babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Uh, oh! Guess who's sitting on oil and gas reserves.

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Uh, oh! Guess who's sitting on oil and gas reserves.
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 17 July 2006 06:43 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh, the irony is just too delicious!

Cuba, it turns out, has offshore oil and gas reserves ripe for exploration. Too bad the brutal US embargo on Cuba prevents US oil and gas exploration companies from getting in on the action.

But wait! Two Republican senators have introduced bills that would waive the Cuban embargo - just for oil and gas companies - to allow them to enter into joint ventures with Cuba to drill in its waters.

Apparently they will bend the rules to allow for a rip off of Cuba's petroleum, but not to sell food or medical supplies.

quote:
The oil deposits in the Mexican Gulf are distributed among three different countries: Mexico, the US and ... yes ... Cuba. Part of the oil deposits of that piece of ocean are under Cuban waters. In fact Cuba's oil reserves have the capacity to produce 1 million barrels a day. Source

From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 17 July 2006 07:00 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If Cuba doesn't need to develop the reserves then it might be better to conserve them for future generations (of Cubans). I can see Cuba protecting the resources by careful husbandry as its voracious neighbour(s) to the north drain the world oil supply like greedy and stupid teenagers.

Will there be a new video game about an evil "oil dictator" in the Carribean whose country needs to be "liberated"? If the Cubans develop the reserves, then you can probably bet on it.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 17 July 2006 09:47 AM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'me waiting for Hugo to step in and offer to develope Cuba's resources without the Americans.
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
marzo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12096

posted 17 July 2006 10:27 AM      Profile for marzo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I heard about this on CBC radio this morning. It seems that these US imperialists feel fine about the blockade when it only hurts Cuban people but now they're getting all jittery about lost money opportunities when oil is found in Cuban territory. What a sense of entitlement!
From: toronto | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 17 July 2006 11:25 AM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
More to the point, if there's any country in the world that the US has been itching to invade, it must be Cuba.
From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
500_Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12684

posted 17 July 2006 11:31 AM      Profile for 500_Apples   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Since Cuba is not part of any trade agreemant (as far as I know), can't they just refuse to accepts bids from US companies?
From: Montreal, Quebec | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 17 July 2006 12:07 PM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
can't they just refuse to accepts bids from US companies?

Let the Americans drill for oil and Cuba can take royalties... Or leave the oil sitting there. I beleive they'll opt for the former if thats the only choices given to them.

I'm really curious what Cuba's reaction would be... You would think they would opt for taking oil companies from Russia or Venezula first... Even Canada... Before American ones.

Or this could be Cuba's opportunity to have the embargoes lifted from them (in exchange for oil?), so they could be thinking of using this for leverage.


From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 17 July 2006 12:16 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'd be curious as to whether these reserves would be enough for Cuba to be wholly self-sufficient in oil. I'd love to see Cuba enter a partnership with either other Latin or South American companies to develop this resource solely for Cuba's needs. It'd be great if Cuba can find even more oil within its territory and sell it to the highest bidder, and use the income to better the lives of its citizens. A pox on the US for the continuing embargo/blockade.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 17 July 2006 02:39 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The problem is that the oil reserves are in a big pool under the ground that's partly in US, Mexico, and Cuban territorial waters. If Cuba does nothing, the oil will eventually be sucked out from under them by the USA and Mexico.
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 17 July 2006 02:51 PM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
oil reserves are in a big pool

Not for sure, but it's definately possible. From the links it looks like it has mostly been testing and gathering data as opposed to actual discovery as of yet. I'd have to see some more geological data to actually confirm that.

Hehe, apparently China is the big partener... I find that pretty funny given the history of the oil sands (Americans have done much to keep the Chinese out of the oilsands... Pretty much enforcing the 'its our oil on canadian land' viewpoint). Now China and Cuba are search for oil miles off the US coastline.

