BS: China Running Out of Fuel

Subject: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 29 Nov 07 - 08:40 PM

I came across this, and found it very interesting.

Chinese tiger has nothing in tank
Rowan Callick, China correspondent | November 28, 2007

CHINA is running out of fuel. Police are guarding petrol stations in several inland provinces to prevent fights, as shortages of petrol and diesel are causing huge queues of trucks, buses and cars.

In Kunming, capital of the southwestern province of Yunnan, 1000 trucks are stranded.

A truck driver named Li told the Chuncheng Evening News he had been stranded at the Stone Tiger Gate petrol station for three days after searching for fuel in other places, but failing. He said his delivery date was way overdue.

Another driver, at Geiju city, said a job that would have taken one day in the past, now took three: one on the road, two queuing for fuel.

Nine days ago, a truck driver was reported to have been stabbed to death in central Anhui province after a row about queuing.

A few days earlier, at Ezhou in Hubei province, 100,000 people were stranded, unable to get to work, because city buses had run out of fuel.

Beijing has been insulated from the headache, and the wealthy coastal provinces are mostly better stocked, because the refineries are nearby.

The problem would intensify as winter approached, and was starting to affect exports, warned the Commerce Ministry, since diesel was crucial for shifting products to ports.

The system is suffering from pressure of demand to sustain its economic growth at the current 11.5per cent - with China now the second-biggest consumer of oil after the US.

Diesel imports rose 46.5per cent in the first nine months of the year, compared with the same period last year.

The other cause of the supply-demand mismatch, is the stuttering transition from government-controlled prices to market pricing.

The Government wishes to graduate towards a system that allows prices to move with international markets.

But inflation is at a 10-year high of 6.5per cent and the Government is reluctant to let oil, a key input for distribution of all products, float free as yet.

The two companies that dominate petrol and diesel sales, Sinopec and PetroChina, are state-controlled but also listed on stock markets, highly competitive, and anxious to become even more market-driven. Both pledged this week to boost their imports, especially diesel.

As inflation began to accelerate this year, the Government announced it was capping the prices of key commodities it still controlled, including oil, until the end of the year.

But it relented under strong pressure from Sinopec, PetroChina and other oil refiners and distributors, and conceded a 10per cent rise from this month.

Even after the 10 per cent rise, the price remains well beyond international levels, and China has to import about half its oil, for which it must pay world prices.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Gurney
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 01:13 AM

Worrying, uncle Dave, worrying, because they have a huge standing army.
Tradition is, if you have a big army and political problems and shortages, blame someone and attack them.

Hope they sort it out soon.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 02:01 AM

Hardly, if you want to do anything with your large Army, they first of all require rather a lot of fuel.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 02:42 AM

Hmm. Well, Japan went to war in '41 mainly because their primary sources of oil and steel were being cut off (by FDR). Without it their war machine, already heavily engaged in a war in China, could not continue to function for long. So they engaged in a tremendously risky new war with the USA, Britain, and Holland so that they could sieze oil-rich areas in Indonesia.

If China feels the squeeze too severely, it does create a certain amount of risk of a future conflict. They would look for oil a bit nearer to home than Indonesia. They'd look for it by moving west through the passes of Aghanistan and into the Caspian region and the Middle East.

Theoretically, that is....I'm not making predictions, I'm merely considering various possible ramifications of China running short of oil.

I'm sure there are other numerous other possibilities as well.

If a country decides to go to war to secure oil, it will make sure its military sector is the one that gets the available oil...and the civilian sectors will face rationing.

So I don't think that an overall national shortage of oil would necessarily stop the Chinese military from launching a large military campaign...it would just force them to succeed quickly in securing new sources of oil...as the Japanese did in early '42 when they captured the entire Dutch East Indies...or to face a collapse of their effort not too far down the road if they failed to secure those new sources of oil.

By early '44 the American submarine campaign had strangled Japan's lifeline of merchant shipping by sinking most of their tankers and other merchant ships, and from that point on the Japanese were desperately short of oil and their war was irrevocably lost.

Anyway, there are other things (besides military campaigns) that the Chinese can do if they want to throw their weight around. They hold a lot of American dollars. They provide a vast amount of consumer goods that the West wants. So there are a number of things they could do, I would think, to get the oil they need.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 03:18 AM

While we are looking at past history LH, China is quite remarkable, it is one of the few nations that has never instigated a war, been subject to attack many, many times but it tends not to start wars.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: GUEST,PMB
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 03:56 AM

I dunno Teri... they invaded Tibet in 1950, and Vietnam in 1979. Both wars were short; the first they won, the second they lost. They of course claim the Tibet awar s merely a police operation reclaiming usurped Chinese territory.

I suppose it's more correct to say that since their self- contained empire was penetrated in the 18th century, they've mostly been too weak to launch wars, and prior to that they were the whole world and it wasn't worth looking outside.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: EBarnacle
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 12:28 PM

Interesting, as PetroChina has just announced that they found a new oil patch in the China Sea and that it is potentially larger than previous reserves in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 12:52 PM

Yes, that is interesting, Teribus. Russia is a bit like that too, I think, although they did attack both Poland and Finland in '39 (rather comparable in some ways to the Chinese moves on Tibet and Vietnam).

The Winter War (Finnish: Talvisota, Swedish: Vinterkriget, Russian: Çèìíÿÿ âîéíà, also known as the Soviet-Finnish War or the Russo-Finnish War[9]) began when the Soviet Union attacked Finland on November 30, 1939, three months after the invasion of Poland by Germany and the Soviet Union that started World War II. Because the attack was judged as illegal, the Soviet Union was expelled from the League of Nations on December 14. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin had expected to conquer the whole country by the end of 1939, but Finnish resistance frustrated the Soviet forces, who outnumbered the Finns 4:1 in men, 200:1 in tanks and 30:1 in aircraft[4]. Finland held out until March 1940, when the Moscow Peace Treaty was signed ceding about 10% of Finland's territory (excluding its population) and 20% of its industrial capacity to the Soviet Union.

The results of the war were mixed. Soviet losses on the front were tremendous, and the country's international standing suffered, especially following its earlier attack on Poland. Even worse, the fighting ability of the Red Army was put into question, a fact that contributed to Adolf Hitler's decision to launch Operation Barbarossa. Finally, the Soviet forces did not accomplish their primary objective of conquest of Finland but gained only a slice of territory along Lake Ladoga. The Finns retained their sovereignty and gained considerable international goodwill.



Perhaps the Russians and Chinese, both being nations which have a vast hinterland with much relatively uninhabited space in large parts of it, tend to think more inwardly or defensively, whereas nations which have a small amount of land but a highly effective military tend to think more aggressively and aim at expansion into distant areas.

For example: Spain, Holland, Great Britain, Portugal, Japan, Italy, France, Germany....these were all nations with a relatively small amount of land and a high density population...and their history shows that they all set out aggressively at one time or another to establish empires far from home.

To do that one usually needs a very good navy, and all those countries made efforts in that direction. Of those the British were ultimately the most successful, establishing what amounted to naval sumpremacy in the world between about 1815 and 1931.

China never had much of a navy in modern times, although they did assemble a huge fleet in ancient times when they attempted to conquer Japan...and lost much of it in a hurricane.

Russia was always hampered in having an effective navy, since they had to split it between the Baltic, the Far East, and the Black Sea...a logistical nightmare...and that nightmare was fully realized when they were utterly defeated by Japan in the early part of the 20th century.

Under the Soviets the Russians finally did build a very powerful fleet, second only to America's, but it has never (fortunately) engaged in a war with its chief rivals.

My impression is that the Russians and Chinese tend to think primarily in defensive terms. They usually fight border campaigns that are aimed at securing and protecting their own border areas and protecting the heartland through establishing buffer states. It's a different psychology from that which motivated the Japanese to go charging into Korea, China, Manchuria, and the South Pacific...or that which motivated England, Holland, and Spain into planting their flags on every piece of distant real estate their ships could sail to.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 02:20 PM

Since China's currency is peged to the dollar they are paying twice the number of dollars for all the oil they buy now.

Whoa is us when they "unpeg" their currency. bye bye Walmart

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Rapparee
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 02:42 PM

And with the Arctic Ocean going ice-free, both the Russians and the Canadians are starting to compete for the "Northwest Passage" -- and any oil that might reside under the ocean floor.

It's not the petroleum reserves are running out -- there's lots of oil in the oil sands and oil shales, for example -- but that the cheaply obtainable reserves are running low.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 05:45 PM

Whoa is us when they "unpeg" their currency.

