A lap around "The Ring"

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
> What is fact and what is not. It always boils down to this. It's been the
> philosophical question of all times, and yet you americans (the vast
majority,
> that is, there are sensible people all around the globe) just fail to see
it.
>
> ---A---


<laughter>

Only a Euro could twist facts about any subject into being a
"philosophical question."

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
> Well, the thing is: OPEC have a limited resource and when you evaluate
this
> resource, you have to take into account the fact that limited supply
creates
> higher prices, thus bigger yield the oil will create.
>
> They can pump it up at the rate you want, but they will actually loose
money on
> it. Who can blame these countries for doing just that? What would US do in
the
> same situation?
>
> Oil strategy was adressed early in the 20th century and has been stable
since.
> US have a lot of oil, but they pump as little as possible (as far as I
know,
> they pump just enough to fill the military reserve tanks, which represents
quite
> a few millions of gallons, mind you), and they go after controlling oil
fields
> all over the world instead, one way or the other. Loads and loads of
american
> historians will back me up on this, btw, I am not just drivelling here.
>
> Chinas evolving economy is one very big reason why oil is expensive these
days.
> And since no oil producing country seem unwilling to pump it up faster, it
will
> create an actual lack of oil. And you can imagine what will happen with
oil
> prices that way. Today, there is enough oil produced, but not to keep
prices low.
>
> The north sea here in northern europe is running dry in some 10 years,
max. I
> have this from the british department of Trade and Industry
> (http://www.og.dti.gov.uk/). China will want huge amounts of oil in a few
years
> time (they're already the third biggest importer these days), expect oil
prices
> to escalate. The potential finds are years from becoming exploited, and
the
> amount is unknown. But one thing is certain: This planet will not ever
produce
> more oil than today, partly because the sources are limited, partly
because it
> is politically impossible to pump more than is done today.
>
> I would like the oil producing countries to pump every single well dry in
3
> years, because then we'd see a huge world wide recession that would take
out
> most of the industrial northern hemisphere. And people would experience
that we
> need to help each other, and think collectively, instead of being
concerned with
> Lewinsky's, or Schiavo's or gay marriages or other "moral" issues. And
this
> "new" country would force the leaders to think differently altogether,
thinking
> community and equality before revenue. Every man for himself won't work
when
> there is no gas to be burnt, no oil to be burnt for heating, no gas.
>
> The paradox is that the countries of the 3rd world will be the only ones
nearly
> unaffected by the oil crisis, since they burn little oil in the first
place.
>
> Americans claim that they have oil in Alaska! Yes, they do, but it is
about 6
> months consume 10 years away.
>
> ---A---

<laughter>

Wow, the tin beanie is on mighty tight today, eh ? Pessimism isn't good
for the health ya know.

Suggest you do some research into history too. I don't buy the "when oil
runs out, etc." moonbat theories you mention, but history has shown people
don't "come together" when times are bad, as you suggest will happen when
oil runs out.
The opposite in fact.

The kumbaya stuff is soooo unrealistic.

Pete wrote:
>
> Goy, it seems ras is spawning a number of Adam Dean's.

I wouldn't go quite that far myself , but for various reasons I'm
certainly "moving on", there was a time when I checked r.a.s. a couple
of times each day for the latest info or a friendly debate about
something sim related, these days it can go weeks, and when I check in
doesn't really seem as if I've missed much

Oh well, the times they are a'changing I suppose


Beers and cheers
(uncle) Goy
"goyl at nettx dot no"

"The Pits" http://www.theuspits.com/

"A man is only as old as the woman he feels"
--Groucho Marx--

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
>
> One very peculiar thing is that after the war, there was born more boys
> than girls; in fact, I think for several years more than 60% of the
> newborns were boys. Funny how nature adjusts so easily to population
> changes...
>

A classic example of the manipulations of the gods.

Bring on the Evolution freaks claiming this is evolutionary adaption -
LOL.

"Asgeir Nesoen" > wrote in message
...
>
> And the "problem" is not alleged, it is a fact. Go there. Or talk to
> someone who did. Cancer frequency is going ballistic. Talk to the american
> soldiers with malformed babies after being down there. There are thousands
> of them. This has never been addressed properly by your "patriotic" press.
>

More like the under the influence of the government/military/weapons
company "you report this we kick your ass" press.

Depleted Uranium - highly effective, super cheap and better to dispose
of it this way than via nuclear waste neccessities - lotsa problems solved.
Bloody fantastic!

"JP" wrote...
>> <snip>
>
> <shrug> We'll see. Definately moonbat stuff here as usual.
> You really have an aversion to facts it seems.

