jimbrown 0 #1 May 30, 2011 Now I know that many of you can just not be convinced that we went into Afgahanistan and Iraq for big oil. "Listen", many of you might say," US oil companies haven't taken one barrel of oil out of Iraq since that war began!" But how much oil does the war machine consume? How many barrels does the US military require on a daily basis? Helicopters, Jets , Tanks,Trucks, Humvees, ships, busses ,generators? And aren't the contracted prices for delivery to the military higher even than retail? What does the military requirement do to the supply/ demand ratio domestically? Is the war one reason for higher fuel prices at home? Peace, Jim B Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
godfrog 2 #2 May 30, 2011 We went to afganistan for control of the opium poppies! Do you realize the profit in Heroin?Experience is a difficult teacher, she gives you the test first and the lesson afterward Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 154 #3 May 30, 2011 despite everyone's beliefs, especially here in the USA, the US does not actually have a lot of control over the price of a barrel of oil Did we go over there with some hopes of controlling it? I believe that is true, but the reality is that we have little control over it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #4 May 30, 2011 Not just for oil, there are a multitude of other business opportunities involved.When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
434 2 #5 May 30, 2011 You can google Afghanistan pipeline, and see different scenarios of plans drawn. At the moment this is the plan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #6 May 30, 2011 No. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #7 May 30, 2011 Quote But how much oil does the war machine consume? How many barrels does the US military require on a daily basis? Helicopters, Jets , Tanks,Trucks, Humvees, ships, busses ,generators? And aren't the contracted prices for delivery to the military higher even than retail? Probably - when Shell delivers oil to your neighborhood gas station, it doesn't have to worry about enemy fire. But your question needs revision. The US military consumes a substantial amount of oil just in daily peacetime operations. Training for the real thing is very much like the real thing. They just don't do it 24/7. So you want to know how much excess usage there is. Compared to 100some million drivers in the US, I doubt it compares at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimbrown 0 #8 May 30, 2011 Quote Probably - when Shell delivers oil to your neighborhood gas station, it doesn't have to worry about enemy fire.Quote Of course Shell isn't delivering to the war zone either. The oil companies deliver outside the war zone and private contractors take it from there. But your question needs revision. The US military consumes a substantial amount of oil just in daily peacetime operations. Training for the real thing is very much like the real thing. They just don't do it 24/7. So you want to know how much excess usage there is. Compared to 100some million drivers in the US, I doubt it compares at all. But how much oil does our war machine require daily? If that oil was available on the open market wouldn't the law of supply/ demand give us some amount of relief at the gas pump? I realise you are saying our war demand is not much more than required for peace time training. I'm suggesting we cut back in a big way on each of those expenditures. Peace, Jim B Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #9 May 30, 2011 Quote I realise you are saying our war demand is not much more than required for peace time training. I'm suggesting we cut back in a big way on each of those expenditures. certainly we could. the primary benefit would be to our budget. I don't think the energy savings is going to be significant. While the military vehicles are not about fuel efficiency, the soldiers stationed abroad are likely to be much more efficient about energy use than the typical American with a large house. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #10 May 30, 2011 No. Some of them are simply nothing more than, "My dick is bigger than yours."My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
doi 0 #11 May 30, 2011 War always and will only ever be about power and natural recources. Obviously there is propoganda to lead you to beleive otherwise, but that is ususally quite transparent if you are willing to consider it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #12 May 30, 2011 QuoteQuote Probably - when Shell delivers oil to your neighborhood gas station, it doesn't have to worry about enemy fire.Quote Of course Shell isn't delivering to the war zone either. The oil companies deliver outside the war zone and private contractors take it from there. But your question needs revision. The US military consumes a substantial amount of oil just in daily peacetime operations. Training for the real thing is very much like the real thing. They just don't do it 24/7. So you want to know how much excess usage there is. Compared to 100some million drivers in the US, I doubt it compares at all. But how much oil does our war machine require daily? If that oil was available on the open market wouldn't the law of supply/ demand give us some amount of relief at the gas pump? I realise you are saying our war demand is not much more than required for peace time training. I'm suggesting we cut back in a big way on each of those expenditures. Peace, Jim B Since the beginning of the 20th century energy has been a critical factor for armed forces worldwide. From the end of the Cold War to the first years of the 21st century, the U.S. Department of Defense’s (DoD) energy consumption dropped by some 40 percent, but with the Global War on Terror consumption has raised again. In fiscal year 2009, the DoD consumed 932 trillion Btu of site delivered energy at a cost of 13.3 billion dollars. Energy consumed per active duty military and civilian personal is 35 percent higher than the U.S. energy consumption per capita, which is amongst the highest in the world. While consuming that amount of energy, DoD emitted 73 million metric tons of CO2, corresponding to over 4 percent of the total emissions in USA. The DoD accounts for less than 2 percent of the US energy consumption and more than 93 percent of the U.S. government energy consumption. Although this may seem small, the fact is that DoD is the largest single consumer of energy in the United States. Nigeria, with a population of more than 140 million, consumes as much energy as the U.S. military. On average, mobility fuels (for aircraft, ships, vehicles and equipments) have accounted for three quarters of the DoD’s total energy use over the past two decades. Buildings and facilities have made up the rest. The U.S. is the strongest military power in the world and just like any other military in the world, energy, in particular energy derived from oil, is at the heart of that power. Oil accounts for nearly 80 percent of total DoD energy consumption, followed by electricity (11 percent), natural gas and coal. DOD pays immense effort for reducing its dependency on conventional oil and seeks ways to use alternative and renewable energy sources. Despite all these efforts, less than 4 percent of the DoD’s energy consumption comes from renewable sources. The DoD uses 360,000 barrels of oil each day. This amount makes the DoD the single largest oil consumer in the world. There are only 35 countries in the world consuming more oil than DoD. The U.S. Air Force is the largest oil consumer within the DoD services.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
434 2 #13 May 31, 2011 No war/conflicts = Cheaper oil = more usage Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flashvortx 0 #14 May 31, 2011 QuoteWar always and will only ever be about power and natural recources. Obviously there is propoganda to lead you to beleive otherwise, but that is ususally quite transparent if you are willing to consider it. You must be reading too much into the propoganda leading you to believe that war always and will only ever be about power and natural recources. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flashvortx 0 #15 May 31, 2011 Are you even a skydiver? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flashvortx 0 #16 May 31, 2011 Quote I'm suggesting we cut back in a big way on each of those expenditures. Peace, Jim B If we cut back on our oil expenditures, how are we going to continue to invade middle eastern countries for the sole purpose taking their oil?It seems to me that if the most powerful nation in the world with the best military in the world wanted to take some oil from some stone age countries, we could probably have done that in 10 years. I know I'm overseas at the moment, but I seem to hear something about a "debt crisis" back in the states. If we came here with the sole purpose of taking their oil, when are we going to start taking their oil? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #17 May 31, 2011 Quote Now I know that many of you can just not be convinced that we went into Afgahanistan and Iraq for big oil. "Listen", many of you might say," US oil companies haven't taken one barrel of oil out of Iraq since that war began!" But how much oil does the war machine consume? How many barrels does the US military require on a daily basis? Helicopters, Jets , Tanks,Trucks, Humvees, ships, busses ,generators? And aren't the contracted prices for delivery to the military higher even than retail? What does the military requirement do to the supply/ demand ratio domestically? Is the war one reason for higher fuel prices at home? Peace, Jim B Face it JB.. as you so well know.. its all about the LUBE Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fossg 0 #18 June 1, 2011 OK, OK you win... Bush personaly planted the bombs in the WTC, all members of the military are mindless drones controled by Big Oil, anyone who should disagree with you is violating your right to free speech. Every wacka doodle conspriacy theroy that you subscribe to is correct. Your absoultelyfuckin right about everything. Your the mayor in "jimbrown town" We are lowly loathsome visitors... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wsd 0 #19 June 1, 2011 Dude, you were not supposed to tell, now the black helicopters and Al Frankens flying saucer will come to get you! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KidWicked 0 #20 June 1, 2011 Quote Dude, you were not supposed to tell, now the black helicopters and Al Frankens flying saucer will come to get you! You and fossg are so cute together. Romantic.Coreece: "You sound like some skinheads I know, but your prejudice is with Christians, not niggers..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
doi 0 #21 June 1, 2011 QuoteYou must be reading too much into the propoganda leading you to believe that war always and will only ever be about power and natural recources. No, I just look at human nature, whether it is about land borders, religion or whatever. Natural resources and power are all every war is about. Try to give an example of a war that is/was not about these things? Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely... Think about that well known saying, why it exists, and what you think the extent of human corruption is. Corruption and greed are the key. Most are not willing to be openly aware of the obvious as acknowledging the corruption and doing nothing about it makes one complicit. Being complicit makes one feel bad so it is easier to deny the obvious corruption that takes place than accept it. Such as the kid that made you cheap shoes/toys/electronics/clothes being paid sweet 'F' all for the favour. We try not to think about that because you would rather pay $50 than $150, we could stop the child labour by not purchasing the cheap stuff. You/we know it but (most often than not) choose to not think about it. We could also stop the wars by not accepting the propaganda the authorities and media give us, but who wants to be the one to make a fuss? Jeopardize their comfy and accepting lifestyle? Anyone? This attitude makes it easy for those with the power to manipulate the sheeple into believing what they want them to. Make a story, repeat it enough and then it is fact. Simple, take WMD's for example. Such as everybody believing the Iraq war and the Afghanistan war are about freedom and to end terror; rather than the distribution of natural recourses. These wars only create terror, hatred and unrest but they are necessary to gain the recourses that will allow us to enjoy our magnificent lifestyles and for the Corporations to make a pretty fortune by supplying it to us while maintaining the access to the recourses. Can you name one war that was not about the distribution of wealth, land or resources? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #22 June 1, 2011 It was to save little brown babies... why else would a powerful, rich nation give up the fine flower of it's loins? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #24 June 1, 2011 How is the war in Afghanistan about wealth, land, or resources? Please try to remember that Afghanistan and Iraq and not the same place. Please also don't mention the supposed Unocal pipeline. If that war were about building a pipeline, I'm pretty sure the pipeline would have at least been started by now. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #25 June 1, 2011 i disagree. I think religion and political ideology has started more wars and caused more deaths than any other reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
