Now *this* is appalling
Kevin Gowen
Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest and
a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled the
stricken country.
Aid agencies are alarmed by refugees' reports that children have been killed
and corpses cut up by people desperate for food. Requests by the United
Nations World Food Programme (WFP) to be allowed access to "farmers'
markets", where human meat is said to be traded, have been turned down by
Pyongyang, citing "security reasons".
Anyone caught selling human meat faces execution, but in a report compiled
by the North Korean Refugees Assistance Fund (NKRAF), one refugee said:
"Pieces of 'special' meat are displayed on straw mats for sale. People know
where they came from, but they don't talk about it."
ObJapan: North Korean guys kidnapped some Japanese guys a while ago.
--
Kevin Gowen
Declan Murphy
> ObJapan: North Korean guys kidnapped some Japanese guys a while ago.
Crikey. Your post refers to a place in the same hemisphere as Japan!
--
"All FDR undid was the value of the dollar"
Kevin Gowen (really)
Dave Fossett
> Anyone caught selling human meat faces execution, but in a report compiled
> by the North Korean Refugees Assistance Fund (NKRAF), one refugee said:
> "Pieces of 'special' meat are displayed on straw mats for sale. People
know
> where they came from, but they don't talk about it."
Time to start recirculating that photo of the Chinese artist eating human
foetuses? ;-)
--
Dave Fossett
Saitama, JAPAN
Kevin Gowen
I hear that Korean kids are kind of gamey.
--
Kevin Gowen
Brett Robson
>
>http://tinyurl.com/dw86
>
>Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest and
>a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled the
>stricken country.
Is that a good enough reason to invade?
---
"he [John Ashcroft] deliberately left Jesus out of office prayers to avoid
offending non-Christians." - Ben Shapiro 27/2/2003
Declan Murphy
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:56:52 -0400, "Kevin ...
>
>>http://tinyurl.com/dw86
>>
>>Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest and
>>a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled the
>>stricken country.
>
> Is that a good enough reason to invade?
Here's a thought. Forget about Jonathan Swift's essay regarding eating
the poor. Its time scientists worked out whether North Korean children
could be processed in a way that yields enough oil to power an SUV.
Ryan Ginstrom
"Declan Murphy" <declan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3EE55DF9...@hotmail.com...
> Brett Robson wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:56:52 -0400, "Kevin ...
> >
> >>http://tinyurl.com/dw86
> >>
> >>Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest
and
> >>a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled
the
> >>stricken country.
> >
> > Is that a good enough reason to invade?
>
> Here's a thought. Forget about Jonathan Swift's essay regarding eating
> the poor. Its time scientists worked out whether North Korean children
> could be processed in a way that yields enough oil to power an SUV.
What is the target mpc?
--
Regards,
Ryan Ginstrom
Declan Murphy
> "Declan Murphy" <declan...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3EE55DF9...@hotmail.com...
>>Here's a thought. Forget about Jonathan Swift's essay regarding eating
>>the poor. Its time scientists worked out whether North Korean children
>>could be processed in a way that yields enough oil to power an SUV.
>
> What is the target mpc?
Well, its not as if the consumers have shown any historical interest in
fuel efficiency, and as each child processed is a child liberated, lets
aim for the low side, process and sell cheap, go for volume. How low can
we go?
Eric Takabayashi
I first heard about cannibalism in North Korea maybe two or three years ago. It
was already so bad that people in the countryside had to watch over their dead
that they not be stolen and eaten.
The rest of the world cared then about as much as they do now. Around that
time, Japan had a national ad campaign featuring a fat feline reporting that
40% of food in Japan was wasted. The food Japan does not eat, particularly the
years' surplus of rice overflowing from storage and even reported rotting
before it can be used, could feed North Korea. But now in particular, as could
be seen on yesterday's news, eight abducted Japanese and their families, if
still alive, and ignored by the public and government for the previous quarter
of a century, matter more than tens of millions of others in need.
Eric Takabayashi
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:56:52 -0400, "Kevin ...
> >
> >http://tinyurl.com/dw86
> >
> >Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest and
> >a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled the
> >stricken country.
