If only it were that simple... The instability is not only there (and as Robert pointed out, it didn't rise like this during Desert Storm). The conflict in Iraq was priced into the crude market 6 years ago. There is conflict in Nigeria, A tin pot dictator in training in Venezuela, Putin backstepping in Russia... The last spike in crude prices was due to Nigeria shutting down production due to rebel attacks. Before that it was a pipeline burst between the US and Canada. "Instability" is everywhere and combined with a massive rise in consumption (thanks China and India) is why the prices are where they are at.
-----Original Message----- From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 10:28 AM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Bush on Iran,ignoring intelligence that doesn't fit his world view. Again. yeah? I'm sure he will. I'd bet money on it. But not by investing in oil. I'm trying to put my money where my mouth is. Seriously, we are paying a premium on our oil because of the risk of instability in the region. There is *no* question about that. On Dec 8, 2007 9:08 AM, Jeff Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All I'm saying Dana is that you, of all people, should understand that > there are waaaaaayyyy more variables that go into this than just "the > president did it for his oil buddies". I'm actually invested quite > heavily in the oil industry(ies), so I keep an eye on as many of the > variables as I can. But > hey... You believe what you want to believe. Will the price of oil > continue to decline? I think it will, but I'm sure 'ol Dubya can make > it go back up if he wanted to... > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 9:37 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Bush on Iran,ignoring intelligence that doesn't fit his > world view. Again. > > versus the previous week yeah, it is. Do you seriously think it will > continue to drop? Have you noticed that 2.73 a gallon is now "low"? > I'd find it amusing that a web developer was lecturing me on finance, > if it weren't so sad. We've had a commodities market for a long long > time, have *you* noticed *that*? > > But hey. The price of oil has more than doubled in the last two or > three years, but that's mere coincidence. Blame Canada, or maybe the Chinese. > It's > difinitely nothing to do with the president's industry ties. Neither > is his threatened veto of the energy bill. > > Nope nope. The president watches over us and protects us. Our father > who art in Washington. > > Bah. > > On Dec 8, 2007 7:34 AM, Jeff Garza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > OPEC serves the purpose of keeping oil prices high. Devaluation of > > the dollar serves the purpose of keeping oil (and gold) prices high. > > Speculation in the commodities markets keeps the price of oil high. > > Lots of things keep the price of oil high. Did you notice that oil > > prices have been declining for the past couple of weeks or so? It's > > down nearly 10 percent... Is that Bush's fault as well? > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2007 7:25 AM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Bush on Iran,ignoring intelligence that doesn't fit his > > world view. Again. > > > > Bush's big stick serves the purpose of keeping oil prices high ;) > > > > On Dec 7, 2007 5:52 PM, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Diplomacy is preferable to war, but there has to be a credible > > > threat of some sort of retaliation for diplomacy to work. Economic > > > sanctions are the best tool the international community has > > > against a country like Iran, but our ability to pressure Iran with > > > sanctions is limited by the refusal of Russia and China to > > > cooperate with more robust > > sanctions > > against them. > > > > > > Fortunately, we have other credible means of threatening Iran. To > > > paraphrase Teddy Rosevelt, Bush is speaking softly and carrying > > > the big stick of the U.S. military on his shoulder, and the > > > Iranians believe (quite reasonably) that Bush will take that stick > > > and thump them if need be. Bush's tough talk on Iran is part of > > > the diplomatic strategy, not an attempt to subvert diplomacy. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Dec 6, 2007 3:13 AM, Vivec wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Government report released Tuesday says Iran stopped nuke work > > > > in > > 2003" > > > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/05/bush.iran/index.html > > > > > > > > At least this information came out before they dropped a > > > > tactical > > nuke. > > > > It's amazing the misdirection and the build up over Iran. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Let's hope that diplomacy is continued with Iran to bring them > > > > in-line with what the world wants. > > > > Because I don't think anyone wants a Nuclear Strike capable Iran. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Check out the new features and enhancements in the latest product release - download the "What's New PDF" now http://download.macromedia.com/pub/labs/coldfusion/cf8_beta_whatsnew_052907.pdf Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:247963 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
