New GWB thinking on the bombing of Iran

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TheNewbie

Senior member
Jul 17, 2007
740
0
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Who's going to bring down our economy?! Other than no one really wanting or being able to do anything like that, there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us, so STFU with that BS.
Sorry, you fail the history course. You will have to take it up next semester.

Nobody is able or willing? Uh, why don't you google "oil embargo", for starters. Have you not noticed that when there is increased friction with oil-selling nations (Venezuela, Iran, etc.) the price of oil immediately goes up?

It's funny you scold and encourage others to read economic or history books, but hubris has a tendency to blind its projector, so not surprising.

You're funny, but nothing more than that.
There's a big difference (which I'm not going to get into right now) between making you pay $2 or a bit more per gallon than bringing down an entire economy. I never said we won't be feeling any discomfort. That may happen, but in the long run there's no threat in that.

I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
You guess wrong.

Again, you said
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us
to which I responded urging you to google oil embargo.

Bringing down the economy doesn't even mean anything. Obviously it won't bring the US down to the point where its GDP is $0. Bringing it down, by the true definition of the word, certainly that is possible. Gain, see what happens when your OPEC masters decide to stop the flow.

From this link However, the effects of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear - it effectively doubled the real price of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the US. This would exacerbate a recession that had already begun, and lead to a global recession through the rest of 1974.

It's great being right. I never get tired of it!
 

TheNewbie

Senior member
Jul 17, 2007
740
0
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
You guess wrong.

Again, you said
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us
to which I responded urging you to google oil embargo.

Bringing down the economy doesn't even mean anything. Obviously it won't bring the US down to the point where its GDP is $0. Bringing it down, by the true definition of the word, certainly that is possible. Gain, see what happens when your OPEC masters decide to stop the flow.

From this link However, the effects of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear - it effectively doubled the real price of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the US. This would exacerbate a recession that had already begun, and lead to a global recession through the rest of 1974.

It's great being right. I never get tired of it!

Obviously it is too much ***** ** **** ***** ****** to understand what I'm talking about so lets just leave it at that for now.

***** is not a word I would use (or any of its synonyms) to describe you. But as long as you're happy...


Edit: Edited to comply with forum rules.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
TheNewbie
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us

Skoorb
Uh, why don't you google "oil embargo"

Skoorb: 1
TheNewbie: 0

TheNewbie also gets docked a point, bringing him to -1 for being so thick-headed that when his point is demonstrably undermined he fails to repent and insists on his rightfulness, even in the face of contradictory and obvious, plain evidence to the contrary.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
You guess wrong.

Again, you said
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us
to which I responded urging you to google oil embargo.

Bringing down the economy doesn't even mean anything. Obviously it won't bring the US down to the point where its GDP is $0. Bringing it down, by the true definition of the word, certainly that is possible. Gain, see what happens when your OPEC masters decide to stop the flow.

From this link However, the effects of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear - it effectively doubled the real price of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the US. This would exacerbate a recession that had already begun, and lead to a global recession through the rest of 1974.

It's great being right. I never get tired of it!
Read all the way through that link and try to figure out why an oil embargo would never be feasible again. OPEC learned that putting the squeeze on the West ultimately slit their own throats and severely eroded the prominence of OPEC on the world stage by spurring new oil development and exploration in the West. An oil embargo is a two-edged sword and OPEC would be loathe to try and pull that little stunt again.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
we're not going to war with Iran.

and all this saber rattling really only makes them look better.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: bamacre
Damn, the Republicans are screwing us, and the Democrats are doing nothing but handing out condoms. These two parties have ruined America more than any terrorist organization could have ever dreamed.

QFT
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
You guess wrong.

Again, you said
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us
to which I responded urging you to google oil embargo.

Bringing down the economy doesn't even mean anything. Obviously it won't bring the US down to the point where its GDP is $0. Bringing it down, by the true definition of the word, certainly that is possible. Gain, see what happens when your OPEC masters decide to stop the flow.

From this link However, the effects of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear - it effectively doubled the real price of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the US. This would exacerbate a recession that had already begun, and lead to a global recession through the rest of 1974.

