Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran Accord Likely to Push Oil Prices Down [1 Million Barrels a Day Could Return to Global Markets]
Wall Street Journal ^ | Nov 24 2013 | TATYANA SHUMSKY

Posted on 11/24/2013 3:05:43 PM PST by WilliamIII

Oil prices are likely to drop, analysts said, as the nuclear accord between Iran and six world powers potentially paves the way for more crude oil to reach the global market.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Germany; Israel; News/Current Events; Russia; Syria; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: china; france; germany; iran; israel; lebanon; nucleariran; obamairandeal; obamanucleariran; oil; oilprices; russia; secstatekerry; syria; turkey; unitedkingdom; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

1 posted on 11/24/2013 3:05:43 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Darn it!


2 posted on 11/24/2013 3:08:17 PM PST by BipolarBob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

And unicorns will deliver the mail, and Leprechauns will brew beer and give it away for free...


3 posted on 11/24/2013 3:08:23 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet ("Of the 4 wars in my lifetime none came about because the US was too strong." Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Costs about $95 to get oil out of the ground in North Dakota. There isn’t going to be much drop.


4 posted on 11/24/2013 3:10:41 PM PST by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob

Zero will do anything to kill the US fracking plays.


5 posted on 11/24/2013 3:11:00 PM PST by txhurl (tagline test)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

What a simplistic and superficial analysis. It has always been the case that as the Middle East erupts in conflict and war, the price of oil goes up. If I ere a speculator I’d buy up oil when this dumb line of reasoning drives prices down.

This so-called agreement will bring Iran and Israel right to the brink, with the U.S. becoming totally relevant. That is a recipe for disaster.


6 posted on 11/24/2013 3:11:57 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

You said: What a simplistic and superficial analysis.

Good point. Restricting the purchase of oil from an oil-producing country doesn’t drive prices up, and easing those restrictions — and increasing supply — doesn’t drive prices down. I wonder what grade you got in Economics 101.


7 posted on 11/24/2013 3:14:44 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

As China becomes their primary customer it will be interesting to see the attitude going forward. My guess is the commies will be a much more controlling customer.


8 posted on 11/24/2013 3:14:50 PM PST by nascarnation (Wish everyone see a "Gay Kwanzaa")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

aren’t we giving them $8 billion which will spent on building nukes?


9 posted on 11/24/2013 3:15:06 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owen

Right now WTI crude is selling at $94.84USD a barrel.


10 posted on 11/24/2013 3:18:16 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; me = independent conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

11 posted on 11/24/2013 3:19:17 PM PST by Jack Hydrazine (Pubbies = national collectivists; Dems = international collectivists; me = independent conservative)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Sorry to be a heretic here, but if Reagan could strike a deal with the Soviets (and a lot of conservatives blasted him for it at the time, myself included ) .... I don’t see why we can’t strike a deal with Iran, especially if it puts our people in their facilities, monitoring them continuously.

It’s weird to me that a lot of conservatives today seem to hunger for war with Iran - and no other “solution” to the Iranian issue will satisfy them. How many wars did Reagan launch? He won the cold war, and he did it without starting any “hot” wars. In contrast, we have the George Bush example - invade Iraq. What, exactly did that get us?


12 posted on 11/24/2013 3:21:25 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: txhurl

The Saudis are against this deal with Iran. Think it has anything to do with their desire to keep Iranian oil off the market so oil prices stay up? Nah, that couldn’t have anything to do with it. !


13 posted on 11/24/2013 3:25:05 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

And if our gas prices go down, that’s all that matters.

Israel?


14 posted on 11/24/2013 3:25:26 PM PST by Kenny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

Who is hungering for war with Iran?

This is the kind of weakness that starts wars.


15 posted on 11/24/2013 3:27:13 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

The best way to avoid war is to look strong, that is how Reagan did it


16 posted on 11/24/2013 3:28:19 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Restricting the purchase of oil from an oil-producing country doesn’t drive prices up, and easing those restrictions — and increasing supply — doesn’t drive prices down. I wonder what grade you got in Economics 101.

Since you asked, I got As in every econ class I ever took. I wonder what grades you got in English and logic because your post doesn't seem even remotely relate to the point I made.

Here it is in English at a much simpler level. The agreement whereby the US turns a blind eye to Iran's intent to build and use nuclear weapons has removed all incentive for Israeli restraint. When Israel launches a massive attic on Iran and it's military and industrial infrastructure (including the aforementioned oil producing sites) a broader war will erupt in the Middle East. War in the Middle East ALWAYS reduces supplies, ALWAYS increases costs of production and delivery and makes speculators very nervous and ALWAYS drives oil prices through the roof.

Do.....you....understand.....now.....? Or should I say it even slower?

17 posted on 11/24/2013 3:29:14 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

One million barrels a day is a very small drop in a very large bucket.


