: Politics and Religion Discussion : as weak as he is

bigguy30 1059 reads

posted 10 years ago

1 / 18

Russia's so desperate it might sell state-owned oil assets

I wonder what the GOP and Russian President Vladimir Putin lovers will say now?
So Reeling under sanctions and a recession caused by depressed oil prices, the Russian government is working to finalize a list of seven strategic state-owned companies slated for partial privatization in a bid to inject fresh funds into federal coffers.

mattradd 40 Reviews 125 reads

posted 10 years ago

2 / 18

Desperate people do desperate things!

Let's not celebrate too soon. Most wars are started because a country feels desperate to improve it's economic condition.

bigguy30 121 reads

posted 10 years ago

3 / 18

mattradd you missed the point.

It was showing how the US led sanctions and especially President Obama was not weak in dealing with Russia.

When dealing with Russia or any other country.
You always don't need a war to make a point!

Posted By: mattradd

Let's not celebrate too soon. Most wars are started because a country feels desperate to improve it's economic condition.

BigPapasan 3 Reviews 103 reads

posted 10 years ago

4 / 18

Russia wants to emulate the U.S. & become an oligarchy. (E)

END OF MESSAGE

mattradd 40 Reviews 136 reads

posted 10 years ago

5 / 18

Well then, I guess I missed your point!

"I wonder what the GOP and Russian President Vladimir Putin lovers will say now?"

You did say in regards to what.

"It was showing how the US led sanctions and especially President Obama was not weak in dealing with Russia."

Guess you needed to make that clearer. However, my point is just as valid as yours, and I'm certain Obama is, at most cautiously optimistic, yet vigilante regarding Russia's next move.

P.S. Where did I say, or even suggest that a war is needed to make a point? It's Russia who has been a military aggressor.

JohnMilton_Esq 140 reads

posted 10 years ago

6 / 18

Russia does not appear desperate

Three issues.
1. Matt, you are correct that SOME wars are started over economic issues. But in the last 100 years while that was a cause of WWI, subsequent wars including WWII and the "modern" era wars were not started over economics. Power and control, yes, religious issues (Shiite vs Sunni) Yes, but because one country was desperate, not so much. Of course that could change with the N Korean problem. I know some think we meddled in the Mideast because of oil but we know in hindsight that theory was wrong. The US could have taken the Iraq oil (I wish we had to pay for the war effort) but the reality is that we left the oil for the Iraqis and now ISIS has a lot of it. The case could be made that the depression and post WWI years made Germany ripe for Hitler, but Hitler's drive was not primarily economic as he himself wrote.

2. Despite what BigGuy posted, Russia is not acting desperately at all. In fact, quite the opposite. Putin has become a dominant player on the world stage. The link is to a analysis published today by the AP (hardly a righty source) of Putin's aggressive military buildup which he will accomplish no matter what condition his economy is.

The sanctions which BG seems to offer as Obama being "tough" on Russia have not worked to curtail Putin one iota.

Russia is now the main player in Syria...think Aleppo in the news today.
Has Russia given the Crimea and land they annexed (stole) from Ukraine back? Nope
Is Russia threatening NATO? Yes
Our own Defense Secretary says that Putin and Russia are a top US concern. Russia is not getting weaker, but stronger.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bbd6193c26f74d05bd4c3685d34ee05f/carter-says-russia-china-potentially-threaten-global-order

Any argument that Putin is now desperate and that Obama has dealt with Russia in an effective manner is just a fantasy. A dangerous one!

bigguy30 137 reads

posted 10 years ago

7 / 18

JohnMilton_Esq just proved my point and is flat out wrong on Russia!

Posted By: JohnMilton_Esq

Three issues.
1. Matt, you are correct that SOME wars are started over economic issues. But in the last 100 years while that was a cause of WWI, subsequent wars including WWII and the "modern" era wars were not started over economics. Power and control, yes, religious issues (Shiite vs Sunni) Yes, but because one country was desperate, not so much. Of course that could change with the N Korean problem. I know some think we meddled in the Mideast because of oil but we know in hindsight that theory was wrong. The US could have taken the Iraq oil (I wish we had to pay for the war effort) but the reality is that we left the oil for the Iraqis and now ISIS has a lot of it. The case could be made that the depression and post WWI years made Germany ripe for Hitler, but Hitler's drive was not primarily economic as he himself wrote.