It's hard to tell if there actually oil there (I'd say likely mind you... Whether or not it's enough to make drilling economically feasible is a different question) or if this is nothing but political posturing.


From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 17 July 2006 11:50 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And Dubya, ruler of the wasteland, said:

Greetings from the lord humungus! My dogs have discovered your puny plan. Hand over that fat tank of gas, and you'll all be allowed to go free!!!

Society and common decency will survive attacks by corporate barbarian hordes. Socialism will outlast widget capitalism based on oil consumption.

Viva la revolucion!

[ 18 July 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Heavy Sharper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11809

posted 18 July 2006 02:22 PM      Profile for Heavy Sharper        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Canada's resources are no more the birthright of American interests than the birthright of Chinese interests. They are our birthright and must be used only by Canadians for the benefit of Canadians!

[ 18 July 2006: Message edited by: Heavy Sharper ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 18 July 2006 06:00 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What exactly is a "birthright", anyway?

Does it mean everyone born in Canada (never mind the immigrants!) is born with the automatic right to burn fossil fuels, cut down the forests, and extract fish from the oceans and minerals from the earth, without regard for the Earth's ecology or for the material needs of the vast majority of the world's population?

Just asking.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
BleedingHeart
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3292

posted 18 July 2006 07:27 PM      Profile for BleedingHeart   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wonder if they have weapons of mass destruction?
From: Kickin' and a gougin' in the mud and the blood and the beer | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 19 July 2006 10:00 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BleedingHeart:
I wonder if they have weapons of mass destruction?

The U.S.A. has been the largest source of terrorism throughout Latin America.

quote:
After that “success,” the U.S. moved on to introduce African swine fever to Cuba in 1971. This was the first outbreak of swine fever in the Western Hemisphere. As a result of the epidemic, Cuba was forced to slaughter the entire pig population (some 500,000 animals), eliminating the supply of pork, a staple of the Cuban diet. When Cuban government spokesmen first accused Washington of unleashing the biological attack, U.S. officials dismissed this with a wave of the hand. However, six years later, following the post-Watergate Congressional investigations of skullduggery by U.S. intelligence agencies, a New York paper reported that a “U.S. intelligence source” told the paper that “he was given the virus in a sealed, unmarked container at a U.S. Army base and CIA training ground in Panama with instructions to turn it over to the anti-Castro group” (“CIA Link to Cuban Pig Virus Reported,” Newsday, 10 January 1977). The article explained in detail how the virus was transferred from Fort Gulick to Cuba.

A decade later, the U.S. introduced a virulent strain of dengue fever in Cuba, as a result of which 273,000 people on the island came down with the illness and 158 died, including 101 children. An article in Covert Action (Summer 1982) detailed U.S. experiments with dengue fever at the Army’s Fort Detrick chemical/biological warfare center and its research into the Aedes aegypti mosquito which delivers it. The article noted that only Cuba of all the Caribbean countries was affected, and concluded that “the dengue epidemic could have been a covert U.S. operation.” Two years later, a leader of the Omega 7 gusano (Cuban counterrevolutionary) terrorist group, Eduardo Victor Arocena Pérez, admitted (in a Manhattan trial in which he was convicted of murdering an attaché of the Cuban Mission to the UN) that one of their groups had a mission to “carry some germs to introduce them in Cuba to be used against the Soviets and against the Cuban economy, to begin what was called chemical war” just before simultaneous outbreaks of hemorrhagic dengue fever, hemorrhagic conjunctivitis, tobacco mold, sugar cane fungus and a new outbreak of African swine fever (Covert Action, Fall 1984).


