Author Topic: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela  (Read 7550 times)

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2007, 02:08:42 PM »
Dude,

You do know the value of the resources and the path are greater than 3.3 B, right?

G o a t b o y

  • Time Out
  • Getbig V
  • *
  • Posts: 21431
  • Time-Out in Dubai, India with Swampi the Cocksmith
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2007, 02:15:13 PM »
You are highly critical of Chavez, but I don't see any outrage over Pakistan's military dictatorship or Saudia Arabia's monarchy. Is it because those two respective countries are in cooperation with the US?

No, it is because the alternative to dictatorship in the two countries you mention is radical theocracy, probably the only form of government there is that is worse than brutal dictatorship.

That's not the case in Venezuela, where the most likely alternative to dictatorship is democracy, and theocracy is not even a realistic possibility.

Hope this helps.
Ron: "I am lazy."

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #52 on: February 09, 2007, 02:19:13 PM »
Dude,

You do know the value of the resources and the path are greater than 3.3 B, right?

That is what the Asian development banks says.

They will know more than me. Argue with them if you think their figures are wrong.
Z

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2007, 02:22:37 PM »
Just admit your wrong. The pipeline deal stalled as soon as America attacked Afghanistan the First time.

Doesn't that make you wrong?  I mean what's it matter when it stalled?  If the taliban was in the way, they were in the way...  Didn't negotiations with the taliban and texas oilmen fail prior to 9/11?  Going from memory here...

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #54 on: February 09, 2007, 02:36:19 PM »
Doesn't that make you wrong?  I mean what's it matter when it stalled?  If the taliban was in the way, they were in the way...  Didn't negotiations with the taliban and texas oilmen fail prior to 9/11?  Going from memory here...

240 -Posted that the pipeline deal with the Taleban was made in the summer of 2001.
The deal was finalized and then fell apart after America attacked the Al Qaeda base in 98.

The whole argument that has been going on this website is that America got screwed out of the pipeline in the summer of 2001, so America caused 9/11 to attack Afghanistan.

My evidence proves conclusively that he was wrong.
Z

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2007, 02:42:25 PM »
240 -Posted that the pipeline deal with the Taleban was made in the summer of 2001.
The deal was finalized and then fell apart after America attacked the Al Qaeda base in 98.

The whole argument that has been going on this website is that America got screwed out of the pipeline in the summer of 2001, so America caused 9/11 to attack Afghanistan.

My evidence proves conclusively that he was wrong.
But wasn't the larger point made by people that the war was to get the taliban out of the way so these pipelines could go through?  Yea that's debatable but I'm not sure anything you've posted disproves that notion so you're really nitpicking semantics without disproving the larger point?  The innitial agreement after we hit afganistan I think it was in 2002 was for a gas AND oil pipeline was it not?

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2007, 02:51:58 PM »
But wasn't the larger point made by people that the war was to get the taliban out of the way so these pipelines could go through?  Yea that's debatable but I'm not sure anything you've posted disproves that notion so you're really nitpicking semantics without disproving the larger point?  The innitial agreement after we hit afganistan I think it was in 2002 was for a gas AND oil pipeline was it not?

That is the CTer view.

The Taliban has been forcefully removed from most of the country and the pipeline would go through the North part of the country.
The initial agreement was only for a gas pipeline. Since it was signed Unocal has pulled out of the agreement.
There is no pipeline development in Afghanistan.

Now the oil and gas pipelines that were going through Afghanistan is going to go through Iran and Pakistan. This deal was signed this year. The Caspian Turkish pipeline has been open since 2005.

So why are we there if there isn't a pipeline going through? Why did America start a war for a pipeline that won't be built?

That is why 240 is wrong.
Z

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #57 on: February 09, 2007, 02:53:22 PM »
iran is going to let the US run a pipeline thru their yard?

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #58 on: February 09, 2007, 02:55:47 PM »
There is no pipeline development in Afghanistan.

Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI) is a proposed natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India.

The 1,680 km pipeline will run from the Dauletabad gas field to Afghanistan. From there TAPI will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The final destination of the pipeline will be the Indian town of Fazilka, near the border between Pakistan and India. The pipeline will be 1,420 mm in diameter with a working pressure of 100 atm and the capacity of 33 billion cubic meter (bcm) of natural gas annually. Six compressor stations are to be constructed along the pipeline. The cost of this international infrastructure is estimated at US$3.5 billion (2005 figures). Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. The Afghan government is expected to receive 8% of the project's revenue.