>
> Is that a good enough reason to invade?
If the US or the rest of the world really gave a damn about giving people
freedom, removing dictatorship, preventing terrorism, or preventing development
or spread of WMD, North Korea would be one place to go, not some country with an
army that can be put down and scared off in a few weeks.
Michael Cash
<eta...@yahoo.co.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
I remarked to my wife recently that the only objection I would have to
nuking the hell out of North Korea is that I live downwind.
Since there isn't much getting around the fact that I *am* downwind of
those fuckers, I would like to suggest that things proceed cautiously
and undue use of force be avoided.
--
Michael Cash
"I am Elmer J. Fudd, millionaire. I own a mansion and a yacht."
Elmer J. Fudd
Millionaire
Eric Takabayashi
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2003 17:42:28 +0900, Eric Takabayashi
> <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>
> >Brett Robson wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 9 Jun 2003 20:56:52 -0400, "Kevin ...
> >> >
> >> >http://tinyurl.com/dw86
> >> >
> >> >Cannibalism is increasing in North Korea following another poor harvest and
> >> >a big cut in international food aid, according to refugees who have fled the
> >> >stricken country.
> >>
> >> Is that a good enough reason to invade?
> >
> >If the US or the rest of the world really gave a damn about giving people
> >freedom, removing dictatorship, preventing terrorism, or preventing development
> >or spread of WMD, North Korea would be one place to go, not some country with an
> >army that can be put down and scared off in a few weeks.
>
> I remarked to my wife recently that the only objection I would have to
> nuking the hell out of North Korea is that I live downwind.
How about a few thousand Japanese and their relatives? How about millions of
impoverished North Koreans who have nothing to do with the idiocy of the Kim regime?
> Since there isn't much getting around the fact that I *am* downwind of
> those fuckers, I would like to suggest that things proceed cautiously
> and undue use of force be avoided.
If undue use of force is to be avoided against countries with WMD development
programs and arsenals upwind of US allies, why do any other countries with less
deserve any less, in the light of US rhetoric?
Kevin Gowen
> Michael Cash wrote:
>> Since there isn't much getting around the fact that I *am* downwind
>> of
>> those fuckers, I would like to suggest that things proceed cautiously
>> and undue use of force be avoided.
>
> If undue use of force is to be avoided against countries with WMD
> development programs and arsenals upwind of US allies, why do any
> other countries with less deserve any less, in the light of US
> rhetoric?
ISTM that Mike was very careful to write "undue force". His feelings on due
force may be a very different matter.
--
Kevin Gowen
Eric Takabayashi
I saw what he has to say about nuking North Korea along with any innocent
starving North Koreans or thousands of captive Japanese and their descendants.
It is too bad it is only dependent upon its possible effect on him. There are
nations downwind of Afghanistan, Iraq, and nearly any other nation the US has
fought or talked tough to.
If the US or any other country would like to be serious about liberating
nations, stopping terrorism, toppling dictatorships, preventing development of
WMD, or preventing proliferation of nuclear arms, they should go for it
instead of standing by while Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea or others do
it.
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
>
>> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>> Michael Cash wrote:
>>>> Since there isn't much getting around the fact that I *am* downwind
>>>> of
>>>> those fuckers, I would like to suggest that things proceed
>>>> cautiously and undue use of force be avoided.
>>>
>>> If undue use of force is to be avoided against countries with WMD
>>> development programs and arsenals upwind of US allies, why do any
>>> other countries with less deserve any less, in the light of US
>>> rhetoric?
>>
>> ISTM that Mike was very careful to write "undue force". His feelings
>> on due force may be a very different matter.
>
> I saw what he has to say about nuking North Korea along with any
> innocent starving North Koreans or thousands of captive Japanese and
> their descendants. It is too bad it is only dependent upon its
> possible effect on him. There are nations downwind of Afghanistan,
> Iraq, and nearly any other nation the US has fought or talked tough
> to.
Good thing we didn't use nukes there, then.