None of the U.S. shadow government or military leaders have never had to defend themselves in a court for war crimes on charges that they waged chemical and biological warfare in Korea, SE Asia or Latin America. And Canada is helping to make the world safe for U.S. hypocrisy.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
eau
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10058

posted 19 July 2006 10:03 AM      Profile for eau        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
300 dead in Lebanon, I wonder what the final number will be once the evacuaees are gone. Will it be Gaza redux?
From: BC | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
eau
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10058

posted 19 July 2006 10:04 AM      Profile for eau        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
oops...sorry that was meant to be a new topic.
From: BC | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 19 July 2006 10:14 AM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:

Society and common decency will survive attacks by corporate barbarian hordes. Socialism will outlast widget capitalism based on oil consumption.

Yeah, because leftist governments have a much better record on conservation of natural resources than rightist ones.


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 19 July 2006 10:25 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Don't they? Okay, let's use examples: USA world's largest consumer of energy, exhausted all domestic sources (except in Alaska which they are trying to get access to without regard for the environment) and has killed some 100,000 Iraqis -- while laying waste to the country and spreading around depleted uranium in order to continue killing for hundreds of more years -- while stealing their oil, and, I don't know, Sweden, aiming for an oil free economy in 20 years? Which is the better example?

[ 19 July 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 19 July 2006 10:42 AM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
...I don't know, Sweden, aiming for an oil free economy in 20 years? Which is the better example?

Sweden, of course. But Sweden's almost always been ahead of the pack environmentally and conservation-wise...and that's under all stripes of government.

In social democratic Europe, one of the easiest ways to create and maintain a large number of well-paying union jobs is to harvest natural resources. European social democrats have, historically, been more than happy to log, mine and pave...In Canada, provincial NDP governments have been somewhat better than governments of other stripes re: the environment, IMO, but not by much...Saskatchewan's looking to get into the oil business, f'rinstance, and not only is our environmental legislation not that great, but somehow I doubt that we'll be big on conservation, so long as the royalty checks are coming in.

Venezuela's sucking up its oil like nobody's business. The Soviet Union had appalling resource management - or lack thereof, rather. China's coal and oil consumption is rapidly increasing and their environmental practices, such as they are, are certainly no better than the West's.

Which model do you think Cuba's more likely to follow?

But, look...the U.S. and Canada are in no position to criticize anyone, really, in terms of resource consumption and environmental practices. But the knee-jerk idea that Communists, socialists, social democrats, or whatever, will conserve natural resources better than "widget capitalists" is, I think, naive...and, well, wrong.

EDIT: And for that matter, I'm glad Cuba may have oil. More power to 'em. And I hope that, if they develop whatever oil may be there, they do so responsibly, with an eye to sustainability and conservation. But I'm not convinced that will be the case.

[ 19 July 2006: Message edited by: Erstwhile ]


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 19 July 2006 12:52 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Erstwhile:

Yeah, because leftist governments have a much better record on conservation of natural resources than rightist ones.



Acshully, what do you think David Suzuki had to say about ecosocialism in Cuba after his visit there last year ?.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Erstwhile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4845

posted 19 July 2006 01:35 PM      Profile for Erstwhile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:

Acshully, what do you think David Suzuki had to say about ecosocialism in Cuba after his visit there last year ?.


What, that Cuba had to go organic due to a lack of cheap oil (thanks to the fall of the USSR) and the inability to afford pesticides etc.?

What makes you think that once they find they have cheap oil again, and a source of national revenue, that they won't return to the industrial farming model to boost production?


From: Deepest Darkest Saskabush | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 19 July 2006 03:18 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Erstwhile:


What, that Cuba had to go organic due to a lack of cheap oil (thanks to the fall of the USSR) and the inability to afford pesticides etc.?

What makes you think that once they find they have cheap oil again, and a source of national revenue, that they won't return to the industrial farming model to boost production?


They've got cheap oil coming from Venezuela now. Or don't you get a newspaper ?.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 21 July 2006 11:14 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I heard about the Cuba oil thing a few months ago and posted in a thread about it at the time. As I recall, the news was that PdVSA was sending in technicians and equipment to do the offshore drilling as soon as Castro says "go".
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca