Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Exxon Mobil: $45 Billion in profits
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Exxon Mobil: $45 Billion in profits
Tweet Topic Started: Jan 31 2009, 02:37 AM (332 Views)
IUCOLTFAN Feb 3 2009, 05:06 PM Post #31
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
Hey NLA.........give us a grade on your boys' first few weeks a President. I sure you see it as "going well so far".........
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BoilerNLA Feb 3 2009, 06:23 PM Post #32
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
3,254
Group:
Members
Member
#136
Joined:
February 9, 2008
IUCOLTFAN
Feb 3 2009, 05:06 PM
Hey NLA.........give us a grade on your boys' first few weeks a President. I sure you see it as "going well so far".........
give him "a grade"?
what are you? the head of the fuckin' PTA?

a) Obama is not "my boy"... he is our President
b) it's too early to hand out grades at this point
c) I would much rather have him in office than any of the other candidates
d) He has the most challenges in front of him than any President has faced for many decades. I won't be surprised if his hair turns white in the next four years.
e) Let's give him a chance, fellas.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Feb 3 2009, 10:34 PM Post #33
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
BoilerNLA
Feb 3 2009, 04:57 PM
aaronk2727
Feb 2 2009, 08:43 AM
BoilerNLA
Jan 31 2009, 03:48 AM
try to convince me again that the war in Iraq was not about oil.
NLA, I would like to hear from you (Not Trouble, BG, or Lars) as to what you mean by this statement. Did Exxon go to war in Iraq? Please, try not to recite vague anti-war talking points, and I am not being sarcastic there. It has been a theme for 7 years to say "no war for oil", but most of the people who say that have no idea what they are talking about.
aaron, you crack me up...

the answer to your silly question is "NO" Exxon did not invade/occupy Iraq.

Now, try to answer my question (which technically wasn't formed as a question, but you get the drift.)
NLA, I will assume you want me to tell you if/why the Iraq war was about oil...so if so, I'll give it a shot. Remember NLA, I am against the war, and as I have said multiple times on here, I'm not really sure what this war is about. Trouble, Lars, & BG have given some great explanations and backed it up with research, but the "reason" changed so many times from the white house, that I really don't know for sure.

Oil could be the reason, but I have no evidence or convincing reason to believe that is what it is about. Oil was cheaper before we invaded, and since then Iraq has consistently awarded oil drilling contracts to nations besides the US, so if the war was for oil, I guess we lost. Now, my question to you was simple...why do you think this war is about oil?
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Feb 4 2009, 09:44 AM Post #34
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
BoilerNLA
Feb 3 2009, 06:23 PM
IUCOLTFAN
Feb 3 2009, 05:06 PM
Hey NLA.........give us a grade on your boys' first few weeks a President. I sure you see it as "going well so far".........
give him "a grade"?
what are you? the head of the fuckin' PTA?

a) Obama is not "my boy"... he is our President
b) it's too early to hand out grades at this point
c) I would much rather have him in office than any of the other candidates
d) He has the most challenges in front of him than any President has faced for many decades. I won't be surprised if his hair turns white in the next four years.
e) Let's give him a chance, fellas.
So all the cabinet appointments and lobbyists in the mix and all the "transperancy" with the tax issues, this is not worth a grade yet??? Obama set the bar very high and you dont even expect him to live by the rules he set for himself? The love affair lives on.


WOW...........make yourself some more kool-aid. If you can honestly say you back this proposed "stimulus package" then you really are the "historical voter" that I pegged you to be.
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
troubleatiu Feb 5 2009, 01:08 PM Post #35
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
3,218
Group:
Members
Member
#21
Joined:
February 5, 2008
aaronk2727
Feb 2 2009, 08:43 AM
BoilerNLA
Jan 31 2009, 03:48 AM
try to convince me again that the war in Iraq was not about oil.
NLA, I would like to hear from you (Not Trouble, BG, or Lars) as to what you mean by this statement. Did Exxon go to war in Iraq? Please, try not to recite vague anti-war talking points, and I am not being sarcastic there. It has been a theme for 7 years to say "no war for oil", but most of the people who say that have no idea what they are talking about.
The Polish-born Zbigniew Brzezinski was the hawkish National Security Advisor to President Carter. In "The Grand Chessboard", Brzezinski gives a little history lesson. `Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some 500 years ago, Eurasia has been the centre of world power.' Eurasia is all the territory east of Germany. This means Russia, the Middle East, China and parts of India. Brzezinski acknowledges that Russia and China, bordering oil-rich central Asia, are the two main powers threatening US hegemony in that area.

He takes it for granted that the US must exert control over the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, known to those who love them as `the Stans': Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikstan and Kyrgyzstan all `of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and most powerful neighbours -- Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China signaling'. Brzezinski notes how the world's energy consumption keeps increasing; hence, who controls Caspian oil/gas will control the world economy. Brzezinski then, reflexively, goes into the standard American rationalization for empire. "We want nothing, ever, for ourselves, only to keep bad people from getting good things with which to hurt good people." `It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single [other] power comes to control the geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.'

sorry aaron, your question was valid and obviously nla cant answer it. so im going to. i also hold to the thought that all our current mid-east (war) policy revolves around oil. ive also extensively said its not so much about cornering it for our consumption, but is as much as keeping the emerging markets from getting it. zbig spells it out here, 5 years before the invasion.
Posted Image
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger
"What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler
"Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boilergrad01 Feb 5 2009, 01:25 PM Post #36
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
troubleatiu
Feb 5 2009, 01:08 PM
aaronk2727
Feb 2 2009, 08:43 AM
BoilerNLA
Jan 31 2009, 03:48 AM
try to convince me again that the war in Iraq was not about oil.
NLA, I would like to hear from you (Not Trouble, BG, or Lars) as to what you mean by this statement. Did Exxon go to war in Iraq? Please, try not to recite vague anti-war talking points, and I am not being sarcastic there. It has been a theme for 7 years to say "no war for oil", but most of the people who say that have no idea what they are talking about.
The Polish-born Zbigniew Brzezinski was the hawkish National Security Advisor to President Carter. In "The Grand Chessboard", Brzezinski gives a little history lesson. `Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some 500 years ago, Eurasia has been the centre of world power.' Eurasia is all the territory east of Germany. This means Russia, the Middle East, China and parts of India. Brzezinski acknowledges that Russia and China, bordering oil-rich central Asia, are the two main powers threatening US hegemony in that area.

He takes it for granted that the US must exert control over the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, known to those who love them as `the Stans': Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikstan and Kyrgyzstan all `of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and most powerful neighbours -- Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China signaling'. Brzezinski notes how the world's energy consumption keeps increasing; hence, who controls Caspian oil/gas will control the world economy. Brzezinski then, reflexively, goes into the standard American rationalization for empire. "We want nothing, ever, for ourselves, only to keep bad people from getting good things with which to hurt good people." `It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single [other] power comes to control the geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.'

sorry aaron, your question was valid and obviously nla cant answer it. so im going to. i also hold to the thought that all our current mid-east (war) policy revolves around oil. ive also extensively said its not so much about cornering it for our consumption, but is as much as keeping the emerging markets from getting it. zbig spells it out here, 5 years before the invasion.
ZBig is a nut but he has one fine daughter that is a MILF

UMMMM UUMMM Mika
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
troubleatiu Feb 5 2009, 01:41 PM Post #37
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
3,218
Group:
Members
Member
#21
Joined:
February 5, 2008
boilergrad01
Feb 5 2009, 01:25 PM
troubleatiu
Feb 5 2009, 01:08 PM
aaronk2727
Feb 2 2009, 08:43 AM
BoilerNLA
Jan 31 2009, 03:48 AM
try to convince me again that the war in Iraq was not about oil.
NLA, I would like to hear from you (Not Trouble, BG, or Lars) as to what you mean by this statement. Did Exxon go to war in Iraq? Please, try not to recite vague anti-war talking points, and I am not being sarcastic there. It has been a theme for 7 years to say "no war for oil", but most of the people who say that have no idea what they are talking about.
The Polish-born Zbigniew Brzezinski was the hawkish National Security Advisor to President Carter. In "The Grand Chessboard", Brzezinski gives a little history lesson. `Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some 500 years ago, Eurasia has been the centre of world power.' Eurasia is all the territory east of Germany. This means Russia, the Middle East, China and parts of India. Brzezinski acknowledges that Russia and China, bordering oil-rich central Asia, are the two main powers threatening US hegemony in that area.

He takes it for granted that the US must exert control over the former Soviet republics of Central Asia, known to those who love them as `the Stans': Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikstan and Kyrgyzstan all `of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and most powerful neighbours -- Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China signaling'. Brzezinski notes how the world's energy consumption keeps increasing; hence, who controls Caspian oil/gas will control the world economy. Brzezinski then, reflexively, goes into the standard American rationalization for empire. "We want nothing, ever, for ourselves, only to keep bad people from getting good things with which to hurt good people." `It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single [other] power comes to control the geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.'

sorry aaron, your question was valid and obviously nla cant answer it. so im going to. i also hold to the thought that all our current mid-east (war) policy revolves around oil. ive also extensively said its not so much about cornering it for our consumption, but is as much as keeping the emerging markets from getting it. zbig spells it out here, 5 years before the invasion.
ZBig is a nut but he has one fine daughter that is a MILF

UMMMM UUMMM Mika
no doubt mika ia a milf... shes hot as hell. how does it feel to be deployed for your duty in iraq based on this "nut's" desires? you were lied to, BG01.
Posted Image
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger
"What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler
"Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Our users say it best:
"Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used."
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 9:33 AM Jul 11
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy