[End Times Sentinel]

I can do this for $100,000.

Would "a lot" be acceptable?  How about, "when all your wells go dry, you've taken it all out."

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

[randog]

How about, "when all your wells go dry, you've taken it all out."

You might want to soften that up...maybe tell them they need to start building casinos and theme parks in 5-10 years.

[HenryLeeII]

I can do this for $100,000. Would "a lot" be acceptable? How about, "when all your wells go dry, you've taken it all out."

You right-wingers think you're so funny with your eco-terrorist quips! How you so thoughtlessly throw out the phrase "a lot" of oil shows that you haven't even thought of the suffering of the dinosaurs who lost their lives so that you may drive some SUV terror-mobile, or even a Hummer.

And that quip "when all your wells go dry, you've taken it all out." How crude! That's probably you're idea of a joke, isn't it? Its probably also your policy for determining when to quit drilling in ANWR! Don't you care how many Aleutian-Americans are displaced, how many caribou are now homeless and starving, and how many penguins have been displaced due to the Cheney/Halliburton/big oil cartel's rape of that once-pristine land?

[Shermy]

Would "a lot" be acceptable?

This article misses a big concern for OPEC, especially Saudi.

Many know that Saudi, etc. support for the sanctions regime over Iraq was due to their desire to suppress Iraqi oil production, which consequently increases the value of their own oil. Hence the "containment" talking points and PR that proliferated before the war - a Saudi-paid anti-war propaganda campaign.

But there's more. If Iraq rejoins OPEC, and if Iraq were established to have significantly larger reserves that previously explored this will upset the OPEC guidelines for apportioning production shares. Shares are much calibrated to reserve size. If followed Saudi would have to give up significant production share.