What's new
  • ICMag with help from Landrace Warden and The Vault is running a NEW contest in November! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!

Maritime/Admiralty Law versus Common Law

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
I don’t believe we actually stole their oil, although the last guy wanted to.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...y-seizure-isis

That being said, i have absolutely no idea what this thread is supposed to be about.

trying to stabilize a country (whether we really should or not) so that disruptions to WORLD trade (not just US oil companies, sorry) are minimized seems a good idea actually. are we heavy-handed morons lots of times ? yup. but no one has ever shown me ANY evidence/proof that we are stealing oil anywhere.
 

h.h.

Active member
Veteran
trying to stabilize a country (whether we really should or not) so that disruptions to WORLD trade (not just US oil companies, sorry) are minimized seems a good idea actually. are we heavy-handed morons lots of times ? yup. but no one has ever shown me ANY evidence/proof that we are stealing oil anywhere.
Let me ask my Indian friends.
 

moose eater

Well-known member
trying to stabilize a country (whether we really should or not) so that disruptions to WORLD trade (not just US oil companies, sorry) are minimized seems a good idea actually. are we heavy-handed morons lots of times ? yup. but no one has ever shown me ANY evidence/proof that we are stealing oil anywhere.

Theft of oil for direct personal possession, versus favors to corporate buddies, while technically different, are not completely dissimilar.

Saddam booted BP out of Iraq, from the Ramallah Field they'd developed.... well, for the same reasons anyone paying close attention and not getting a kick-back would like to boot BP from damned near every place they've ever operated; they're the mafia of the oil patch. Period. Thieving, shell-game-playing, dishonest, corporatist vermin.

AS SOON AS the US had sent sufficient troops in to hold the opposition to a low rumble, BP was back in those same fields, though operating as a contractor, rather than as a primary operator and investor.

By the way, for anyone who's heard BP's, Conoco Phillip's, Exxon's, and others crocodile tear-and-whining sessions, wherein they try to steal resources from sovereign nations or states for a wish and a prayer, consider that when BP re-entered the Ramallah Field, they were working for between $1.50 and $2/bbl., ON PAPER, per contract. So all those places where they say they aren't making bank where they're heavily subsidized (the USA, for example), are just sound-bytes in their perpetual effort to gain as much as possible for as little as possible.

The fact that most of the Iraqi oil was headed at that time for European markets, doesn't mean that oil wasn't a primary issue in the play. It definitely was. The corporations who benefitted hold considerable sway over a good many governments, including the US.
 

Amynamous

Active member
Theft of oil for direct personal possession, versus favors to corporate buddies, while technically different, are not completely dissimilar.

Saddam booted BP out of Iraq, from the Ramallah Field they'd developed.... well, for the same reasons anyone paying close attention and not getting a kick-back would like to boot BP from damned near every place they've ever operated; they're the mafia of the oil patch. Period. Thieving, shell-game-playing, dishonest, corporatist vermin.

AS SOON AS the US had sent sufficient troops in to hold the opposition to a low rumble, BP was back in those same fields, though operating as a contractor, rather than as a primary operator and investor.

By the way, for anyone who's heard BP's, Conoco Phillip's, Exxon's, and others crocodile tear-and-whining sessions, wherein they try to steal resources from sovereign nations or states for a wish and a prayer, consider that when BP re-entered the Ramallah Field, they were working for between $1.50 and $2/bbl., ON PAPER, per contract. So all those places where they say they aren't making bank where they're heavily subsidized (the USA, for example), are just sound-bytes in their perpetual effort to gain as much as possible for as little as possible.

The fact that most of the Iraqi oil was headed at that time for European markets, doesn't mean that oil wasn't a primary issue in the play. It definitely was. The corporations who benefitted hold considerable sway over a good many governments, including the US.

BP seems to leave a dirty, filthy mess wherever they go.
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
BP seems to leave a dirty, filthy mess wherever they go.

no arguments there. BP is a world-wide conglomerate based in Great Britain. not even a US oil company. i'm not naive enough to pretend that oil is not a consideration where it exists, but like i said earlier, no one has shown me any evidence yet of the US invading a country & "stealing" their oil. so BP had an agreement, developed a vast oil field under that agreement, then had Saddam throw them out? any disagreement between Saddam & BP...well, i wouldn't fucking believe either of them. like choosing between snakes...
 

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top