Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Strictly: Drilling II -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sammaster who wrote (26843)	1/27/2003 10:09:34 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Respond to of 36161

<<a short war would mean the oil spigots open and flood US with cheap oil...>> A thought that keeps bugging me about the "cheap oil" scenario....if we wait (and finally receive) UN assistance in this war, and especially with the occupation, how is it that we get to dictate unilaterally the terms of what happens with Iraq's natural resources? Might not the traitorous French, the duplicitous Sauds, the petulant Russians or the indifferent Chinese object to this scheme, seeing that it works against their own self interests in each case? This is the main problem I have with the whole theory of this being a "War for Texaco"...if we go it alone, than this is true, but if we build a consensus, the terms of occupation will likely be determined by the occupier (UN). Discuss among yerselves!<G>