> If the US or any other country would like to be serious about
> liberating nations, stopping terrorism, toppling dictatorships,
> preventing development of WMD, or preventing proliferation of nuclear
> arms, they should go for it instead of standing by while Israel,
> India, Pakistan, North Korea or others do it.
What's wrong with Israel's having nuclear weapons?
--
Kevin Gowen
mtfe...@netscape.net
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
> I first heard about cannibalism in North Korea maybe two or three years ago. It
> was already so bad that people in the countryside had to watch over their dead
> that they not be stolen and eaten.
> The rest of the world cared then about as much as they do now. Around that
Most of the world does in fact care; what do you suggest they do?
Mike
Eric Takabayashi
Then waiting another decade for more millions to die while waiting for a second
generation dictator to change his ways is a rather odd approach.
> what do you suggest they do?
Give the North Korean people what they need.
Eric Takabayashi
Israel having nuclear weapons is no more wrong than India, Pakistan, the
US, or even North Korea or any other nation so far, having nuclear weapons.
There was some excitement in the beginning when possession was suspected or
revealed, then it was accepted as how things are.
But backing Israel, for one, puts the US in an awkward position when
condemning invasion, terror, or WMD in the Middle East.
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
>
>> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>>> If the US or any other country would like to be serious about
>>> liberating nations, stopping terrorism, toppling dictatorships,
>>> preventing development of WMD, or preventing proliferation of
>>> nuclear arms, they should go for it instead of standing by while
>>> Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea or others do it.
>>
>> What's wrong with Israel's having nuclear weapons?
>
> Israel having nuclear weapons is no more wrong than India, Pakistan,
> the US, or even North Korea or any other nation so far, having
> nuclear weapons.
I guess it all depends on how you define "wrong".
> There was some excitement in the beginning when
> possession was suspected or revealed, then it was accepted as how
> things are.
>
> But backing Israel, for one, puts the US in an awkward position when
> condemning invasion, terror, or WMD in the Middle East.
How so?
--
Kevin Gowen
Michael Cash
<eta...@yahoo.co.jp> belched the alphabet and kept on going with:
>Kevin Gowen wrote:
I'm so fucking tired of hearing about fucking Mideast Peace for my
entire fucking life that I really wouldn't give a shit if somebody
were to nuke that entire god-forsaken, flea-bitten area into a
pleasantly rippled sea of glass as well. Every fucking time the
fucking news comes on the fucking radio it's the fucking Israelis and
the fucking Palestinians and their latest fucking atrocities on one
another and how fucking Sepponia is supposed to solve all their
fucking problems. Well, fuck those fuckers one and fucking all. Why
the fuck should Sepponia be expected to want fucking Mideast Peace and
fucking care more about achieving Mideast Peace more, apparently, than
the fuckers who fucking live there? They wanna kill each other? Back
up and let the fuckers have at it hammer and fucking tongs.
That's one of the reasons I would make a shitty president of Sepponia.
Can't you just see me at a press conference the first time they ask
about my plan for Mideast Peace?...."Fuck them. Next question?"
There will be Mideast Peace when one side has totally annihilated the
other, and not a minute before. And until such time, I ask to be
excused from news about it. Nothing but a fucking farce.
Bush goes over, sits down and talks with the fuckers, like they're
actually civilized human beings, everybody blathers on about the
latest installment of the decades-long farce....Roadmap to Peace....
and he's barely out of their fucking airspace before the sorry
bastards are right back at blowing each other to hell again.
How do the Israelis start trekking down the trail to peace? They take
a bunch of helicopters and vaporize an eight year old girl. How do the
Palestinians go about it? They vaporize themselves and whomever they
can manage to take with them.
Fuck 'em all. And I'll be damned glad to hear an American news outlet
say something similar someday. "Our next story on Mideast Peace will
be when hell freezes over. Now for the weather...."
mtfe...@netscape.net
> mtfe...@netscape.net wrote:
>> Most of the world does in fact care;
> Then waiting another decade for more millions to die while waiting for a second
> generation dictator to change his ways is a rather odd approach.
Not really; in fact, that's the standard approach.
Marching in and 'doing something' is the odd approach.
>> what do you suggest they do?
> Give the North Korean people what they need.
You mean, a better government?
Mike
Kevin Gowen
> There will be Mideast Peace when one side has totally annihilated the
> other, and not a minute before. And until such time, I ask to be
> excused from news about it. Nothing but a fucking farce.
Exactly. The longest lasting peaces are those that come after a surrender.
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Wayne Williams
>
> I'm so fucking tired of hearing about fucking Mideast Peace for my
> entire fucking life that I ... [continues in a similar vein]
When I was in college, we used to play the "Miller Light" game. Whenever
a Miller Light ad came on, the whole bar would chant the script while
inserting "fucking" as every other word:
"Fucking fencing fucking all fucking day. Fucking finally fucking get
fucking home, fucking only fucking got fucking light fucking beer.
Fucking ever fucking tasted fucking light fucking beer? ..."
KWW
Brett Robson
>
>I'm so fucking tired of hearing about fucking Mideast Peace for my
>entire fucking life that I really wouldn't give a shit if somebody
>were to nuke that entire god-forsaken, flea-bitten area into a
>pleasantly rippled sea of glass as well. Every fucking time the
>fucking news comes on the fucking radio it's the fucking Israelis and
>the fucking Palestinians and their latest fucking atrocities on one
>another and how fucking Sepponia is supposed to solve all their
>fucking problems. Well, fuck those fuckers one and fucking all. Why
>the fuck should Sepponia be expected to want fucking Mideast Peace and
>fucking care more about achieving Mideast Peace more, apparently, than
>the fuckers who fucking live there? They wanna kill each other? Back
>up and let the fuckers have at it hammer and fucking tongs.
That is exactly the attitude the Babylonians (or was it the Medes?), Romans and
several other empires took. Sick of the whole lot.
>That's one of the reasons I would make a shitty president of Sepponia.
>Can't you just see me at a press conference the first time they ask
>about my plan for Mideast Peace?...."Fuck them. Next question?"
My attitude would be. "Ah Mr Sharon, just back the truck up and we'll fill it
with weapons. Sorry only low yield nukes, don't want you fouling up the Med with
fallout. Yes you can have lots of helicopters, we are giving shoulder launched
SAMs to Hammas so that will be interesting. Please hurry Mr Arafat will be here
soon."
>
>There will be Mideast Peace when one side has totally annihilated the
>other, and not a minute before. And until such time, I ask to be
>excused from news about it. Nothing but a fucking farce.
There was peace for extented periods of time. The Ottomans did a good job of
uniting everyone against them.
Chulsoo Kim
Don't knock it 'til you've tried it.
Is this courageous young man a relative of yours?
Eric Takabayashi
> I'm so fucking tired of hearing about fucking Mideast Peace for my
> entire fucking life that I really wouldn't give a shit if somebody
> were to nuke that entire god-forsaken, flea-bitten area into a
> pleasantly rippled sea of glass as well. Every fucking time the
> fucking news comes on the fucking radio it's the fucking Israelis and
> the fucking Palestinians and their latest fucking atrocities on one
> another and how fucking Sepponia is supposed to solve all their
> fucking problems.
I will repeat my position that the US is not supposed to be global policeman.
US personnel should be at home with their families and friends.
> Well, fuck those fuckers one and fucking all. Why
> the fuck should Sepponia be expected to want fucking Mideast Peace and
> fucking care more about achieving Mideast Peace more, apparently, than
> the fuckers who fucking live there?
The US uses more oil, and doesn't have or use as much of its own.
> They wanna kill each other? Back
> up and let the fuckers have at it hammer and fucking tongs.
If the army and extremists would like to have at each other only, that would be
life. Unfortunately, both sides do not have such sense.
> That's one of the reasons I would make a shitty president of Sepponia.
> Can't you just see me at a press conference the first time they ask
> about my plan for Mideast Peace?...."Fuck them. Next question?"
As a matter of fact, that could be better than what is currently happening. You
wouldn't be accused of or attacked for meddling, at least.
> There will be Mideast Peace when one side has totally annihilated the
> other, and not a minute before. And until such time, I ask to be
> excused from news about it. Nothing but a fucking farce.