Hmmm... I wouldn't call it an aversion to the facts, but Mitch is right: in
my haste to get my point across, I did end up sounding like a raging lefty.

Tends to happen when one's posting at this time of night and having to get
up at a reasonable hour in the morning. DST just messed up my biorythm and
makes me more intolerant than usual.

> Your comments I guess are the latest version of a "resurging
> Europe". Last (but not first) heard it when the Euro, etc.
> came about.

Yeah, and I got in a right state when BBC news made fun of it at the
release. No, really... bloody cheeks.

> Seems a lot of jealousy to feel the need to make such comments
> imo.

Oh, but I am jealous of the country you live in and your mindset in certain
ways, no question. But at the same time I think, on the whole, things are
better arranged over here. Less of a feelgood factor on the individual
level, but with a broader perspective on the world.

> p.s. Wasn't it Europeans tied in with the oil/food scam ?
> Why yes, it was. As long as you brought up the UN, etc.

As in we were part of the UN at the time (like everone else, for that
matter, why don't you go pick on some Peruvian?) and participated in
sanctioning Iraq due to non-compliance on their part? -and then you guys
decided we weren't being "hard" enough?

Ok, so we have long standing ties with the place (probably dating back to
Roman times) and, on the personal and individual company level this has led
to some "creative trading", but to actually conclude we were supporting
Saddam behind your back is a bit rich.

Jan.
=---

"Jan Verschueren" > wrote in message
news
> "JP" wrote...
> >> <snip>
> >
> > <shrug> We'll see. Definately moonbat stuff here as usual.
> > You really have an aversion to facts it seems.
>
> Hmmm... I wouldn't call it an aversion to the facts, but Mitch is right:
in
> my haste to get my point across, I did end up sounding like a raging
lefty.
>
> Tends to happen when one's posting at this time of night and having to get
> up at a reasonable hour in the morning. DST just messed up my biorythm and
> makes me more intolerant than usual.
>
> > Your comments I guess are the latest version of a "resurging
> > Europe". Last (but not first) heard it when the Euro, etc.
> > came about.
>
> Yeah, and I got in a right state when BBC news made fun of it at the
> release. No, really... bloody cheeks.
>
> > Seems a lot of jealousy to feel the need to make such comments
> > imo.
>
> Oh, but I am jealous of the country you live in and your mindset in
certain
> ways, no question. But at the same time I think, on the whole, things are
> better arranged over here. Less of a feelgood factor on the individual
> level, but with a broader perspective on the world.
>
> > p.s. Wasn't it Europeans tied in with the oil/food scam ?
> > Why yes, it was. As long as you brought up the UN, etc.
>
> As in we were part of the UN at the time (like everone else, for that
> matter, why don't you go pick on some Peruvian?) and participated in
> sanctioning Iraq due to non-compliance on their part? -and then you guys
> decided we weren't being "hard" enough?
>
> Ok, so we have long standing ties with the place (probably dating back to
> Roman times) and, on the personal and individual company level this has
led
> to some "creative trading", but to actually conclude we were supporting
> Saddam behind your back is a bit rich.
>
> Jan.
> =---


Oh, if there was a Peruvian here saying the same things, I'd be bitching
at them too, don't worry.

Anyway, fwiw, I actually agree with most of your comments here, in a
general sense.

Mitch_A wrote:
> This one little sentence speaks volumes and shows us exactly who John
> Wallace is. And what an ugly view it is....
>
> Stalin and Saddam both hero's while GW is the anti-christ?
>
> Sad..
>
> Mitch

Mitch, you have *NO* idea what I said, so how can your response even
begin to make sense?

My comment was in no means any form of endorsement of Stalin - it simply
alluded to a very famous quote of his. If you don't understand what I
write, at least give me the respect of not turning my words into what
you wished they meant.

Mitch_A wrote:
> Versus your concrete argument that half of the Iraqi population is going to
> die of cancer...

You are just a font of disinformation today.

I said "ALMOST half of ONE town in SOUTHER IRAQ are FORECAST to CONTRACT
cancer in the coming years". You read "half of the Iraqi population will
die from cancer"!!??

Almost half does not equal all.
One town in Souther Iraq does not equal the entire Iraqi population
Contract does not equal die

So you got "cancer" right, and the entire rest of the sentence wrong.
What the heck happens when you go to the shop to ask for a pint of milk?
The mind boggles as to what you must come back with ;-)

By the way, do you have information to prove the Basra cancer facts
wrong? I base this on first-hand jourmalistic and medical evidence. On
what do you base your belief that it's wrong?

rmagruder wrote:
> Where do you get "half a million children" from?

The WHO, the UN, the CIA - it's very widely known. Do a google search on
Albright and iraqi kids - even she didn't deny it.