From: "Gary Wiltshire" 

On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:27:45 -0400, Adam Flinton
 wrote:

> Gary Wiltshire wrote:
>> On Tue, 31 May 2005 15:10:19 -0400, Adam Flinton
>>   wrote:
>>
>>> Gary Wiltshire wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 29 May 2005 21:01:06 -0400, Geo
 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "Adam" 
wrote in message
>>>>> news:4295b7cb{at}w3.nls.net...
>>>>>
>>>>>> Possibly a route to the Indian ocean. Problem is
that that route
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> end up as a purely indo-pakistani supply pipeline.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Or to India, I don't really remember where it was
going, just that
>>>>> it  was
>>>>> supposed to cross northern Afghanistan.
>>>>>
>>>>> Geo.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>  I don't see it being a purely Indian subcontinent supply line as a
>>>> problem.  If they don't buy that oil, they'll be buying it
>>>> elsewhere.    It's mostly a big pool.
>>>>
>>> Yeah the diff is that they didn't used to be buying that flow of oil.
>>>
>>> Adam
>>   There is no "diff."  If they don't buy the oil from the new new
>> pipeline,  they'll buy it on the rest of the market.  Their economies
>> are growing and  so is their demand for oil.
>>
>
> D'uuuuuhhhh yes there is a f*cking huge diff & it's political.
>
> If the US (as an example) was to get none of the oil & India was to get
> the lot, would the US be pushing for the construction (as the have wrt
> Baku-Med)? .....D'uuhhhh noooooo...
>
>
> Now that India is looking to buy that flow of oil it makes a huge damn
> diff.
>
> Adam

You still don't get it.  The oil that India DOESN'T end up buying elsewhere
because of the pipeline, WE (and others can buy).  The planet's oil is just
one big pool.

--
Gary Wiltshire

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5