The Mideast used to be as peaceful as other parts of the world before this
century.
> Bush goes over, sits down and talks with the fuckers, like they're
Rather abrupt, wasn't it?
> actually civilized human beings, everybody blathers on about the
> latest installment of the decades-long farce....Roadmap to Peace....
> and he's barely out of their fucking airspace before the sorry
> bastards are right back at blowing each other to hell again.
>
> How do the Israelis start trekking down the trail to peace? They take
> a bunch of helicopters and vaporize an eight year old girl. How do the
> Palestinians go about it? They vaporize themselves and whomever they
> can manage to take with them.
>
> Fuck 'em all. And I'll be damned glad to hear an American news outlet
> say something similar someday. "Our next story on Mideast Peace will
> be when hell freezes over. Now for the weather...."
No, you'll hear about North Korea and SARS. Maybe something about banks and
Koizumi. Matsui. Maybe Ichiro. Possibly Shinjo. Nomo or Hasegawa if you're
lucky. Mac Suzuki if he happens to win a second game.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> > Kevin Gowen wrote:
> >
> >> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> >>> If the US or any other country would like to be serious about
> >>> liberating nations, stopping terrorism, toppling dictatorships,
> >>> preventing development of WMD, or preventing proliferation of
> >>> nuclear arms, they should go for it instead of standing by while
> >>> Israel, India, Pakistan, North Korea or others do it.
> >>
> >> What's wrong with Israel's having nuclear weapons?
> >
> > Israel having nuclear weapons is no more wrong than India, Pakistan,
> > the US, or even North Korea or any other nation so far, having
> > nuclear weapons.
>
> I guess it all depends on how you define "wrong".
I don't believe ANY nation believed to have nukes so far are in the wrong
for having them, nor do I fear them. That's the point. Most Japanese who
talk about nukes, particularly in North Korea, are scared for some
reason, as if any of North Korea's other weapons or tactics didn't
matter, as well as forgetting about every other nation they used to worry
about with nuclear weapons.
> > There was some excitement in the beginning when
> > possession was suspected or revealed, then it was accepted as how
> > things are.
> >
> > But backing Israel, for one, puts the US in an awkward position when
> > condemning invasion, terror, or WMD in the Middle East.
>
> How so?
Because if the US were not Israel's buddy, they would be able to
acknowledge that it is Israel's use of "undue force" such as shooting or
running over even foreign protesters, bulldozing and blowing up
residential districts, or killing men, women and children not linked to
terror, which contributes to the unrest and violence.
Kevin Gowen
Israel's force isn't undue. What do you really think would happen if Israel
declared tomorrow, "We renounce violence forever. We have dissolved our
armed forces"?
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Gowen
Don't I wish he were!
--
Kevin Gowen
Eric Takabayashi
> Israel's force isn't undue.
So even a military helicopter firing seven missiles at a car (AND failing to
kill the mark despite destroying the target) in a residential area, taking out
bystanders, when a sniper, assassin or traitor could do it cleaner and
cheaper, is not undue force? Rolling a bulldozer over an American protester
instead of carrying her away or using gas, as would be done in her home
country, is not undue force? Bulldozing civilian homes with families sleeping
in them is not undue force? Firing rockets into civilian neighborhoods because
someone in them is shooting at soldiers, is not undue force? Shooting
civilians dead from behind is not undue force? Beating up civilian non
terrorists in the street is not undue force? A lethal attack on a known US
warship is not undue force? Massacre in a refugee camp is not undue force?
> What do you really think would happen if Israel
> declared tomorrow, "We renounce violence forever. We have dissolved our
> armed forces"?
Straw man. Both Israeli forces and extremists have to give up attacks on
innocents.
Kevin Gowen
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
>
>> Israel's force isn't undue.
>
> So even a military helicopter firing seven missiles at a car (AND
> failing to kill the mark despite destroying the target) in a
> residential area, taking out bystanders, when a sniper, assassin or
> traitor could do it cleaner and cheaper, is not undue force? Rolling
> a bulldozer over an American protester instead of carrying her away
> or using gas, as would be done in her home country, is not undue
> force?