Are you saying we are horses?

If so, then woe is us.    (Woe is we??)

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Riginslinger
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 07:35 PM

The answer, of course, is to develope a bean that will grow in traditional rice paddies. Harvest the beans, feed the beans to the huge standing army, and run the entire country on methane.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 30 Nov 07 - 08:09 PM

"China never had much of a navy in modern times, although they did assemble a huge fleet in ancient times when they attempted to conquer Japan...and lost much of it in a hurricane."

From whence comes the Japanese Kamikaze - "Divine Wind".

And I just couldn't resist noting...

"The answer, of course, is to develope a bean that will grow in traditional rice paddies. Harvest the beans, feed the beans to the huge standing army, and run the entire country on methane."

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 04:37 AM

But this year, lots of places in China can't grow rice or beans because of a widespread drought, and China is already taking water (apparently needed in drought areas?) to stockpile and save it for the Olympic visitors expected next year.

In drought, China stores Olympics water
Beijing and Qingdao diverting, storing water ahead of expected demand
Reuters
updated 7:23 a.m. CT, Fri., Nov. 30, 2007

John

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 05:40 AM

Air Force flying low today John?

:-P

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 07:05 AM

Both Russia and China have, both past and present, too many potential problems within their own borders to successfully expand, or even look outwards, that's the price of repression.

"For example: Spain, Holland, Great Britain, Portugal, Japan, Italy, France, Germany....these were all nations with a relatively small amount of land and a high density population...and their history shows that they all set out aggressively at one time or another to establish empires far from home."

In the fifteenth century I do not believe that any of the European countries mentioned above would have fitted the description of having, "a relatively small amount of land and a high density population". Even today only 15% of the land available in the UK is built on, and given proper backing and support British farming could still feed the UK.

Of the countries mentioned - Spain, Portugal, France, Japan, Germany and Italy were the only ones who ever set out aggressively to establish empires. The British and the Dutch founded their empires on the basis of trade not conquest. Both the British and the Dutch confronted Spain, the "Super-Power" of their day, in the sixteenth century and they did so at sea. The Dutch for reasons best known to themselves sided with the Colonies during the Revolutionary War, or War of Independence, in 1776 and bitterly regretted it - they damn near lost everything and never again attained a position where they could challenge Great Britain at sea.

The Russians may have built a large Navy it could never, ever have been described as powerful or profficient. It was utterly shambolic and at times extremely comical, in short a joke.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Stu
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 07:17 AM

"given proper backing and support British farming could still feed the UK"

Something's wrong here Teribus - this must be at least the second or third thing we've agreed upon this year ; )

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: autolycus
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 10:29 AM

The answer is a steady move away from materialism aka steadily cutting the ground from under our feet completely aka killing the goose that lays the whachamacallit aka treating our environment, upon which we depend, as an object, a mere thing. Rather than as what we require absolutely for our lives. As the man said, " Ecology. Look it up. You're involved."

If we don't find another way to organise ourselves, or live, as it's sometimes called, then the future is an immovable object.

Forget it, let's commit homo sapienscide. Why not.

Ivor

PS Feeling good, thanks, off to see a student.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 10:35 AM

The British, Teribus, were busily engaged in empire-building in, for example, France during the 100 Years War, and they failed only due to the fortuitous arrival of Joan of Arc in 1429. If not for her brief campaigns which utterly reversed the British fortunes, what we now know as the nation of France would have gone through the same sort of lengthy occupation by the British Empire as Ireland endured. The British also created the world's biggest and most successful overseas empire all over the place....Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, North America, various Pacific islands, India....and they ran it very well, as empires go. I'd say it was the most successful empire since Rome.

I cannot fathom how you can go about leaving Great Britain off my list of those who "set out aggressively to establish empires". Really can't. Did they just accidentally fall into the great good fortune of acquiring the world's biggest empire...or did the suffering inhabitants of those scattered lands ask the British to come in and take over? ;-)

But I know you like to get into the minutiae and nitpick the details, and so do I. Isn't it a joy to have something like that to disagree about again? ;-)

I await your response with much anticipation, I assure you, but do not assume that my characterizing Great Britain as being among the nations who "set out aggressively to establish empires" is in some way a blanket condemnation of the British nation or its character. It is not. Most (if not all) great nations have engaged in empire-building at some time in their history, and it is usually thought to be a glorious and entirely noble enterprise by those doing it...while not so much liked by those receiving the imperial attention. That is strictly a matter of individual perspective. Everyone feels instinctively that they are doing "the right thing" when it comes to such disputes.