Original project started in March 1995 when inaugural memorandum of understanding between the governments of Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a pipline project was signed. In August 1996, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium for construction of pipeline, led by Unocal was formed. On 27 October 1997 CentGas incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998 the Taliban, selecting CentGas over a Brazilian competitor, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquishes its 10% stake in project. Unocal withdrawn from the consortium on 8 December 1998.

The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in 2005 Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. Signing the agreement was made possible by the invasion of Afghanistan by United States military forces a year prior, which overthrew the Taliban government controlling most of Afghanistan. Building the pipeline was cited by some critics of the Bush administration as a motivation for the invasion. Some people have even said that if you take a map of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan and a map of the proposed pipeline they are very close together, suggesting that bases are positioned to protect natural gas interests. However, since then the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part was supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control.

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #59 on: February 09, 2007, 03:03:26 PM »
iran is going to let the US run a pipeline thru their yard?

The pipeline Unocal was proposing was to import oil to India and Pakistan not the US.

America is choked at both Pakistan and India for wanting to build a pipeline with Iran and has threatened sanctions on India if they build it.
Looks like it will probably go ahead anyway.

http://www.payvand.com/news/07/feb/1108.html
Z

a_joker10

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 1922
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #60 on: February 09, 2007, 03:06:01 PM »
Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline

The Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP or TAPI) is a proposed natural gas pipeline being developed by the Asian Development Bank. The pipeline will transport Caspian Sea natural gas from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan into Pakistan and then to India.

The 1,680 km pipeline will run from the Dauletabad gas field to Afghanistan. From there TAPI will be constructed alongside the highway running from Herat to Kandahar, and then via Quetta and Multan in Pakistan. The final destination of the pipeline will be the Indian town of Fazilka, near the border between Pakistan and India. The pipeline will be 1,420 mm in diameter with a working pressure of 100 atm and the capacity of 33 billion cubic meter (bcm) of natural gas annually. Six compressor stations are to be constructed along the pipeline. The cost of this international infrastructure is estimated at US$3.5 billion (2005 figures). Proponents of the project see it as a modern continuation of the Silk Road. The Afghan government is expected to receive 8% of the project's revenue.

Original project started in March 1995 when inaugural memorandum of understanding between the governments of Turkmenistan and Pakistan for a pipline project was signed. In August 1996, the Central Asia Gas Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium for construction of pipeline, led by Unocal was formed. On 27 October 1997 CentGas incorporated in formal signing ceremonies in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan by several international oil companies along with the Government of Turkmenistan. In January 1998 the Taliban, selecting CentGas over a Brazilian competitor, signed an agreement that allowed the proposed project to proceed. In June 1998, Russian Gazprom relinquishes its 10% stake in project. Unocal withdrawn from the consortium on 8 December 1998.

The new deal on the pipeline was signed on 27 December 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan and in 2005 Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of feasibility study designed by British company Penspen. Signing the agreement was made possible by the invasion of Afghanistan by United States military forces a year prior, which overthrew the Taliban government controlling most of Afghanistan. Building the pipeline was cited by some critics of the Bush administration as a motivation for the invasion. Some people have even said that if you take a map of U.S. military bases in Afghanistan and a map of the proposed pipeline they are very close together, suggesting that bases are positioned to protect natural gas interests. However, since then the project has essentially stalled; construction of the Turkmen part was supposed to start in 2006, but the overall feasibility is questionable since the southern part of the Afghan section runs through territory which continues to be under de facto Taliban control.


Thanks for agreeing.
There is no pipeline being developed, since no one is putting any money into the project.
BTW I already posted most of that information, except for the CT spin a the end.
Z

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Rice believes Chavez is "destroying" Venezuela
« Reply #61 on: February 12, 2007, 04:48:24 AM »
No, it is because the alternative to dictatorship in the two countries you mention is radical theocracy, probably the only form of government there is that is worse than brutal dictatorship.

That's not the case in Venezuela, where the most likely alternative to dictatorship is democracy, and theocracy is not even a realistic possibility.

Hope this helps.

Dictatorship is never ok, not even "considering the alternative".

Hope this heps.

-Hedge
As empty as paradise