Re: [metatuning] Arab Hard-Liners Propose Plan

There is no US anymore. you are living in a Saudi Arabian colony. The
president is no more than the regional governor general. Actually oil
companies own Saudi Arabia too. There are no countries any more, only such
multinational states. we have moved beyond geographical based control to
economic.

"X. J .Scott" wrote:

>
>
> I really hope they DO cut off oil shipments to the US.
> We don't need to finance the psychotic schemes of the
> totalitarian Despocracies of the middle east any
> longer! Let them keep their oil and we shall keep our
> money! It's long past time this country got past her
> dependence on such a depletable and environmentally
> destructive resource.
>
>

-- Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria island
http://www.anaphoria.com

The Wandering Medicine Show
Wed. 8-9 KXLU 88.9 fm

> There are no countries any more, only such
> multinational states. we have moved beyond geographical based
> control to economic.

Well, my inclination is to agree more than disagree
with this part.

In-Reply-To: <E16srHy-00016A-00@...>
X. J .Scott wrote:

> I really hope they DO cut off oil shipments to the US.
> We don't need to finance the psychotic schemes of the
> totalitarian Despocracies of the middle east any
> longer! Let them keep their oil and we shall keep our
> money! It's long past time this country got past her
> dependence on such a depletable and environmentally
> destructive resource.

On what is this opinion based? We had our oil supply cut off in Britain
for about a week some time ago, which was enough to convince most of us
that we're totally dependent on that resource, depletable and
environmentally destructive though it is.

The first thing you notice of course is that people complain about their
cars being short of fuel. So those of us who can walk to work and the
shops sit smugly and wonder what all the fuss is about. But after a few
days it gets difficult to buy fresh food. Yes, it's not like all the
shelves in the supermarket are bare. Only about half of them. Some shops
ration bread and milk so they don't completely disappear. Frozen peas,
strangely enough, are completely unavailable.

As it happens, you don't even find the traffic gets quieter. People spend
*more* time driving around looking for somewhere with fuel for sale. You
can spot such places by the long queues.

With such a brief famine, we were spared the worst effects. There were
emergency supplies of fuel for those who really needed it. There were no
power cuts, so my freezer kept working. Martial law was not required.

A shortage of a few months over the winter in the US would almost
certainly be disastrous. It gets extremely cold in many cities, and the
main fuel used for heating is oil. Cold and hunger do kill -- the death
toll of the WTC or the Afghan war wouldn't be at all difficult to exceed.
Many people own guns, and if it were a matter of feeding their children,
you bet they'd use them.

It does look like the overriding principle behind US foreign policy is to
secure a plentiful supply of oil. I fully endorse this position.

Graham

> A shortage of a few months over the winter in the US would
> almost certainly be disastrous. It gets extremely cold in
> many cities, and the main fuel used for heating is oil. Cold
> and hunger do kill -- the death toll of the WTC or the Afghan
> war wouldn't be at all difficult to exceed. Many people own
> guns, and if it were a matter of feeding their children, you
> bet they'd use them.

> It does look like the overriding principle behind US foreign
> policy is to secure a plentiful supply of oil. I fully
> endorse this position.

> Graham

You have a good point.
It looks like they've really got us all over a barrel
and we have no choice but to do as they say.

The US might be slightly different since we do have
some oil here that we produce -- I assume the uk has no
or few oil fields.

Even so we don't have as much as we need for day-to-day
and it would take a few months to ramp up production
to be self-sufficient.

What were the circumstances with the uk being cut off
from oil? I never heard about this incident.

Is france exempt from such shenanigans? I heard that
almost all of their electric production was nuclear.

Until we come up with something else it would seem to
be a matter of critical national security that we
immediately implement alternative energy sources.

- Jeff

In-Reply-To: <E16t809-0005Jz-00@...>
X. J .Scott wrote:

> You have a good point.
> It looks like they've really got us all over a barrel
> and we have no choice but to do as they say.

One important objective is to prevent a single dictator getting control of
a large proportion of the world's oil. Precisely so we don't have to do
what they say. That was the main reason for getting Saddam Hussein out of
Kuwait (because he wouldn't have stopped there).

> The US might be slightly different since we do have
> some oil here that we produce -- I assume the uk has no
> or few oil fields.

In fact, no. The UK is a net exporter of oil, the US a large importer.

> Even so we don't have as much as we need for day-to-day
> and it would take a few months to ramp up production
> to be self-sufficient.

You don't have enough, face it. Bush is trying to open up Alaska, but
it'd mean a fraction of your energy usage. The only solution would be to
reduce consumption, and switch to alternative sources.

> What were the circumstances with the uk being cut off
> from oil? I never heard about this incident.

The refineries were blockaded as a (peaceful) protest against the high tax
on petrol.

> Is france exempt from such shenanigans? I heard that
> almost all of their electric production was nuclear.

I think they have over 50% nuclear, and we (the UK) import some
electricity from them. Coal and natural gas are important here, probably
more so than oil. We get a lot of gas from the North Sea.

You still have the problem that cars, delivery vehicles and farm machinery
are all built to run on oil derivatives. And a shortage of one fuel would
drive up the price of the others.

I think there were similar protests in other countries, but they didn't
get out of hand like here.

> Until we come up with something else it would seem to
> be a matter of critical national security that we
> immediately implement alternative energy sources.

Certainly! Wind, waves, solar and nuclear are all expensive, and (except
maybe nuclear) can't replace fossil fuels. But it's important to have
diversity, and you can't switch overnight. That's where the oil lobby is
dangerous.

Graham