Yeah, I am pretty sure about that.
Likewise.
This is what I am talking about. Wherever you are, there is someone who claims to rule you. And you'll obey, because you, like many people, are psychologically incapable of resistance.
Obama Just pwned at Monopoly!
- Thread starter Jon
- Start date
Just in time for Iran's selling of their oil in non-US currency. We goin to war! .. .. again!
I think it's time for other countries to pull together to help liberate us United States citizens from the tyrannical Democratic, Republican and military industrial complex regimes. We've done you guys some favors in the past, yes? Plz return favor..
Helpzz!!
I think it's time for other countries to pull together to help liberate us United States citizens from the tyrannical Democratic, Republican and military industrial complex regimes. We've done you guys some favors in the past, yes? Plz return favor..
Helpzz!!
Hasn't this sort of stuff always been the case?
It's always been the case in Britain.
During the Falklands war, all ships were seized by the govt for their task force. One minute the QEII was a luxury cruise ship making millions for Cunard, and the next it was converted into a hospital ship and Cunard had to cancel all bookings and take the losses on the chin. They also wanted to take the Royal Yacht Britannia, the royal family complained that it would ruin the fittings to be converted to a hospital ship, the govt caved, but took revenge when John Major's govt decided that the taxpayer wouldn't pay for it anymore and it was moth-balled (Queen burst into tears).
And during WW2, when we were under siege from U-boats, the govt instructed everyone to plant food, you got fined if you didn't dig up your roses and plant potatoes, and farms were inspected for productivity and if they didn't measure up, the govt simply took the farm off the owner and put their own managers in, and the owner had no comeback - they didn't get their property back till after the war. Any large house big enough for barracks was also taken over by military and they had the freedom to do what they wanted, i.e. ruin your downstairs livingroom by turning it into a mens bathroom with fifty urinals etc. After the war people went back to homes that were a right mess (but felt lucky just the same as they could have been bombed like the houses in the cities).
It was very drastic, but you could argue it saved lives. Before the war we were importing 60% of our food, and if the govt hadn't enforced food production we'd have starved.
I'd be very surprised if there was a single sovereign govt on earth that didn't have these types of rules in place. You can emigrate to Costa Rica or wherever, but I'll bet they have the same rules or worse, and won't even tell you about them. You guys are so sweet and innocent!
It's always been the case in Britain.
During the Falklands war, all ships were seized by the govt for their task force. One minute the QEII was a luxury cruise ship making millions for Cunard, and the next it was converted into a hospital ship and Cunard had to cancel all bookings and take the losses on the chin. They also wanted to take the Royal Yacht Britannia, the royal family complained that it would ruin the fittings to be converted to a hospital ship, the govt caved, but took revenge when John Major's govt decided that the taxpayer wouldn't pay for it anymore and it was moth-balled (Queen burst into tears).
And during WW2, when we were under siege from U-boats, the govt instructed everyone to plant food, you got fined if you didn't dig up your roses and plant potatoes, and farms were inspected for productivity and if they didn't measure up, the govt simply took the farm off the owner and put their own managers in, and the owner had no comeback - they didn't get their property back till after the war. Any large house big enough for barracks was also taken over by military and they had the freedom to do what they wanted, i.e. ruin your downstairs livingroom by turning it into a mens bathroom with fifty urinals etc. After the war people went back to homes that were a right mess (but felt lucky just the same as they could have been bombed like the houses in the cities).
It was very drastic, but you could argue it saved lives. Before the war we were importing 60% of our food, and if the govt hadn't enforced food production we'd have starved.
I'd be very surprised if there was a single sovereign govt on earth that didn't have these types of rules in place. You can emigrate to Costa Rica or wherever, but I'll bet they have the same rules or worse, and won't even tell you about them. You guys are so sweet and innocent!
Oh not sure if this is mentioned yet but my guess is that this is mostly about OIL PRICES. We'd prob already be at war right now if oil didnt just skyrocket again.. just on the hint we might be hitting Iran. If we hit them, oil will prob surge to at least $180/barrel. But if Obama can control oil resources in the U.S. somehow then he can possibly keep prices down and continue on with his war w/out too much disapproval from the public. Oil contract speculators do actually drive the price of oil up.
The gov used to control oil prices in the U.S. I think. Maybe they'll start something like that again. Good thing i sold USO recently.
The gov used to control oil prices in the U.S. I think. Maybe they'll start something like that again. Good thing i sold USO recently.
I don't think the US wants to go to war with Iran - they've been trying to avoid been dragged into it for over a decade.
I read somewhere that Israel wanted to bomb Iran during the Iraq war (what a holy mess that would have created!!) but they couldn't get to Iran without flying over Iraqi airspace, and they couldn't do that while American AWACS were protecting it.
They asked Bush and then Obama for the friendly codes to the AWACS (so they could fly over without being identified as enemies) and both Bush and Obama refused.
The current situation has only arisen because the US has pulled out of Iraq (and who can blame them?), leaving the airspace open. My reading of teh situation is that Obama is trying to string things out till the election (as he needs aipac support) but after the election when he doesn't have to worry about re-election, he'll probably do something drastic, like cut Israeli subsidies if they don't stop sabre rattling.
Nice, I'm a self proclaimed genius also. Maybe we can start a club.
No one ever told you that assumptions are for assholes?
If the US govt wanted lower fuel prices, they would stop exporting fuel from the US. Fuel is one of our largest exports now, thus the higher gas prices. Iran is not (would not be) about oil prices. The reason for taking over a country is to control their financial industry, not only to secure their resources.
Speculators are not driving fuel prices up, EXPORTS ARE DRIVING FUEL PRICES UP.
http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/07/what-makes-gasoline-prices-go-up/
No, he moved his Jewish ass to Israel, where he is now manning missle turrents against Iran. You need to catch up.
Well the gov doesnt export oil right now companies do. The gov doesnt do anything except store some strategic oil reserves. My point is that Obama could, as the document suggests, take over (steal) resources (like OIL) from domestic companies, individuals, whatever, to control oil prices more. So the gov would end up stopping all that oil exporting by first stealing it from those who currently own it.
I honestly think oil prices are the biggest reason we're not already at war. The administration knows that it will raise oil prices massively if we go to war with Iran and that sort of thing can destroy and oil-dependent economy. So this whole law change is a possible work-around to that situation.
The govt wants higher oil and fuel prices. Their "green" initiatives (solar, biofuel, etc) won't take off if oil prices are low.
Well we have conflicting conspiracy theories I guess. Or, the gov wants the prices to get higher.. but just not crazy high.. because who the fuck would voters blame?? The current administration duh.
Personally I don't believe the current administration wants oil to get higher because they want to win elections. People vote economy.
You're overlooking the devaluation of the USD because Iran stopped trading oil in USD. All oil has been traded in USD, and pretty much every war we've had over the past decades has "mysteriously" been with countries that stopped trading oil in USD.
Now, since the USD is not on the gold standard, oil is all that's been keeping the USD stable. After a couple weeks of the cannal block earlier this year, Iran, China, India, etc. countries did a currency swap with one another so that they could sell and buy oil from one another. Surprise, US MSM started pushing more propaganda about Iran nuclear intentions and hinting for war.
United States Crude Oil Exports by Year (Thousand Barrels per Day)
US oil exports were three times higher in 1984, yet US fuel prices were less, even when adjusted for inflation.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQYy25kLijA&]The truth about rising gas prices, the stock market, & Warren Buffett's taxes - YouTube[/ame]
Well no i didn't overlook that and mentioned it in my first post in this thread. But I wasn't even talking about WHY we're going to war really.. I'm trying to explain a possible reason WHY this law was changed that gives the pres even more control over domestic resources during wartime.
Ah. I just skimmed most of this thread
The law coincides lovely with the one a couple of months ago that extended the Warzone to the US and allows unlimited detention of American Citizens who are "accused" of terrorism. Just think about the possibilities of personal asset seizures.
Ya, I knew I read this somewhere. Here's some info on what the U.S has done before and could be ramping up to do something like it or more extreme again.
- From 1974 to 1980 the government implemented domestically produced oil price controls.
- The result of this price control was that U.S consumers would have to pay 50% more for oil that was imported from other countries than domestic oil and U.S. oil producers received less than world market prices.
- In effect, the U.S oil producer was subsidizing the U.S. consumer.
- This was all done because there was originally a world recession caused by a huge 1973-1974 oil price spike.
- The short term effect of this government price control was that the world recession hit the U.S less than other countries.
- The long term effect of this price control was that U.S oil producers explored the US territories less for oil during that period of time.
Good info at: History and Analysis -Crude Oil Prices
Learn from history fellas
- From 1974 to 1980 the government implemented domestically produced oil price controls.
- The result of this price control was that U.S consumers would have to pay 50% more for oil that was imported from other countries than domestic oil and U.S. oil producers received less than world market prices.
- In effect, the U.S oil producer was subsidizing the U.S. consumer.
- This was all done because there was originally a world recession caused by a huge 1973-1974 oil price spike.
- The short term effect of this government price control was that the world recession hit the U.S less than other countries.
- The long term effect of this price control was that U.S oil producers explored the US territories less for oil during that period of time.
Good info at: History and Analysis -Crude Oil Prices
Learn from history fellas