2. Despite what BigGuy posted, Russia is not acting desperately at all. In fact, quite the opposite. Putin has become a dominant player on the world stage. The link is to a analysis published today by the AP (hardly a righty source) of Putin's aggressive military buildup which he will accomplish no matter what condition his economy is.

The sanctions which BG seems to offer as Obama being "tough" on Russia have not worked to curtail Putin one iota.

Russia is now the main player in Syria...think Aleppo in the news today.
Has Russia given the Crimea and land they annexed (stole) from Ukraine back? Nope
Is Russia threatening NATO? Yes
Our own Defense Secretary says that Putin and Russia are a top US concern. Russia is not getting weaker, but stronger.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/bbd6193c26f74d05bd4c3685d34ee05f/carter-says-russia-china-potentially-threaten-global-order

Any argument that Putin is now desperate and that Obama has dealt with Russia in an effective manner is just a fantasy. A dangerous one!

bigguy30 129 reads

posted 10 years ago

8 / 18

Re: Well then, I guess I missed your point!

Mattradd you talk like a politician and need to be clearer yourself. Lol

When you mention "Most wars are started because a country feels desperate to improve it's economic condition.

I wonder why it's any confusion on your part with the suggestion of war?
You are slick but not all together wrong either.

Posted By: mattradd

"I wonder what the GOP and Russian President Vladimir Putin lovers will say now?"

You did say in regards to what.

"It was showing how the US led sanctions and especially President Obama was not weak in dealing with Russia."

Guess you needed to make that clearer. However, my point is just as valid as yours, and I'm certain Obama is, at most cautiously optimistic, yet vigilante regarding Russia's next move.

P.S. Where did I say, or even suggest that a war is needed to make a point? It's Russia who has been a military aggressor.

brooks5 148 reads

posted 10 years ago

9 / 18

as weak as he is

Putin always seems strong enough to bitch-slap the pussy-in-chief Obama

bigguy30 130 reads

posted 10 years ago

10 / 18

Brooks5 another Putin GOP lover proving my point from earlier.

I love how stupid and lost you sound. Lol

Posted By: brooks5

Putin always seems strong enough to bitch-slap the pussy-in-chief Obama.

DoctorGonzo 106 Reviews 153 reads

posted 10 years ago

11 / 18

Come on Laffy, that's just stupid. Even you should understand the Saudi's are taking a short term.

... hit in order to bankrupt the US fracking industry.

And its working too.

The fact Russia's petroleum oligarchs are also taking a big hit is just a pleasant byproduct of Arab manipulation of world oil markets. The Wahabi's can still order their diamond-encrusted Mercedes convertibles and gold-plated Ferrari's to their hearts content while starving out the smaller players not just in the US, but within OPEC as well.

Posted By: Laffy

prices to hurt Russia according to some articles I read.

At least he didn't say he looked into Putin's soul and saw a great man right before he sent tanks into another country.

HONDA 153 Reviews 155 reads

posted 10 years ago

12 / 18

The main reason is to keep Iran from gaining market share. The Saudi's hate Iran more than Israel..

.........and/or the United States for that matter. The U.S. fracking industry is just road kill in their ultimate aim to destroy Iran both financially and militarily

HONDA 153 Reviews 101 reads

posted 10 years ago

13 / 18

Re: I've seen many articles

Probably not yet, if oil hovers around $30/ barrel, but when you are owing banks $$$ millions, frackers have no choice but to keep production up. Many oil frackers have cut production costs to the bare bones. If the price of oil falls way below their production costs, they will have to shutdown. Over in the Middle East, it's really a big mess, Saudi Arabia and Iran, both mortal enemies, are IMHO sowing the seeds for their ultimate destruction. Russia desperate for $$$ has no choice but to keep producing oil at a furious pace. Lower oil prices are going to be with us for a long time, we have a global oil oversupply problem as well as decreased demand for oil because of a looming global recession.

