should live, and going to war with them because they don't do as they're told...

What if, when America hands Iraq back to it's own people, they choose not to sell their oil to the U.S. ? (Venezuela have recently made this choice) Will America just accept that, and walk away? America has no right to demand that Iraq sell it's oil to them, if the Iraqis don't even want to dig it out of the ground, then that is their right.

If there are resource wars, whomever starts it, and whomever is involved in it, they will be because one country is trying to take oil (insert resource here) from another country (probably the one that owns that resource). What right has any country to start a war to take another country's resources, or even, to pay for them?

This post is only about America because they are a real and current example, it applies to every country on the planet.

[maverickdoc]

Ebyss, great points. This thread is not about the legitimacy Iraq per say. Rather it is about the effects of fighting war for oil from a PO perspective

[Ebyss]

Agreed, I went OT, apologies for that. I was responding to another posters query re my previous statement. Iraq was merely the example I used to explain what I meant.

[maverickdoc]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ebyss', 'A')greed, I went OT, apologies for that. I was responding to another posters query re my previous statement. Iraq was merely the example I used to explain what I meant.

[wisegoat]

I've been putting a lot of thought into the "resource wars" scenario, and forgive me if i'm being very obvious (or redundant even) but the thought just crossed my mind... I see more and more news articles stating that this and that country will rely more on it's own oil, and not export as much... this is particularily shitty for the states since they have no oil left. I think wars will break out once saudi arabia and iraq (oh wait! can't happen, they're already invaded!) and iran all commit to a similar policy... so the middle east will be the epicenter of world war 3, with USA/Canada/Most-of-europe fighting against China/Russia (i group them cuz they have similar politics, at least historically) and I'm not too sure where india will fit in, probably with the states since they us has brought so muhc business to them.. then again, they're big enough to handle themselves perhaps?

regardless.. everyone's gonna want their oil, and the second they say NO, the world will say YES. (there's a poll, if you answer it please justify your response)

Which country will start WW3? Poll ended at 30 Apr 2005, 12:07
USA 38 63%
China 10 17%
India 0 No votes
Europe 0 No votes
Japan 1 2%
Israel 7 12%
Middle Eastern Countries 4 7%
Total votes : 60

[RonMN]

anybody see that the dollar just FELL 10 CENTS against the euro in the last couple hours???

[sjn]

It would be suicide for the EU to be on the same side as the US. Geography will play a major role.

Edit: The EU will be politically divided and will initially try to hold together by trying to keep out of the wars. The UK will at first (given a similar goverment that exists currently), try to favour the US, but it is now and certainly will be dependent on any oil and especially NG from the east.

[gnm]

10 cents? where do you get that? Wasn't it 1.28 yesterday - I show 1.29 now....

-G

[Sys1]

"Which country will start WW3?"

As Afghanistan and Irak wars were the first linked to peak oil, the question should be "Which country has started WW3?"

[RonMN]

The euro was quoted at $1.3906 in European trading, up from $1.2959 Wednesday. Later, in midday trading in New York, the euro was worth $1.2973.

Looks like it's back to 1.29...kind of a wild swing

[leal]

Before I voted I changed the question to:
Which country has the strongest military but is depending on imported oil?

[RonMN]

this one's easy...it will be the convergence of 3 armys. they all do battle at one point and the blood will be up to the horses bridal for one thousand six hundred stadia (whatever a stadia is)...
Just read the book...it's called REVELATIONS!

[formandfile]

FRANCE!!!

And the only way we can stop the French war machine from hijacking the American way of consumption and greed is to stop buying wine and cheese....and eat 'freedom' fries instead

[ernest]

Some of you guys are such USA haters.

A. China and Russia have nothing in common politically and never did, their only link was a vague similarity in government, and it was vague. Religion, culture and history of the two regions are far different, and Russia has its own oil, more likely that China will take on Russia.

China is the gorilla here. One of the reasons they want to take back Taiwan is the oil properties and the rights to the Spratly Islands. With Taiwan, China's legitimacy to territorial claims of the Spratlys is increased substantially. China has already made naval incursions into questionable waters for years. It is quite possible they just invade.

If nothing else, try reading some history instead of spouting the ancient marxist twaddle about America the capitalist monster.

Quite likely that Iran will end up in Saudi Arabia when the inevitable fall of the Sauds occurs, and we meet them there. Or likely that China just invades Australia, plenty of land, and plenty of oil and gas in the northern territorial waters. Or likely that Russia goes into Kazakhstan. Or likely that the US goes into Brazil. There are endless possibilities. The notion that America is the bad guy of the world is so hopelessly and stupidly outdated leftist twaddle that it makes me wonder where you guys got your education.

[smallpoxgirl]

China and Russia? I don't see it. China and Russia have a long history of animosity towards eachother. Even when they were both communist, they didn't trust eachother. So lets see...my wild guess....How about this.

Axis: US, Canada (as a seperate nation or as the 51st state), Russia, India, Isreal, Turkey, Japan, Phillipeans, Indonesia

vs.

Allies: EU, China, Venezuala, Iran, the stan's, Argentina, most of Africa

Saudi Arabia could go either way. My prediction would be the ouster of the Sauds and joining the allies under an new radical Islamic government.