knoxman,

You may want to watch your friends and family die of starvation while wallowing in poverty, but I don't. I am a realist. I know that without oil, millions, possibly billions of people would die. For that reason, it is a vital national interest for the US to make sure that oil is flowing.

a realist would also see the absurdity of a statement like that.

bl8ant,

Thanks, that added a lot to the conversation. Much better than telling me why you feel that way.

it's blatantly obvious in the face of our crisis with climate change....

but you probably think that's all hype i guess....

Everyone in the US, go out and look at the interstate. See all those giant 18 wheelers? It's hard to believe, but each one of them is powered by fuel made from oil. Almost everything you need / want is delivered by those trucks. Most of Americas foods are grown by a few huge farms. Without those trucks, they have no way of delivering that food. Without food...you die. If oil suddenly disappeared, billions of people in cities who depend on having their food delivered would die. China, Russia, Europe, Africa, South America and the US all depend on oil to feed their people. Without oil, people starve and die. It's not rocket science.

well lets see

it is better to go to another country

invade and occupy

watch thousands die

so their oil can be taken

than to drill on the slope in alaska

hhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

imagine that

but oh yeah

that might harm the eco system there

i guess that is more important

but hey what do i know

bl8ant,

Man made Global Warming? It's a hoax. Global warming is caused by the Sun, humans are responsible for about 2% of global warming at most.

But let me get this straight, you think humans starving to death is cool, because we might be raising the earth temperature?

adj4u,

I say drill in ANWR, California Coast, Gulf of Mexico and anwhere else we have oil, so that we don't have to worry about foreign oil. Make the plants to turn coal into oil too. Foreign oil is a national security risk.

But Iraq isn't about oil. We aren't taking their oil. It was about many things, WMDs being one. We were wrong on WMDs, but we couldn't take the chance that we were right. It's that simple. The American people would have impeached the President if we hadn't done something about Iraq. History will show that the only reasonable course of action was war.

well last i checked

mexico was the u s number 1 importer of oil

and canada was number 2

not sure iraq was even on the list

but i am not sure it is not about the oil

look at the fluxuation in the market since

the iraq situation

oil man is in the whitehouse

oil market explodes on what might happen

and oil companies are breaking records every 1/4

where there profits are concerned

if anyone believes oil is not a major factor

then there may be a problem in the logic area

sure there were other reasons to use

but those were a mask to hide the destabilization

of the oil market to force higher prices so

the oil companies can jack up profits

but hey what do i know

Spidercmb,

As a self-sufficient nation, shouldn't we be working towards coming up with viable alternatives for our overdependence on oil? Of course we should. But we're not. Why? Simple. Too many people on both sides of the political fence in Washington have their hands in the oil industry. Hell, Condi even has a FREAKIN' OIL TANKER named after her! As long as politicians profit from the oil industry, scientists working on viable alternatives to oil will have to deal with the insurmountable obstacles the U.S.govt. places before them.

How about investing as much money into finding an alternative fuel source as we do financing an illegal war, spider.
Yes, of course its about the oil. I know you find that possibillity hard to grasp, because it is disgusting. But, Im afraid that is exactly why we are there. If we went there for WMD, why did this administration take so many pains to fabricate the lie. ie. scooter Libby??

I think we should blame the amish!!

Fanta46,

It's sad that you don't understand what Scooter Libby was accused and convicted of. You don't grasp that situation or you are knowingly lying. Scooter Libby was convicted for misremembering the details of a non-Crime. The Special Prosectuor knew before he talked to Libby who had leaked and that the leak wasn't a crime. It's a fact, look it up. It's sad that something like that is common knowledge and yet you still believe the conspiracy theory.

LEPRACHAUNS ARE REALLLLLLLLLLL!!!!

leprechans are real!!!!

So what facts didnt he remember spider. LMAO

He said Reporter X told me about Valere Plame, but it was really Reporter Y. Look it up if you have any interest in the truth. What Libby has to do with oil, I'm not sure.

Its a crime even if its a misdemeanor. He was convicted of perjury. They are after Cheney for leaking the identity of a CIA agent, and that treason. You should know that. Perjury is the crime they got libby on, and it was a Fed judge appointed by Bush that handed down the sentence, They cant cry democrat over that!

They fabricated the story of WMD, and when wilson was telling on them, they leaked his wifes name to the press when he wouldnt be quite about it.
If WMD existed why did they needed to fabricate a lie about WMD.
They did, because they knew they didnt exist, and had to try to convince Congress and you that they did.
That way you would support the war, even though they went there to get the oil.

Fanta46,

I know what he was convicted on, but should he have been tired in the first place, that's the question. Is it reasonable to assume that someone who does lots of interviews with the press might have forgotten who mentioned what two years earlier? YES, it is reasonable to assume that. Did it make any difference to the case? No! The investigation determined the leaker almost immediately after it began. They had already talked to the leaker (Armitage) and determined that no crime was commited before they talked to Libby. He is innocent, he had a brain fart and for that he gets 30 months in prison? WHAT!? That's an injustice. I misremember things all the time, I would hate to think that I would go to prison for it.

------------------------------------------------------------
Right up to the final stages of the deliberations, there were hints of some confusion on the jury as to just what Mr. Libby was accused of doing. This morning, for instance, Judge Walton was asked if Mr. Libby was accused of making a false statement to a reporter from Time magazine. No, the judge said; he was not.
------------------------------------------------------------

At the final stages of deliberations, the jury didn't know what Libby was accused of...

yes, oh yes, he should have been tried, and he received a lenient sentence in my opinion, even before Bush commuted it.

Of course, I cant remember why people should tell the truth.