What a goofy bitch she was. "Surely they wouldn't roll over me! I am a human
shield!"
She rolled the dice and took her chances. She crapped out.
> Bulldozing civilian homes with families sleeping in them is
> not undue force? Firing rockets into civilian neighborhoods because
> someone in them is shooting at soldiers, is not undue force? Shooting
> civilians dead from behind is not undue force? Beating up civilian
> non terrorists in the street is not undue force? A lethal attack on a
> known US warship is not undue force? Massacre in a refugee camp is
> not undue force?
Did I stutter?
>> What do you really think would happen if Israel
>> declared tomorrow, "We renounce violence forever. We have dissolved
>> our armed forces"?
>
> Straw man.
How is this a straw man argument?
> Both Israeli forces and extremists have to give up attacks
> on innocents.
Don't fight the hypothetical.
--
Kevin Gowen
Kevin Gowen
> I will repeat my position that the US is not supposed to be global
> policeman. US personnel should be at home with their families and
> friends.
Home is where you hang your hat.
--
Kevin Gowen
John W.
>
> The US uses more oil, and doesn't have or use as much of its own.
>
were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
> If the army and extremists would like to have at each other only, that would be
> life. Unfortunately, both sides do not have such sense.
>
Build a fence around the place. Better yet, put the leaders (ALL of
them, including those of Hamas etc.) in a small room with no AC, no
toilet, and water laced with laxative. Tell them they can come out
when they've all sworn on their God that they will pursue peace.
> The Mideast used to be as peaceful as other parts of the world before this
> century.
>
It's more organized now, thanks to the Europeans.
John W.
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<3EE70B04...@yahoo.co.jp>...
> >
> > The US uses more oil, and doesn't have or use as much of its own.
> >
> Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. If the CAFE (sp) standards
> were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
> possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
> sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
> oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
Is it cheaper? Are the known reserves as large as those in Saudi Arabia or Iraq?
> > If the army and extremists would like to have at each other only, that would be
> > life. Unfortunately, both sides do not have such sense.
> >
> Build a fence around the place.
Already tried. Unfortunately, there are also places they live and work together.
> Better yet, put the leaders (ALL of
> them, including those of Hamas etc.) in a small room with no AC, no
> toilet, and water laced with laxative. Tell them they can come out
> when they've all sworn on their God that they will pursue peace.
You need to get them together first. So I hear there are states which do not even say the name
"Israel", as well as Israelis who will have no part of what is already being tried.
Michael Cash
<kgowen...@myfastmail.com> belched the alphabet and kept on going
with:
>Eric Takabayashi wrote:
I have come up with a modern replacement for the old "Home is where
the heart is"...
How's this?
"Home is where the rechargers are"
I bet obakesan will like that one.
Eric Takabayashi
Then by their own words, American troops do not consider such as
Afghanistan or Iraq, home.
mtfe...@netscape.net
> "John W." wrote:
>> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<3EE70B04...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>> Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. If the CAFE (sp) standards
>> were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
>> possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
>> sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
>> oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
> Is it cheaper? Are the known reserves as large as those in Saudi Arabia or Iraq?
Nope, but we likely won't need oil for about 700-1000 years on the order
the Saudis can supply it.
BTW, the Iraqis could put everyone out of the oil export business, if they
wanted to. They could produce oil for about half of what it costs the Saudis,
and about 70% of what it costs the Russians.
> You need to get them together first. So I hear there are states which do not even say the name
> "Israel",
It's not like you have pass a test to live in the area.
Mike
mtfe...@netscape.net
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<3EE70B04...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>>
>>
> were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
> possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
> sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
> oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
Right now, Russia is the 2nd greatest exporter of oil, behind Saudi Arabia.
Mike
Eric Takabayashi
Kevin Gowen
Yes. That is because they are on 出張.
--
Kevin Gowen
Eric Takabayashi
> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
> > "John W." wrote:
>
> >> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<3EE70B04...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>
> >> Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. If the CAFE (sp) standards
> >> were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
> >> possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
> >> sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
> >> oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
>
> > Is it cheaper? Are the known reserves as large as those in Saudi Arabia or Iraq?
