• #9
    Natural gas ... that's what Afghanistan was really about ... the U.S. running a pipeline across that country in attempts to sell India and China natural gas but in the end they got bought it from Iran instead hence the reason we were wanted to bomb the crap out of them!

    It's always about money!
  • #13
    @MBernard We had to make lemonade out of lemons somehow after that natural gas deal fell through =)

    Drugs seems to be about the only thing the U.S. does well anymore ... it's our ace in the hole since most jobs were outsourced.
  • R Load more replies

  • #7
    Well Micheal, the world will be more than happy to switch off dependence to oil as soon as people like you quit yakking about alternative solutions and start producing consumer ready alternative solutions.
  • #27
    Fat chance the fanatic fanboys want to return to a farm lifestyle that they are romantically in love with while living in the metroplex.
  • #41
    Well, we would when the Feds lift the restrictions & regulation put into place to be able to honestly compete with fossil fuels. But since fossil fuels have a long time strong hold in American politics, this is a hard feat.
  • #6
    Oil is the cause of everything in some peoples minds. The only point that is neede to be taken home is that it is not our business, and not our concern and we need to stay the hell out of it.
    If Europe wants to put restrictions on imported Russian oil then let them do it but we need to stay out of it.
  • #16
    You have over played the part of oil and underplayed the need/desire for a southern port. If the Ukraine had gone to the EU before this, they could have closed the southern port to Russian ships. I believe that oil and natural gas production in other areas outweighs the amount coming out of Crimea. But your in good company, most over value the oil component as a primary driving force.
  • #2
    Just as Fienstien and the senate had their "do as I say not as I do" moment with NSA spying, America has a similar predicament when it comes to nation building. We say we're promoting democracy by overthrowing whatever regime there was and then holding a vote with troops with guns on the ground propping up a leader more favorable to our interests, who virtually always turns against our interests. Yet people still somehow find it easier to believe other countries hate us for our "freedom."
  • #28
    @Cal You know the Syrian Rebels right?

    Those guys are Al-Qaeda.

    Obama's trying to repeat Reagan's worst mistakes but none of his successes - shamnesty, arming rebels, increasing the debt... Except Reagan was a strong leader and had he not faced Democrat obstruction he could have shrank the government...
  • #34
    @BobSmith "You know the Syrian Rebels right? Those guys are Al-Qaeda."

    SOME of those guys WERE al Qaeda. Even they have abandoned Syria, now.
  • #37
    Wrong again Bob. The Syrian rebels are not the same thing as Al-Qaeda. And the only ones that got any US aid were the ones specifically verified to NOT be connected to Al-Qaeda.

    Oh and Reagan never had any interest in shrinking the government. Only in shrinking taxes.
  • R Load more replies

  • #26
    We can all try to second and third guess why we should or should not intervene. We can talk about what is or is not in the worlds best interest. There are tons of excuses we can make both pro and con all with no true resolve. The simple unmitigated fact of the matter is , survival of the fittest and in the end that is what it will all come down to. We don't openly talk about it because is scares people but the powers to be want to remain the power and will, as long as they have folks to fight and die for them.
  • #22
    This isn't about democracy, it's about American business being allowed to continue to exploit other countries' natural rescources.
  • #17
    Be interesting to see what the right-wingers think about this article once their leaders tell them what to think. They will probably be told to say this writer is anti-American and hates America.
  • #57
    The headline is a bit too brief and condensed.

    It's not oil.
    It's not natural gas.
    It's not sovereignty.

    It all comes back to mo money, mo money, mo money.

    The oil, the gas, to secession - all tie back to money.

    Basically, Russia supplies most of Europe with energy.
    Energy equals jobs.
    Gawd awful amounts of money change hands.
    The gas and oil make the economic engine run.

    The Crimea was a cash cow for Kiev, too.
    All those Russian bases, the port facilities were not free.
    Russia paid Ukraine some stipend for the lease/rent, etc.

    Now, that Crimea is part of Russia, Russia does not have to pay itself for the use of the facilities that it built.
    Even worse for the Ukrainians - Russia doesn't have to pay them.
    The Ukrainians are broke.
    Massive amounts of their economy have been squandered on palaces for the overseers.

    So, Kiev is in debt.
    Kiev "has" to rely on Russia to keep the lights on.
    Russia still wants Kiev to pay the power bill.
    The rent on the Crimean facilities used to offset some of that expense.

    Kiev isn't crying over loss of territory and sovereignty.
    Kiev is crying over its checkbook balance.

    There is really nothing the US can do about it.
    We can't build a trans-Atlantic pipeline.
    We can't build enough tankers to ship the volume of oil and gas that Russia can deliver thru their pipelines.
    We can't airlift the oil and gas.

    What we "are" dumb enough to do - is pick up the bulk expense of Ukraine's debt.
    Which ironically goes to Russia.

    In effect we are borrowing/printing money (at interest) in order to give to Ukraine (which gets a decent skimming by the non-deposed bureaucrats).
    Which - in turn - sends any thing that is left on to Russia.

    In essence, we are paying Russia for annexing Crimea, crying all the way.
    And, Obama wants us to believe that some how these idiotic sanctions are going to mean any thing to Russia.
    Let's see...????
    Russia gains territory without firing a shot - and, no logistical losses.
    Russia still gets paid for services rendered and resources delivered.
    The payments are coming from a country stupid enough to do it on credit.

    Now, this is not just a one shot brain fart,- cuz, we are going to pay Ukraine's utility bill next year, too...- and, the year after that into perpetuity. All on credit...

    Barry wonders why Putin doesn't respect him...????

    well, for the most part, Putin doesn't respect him - because, Barry pays him not to.
  • #36
    The Kingdom of Heaven runs on brotherly love. The kingdoms of the Earth run on oil. It will be that way for the foreseeable future.
  • #56

    The saying isn't from the Bible. I stay out of metaphysical discussions with anybody. Nobody can prove anything.
  • #66
    @gammler Well, your the one that threw in the wordings "The Kingdom of Heaven", you can't get any more metaphysical than that.
  • #72
    But it only belongs in Bible speak. I will not use the word religion. Religion has given a bad out look on the Bible.
  • R Load more replies

  • #32
    "Lastly, the energy supply argument is deeply disconcerting because it merely provides a shot in the arm for an unsustainable energy industry."

    Not to mention that our current rate of fracking may be environmentally unsustainable in the long run...

    I won't say Russian energy supply has nothing to do with this, but the strategic location of the Crimea and the Ukraine, for both Russia and NATO counties, is worth many billions of cubic feet in gas, especially given the oil reserves left in Iran.
  • #25
    Czar's are not terribly off-put by the considerations of puny western metro-sexuals. Putin is of the opinion he knows what's best for Russia. At this stage money is not in his politics. Old fashion geography and boarders are. The eastern boarder must be secured at all costs. With the current western wimps, it doesn't look like he's going to have much of a challenge. I often wondered how the folks of the 1930's could have missed the warning signs. Well now we know.
  • #19
    This is all very rational, but I'm not at all sure that Putin is rational, or even understands these issues.

    It's just as likely that Putin is motivated by his own, and his nation's, insecurities.
  • #1
    "Oil Is At The Heart Of The Ukraine Crisis"

    Jesus Christ...don't let the Right hear you say that....

    if they do, we'll be invading Russia tomorrow!
  • #4
    Completely inappropriate partisanship. I bet you will completely ignore that 2008 Obama received more oil money then any other candidate and was deeply in bed with them until the Deep-water horizon disaster? I bet you will also ignore that it was the Democrats who lifted the off-shore ban in the first place?
  • #23
    @boombatic Then you're no better than those on the right I call out on their hypocrisy. Here you go ashum99s, your liberal counter part here pardons what democrats do because republicans do it just like you pardon republicans when democrats do it to. And y'all both blame the other side instead of taking the rational point of view of that both republicans and democrats suck.
  • #40
    @Libertyiskey Actually no. Even if Obama is in bed with oil companies, he has yet to be directly responsible for killing thousands of people, both American and foreign, for it.

    Also trying to compare off-shore drilling to starting a war would be hilarious, if it wasn't so devastating. Sure, we need to meet our energy demands, we need gas and oil for people to get back and forth to work, to heat their homes, etc., but at what cost? Domestic drilling sounds like a great alternative to just murdering a few thousand people to get it.
  • #47
    @boombatic Yep, so this means both parties are incapable of ruling!!!!!!! I knew this for a very long time.
  • R Load more replies

  • #29
    This whole article is a rationalization for appeasement of a tyrant.

    Typical of Progressives like Friends Committee on National Legislation... A huge lobbying group for "Social Justice."
  • #30
    "Founded in 1943 by members of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), FCNL's nonpartisan, multi-issue advocacy connects historic Quaker testimonies on peace, equality, simplicity, and truth with peace and social justice issues. FCNL fields the largest team of registered peace lobbyists in Washington, DC."
  • #31
    It's too bad about the Quakers. As their numbers dwindled the communists calling themselves Progressives appropriated the good name they made for themselves by leading the charge against slavery and working tirelessly on the Underground Railroad.