Quote:
Originally posted by onetime2
The oil argument is interesting since those who propose it can not lose. If oil prices dropped, it was about sating the nation's thirst for oil. If oil prices rise, it's about the evil corporations (and hence Bush's) thirst for money.
As evidenced by the first Gulf War where we gained no pricing leverage or additional access to oil, oil is not the big driver of US policy.
Of course, the accusations will remain with attempts to paint it as class warfare and how the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Such is politics.
|
I'm not going to address the non-sequiter.
However, I'm still curious about why you expect to pay lower consumer prices for gasoline after allowing that this war is "about oil?"
Maybe I'm not making this question clear. The argument seems to be that since we haven't received cheaper oil, we must not be in the gulf for oil.
Why do you believe a war for oil would result in cheaper gasoline consumer prices?
Even if we are both wrong, that is, we are there for oil, and this does entitle us to lower prices, what leads you to believe we would we get lower prices
now?