18 posted on 11/24/2013 3:31:38 PM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah so shall it be again,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

When Israel launches a massive attic on Iran

Get back to me when they actually do that, and I’ll send you a gift certificate for a night out at Red Lobster. Because it’s not gonna happen.


19 posted on 11/24/2013 3:31:55 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
if Reagan could strike a deal with the Soviets (and a lot of conservatives blasted him for it at the time, myself included ) .... I don’t see why we can’t strike a deal with Iran, especially if it puts our people in their facilities, monitoring them continuously.

That's a bit like saying it might be possible to strike a deal with the Nigerian banker who keeps asking for more small payments before releasing the $10 million you inherited that he's holding.

The fact is there is no will for peace with the Iranians mullah's, there never was any intent for peace with the Iranian mullahs, and any attempt to negotiate peace by the Iranian mullahs is a cynical deceptive effort on their part to extract more from the other side. If you don't believe it, then go ahead and keep exchanging emails with the Nigerian banker.

20 posted on 11/24/2013 3:35:19 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (My tagline is in the shop.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

The fact is there is no will for peace with the Iranians mullah’s, there never was any intent for peace with the Iranian mullahs,

Sounds like me when I was criticizing Reagan for dealing with Gorbachev. I learned.

Also, when was the last time Iran - these folks who have no will for peace - actually invaded another country? As I recall, the only war they’ve been involved in, in modern age, is the Iran - Iraq war, and Saddam started that.


21 posted on 11/24/2013 3:38:05 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Leprechauns will brew beer and give it away for free

Tell me more about these Leprechauns...

/johnny

22 posted on 11/24/2013 3:39:17 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

all that oil was already reaching the world markets.
this article is BS

nothing was stopping the Iran oil from export, indeed that was the most glaring weakness of the socalled sanctions

most of Iran’s oil is, or will be going to China ... increasingly so, and less to Europe as time goes by. But it all gets to the world market and it all gets purchased.


23 posted on 11/24/2013 3:41:39 PM PST by faithhopecharity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
“I don’t see why we can’t strike a deal with Iran...”

Iran has repeated many, many times that it desires to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Those are threats a terrorist state makes. In the past the US had a policy not to negotiate with terrorist states. Obama now has changed this.

Now it appears the US will help fund Iran.

Making a statement that “a lot of conservatives today seem to hunger for war with Iran - and no other “solution” to the Iranian issue will satisfy them.” is a stale liberal talking point just like “part of the problem conservatives have with Obama is that he is black”.

I know a lot of conservatives and none of them “hunger for war with Iran”, or “have a problem with Obama is because he is black”.

The conservatives I know detest war, but know a terrorist state like Iran, sworn to destroy Israel, should be dealt like the terrorist state it is. Sanctions are the only thing that has shown Iran can be slowed down. They also have a problem with Obama’s policies that are destroying the country from within, not the fact that he is 1/2 white and 1/2 black.

24 posted on 11/24/2013 3:42:17 PM PST by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the Whitehouse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

“I don’t see why we can’t strike a deal with Iran...”
Iran has repeated many, many times that it desires to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Those are threats a terrorist state makes.

Right, they said, “we will bury you.”

Oh, wait, that was the Soviets that said that, against us — look it up. They also financed a lot of terrorism, including the murder attempt against the Pope.

Reagan still negotiated with them


25 posted on 11/24/2013 3:45:49 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

They also have a problem with Obama’s policies that are destroying the country from within, not the fact that he is 1/2 white and 1/2 black.

Well, at least i’m with you there.


26 posted on 11/24/2013 3:47:14 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

That would be the first positive thing Obama’s done for the economy.


27 posted on 11/24/2013 4:01:35 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment. [Ludwig Von Mises])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

The U.S. could have more than twice that amount of oil from Canada, just for the asking (and permitting the pipelines).


28 posted on 11/24/2013 4:06:17 PM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII; All

Reading your posting history, you have a distinct smell.


29 posted on 11/24/2013 4:14:26 PM PST by Las Vegas Ron ("Medicine is the keystone in the arch of socialism" Vladimir Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

The big difference between Reagan and Bush (both Bushes, in fact) was that 1990 marked a major turning point in Republican foreign policy. From that point forward, the GOP probably put the Pentagon up for sale to foreign interests (mainly Saudi Arabia).


30 posted on 11/24/2013 4:16:06 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII; All

31 posted on 11/24/2013 4:17:16 PM PST by LyinLibs (If victims of islam were more "islamophobic," maybe they'd still be alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

One little monkey wrench in that scenario is that there probably isn’t any political will in Israel to do what you’ve suggested they’ll do.


32 posted on 11/24/2013 4:17:19 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("I've never seen such a conclave of minstrels in my life.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

No Keystone pipeline, no ANWAR, thus promised Obama to Jarret Iran.


33 posted on 11/24/2013 4:26:25 PM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

Obama always wanted us addicted to iranian oil.


