"Currants Bw..."

[Niall_Quinn]

That's not true. Canada took over as the number one supplier for the U.S 10 years ago and continues to grow. That's nothing to do with Trump. The pipeline deals were being discussed before Trump took office but Obama rejected them. As said, with Obama distancing himself for the Saudi's and pushing them down the list when it comes to oil dependency, it makes no sense for Trump to form a close relationship with them. I can't see the need.

Judge Uncle Tom by his actions, not his serpentine words. Billion dollar arms deals and Saudi's staunchest defender in terms of blocking legitimate legal challenges from the victims of Saudi terror. That's the real track record. Canada could never hope to supply all of the US's energy demands. The Saudi's remain integral to supply. And you bypassed the original reason I gave for Trump's renewed relations. It's not a secret. Trump came out and said it himself.

[Power n Glory]

Judge Uncle Tom by his actions, not his serpentine words. Billion dollar arms deals and Saudi's staunchest defender in terms of blocking legitimate legal challenges from the victims of Saudi terror. That's the real track record. Canada could never hope to supply all of the US's energy demands. The Saudi's remain integral to supply. And you bypassed the original reason I gave for Trump's renewed relations. It's not a secret. Trump came out and said it himself.

You can't pass 10 years of policy off as it was all Trump's idea. Canada can't supply all the oil needs for the U.S but I guess that is why you look for alternative energy sources. Does the renewed relationship mean the Saudi's enemies are now Trumps enemies? Iran and Yemen?

[Niall_Quinn]

You can't pass 10 years of policy off as it was all Trump's idea. Canada can't supply all the oil needs for the U.S but I guess that is why you look for alternative energy sources. Does the renewed relationship mean the Saudi's enemies are now Trumps enemies? Iran and Yemen?

As always. I didn't say anything was Trump's idea. I said he's done more to promote energy independence that a whole bunch of presidents before him, including Uncle Tom with his cosy arms dealing and veto pen. What I actually said in the initial posts is Trump's team has been weak in allowing Uncle Tom and the globalists to drag him back into the whole friends and enemies business. And that's what it is, a business. That's all it is. Trump is finding out there's a whole level of business way below the depths he's ever sunk. Why do you think he can get a pipeline deal through but can't secure the borders? Anything that involves the usual suspects making money, Trump will be allowed to win. Anything that costs them money, that will go in the loss column. So Iran and Yemen? Don't know how that stands today. I'd have to look at the stock market to find out.

[Niall_Quinn]

Sweden this time.

[Power n Glory]

As always. I didn't say anything was Trump's idea. I said he's done more to promote energy independence that a whole bunch of presidents before him, including Uncle Tom with his cosy arms dealing and veto pen. What I actually said in the initial posts is Trump's team has been weak in allowing Uncle Tom and the globalists to drag him back into the whole friends and enemies business. And that's what it is, a business. That's all it is. Trump is finding out there's a whole level of business way below the depths he's ever sunk. Why do you think he can get a pipeline deal through but can't secure the borders? Anything that involves the usual suspects making money, Trump will be allowed to win. Anything that costs them money, that will go in the loss column. So Iran and Yemen? Don't know how that stands today. I'd have to look at the stock market to find out.

What does 'more to promote' mean? Words? Looking at the facts, the last president has actually cut U.S dependency on middle eastern oil with the Saudi's losing their number 1 ranking to Canada. A policy in place before Trump. Diplomatic relations weren't severed but they weren't as friendly as previous President's and it looks like Trump has rekindled that friendship. There was no need for Trump to form a closer relationship with the Saudi's from the looks of it. You're wrong about him doing more than any other President. He looks to be linking arms again. You definitely can't blame it on Obama.

[Power n Glory]

I'll find the post, but some months back you were saying something about America's dependence on the petrodollar and such a close tie with the Saudi's was formed.

I'm sure we discussed the pipelines, Canada and the decline in US dependence on middle eastern oil before. But if we're having to keep ties with these dodgy regimes for oil, why scrap the climate change policies?

[Niall_Quinn]

What does 'more to promote' mean? Words? Looking at the facts, the last president has actually cut U.S dependency on middle eastern oil with the Saudi's losing their number 1 ranking to Canada. A policy in place before Trump. Diplomatic relations weren't severed but they weren't as friendly as previous President's and it looks like Trump has rekindled that friendship. There was no need for Trump to form a closer relationship with the Saudi's from the looks of it. You're wrong about him doing more than any other President. He looks to be linking arms again. You definitely can't blame it on Obama.

Well, I cited examples that can be verified and you proclaimed, "You're wrong". So whatever. Uncle Tom didn't cut dependency, the price of a barrel of oil did that. And you still won't touch the reason I gave for Trump's "friendship" (seriously?) with the Saudis. Then the real mystery part of your post. Where have I tried to blame Uncle Tom for Trump striking a deal with the Saudis on refugees? It's very odd behaviour. I say, Trump has done more for energy independence that the last ten presidents, or words to that effect, and you pip in with eulogies to Uncle Tom. We're not really having the same conversation, are we?

Regarding the global warming thing, that was dumped because it's a global tax scheme that returned nothing for those who would bear the burden of the tax.

[Power n Glory]

Found our previous discussion from January. From Brexit to Trump.

http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/sh...?t=8&page=2172

The Petrodollar. If that goes down the America goes down and America won't go down without shooting off everything it's got.