It's great being right. I never get tired of it!
Read all the way through that link and try to figure out why an oil embargo would never be feasible again. OPEC learned that putting the squeeze on the West ultimately slit their own throats and severely eroded the prominence of OPEC on the world stage by spurring new oil development and exploration in the West. An oil embargo is a two-edged sword and OPEC would be loathe to try and pull that little stunt again.


Now they have China, and the "west" doesn't mean Europe. Although I don't see an embargo happening anytime soon, it's not impossible. A Great Depression as a result? probably not but a good whopping recession could be in the works. Of course spending 10% of what we do on the Iraq War would probably fix our dependence, but we don't want to do that as a country. Wars are easier these days because they really don't inconvienence the vast majority of Americans.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Read all the way through that link and try to figure out why an oil embargo would never be feasible again. OPEC learned that putting the squeeze on the West ultimately slit their own throats and severely eroded the prominence of OPEC on the world stage by spurring new oil development and exploration in the West. An oil embargo is a two-edged sword and OPEC would be loathe to try and pull that little stunt again.
Right, but nobody is discussing whether it could be done again. I merely said there is a historical precedent for it. The US' oil imports from the middle east as a percentage of its total imports have gone down substantially in the last couple of decades so an oil embargo would not hurt _as much_. It would certainly still hurt.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I also don't blame him for hating the U.S.

Well, I do. If he hates the USA so much, why is he still here?

Well if he had said that then you might have a point. He didn't. You don't.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
I sincerely hope we never go to war with Iran, but something must be done to end their nuclear research NOW. The ball is in Iran's court, and I just hope they don't force the western hands...
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,902
10,233
136
Originally posted by: loki8481
we're not going to war with Iran.

and all this saber rattling really only makes them look better.

We are preparing for war with Iran. A slip of the finger from either nation is all it would take. That is what happens when tensions are high.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,875
8,459
136
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: tweaker2
Originally posted by: senseamp
These are neocons we are talking about. If reality flies in the face of their ideology, they stick by the ideology at all cost.
the neocons remind me of a rabid wandering lynch mob looking for victims that they can hang and confiscate property from.

And the Democrats are in cahoots. They aren?t as leftist as P&N?s Dems. If being left somehow signifies that you support nuclear proliferation and state sponsored acts of war against our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

unlike this country's neocons, who support nuclear proliferation and state sponsored acts of war only if it's our country or our proxies and allies doing it, i tend to have a more balanced, worldly view in which i support neither.

edit - content
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,986
1
0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well if he had said that then you might have a point. He didn't. You don't.

He certainly implies it from his other words...
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: TheNewbie
I dare say I know both my history & economy at least as much as you, though my guess is that I know much more.
You guess wrong.

Again, you said
there's no "serious" country that even if it could who would risk its own stability just to get back at us
to which I responded urging you to google oil embargo.

Bringing down the economy doesn't even mean anything. Obviously it won't bring the US down to the point where its GDP is $0. Bringing it down, by the true definition of the word, certainly that is possible. Gain, see what happens when your OPEC masters decide to stop the flow.

From this link However, the effects of the Arab Oil Embargo are clear - it effectively doubled the real price of crude oil at the refinery level, and caused massive shortages in the US. This would exacerbate a recession that had already begun, and lead to a global recession through the rest of 1974.

It's great being right. I never get tired of it!
Read all the way through that link and try to figure out why an oil embargo would never be feasible again. OPEC learned that putting the squeeze on the West ultimately slit their own throats and severely eroded the prominence of OPEC on the world stage by spurring new oil development and exploration in the West. An oil embargo is a two-edged sword and OPEC would be loathe to try and pull that little stunt again.

Right, but nobody is discussing whether it could be done again. I merely said there is a historical precedent for it. The US' oil imports from the middle east as a percentage of its total imports have gone down substantially in the last couple of decades so an oil embargo would not hurt _as much_. It would certainly still hurt.
So what's the point of citing historical precendent in this case if you agree it will likely never happen again? You seemed to be saying in your rebuttal to TheNewbie that OPEC could bring down our economy if it wanted to do so today and then exclaimed how you never tire of "being right." OPEC could not bring down our economy. Certainly it could cause some grief but it would hurt them far more than us. The west can adapt. For the most poart oil is all they have to keep their economic boat afloat.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: loki8481
we're not going to war with Iran.

and all this saber rattling really only makes them look better.

We are preparing for war with Iran. A slip of the finger from either nation is all it would take. That is what happens when tensions are high.

what are we going to go to war with, precisely, with our army bogged down in two losing wars?
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: loki8481
we're not going to war with Iran.

and all this saber rattling really only makes them look better.

We are preparing for war with Iran. A slip of the finger from either nation is all it would take. That is what happens when tensions are high.

what are we going to go to war with, precisely, with our army bogged down in two losing wars?

Ask the "the all knowing intelligent supreme genius"........bush :roll:
 

Arkaign

Lifer
Oct 27, 2006
20,736
1,379
126
Originally posted by: loki8481
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: loki8481
we're not going to war with Iran.

and all this saber rattling really only makes them look better.

We are preparing for war with Iran. A slip of the finger from either nation is all it would take. That is what happens when tensions are high.

what are we going to go to war with, precisely, with our army bogged down in two losing wars?

Our Navy ;) The power projection available from multiple carrier battle groups is simply astonishing. We could reduce a continent to rubble and smoking ruins from just one of them, combined with a couple of our Tridents.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well if he had said that then you might have a point. He didn't. You don't.

He certainly implies it from his other words...

It looked to me that he was frustrated with his situation which was in large part a result of US actions. Clearly the Iranians decided the road they would go down, but I happen to be frustrated by claims we were effectively forced to go to war in Iraq because Saddam violated UN declarations. I also don't like that we installed Pinochet, caused the assisination of various and sundry leaders we didn't like, such as the elected leader of Iran a half century or so ago, nor that we inflicted the Shah on them. Do I hate the US? No, but I've some good old fashioned harsh language for those who supported those actions.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: palehorse74
I sincerely hope we never go to war with Iran, but something must be done to end their nuclear research NOW. The ball is in Iran's court, and I just hope they don't force the western hands...
Why must something be done? Nothing was done when Pakistan got the bomb or NK and they've not used them. The biggest reason Iran has to get nukes is because they need them desperately to secure their borders. With all the drum beating going to march in and start attacking them by the clowns here and elsewhere, I wouldn't blame them at all if they were trying to get nukes. I would to in their shoes.
So what's the point of citing historical precendent in this case if you agree it will likely never happen again?
*sigh* He said they cannot do anything and wouldn't threaten their own stability. I've shown that they can and have in the past. Further, I stated that an embargo may have less effect now based on how much the US relies on their oil, but obviously still a major effect could be had since, if we look at the news, we note that "escalations of tension" (not even a reduction in actual flow) has a precipitous effect on the market and prices go up. If OPEC shut down the pipes, oil costs would go up and that would hurt the economy. I never quantified to what extent because nobody can guess and if they do guess, they're lying. It would be more than $1 and less than the entire GDP.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
Originally posted by: Pabster
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Well if he had said that then you might have a point. He didn't. You don't.

He certainly implies it from his other words...

Your error, Pabster, is equating hating something the US does with simply hating the nation entirely.

Pabster, do you approve of everything the US has ever done, from the genocide against the Indians to stealing half of Mexico to the injecting of black men with Syphilis in a medical experiment to our period with Eugenics and involuntary sterilization to the Iran-Contra crimes and so on?

Either you approve of all of these and other wrongs, or you need to leave the country since you must 'hate America', as implied by your words of condemning those wrongs.

It's like arguing with 6 year olds - you try to talk war, and they say "nah nah you hate the troops", you say the nation did a wrong, and they say "nah nah you hate America".

There can be no substantive discussion of the issues, since the discussion is derailed to 'you hate America' 'No, I don't' 'yes you do' 'no I don't'.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
Originally posted by: Lemon law

Does not our congress ever learn?

Seems to me that they learn just fine. It some of us who don't.

The Dems learned from Iraq that they could stand up and act tough (when popular), beating their chest and calling for Saddam's removal. Then, when that became unpopular they could revise history and wash their hands of it. And most people bought it.

They've learned that even though in the majority, they can still fund the *war*, and be *excused* for it cuz they dont have enough of a majority etc.

They're gonna permit GWB to do this, claim that they didn't and all the guilables will believe them.

No, they've learned real real well. The not learning thingy rests elsewhere.

Fern