>
> Nope, but we likely won't need oil for about 700-1000 years on the order
> the Saudis can supply it.
How do you figure that?
http://www.bp.com/downloads/1612/statistical_review.pdf
page 4
> BTW, the Iraqis could put everyone out of the oil export business, if they
> wanted to. They could produce oil for about half of what it costs the Saudis,
> and about 70% of what it costs the Russians.
And how long would that last?
mtfe...@netscape.net
>> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>> > "John W." wrote:
>>
>> >> Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<3EE70B04...@yahoo.co.jp>...
>>
>> Nope, but we likely won't need oil for about 700-1000 years on the order
>> the Saudis can supply it.
> How do you figure that?
> http://www.bp.com/downloads/1612/statistical_review.pdf
Couple weeks ago, _Time_ had a rather extensive article on the oil
situation.
>> BTW, the Iraqis could put everyone out of the oil export business, if they
>> wanted to. They could produce oil for about half of what it costs the Saudis,
>> and about 70% of what it costs the Russians.
> And how long would that last?
Couple hundred years.
Mike
John W.
Depends. The Volkswagen Jetta Diesel gets nearly 50 mpg, over 50%
greater than the non diesel. My dad's Ford F-250 Diesel gets over
20mpg; friends with the non diesel (V8 or V10) trucks get 15 at most.
These vehicles cost a bit more, but the value gained over time is much
greater. If people would buy these sorts of vehicles, we'd save a
bunch more gas. It would also be nice if car manufacturers would offer
a greater variety of diesels (such as in small trucks and vans; I know
tons of people that would buy these for their work vehicles) and offer
greater incentives.
Ken
> mtfe...@netscape.net wrote:
>
>>Eric Takabayashi <eta...@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>>
>>>"John W." wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>Of course, it doesn't have to be this way. If the CAFE (sp) standards
>>>>were the same across the board, or more even handed (and this is
>>>>possible), the US wouldn't be so dependent. Besides, there are other
>>>>sources of oil; I remember a story some years ago that said Russian
>>>>oil reserves could easily fill our needs.
>>>
>>>Is it cheaper? Are the known reserves as large as those in Saudi Arabia or Iraq?
>>
>>Nope, but we likely won't need oil for about 700-1000 years on the order
>>the Saudis can supply it.
>
>
> How do you figure that?
>
> http://www.bp.com/downloads/1612/statistical_review.pdf
>
> page 4
>
>
>>BTW, the Iraqis could put everyone out of the oil export business, if they
>>wanted to. They could produce oil for about half of what it costs the Saudis,
>>and about 70% of what it costs the Russians.
>
>
> And how long would that last?
A few decades at most? This is actually a fairly short period of time,
as observed models of oil well production volumes are bell curve-shaped.
As new reserves are not being discovered at a pace that would match
the world's increasing consumption -- these pesky development-obsessed
Chinese and south-east Asians! -- some experts expect the worldwide
demand/supply balance to significantly degrade in about 20 years as
production volumes start to fall.
Oil wells, and oil-producing regions, cannot continue to produce at
their maximum recorded volumes until their reserves are exhausted.
In practice, after increasing from production start and reaching a
peak, the volumes extracted from a well then go down.
Simple calculations based on "proven" reserve volumes divided by
current annual production volumes are thus misleading. Due to price
inelasticities, oil prices might shoot up to early 1980 levels -- USD
80 per barrel? -- with disastrous effects on all countries' economic
growth, and possibly food supplies. People tend to overlook how
energy- intensive modern agriculture is, relying on industrial
fertilizers, herbicides and mechanized production methods.
The global geopolitical situation in 20 or 30 years might get, well,
quite "interesting".
Compared to Japan, for example, the US consumes about double the amount
of non-renewable energy for every dollar of GDP. Unless the US take
significant steps to either secure inexpensive and reliable oil supplies
or significantly reduce their energy consumption in the next 20 years,
their way of life is headed for serious trouble...