34 posted on 11/24/2013 4:27:17 PM PST by lavaroise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

and there it is. It’s always energy-driven.


35 posted on 11/24/2013 4:28:44 PM PST by MarMema ("If Americans really wanted Obamacare, you wouldn't need a law to make them buy it." Ted Cruz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: faithhopecharity
all that oil was already reaching the world markets. this article is BS

Ah, so this the PR move.

36 posted on 11/24/2013 4:29:56 PM PST by MarMema ("If Americans really wanted Obamacare, you wouldn't need a law to make them buy it." Ted Cruz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kenny

Israel is under the bus. So sad that we have abandoned them.


37 posted on 11/24/2013 4:31:06 PM PST by MarMema ("If Americans really wanted Obamacare, you wouldn't need a law to make them buy it." Ted Cruz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MarMema

any lies or deceptions to mislead the public

yes, “our” administration’s mass media propagandists are still alive and well


38 posted on 11/24/2013 4:48:15 PM PST by faithhopecharity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Donate here!

Four days until
Thanksgiving
Lets get'er done!

39 posted on 11/24/2013 5:21:20 PM PST by RedMDer (Happy with this, America? Make your voices heard. 2014 is just around the corner. ~ Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

A million barrels is about 1/19th of the oil used in the U.S.A. in only one day. We, as a nation, use about a million barrels less per day than we did a few years ago, before we began our managed slide toward becoming a third world country.


40 posted on 11/24/2013 5:23:11 PM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fella
Last time a weak American President negotiated with Iran....


41 posted on 11/24/2013 5:38:32 PM PST by GeronL (Extra Large Cheesy Over-Stuffed Hobbit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
Never in the history of US Soviet relations has the US designated the Soviet Union a state sponsor of terrorism.

Currently there are four such countries designated by the United States as state sponsors of terrorism.

These countries are Syria, Cuba, Sudan, and Iran.

Essentially Obama is cutting a deal to provide economic relief to a country that is officially on the US government list of countries that sponsor terrorism.

42 posted on 11/24/2013 7:05:58 PM PST by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the Whitehouse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial

Are you saying the Soviets weren’t sponsoring terrorism?

You have a lot to learn. Start with the famous book by Claire Sterling, The Terror Networks.


43 posted on 11/24/2013 7:14:25 PM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

I hereby apologize to Israel, on behalf of all REAL Americans. Many Americans suspect President Muhummad Al-Obama is a Kenyan, but few know Valerie Jarret, who secretly negotiated this “deal”, is Iranian. PERSIAN. Check Wikipedia or Google it.


44 posted on 11/24/2013 7:19:23 PM PST by 2harddrive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII
BS,
If that were the case, why is Russia for it?
45 posted on 11/24/2013 7:23:58 PM PST by expat2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII

No, I am not saying that. I am saying the US State Department has never designated the Soviet Union as a state that sponsors terrorism. Nor has it listed many other countries that have done the same.

Like it or not, historically the US has limited the number of states it puts on the state sponsor of terrorism list because the ramifications of being on the list are severe and codified in law.

If you go to the US State Department website you can see what it means to be on this list. Iran is one of four on the list, and Obama is cutting a deal to give economic relief to Iran.

That is what I am saying.


46 posted on 11/24/2013 7:30:12 PM PST by Gabrial (The nightmare will continue as long as the nightmare is in the Whitehouse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Comments?


47 posted on 11/25/2013 5:53:14 AM PST by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gabrial; ElkGroveDan

You said: I am saying the US State Department has never designated the Soviet Union as a state that sponsors terrorism.

My comment: Big friggin deal. Whatever report the State Department did or didn’t issue, The Soviets were terror sponsors — that’s a fact, Jack — but Reagan still negotiated with them. Was Reagan a “Neville Chamberlain”?


48 posted on 11/25/2013 9:41:32 AM PST by WilliamIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Owen; GeronL

Wrapped in a 7 Bil dollar gift to the Mullahs to kill Jews and Americans.

I think you can figure out where a lot of that American ‘aide’ will go. Valerie’s boys.

“Top Iranian Mullahs Corrupt, Official Says”

http://www.newsmax.com/KenTimmerman/iranian-mullahs/2008/06/10/id/339882

Iran will choke on its own oil puke.
________________________________

DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW!


49 posted on 11/25/2013 11:50:01 AM PST by 444Flyer (How long O LORD?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WilliamIII; GeronL; All

Say, looking over your posts in forum, you seem to be one of these insidiously subtle trolls...feeding the Viking kitties just enough catnip to keep the “zots” at bay.

John Kerry got rolled like a pudgy old drunk on a park bench. Knowing his history, he never met an enemy of the United States that he couldn’t find any agreement with. We are worse than “Jengis Kahn” according to him; didn’t you know that?


50 posted on 11/25/2013 12:25:33 PM PST by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-63 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson