Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Huckabee: US "Enslaved" To Saudi Oil  
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1904 times:

Further proving what intelligent people already know: those can speak beyond talking points and are able to level with the public will never be our leaders. Successful politicians are people who were good on the playground but were never able to actually do anything substantial otherwise.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071125/...;_ylt=Al16yvhCZ1yFic797hbCZpSs0NUE

"The United States has been far too involved in sort of looking the other way, not only at the atrocities of human rights and violation of women," Huckabee said on CNN's "Late Edition."

"Every time we put our credit card in the gas pump, we're paying so that the Saudis get rich — filthy, obscenely rich, and that money then ends up going to funding madrassas," schools "that train the terrorists," said Huckabee. "America has allowed itself to become enslaved to Saudi oil. It's absurd. It's embarrassing."

Huckabee said "I would make the United States energy independent within 10 years and tell the Saudis they can keep their oil just like they can keep their sand, that we won't need either one of them."


JFK set the goal, and we got to the moon in six years. If the US wanted to tackle the energy issue and tell these governments where to go, it could. America can do anything it sets its mind to...unfortunately there's zero political will to get the job done this time around. The problem in it all is that we don't know these things about ourselves, but other countries do, and there's the foundation for the hypocrisy that keeps otherwise moderate people from wanting to be on our side. The Saudis don't even recognize Israel for crying out loud  Yeah sure


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1885 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just like most Americans, Huckabee doesn't know that most US oil imports come from Canada. Saudia Arabia is number two. Does his energy independence include from us? If so, he doesn't have a hope in hell of achieving his goal


Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1868 times:



Quoting Arrow (Reply 1):
Just like most Americans, Huckabee doesn't know that most US oil imports come from Canada. Saudia Arabia is number two. Does his energy independence include from us? If so, he doesn't have a hope in hell of achieving his goal

Crude oil imports to US Sept 2007 data
Thousands of barrels per DAY
CANADA 1,956
SAUDI ARABIA 1,441
MEXICO 1,293
VENEZUELA 1,146
NIGERIA 1,137
IRAQ 603
ANGOLA 578
ALGERIA 503

Let us see, the Canadians well they are Canadians!! The Mexicans are invading. Venezuela has Chavez. Nigeria is unstable, corrupt and does not like Miss World contests. Iraq is, well again Iraq. Angola, aren't they still Communist under Cuban influence. And Algeria, we know that is full of terrorists.

The dangers that beset Mr Huckabee are more than even he realises!!

Total petroleum imports shows Canada even further ahead.

Country Sep-07
CANADA 2,467
SAUDI ARABIA 1,560
MEXICO 1,429
VENEZUELA 1,325
NIGERIA 1,181
ALGERIA 701
IRAQ 603
ANGOLA 591
VIRGIN ISLANDS 381
RUSSIA 348
ECUADOR 239
BRAZIL 232
COLOMBIA 186
UNITED KINGDOM 185
KUWAIT 163

I suggest, Arrow, that you keep a sharp lookout along that parallel for signs of high heat flow indicating the start of a rifting episode to take you away from your neighbour. Some have longed for a continent of the USofA.

So 2.467*about 90 millions a day to Canada. Go the loonie!


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1859 times:

I think you guys are missing his general point in that the money we pay for Saudi oil inevitably ends up funding things we absolutely need to be concerned about. Oil from Canada represents a larger overall share, but the Saudi component still represents a large enough figure overall that it can't be ignored, much less easily removed. Not to mention that the Canadian government and/or agents working on its behalf are not in the habit of sending money to Afghanistan and elsewhere to be used for fundamentalist education.


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1842 times:

No doubt, Canada IS the America's number one source but ask your average Joe on the street who the top supplier of oil/petroleum to the United States is and I'll bet he'll reply with "Saudi Arabia."

Do I think we should import one Riyal of Saudi oil? Absolutely not. Why? For the same reasons Huckabee wants us free from Saudi oil.

Do I think "Energy Independence" is solely an American issue? No. It's a problem the entire world must solve together. It isn't "us versus them" (no pun intended). We all breathe the same air.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
"Every time we put our credit card in the gas pump, we're paying so that the Saudis get rich — filthy, obscenely rich, and that money then ends up going to funding madrassas," schools "that train the terrorists," said Huckabee. "America has allowed itself to become enslaved to Saudi oil. It's absurd. It's embarrassing."

 checkmark  I agree with him. It IS absurd and embarrassing.

 redflag  But funding madrassas? I'm not so sure about that.

Mike Huckabee is just trying to rally the Republican base.


User currently offlineJGPH1A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1819 times:



Quoting Flynavy (Reply 4):
No doubt, Canada IS the America's number one source

Stand by for an imminent invasion of Canada, then.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12508 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1810 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Even if the US could wean itself off Saudi oil, it will not make any difference to Saudi Arabia - China and India could easily fill the void left by the US.


Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13092 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1804 times:

The USA is never going to be energy independent. Huckabee's comments have been said by many Presidential and other political candidates since the early 1970's to make them sound good to the masses. Saudi Arabia and too many of the countries we buy oil from are not, never will or often are not modern democracies, have horrible human rights policies and records we usually ignore and are defacto enemies of the USA.
All but a few Americans will not make the massive lifestyle and political changes, including driving by as much as 50%, and only driving cars that get 30+MPG city driving, fuel taxes that raise the price of gas to $5.00+/gallon, accept millions of power windmills, millions of acres of solar panels and/or make 80% or more of our electricity from nuke sources.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1801 times:



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 6):
Even if the US could wean itself off Saudi oil, it will not make any difference to Saudi Arabia - China and India could easily fill the void left by the US.

Just so. Especially in a time of shortage, oil is pretty fungible.

I doubt if we were missing the point Aaron. Just Huckabee was not as far as I could see, proposing a method of reducing US oil consumption by, oh 30 to 40% to start to make a difference. I could suggest how, but I am not that brave (?or stupid)!!  covereyes 

Until he does that, he does not have a point IMHO. And no, corn sourced alcohol is not the solution.

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 4):
redflag But funding madrassas? I'm not so sure about that.

Not sure why the uncertainty on that, where the heck do you think they get the funds for madrassas? Or do you think Saudi supported madrassas are not all over the world a bit like a plague of locusts?


User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1795 times:



Quoting JGPH1A (Reply 5):
Stand by for an imminent invasion of Canada, then.

I wasn't suggesting we do that! I'm just aware of the actual numbers.  banghead 

Quoting Baroque (Reply 8):
Not sure why the uncertainty on that, where the heck do you think they get the funds for madrassas? Or do you think Saudi supported madrassas are not all over the world a bit like a plague of locusts?

I personally am not an expert. But if this is in fact the case it's all the more reason for us not to import their oil (i.e. a de-facto sanction on them). Perhaps India and China would fill in the gap, yes, but at least we'd be leading by example in terms of not supporting states who sponsor - albeit directly or indirectly - global terrorism.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
The USA is never going to be energy independent.

Perhaps, perhaps not. But you essentially stated what I did - that Huckabee is just trying to rally the Republican base.


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1791 times:



Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
All but a few Americans will not make the massive lifestyle and political changes, including driving by as much as 50%, and only driving cars that get 30+MPG city driving, fuel taxes that raise the price of gas to $5.00+/gallon, accept millions of power windmills, millions of acres of solar panels and/or make 80% or more of our electricity from nuke sources.

It was only possible to post if it came from a US flag member, so thanks LTBEWR.

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 9):
I personally am not an expert. But if this is in fact the case it's all the more reason for us not to import their oil (i.e. a de-facto sanction on them). Perhaps India and China would fill in the gap, yes, but at least we'd be leading by example in terms of not supporting states who sponsor - albeit directly or indirectly - global terrorism.

That would be a start, but they could use Indian or Chinese sourced currency to exactly the same effects. Maybe a bit of virtue, but not a lot of effect. So go the arms salesmen selling stuff to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis armed to the teeth with US, UK and French weaponry are far less dangerous than the products of the KSA sponsored madrassas! A bit "Irish" but true.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1780 times:



Quoting Flynavy (Reply 4):
Do I think "Energy Independence" is solely an American issue? No. It's a problem the entire world must solve together.

It certainly must be addressed by everyone. The US though, particularly with the level of consumption encouraged by a largely suburban and auto-dependent lifestyle in the post WWII period, is in the best position to set standards and chart a new course toward energy solutions that will benefit the marketplace and eliminate the need for archaic resources that create undue political risk and strife.

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 4):
But funding madrassas? I'm not so sure about that.

It's well-known that a lot of Saudi money finds its way to fundamentalist Islam being taught elsewhere.

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 9):
Perhaps India and China would fill in the gap, yes, but at least we'd be leading by example in terms of not supporting states who sponsor - albeit directly or indirectly - global terrorism.

That's more of the point than anything.

Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
All but a few Americans will not make the massive lifestyle and political changes, including driving by as much as 50%, and only driving cars that get 30+MPG city driving, fuel taxes that raise the price of gas to $5.00+/gallon, accept millions of power windmills, millions of acres of solar panels and/or make 80% or more of our electricity from nuke sources.

They said it wasn't possible to go to the moon either. We may well see the day where even the spineless politicos in Washington come to realize that the above and a better commitment to education are the only things that will enable us to retain our position at the top of the economic and political spheres.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1769 times:



Quoting Aaron747 (Reply 11):
Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
All but a few Americans will not make the massive lifestyle and political changes, including driving by as much as 50%, and only driving cars that get 30+MPG city driving, fuel taxes that raise the price of gas to $5.00+/gallon, accept millions of power windmills, millions of acres of solar panels and/or make 80% or more of our electricity from nuke sources.

They said it wasn't possible to go to the moon either. We may well see the day where even the spineless politicos in Washington come to realize that the above and a better commitment to education are the only things that will enable us to retain our position at the top of the economic and political spheres.

Come back Jimmy Carter, some of us forgive you, come to that some of us never blamed you in the first place, no matter, at last the 1978 show would be good in energy terms.


User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12508 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1759 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Baroque (Reply 10):
The Saudis armed to the teeth with US, UK and French weaponry are far less dangerous than the products of the KSA sponsored madrassas!

Exactly! Similar thoughts were expressed in another thread here recently. Maybe it is better for the US to be "dependent" on Saudi oil and maintain relations with that country, because the realty of the alternative is, frankly, not very attractive.

Better the devil you know, etc.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineBHXFAOTIPYYC From Portugal, joined Jun 2005, 1644 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

Even at $99 a barrel, oil is still a cheap source of energy. Granted everytime we fill up it certainly doesn't fell "cheap" but a lot of that is taxation, especially in Europe. Alternative technologies aren't all they're cracked up to be... solar is only about 14% efficient (luckily BP holds the patents on that!), a gallon of hydrogen is more expensive to produce than a gallon of petrol, you'd need to devote a country the size of France to grow enough bio fuels etc etc... Nuclear is probably the front runner, but people are hugely paranoid about it. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be looking at alternatives, but apart from a lot of hot air from politicians on the subject, below the surface the will isn't there as Aaron747 says. Maybe when oil is $200 a barrel we'll all get serious about real alternatives. Until then....


Breakfast in BHX, lunch in FAO, dinner in TIP, baggage in YYC.
User currently offlineCF188A From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1750 times:



Quoting Baroque (Reply 2):
IRAQ 603

what an ironic coincidence


User currently offlineBaroque From Australia, joined Apr 2006, 15380 posts, RR: 59
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1746 times:



Quoting BHXFAOTIPYYC (Reply 14):
. Maybe when oil is $200 a barrel we'll all get serious about real alternatives. Until then...

Very nice, in the sense of precise and accurate summary BHX. Losing the addiction to cheap fossil fuels is not going to be easy. If this is a peak oil effect, a couple of years should see if you are correct about when to get serious.


User currently offlineArrow From Canada, joined Jun 2002, 2676 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Flynavy (Reply 4):
No doubt, Canada IS the America's number one source but ask your average Joe on the street who the top supplier of oil/petroleum to the United States is and I'll bet he'll reply with "Saudi Arabia."

And no one has yet mentioned natural gas or electricity. US gets about a third of its natural gas from Canada; not sure what the numbers are for electricity, but they are significant.

But you can't load electricity in a tanker, and while LNG is becoming a more attractive option for gas, it still has trouble competing on price with Canadian sources.

Energy independence for the US is possible -- but not without a huge price hike, and a much more committed approach to conservation. And think about this: if the US could completely back-out Canadian energy, Canada's economy would tank along with the high-flying loonie, and Canadians would no longer be able to afford to buy all that stuff they import from the US. Given that Canada is the largest export customer for 38 of the US states, that might be somewhat painful below the 49th parallel.

Energy is just one example of that xenophobic push down there to try and back out everything imported, with China at the top of the hate-list. Listen to Lou Dobbs nightly rant and you'll get the picture. But if Dobbs' point of view prevails, those other economies will also tank, and their capacity to buy stuff from the US will tank with it. A brave new world will emerge from that, and the US will no longer be the economic superpower it is now -- its market of 300 million just isn't big enough.

Be careful what you wish for ...



Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.
User currently offlineQueso From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1693 times:



Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
From Japan

A quick question- Do you ever post any topics that are not negative toward the United States?


User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1693 times:

Quoting Arrow (Reply 17):
Be careful what you wish for ...

Wait just a damn minute - I never wished for any Canadian sanctions. And I'm certainly NOT a xenophobe as your comments seem to insinuate. If you'd read my post carefully you would realize that.

If Canada were a human rights violator, the no. 2 importer of oil/petroleum to the US, and had a legal system based on Sharia Law I'd be desiring sanctions against Canada as well. Obviously that isn't the case and I value the US' political and economic relationships with Canada.

But calm down - this thread isn't about Canada.

It isn't even about Xenophobia.

It's about the Saudis. Their human rights (or lack thereof) track record speaks for itself, not to mention their direct (and/or indirect) support for terrorism.

[Edited 2007-11-26 11:13:37]

User currently offlineFlynavy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1685 times:



Quoting Queso (Reply 18):

I actually think this topic is fairly neutral. After all, his post is essentially just quoting what Mike Huckabee said anyway.


User currently offlineCastleIsland From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1676 times:



Quoting Queso (Reply 18):
A quick question- Do you ever post any topics that are not negative toward the United States?

Aaron's wife is Japanese and they live there; as far as I can tell, he appreas to be native to the U.S., although I might be mistaken. Further, very little change ever occurred as a result of complacency. Criticism is not just a right, it's a responsibility.

Quoting Flynavy (Reply 20):
I actually think this topic is fairly neutral. After all, his post is essentially just quoting what Mike Huckabee said anyway.

Pretty much so, but even if he is on one side of the issue, if you think something needs grease, it ain't gonna happen if you don't bring it up.


User currently offlineFumanchewd From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1667 times:

It would be nice.

Quoting Aaron747 (Thread starter):
JFK set the goal, and we got to the moon in six years. If the US wanted to tackle the energy issue and tell these governments where to go, it could.

I agree. The problem is that most Americans don't want to give up their cheap lifestyle choices. i.e. gas guzzlers and 737 flights to Vegas every other month. It would take a federal law to impose everyone buying more expensive electric/hydro fuel cell vehicles.

On top of that oil produces more than just fuels. Plastics, chemicals, and a good amount of manmade materials use some form of petroleum in their composition. Not to mention the cargo ships, jets, and hundreds of thousand deisel powered trucks and trains holding our country together. There is no technology that is cheap enough to switch all of these vehicles.

As for jets, there is no other technology at this point. UHB jets, Easyjet's pusher engines, and efficiency will reduce the amount of fuel used, but I don't see a replacement for Jet fuel for a long time.

I do want to see this country independent from oil. It would be great if we didn't have to import any. I personally would change my lifestyle to help this happen, but I don't see too many others that would be willing to make any sacrifices.

I hope that he can prove me wrong.


User currently offlineLAXspotter From India, joined Jan 2007, 3650 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 1618 times:



Quoting LTBEWR (Reply 7):
All but a few Americans will not make the massive lifestyle and political changes, including driving by as much as 50%, and only driving cars that get 30+MPG city driving, fuel taxes that raise the price of gas to $5.00+/gallon

Gas Tax, like all the other European states where gas is consistently over $5.5 per gallon, people will HAVE to get rid of their inefficient cars. I hope it happens one day, but I doubt it. The lack of public trasport infrastructure and our addiction to our vehicles is a barrier.

Quoting Queso (Reply 18):
Do you ever post any topics that are not negative toward the United States?

who cares, does it hurt your feelings?



"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" Samuel Johnson
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 8135 posts, RR: 26
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1605 times:

Quoting Fumanchewd (Reply 22):
It would take a federal law to impose everyone buying more expensive electric/hydro fuel cell vehicles.

That's totally out of the question. If Washington would stop interfering with the public perception of the economy, we might just have a few necessary corrections and/or recessions that would solve this issue via the market. The problem is that we have an entire political class (both major parties) that has successfully molded a longstanding attitude that recessions are evil and to be avoided at all costs and that creates the absurd notion that we need more regulation to bring change to any kind of market problem.

Quoting Queso (Reply 18):
A quick question- Do you ever post any topics that are not negative toward the United States?

When the government starts doing its job better, I'll gladly post the good news.  

Otherwise there aren't many positive topics I could post that would be of much interest around here - I doubt anyone much cares for my feelings regarding the great national parks of the west and desert southwest, the appeal of small town amateur league baseball, or various tidbits on American urban architecture and design.

Now, let me turn it back around Queso: do you honestly want American money paying for the continuation of the Saudi brand of fundamentalist Islam?

[Edited 2007-11-26 17:07:49]


If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
25 Baroque : Fair return of "serve". Ping, PONG, any more ping?
26 Post contains images LAXspotter : , What abour our freedoms? IMO, major lifestyle changes need to be made by the average American to offset the unbelivable demand for Crude Oil.
27 Baroque : Which ones would they be LAX? Just kidding folk!! Put it down to the freedom of not being ruled in a couple of days by the Man of Steel and the Deput
28 Copaair737 : And just like them, if elected, he'll change his tune. Clinton said we needed to get tough on China's human rights violations, but he changed his tun
29 LAXspotter : Whatever happened to accountability. I dont think too many people would disagree if we started imprisoning politicans for lying.
30 Baroque : I can do that now if you really wish, but how much are you willing to pay? Trouble is that even at USD100 a barrel, crude oil is still cheaper than t
31 Aaron747 : I'm not going to hold my breath for Queso's answer. Paging Doctor Zhivago...
32 FLYB6JETS : Classic leftist comment. Tax Americans into submission. Think before you speak.
33 Aaron747 : Just so you know...gas is around $5.40 in my part of Japan. We have the world's best rail network in terms of access per capita and nearly 70% of the
34 Queso : Hell no! Oh ye of little faith! You might be surprised, I'd enjoy a discussion about National Parks (especially of the west and desert southwest) and
35 Arrow : The alternative, of course, is for you to consume yourselves into submission. As a believer in free markets, I'm tempted to say 'go for it,' but we'r
36 FLYB6JETS : It is that mindset that is sending this country down the toilet. Tax people until they can't afford to live. What does it solve? Nothing. Explain how
37 Arrow : There's nothing magic about it. It will force you to think about how much money you are prepared to spend on a particular activity -- in this case co
38 Post contains images Toast : Would doubling the price of fuel in the US lead you to bankruptcy? I'm sorry to hear that... It works, at least on people who can count and think rat
39 FLYB6JETS : I am all for mass public trasnportation. I hate driving because it seems the majority of people on the roads are morons who shouldn't be driving anyw
40 Toast : Sure, mass transit may be inadequate in many places in the US, but it doesn't explain why so many people drive huge, gas-guzzling cars. Of course you
41 LAXspotter : no surprise, still lower than the Netherlands tho. BTW, all highways are toll right? I agree, its impressive. agreed soon it will. In the US, even th
42 Post contains images FLYB6JETS : I agree 100%. Would I love to have a big expensive SUV? Sure. But I don't because I don't need it. My Pontiac Vibe gets me from point a to point b ju
43 LAXspotter : well it seems you disagree with the choices that a lot of people are making out there, we just dont agree on how to solve this problem.
44 Post contains images FLYB6JETS : I will drink to that. (Couldn't find a frosty mug smilie, sorry)
45 Post contains images Toast : A good option as well, probably better than taxing gas itself. Believe me, politicians know every trick in the book how to tax stuff. Just create a t
46 FLYB6JETS : I think we have quipped a few times, mostly under my old name, Jetjock22. We got into it over something that had to do with history and WW2 or someth
47 Post contains images Toast : Ah, so you're that asshole! Still can't remember, but I do realize my opinions on some subjects may be controversial.
48 Baroque : Part of the answer from: some from Toast, but additionally, explain how your theory of wasting as much as using a finite resource is going to solve a
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Does The Word "bugger" Mean To You? posted Sat Oct 13 2007 08:11:11 by Ronglimeng
US Arms Sale To Saudi Arabia - Good Or Bad? posted Sun Sep 2 2007 20:40:36 by Bmacleod
"A Plan To Destroy America" posted Wed Mar 7 2007 08:20:29 by FlyUSCG
Brownback's "Off To See The Wizard" posted Tue Jan 23 2007 21:37:40 by AeroWesty
US Navy "Pump-It" posted Fri Nov 24 2006 22:37:28 by AirframeAS
"I Refuse To Wear Clothes" On Jerry Springer posted Thu Nov 9 2006 13:35:26 by Shinkai
"Michael Jackson" Sentenced To 508 Years In Jail.. posted Wed Nov 1 2006 13:22:03 by Thom@s
You Hear "Death To Israel"? - Smile! posted Wed Oct 25 2006 12:20:19 by 7474ever
Video Flashback - "I Want To Know" posted Sun Sep 24 2006 22:36:53 by AeroWesty
Politico: "Racist To Eat Fried Chicken In Ghetto" posted Sat Sep 23 2006 23:35:09 by FlyingTexan