GaGambler 128 reads

posted 10 years ago

14 / 18

Sorry Honda, but the Saudis declared war on the US Oil industry long before the Iranian deal

Iran is the road kill in their ultimate aim to keep the US from becoming independent, or even worse, become a net exporter.

Obama is a 1,000% complicit in this as it hurts Russia financially and has the potential to destroy the US oil industry as we know it. Anyone who thinks Obama is NOT out to destroy the US Oil business has only to take notice of his proposed $10 bbl tax at the producer level on oil. Quite frankly, if that were to pass I would have to shut my doors and so would thousands of other oil producers who are barely hanging on by a thread right now. To put this in context, right now I get about $25 a barrel for the oil I sell, a $10 tax would amount to an additional 40% tax on top of all the other taxes I pay and would effectively put me out of business, and my business is MUCH more efficient than the so called "frackers" you speak of, they quit making money at about $50 a bbl, while I can do just fine at $30-40 bbl. Cut that to $15 bbl and I and every other American producer goes out of business, but that is the goal of the Saudis and our incompetent POTUS is playing right along with them.

GaGambler 124 reads

posted 10 years ago

15 / 18

Keeping production up and replacing production lost by decline and attrition are quite different

The so called "oil frackers" are already losing money by the boat load and their only short term fix is continuing to produce existing production as hard as possible, even if they are doing so at a loss.

What most non oil people fail to take into consideration is the 70% first year decline curve in oil produced from most of these rather tight shale formations like the Bakken and the Eagleford. If no new wells are drilled you will most likely see at least 2 MM BOPD worth of American oil taken off the market by the end of the year, about double what the conventional wisdom is predicting.

Keep in mind, most large companies had no choice but to deploy their Cap Ex budgets last year, but with the new year comes new budgets and those budgets have been slashed dramatically. This year is going to be quite painful for all oil producing countries and companies, including my own, but once all the excess has been wrung out of the market, and the weaker, less efficient and poorly capitalized companies have gone broke, those of us who are still left standing will be in a position to get rich, or in the case of the Saudis "richer" Oil will come back, but it's going to be a painful road back for many and many will not survive.

GaGambler 121 reads

posted 10 years ago

16 / 18

Don't expect me to make a habit out of this, but this question deserves an answer

Only the large, integrated oil companies with downstream operations are able to pass the tax along to the consumer.

Not all oil companies own gas stations or refineries. There are thousands of independent producers who only produce crude oil and sell that crude oil to a refinery, those thousands of producers, along with the hundreds of thousands of jobs they create would be wiped out with a stroke of a pen.

Now if there was a $.25 tax on gasoline, THAT would generate the revenues the administration claims it is looking for, it would actually have a chance of passing, and it wouldn't wipe out thousands of small businesses.

The tax as written is the equivalent of raising the income tax to 60% on the poor and middle class, while leaving the rich completely alone. This tax would wipe out the small businessman, raise prices for the consumer and do next to nothing to impact BIG OIL. Is that really what you want?

For the record, during this time of extremely low oil and gas prices, I would not be against an increase in the gas tax as long as long as the revenue generated was slated to be used to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. The consumer could easily afford it and the economic benefits could be quite tangible. Yes, it would still have a small adverse effect on me, but I believe the economic benefit would be well worth it. The tax as proposed is as regressive a tax as I can imagine and it proves that either Obama is clueless or that he intentionally wants to wipe out the small oilman.

brooks5 77 reads

posted 10 years ago

17 / 18

Oh, I hate Putin and

am sincerely deeply saddened that the murderer/monster has made our President his bitch for all the world to see. Even you see it or you wouldn't react with name-calling. Libs go nuts when you tell the truth as you so often prove.

It wouldn't have happened had we not put a PUSSY in the White House. Pussies vote for pussies, I guess.

You seem to be OK with that.

Chat soon there buddy!

brooks5 71 reads

posted 10 years ago

18 / 18

two points

1. Bullshit about the oil prices thing.
2. When libs compare, they cede the point

I am going to post the lib dictionary/English translation soon!