There is no contradiction in what I am saying. I hate the Saudis, I think they are animals, not even human. But, I'm assuming (correct me if I'm wrong) that we don't want a nuclear war or a total and final financial collapse? If we agree on that much then we are forced to agree, whether we like it or not, that the US and Saudis must remain aligned at this point in time. Because the continuance of the Petrodollar rests on them, that's how fucking stupid successive US regimes have been. And if China decides to participate in any sort of attack on the Petrodollar, maybe under the disguise of reluctantly protecting its own contracting and probably collapsing economy, then that will be that. So it would be insanely dangerous to provoke that situation right now. If and when the US does secure energy self sufficiency then that's going to be even more dangerous but this is where your criticism finds an answer. Deprived of an option to just blow everything up, how can the Saudis be cut out of the picture? How can they be marginalised, ostracised and sanctioned like the bastards should have been, in any just world, years ago? We don't live in a just world but we want to carry on living. I hope whoever is pulling Trump's strings knows the answer because the other lot sure as hell didn't have a clue.

Aren't the American's trying to wean themselves off Saudi oil with the Keystone pipeline from Canada and the Dakota pipeline? Isn't that what Trump just approved? Also, why back out of the agreement with Iran and sour relations if it means the US can get oil from the Saudi's rivals? Isn't that how the Saudi's are cut out the picture?

Either way, whatever the purpose for not severing diplomatic ties with the Saudi's, you're presenting an argument to maintain the status quo in order to keep the peace and economic stability. Isn't that a similar argument many have posed when talking about Brexit and staying part of the EU? The people for it aren't in favour of bigger governments that can't be held accountable, it's just a complex mess nobody has a clear solution for. But saying that, it doesn't mean people aren't pissed off with the injustice and corruption seen. I still don't get why you box people into brackets so often and defend Trump's policies when defiance and protest is a good sign to show that people aren't falling for the okie doke. If we're having to topple governments and demonize a religious group for the sake of oil, isn't it time we found a cleaner and new energy source and have governments push for that instead of this other bullshit?

[Power n Glory]

Well, I cited examples that can be verified and you proclaimed, "You're wrong". So whatever. Uncle Tom didn't cut dependency, the price of a barrel of oil did that. And you still won't touch the reason I gave for Trump's "friendship" (seriously?) with the Saudis. Then the real mystery part of your post. Where have I tried to blame Uncle Tom for Trump striking a deal with the Saudis on refugees? It's very odd behaviour. I say, Trump has done more for energy independence that the last ten presidents, or words to that effect, and you pip in with eulogies to Uncle Tom. We're not really having the same conversation, are we?

Regarding the global warming thing, that was dumped because it's a global tax scheme that returned nothing for those who would bear the burden of the tax.

You've cited examples I made months ago. I'm not just saying 'you're wrong' I've given clear examples with Canada. You can check the figures for yourself and I was just reading the below. The last administration clearly cut the US dependency on foreign oil.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/07/21/inve...bama-oil-boom/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier.../#7b5d5c4c10fd

There is a great irony that spans the presidential terms of George W. Bush and Barack Obama. President Bush, widely viewed as a Texas oil man, presided over eight straight years of declining U.S. crude oil production. In the year 2000, just before President Bush took office, U.S. crude oil production averaged 5.8 million barrels per day (bpd) according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). During President Bush's last year in office, 2008, U.S. crude oil production averaged 5.0 million bpd.

The irony is that President Obama - who is not viewed as a friend of the oil and gas industry - has presided over rising oil production in each of the seven years he has been in office. (On a separate note, expect that streak to be broken in 2016). From that low point in 2008, U.S. oil production has grown each year to reach 9.4 million bpd in 2015 -- a gain of 88% during Obama's presidency. This is in fact the largest domestic oil production increase during any presidency in U.S. history

I'm not just making stuff up. That coincides with Obama's frosty relationship with the Saudi's. It wasn't severed but far from smooth.

I say, Trump has done more for energy independence that the last ten presidents

Where do you get that from? Can you back that up because what I'm reading says otherwise. If he's pursuing that path where the U.S have energy independence, great, but it's pretty pointless if he's willing to rekindle a relationship with Saudi Arabia and bomb their enemies. It doesn't matter if his agenda is for the Saudi's to take on more refugees. That's just ridiculous reasoning when you think about it.

Where have I tried to blame Uncle Tom for Trump striking a deal with the Saudis on refugees? It's very odd behaviour.

Didn't you claim it's Obama's fault that Trump's been dragged into the whole 'friends and enemies business' as seen below?

What I actually said in the initial posts is Trump's team has been weak in allowing Uncle Tom and the globalists to drag him back into the whole friends and enemies business

We're having the same conversation.

[Niall_Quinn]

One more time. In answer to your original question, the one you are treating like a third rail, Trump's deal with the Saudis relates to refugees. So you ask, why the sudden deal? I say, because of the refugees. You say,.. and another thing about oil!

Nothing I said there about the petrodollar contradicts anything I have subsequently said, it merely reinforces it. Uncle Tom benefitted from high oil prices and improved technology he had nothing to do with. Competition finds a way when the profits are there. If the profits aren't there then production falls off a cliff. Particularly in Canada where almost all the reserves are heavy crude. The inverse relationship between the dollar and energy independence, yes, what of it? Which bit are you disputing? And coal, we didn't talk about that but it's the exact opposite of Uncle Tom's investment in imaginary energy sources.