Bill Sikes wrote:
So it doesn't belong the the U.S.A., but the U.S.A. will take it if it's not given?actually, so far we have not simply taken - saudia arabia isn't the 51st state of our union, for example. we pay for the oil. but we have to ensure that it is available, so while it's a weird concept, we are willing to force oil bearing nations to sell us their product.
unlike GB, which simply conquered whomever, whereever, whenever, in the good old days when they were a super power, and extended the reach of their kingdom just for the sheer joy of conquering. how about those falklands! yes, those sheep were worth the hundreds of lives lost to maintain british dominance of those..uh...pastures.
[i'm teasing you - there's hardly a nation on earth that hasn't engaged in expansionism and aggression at one time or another in its history]
What a load of rubbish. I'm sure that if person A was drowning, and person
B saved him, then person A would not hate person B. You do seem to have
a problem with the Frogs at the moment, as they would not support the U.S.A.
the french are always a problem. they consider themselves the dominant world power, sitting on their cardboard throne. they clearly believe they are superior to every other nation, that's palpable. A favorite sardonic quote:They aren't much at fighting wars anymore. Despite their reputation for fashion, their women have spindly legs. Their music is sappy. But they do know how to whip up a plate of grub.
-Mike Royko
Well, not everyone gets their own way all the time. When you don't. you just
have to be civilised and live with it. "Freedom fries", indeed! What a joke!well sure. that's just politicians pandering. happens all the time, here and everywhere.
Going back to the above quoted paragraph, it is clear that the main benefactor
of Europe in the struggle during WW2 was in fact the USSR. There were also
major contributions from many other countries.i'd be interested in your rationale that the russians were the main benefactor. i find that unsupported by history. the iron curtain descended right after world war II, while the US was helping rebuild europe. where were the russian troops in the liberation of france? austria? italy? spain?
Do you really believe the two paragraphs above? If so, IMO that's really sad.
There are other ways I could describe it, but... Why should people be jealous
of the U.S.A.? Lovely countryside, I guess...we are the only remaining world superpower. yet - in the main - we don't wield our power as tyrants or conquerers. yes, we stick our little fingers into affairs all over the globe. we don't however run around blithely toppling and taking over nations. again, in the main. i'm sure any number of examples of this can be tossed about. however, heck, there's cuba, a communist, totalitarian nation, just ninety miles off our shore - we could incredibly easily take over that island, but there it has remained for the last fifty-plus years.
A> i fail to see what increasing the price would do for filling the gap between
A> 40% and 100%. increased price won't magically make more oil appear.
Erm, yes, it will. If the price increases, deposits which were not economic to
extract at a certain price become economical.problem: the united states does not have enough reserves of any kind of oil to support our needs, whether extraction were economically feasible or not. besides those up in alaska, but that's a sticky bit of a wicket, so to speak. and even those reserves aren't enough to fill the gap.
Taking things further, alternatives
become viable, for instance biofuel, oil from coal, etc.that's a common misconception, at least WRT biofuel. oil from coal may happen - how many decades of study and experimentation would be necessary to make it a reality? it'd be great if we could just flip a switch and not be dependent upon foreign oil. but under the scenario, with all foreign oil cut off, the gap could not be filled fast enough.
Bill>It's most unlikely that *everyone* would refuse to sell oil to the U.S.A.
> well, that wasn't the scenario i presented,
Er, well you did mention that in your previous article.perhaps i didn't phrase that clearly. my scenario was that everyone cuts off the supply of oil to the US. you said it's unlikely that would happen. i agree - but that wasn't the scenario. but we're quibbling about a hypothetical.
I would not say that much of the world hates the "U.S.". Why should they?
That is unless it's a bit that's been trampled on, like Iraq, etc.as before. we are the only remaining dominant super power. other nations hate us because of who we are, and what we represent. obviously, we are speaking in gross generalities. the US has allies, the US has enemies, as do most nations. but just as the british have a general disdain for the french, much of the rest of the world has a general disdain for the 'ugly americans'.