sooda
Veteran Member
Remember all the BS about no bid contracts? I thought I'd die laughing.. In a war zone its COST PLUS. Always has been .. damned morons.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do you think there will be war? (US vs Iran)
- Thread starter Nimos
- Start date
Remember all the BS about no bid contracts? I thought I'd die laughing.. In a war zone its COST PLUS. Always has been .. damned morons.
Road Warrior
Seeking the middle path..
Halliburton isn't a weapons dealer. You were right about oil, but wrong to assert (if you are) that this is about the MIC as the conspiracy theory
We Never Know
No Slack
Lol. That's one thing I've noticed about you. No matter what someone asks, you're experienced in it.
That's awesome!!
It seems you know more about Iran, Russia, the U.S., the bible, oil, the flood, fossils, prophecy's, etc than anyone. You're just the jack of all trades.
Road Warrior
Seeking the middle path..
Sorry dude, but ridiculing people isn't an argument. I've had my own arguments with @sooda but I've never found lying or BSing to be a factor.
We Never Know
No Slack
And for the record. I live in OK and have many friends and some family that work in oil and have been for many years here in the states, off shore and world wide. Here in the states, Hit a well, cap it. Hit a well, cap it. Hit a well, cap it. Has been a practice for many years.
We Never Know
No Slack
IMO I'm not lying. I've seen it several times. Wasn't trying to ridicule, just pointing out what I've seen.
Nimos
Well-Known Member
I think you are right, I think they might use the situation to keep trying to force Iran in knees economically, without actually having to send in troops.
No !!
-
-
Road Warrior
Seeking the middle path..
Sorry, man, never intended to imply you were lying. I only meant to say that I've never seen @sooda lie.
It won't hurt them if we start using other energy sources and conserving energy?
You can't possibly believe that adding $10 to the price of a gallon of gasoline won't hurt oil companies.
Can you?
Tom
Or the rest of the Gulf Oil Region.
How great would it be for USA producers to have the barrel price quintuple?
Tom
We Never Know
No Slack
I remember people saying
"if gas hits $1 a gallon I won't buy it"
"if gas hits $2 a gallon I won't buy it"
"if gas hits $3 a gallon I won't buy it"
...they kept buying it.
There are more cars on the road today than ever and people depend on gas too much. Work and recreation. They will pay for it even if it means doing without other things.
Shad
Veteran Member
This is not a topic meant for people to have a go at either Nation (or Trump), but simply whether people think there will eventually be war or not. And by war I mean with weapons, so not an economic war as that is already happening.
Opinions of why you think either way are appreciated. But try to keep it civilized and keep the opinions as objective as possible, as that would make it more interesting.
I think a conflict is unlikely until after 2020 election (Lame duck and all) unless Iran hits a US military asset like a mine hitting a warship. I do not see the conflict along the lines of Iraq or Afghanistan but that of the strikes against Iran in the 80s. I believe there is enough of an invasion type of war wariness within the GOP for a war to be considered an unpopular view pre-2020 let alone swing voters. Limited action like Syria seems to be more acceptable in general. After all a lot of outcry over Syria has died off.
Now if Trump loses 2020 I think action will only be taken by the Dems when it targets US warships. I think Dem concerns will be in saving Obama's deal unless pressed.
Some of us live a good distance from needful services. A great increase in fuel price would knock us out cold. We'd be hunting squirrels for food.
We Never Know
No Slack
Some of us never stopped hunting animals for food.
And you are correct. It would devastate many because peooke are dependant on gas and have a limited budget. However IMO that dependency would make them cut corners elsewhere because they still have to get to their jobs to make that money for survival.
@beenherebeforeagain won't like that.
I think people will be more resourceful in addressing higher gas prices.
They'll try carpooling, fewer trips, motorcycles, bicycles, staycations, etc.
Some heads would roll in the senate and house. That's why instead of forcing fuel prices up you have to act indirectly. The oil companies are going to run a campaign of their own if you try to jack up oil prices. What you have to do is make them lose interest in you and cause the tax to appear happen on its own, like an imminent and unstoppable cost they can't avoid. That sounds tricky, but its the only way. One doesn't just step in front of a train and say 'Stop you hear?' No, you have to call the train company and report a problem with the track. Then they'll stop the train. To effect change you have to move unseen and also once change is inevitable talk about the benefits of it. "Well its a good thing really that we all have to pay more for petroleum because...and of course there's nothing I can do about that."
Without so many cars there will be a lot more squirrels, so its fair.