And that is also true of the verbal debates on this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Stu
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 11:07 AM

Talk about thread drift.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Art Thieme
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 12:07 PM

If China is, indeed, running out of fools, they ought to see it as a blessing. But if they need to replenish their numbers in their country, they might raid the U.S. government!!

Art Thieme

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Gurney
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 03:46 PM

Little Hawk, far be it from me to argue with anyone, (ha) but to call the 100 years war a British war is stretching it a bit. It was an attempt by the invaders/rulers of that island to recover lands usurped from them by the French, providing that you look at it from their point of view. Pretty much like the excuse given by China for invading Tibet, but a couple of generations shorter.

The Royal Navy was begun to keep Viking raiders down, and expanded to defend against Catholic-Church-influenced invaders at a later date and on several occasions. Once established, it was so obviously an asset that it had to be maintained, and unlike an army of that time, the hardware and personnel had to be developed and trained.
It is commonly forgotten or ignored nowadays, but religion was a factor in both the original invasion of Ireland and subsequent rebellions in that state. If England had remained Catholic, the history of those two countries would have been very different. However, Henry started his own church because the RC church already owned something like 1/4 of England's arable land, left to them in devout bequests by Norman-descended nobility.

My earliest comments concerning 'What to do with big military forces' are aptly demonstrated by the establishment of the British Empire, which, as (someone?Teribus? it's gone!) said, began a trading empire, but was backed up by military muscle when it met opposition in the form of locals trying to destroy it, limit it, or remove it's influence.
The fleet destoyed by the Kamikazi WAS Chinese, but organised against their will by their invaders, the Mongols.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 04:20 PM

Interesting point about the Mongols, Gurney! You're quite right.

Trading empires are often back up by military muscle, because money talks, doesn't it?

Yes, I'm sure that everyone in the 100 years war felt justified in their efforts to take over various parts of what is now France, but the fact remains that it was primarily an effort by the English-speaking peoples from the British Isles...the English...to take over a very large area of land inhabited mostly by French-speaking peoples...the French. To that I say, "Vive La France!" ;-) If it had been the French trying to cross the channel and take over all of England (again)*, I would say, "To the battle, good sirs, and God save England for the English!"

In their expansion of power those same English-speaking people eventually took over Scotland and Ireland, and it was not appreciated by the Scots and Irish, was it? And yes, religious strife played a major part in those conflicts, as it did in the conflicts between Spain and England...and in many other parts of Europe. But that was somewhat later (than the 100 years war).

* ( William the Conqueror already did that once in 1066. My sympathies in that case would be with the local people, the Anglo-Saxons, who resisted his attempt...in that case unsuccessfully.)

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 01 Dec 07 - 04:57 PM

Getting back to the subject of China's fuel shortage, this article might help:

Fuel shortages in China

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 01:13 AM

"the 100 years war......was primarily an effort by the English-speaking peoples from the British Isles...the English...to take over a very large area of land inhabited mostly by French-speaking peoples...the French." - Little Hawk (Supposed Student of History)

Eh, Little Hawk, those who ruled England at the time, were the descendents of the self same Norman knights (Note "Norman" Little Hawk - Not French) who had crossed the channel to invade England with the Conqueror in 1066, when they did so they left behind them rather large chunks of France, which presumably they felt like they still retained title to. Add to that minor legal hiccup in what you contend, as any child in the UK knows, the language spoken at court and amongst the nobility in England at the time of the 100 years war was French.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 04:17 AM

stigweard - the chain of thought was; China running out of fuel - we're all going to run our of fuel - our way of life and our system are what is behing the vast use of fuel - we either hit a brick wall or change - I'd rather it was the latter - oh, the hell with it.

Hope that helps.

I also get torn beyween thread drift on the one hand; and that everything is connected and we need joined-up thinking on the other.

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Stu
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 05:18 AM

"but the fact remains that it was primarily an effort by the English-speaking peoples from the British Isles...the English...to take over a very large area of land inhabited mostly by French-speaking peoples...the French"

What a delightful oversimplification of the whole sequence of events - typically American if you don't mind me saying.

As Teribus has said, this was a continuation of a spat between various Norman (actually Vikings themselves) and French factions, all of whom had claims to bits of territory all over the continent. A quick pike around Wikipedia will reveal just how complicated the whole situation was, and how it dominated over 500 years of history in the Isles.

It was the Normans who invaded Ireland and Scotland, gradually subdued the Welsh and kept the English out of their own forests and subject to the feudal system - and of course continued waging war on their relatives over the Channel.

A 1000 years under the Norman Yoke. Huh.

Ivor - how's that for thread drift : )

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 07:34 AM

Not so much thread drift as thread over the horizon,stig. Ahem, tho' i went further than you, I still tied it to the thread.

I thought what I just wrote was unfair, then realised that whereas you have gone far afield, i stuck to the subject but went very deep - vertical rather than horizontal.

The thread at least demonstrates that the phrase "the verdict of history" may be pri------tty meaningless.

   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 11:09 AM

Yes, Teribus, I had already alluded to the Norman connection, William the Conqueror, and all that, in my post of 01 Dec 07 - 04:20 PM .... as you would know if you read my posts with a little more attention to detail, and a little less malicious intent. I did that specifically so contentious nitpicking minds like yours would take note that I had not overlooked said Norman connection. I am well aware that the Normans came from what is now part of France and they took over and ran England after 1066. I had anticipated precisely the objections you would raise. Follow the asterisk in my post, and you will see that. Those Normans were the aristocracy of England. Their army was composed to a great extent of Native-born Englishmen, and they were attempting to use that army to occupy all of what is now France, in which case what is now France would have undergone a lengthy period of foreign domination, as Ireland did, by a bunch of Norman Aristocrats whose seat of power was in London, and who thought of themselves "the English". The Normans, in effect, became the new English aristocracy, and eventually blended in with the local Anglo-Saxons. As Stigweard said, it was a complicated situation.

Now go and argue it out with the modern-day French, would you? Try to convince them that it wasn't an English invasion of France. ;-)

Now here's a useful quote about it from Wickipedia (note the bolded section):

In 1066, the most famous Norman leader, Duke William II of Normandy, conquered England. The invading Normans and their descendants replaced the Anglo-Saxons as the ruling class of England. After an initial period of resentment and rebellion, the two populations largely intermarried and merged, combining languages and traditions. Normans began to identify themselves as Anglo-Norman. Eventually, even this distinction largely disappeared in the course of the Hundred Years war, with the Anglo-Norman aristocracy increasingly identifying themselves as English. The Anglo-Norman language was considerably distinct from the French language; this was the subject of some humour by Geoffrey Chaucer. The Anglo-Norman and Anglo-Saxon languages eventually merged to form Middle English.

Even after the dukedom of Normandy was lost by the English Crown (although the Channel Islands were retained), and there were several changes of dynasty, the connection to modern France was long maintained. The nobility of England were part of a single French-speaking culture, and many had lands on both sides of the channel and owed fealty to kings of France and of England. The Kings of England included parts (often large parts) of modern France in their dominions, and did not necessarily consider England their most important holding (although it brought the title of King - an important status symbol). Nor did medieval Kings consider England to be owned by Normandy, since if it were considered such it would be under the control of the King of France, Normandy being his vassal. King Richard I (the Lionheart) is often thought to epitomise a medieval English King, but spent more time in Aquitaine or on Crusade than in England, and was not brought up to speak English: in fact, no English King until Richard II was a native speaker. Most medieval English Kings had a claim to the throne of France.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 11:13 AM

And the question remains: what are the ramifications of China running out of fuel? And are they running out of fuel? And why?

(we return to our scheduled program...)

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 11:40 AM

LH, my first post (ha!) attempted to anticipate (in the correst sense) that critical moment, and leap onto about seven questions beyond. Pretty dumb of me, eh?

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 11:53 AM

I thought it was your second post that did that, Ivor. Well, doesn't matter....

But how about that fuel shortage in China, eh? ;-) Gosh...this could be serious!

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 12:07 PM

Eh, as stigweard said the Normans were not French they were descendents of Norsemen who a French King paid off to stop them from repeatedly sacking Rouen with a sizeable chunk of his kingdom, which then naturally enough became known as Normandy. That was one of the reasons that William's invasion was linked to a Norse Viking invasion attempt led by the then King of Norway Harald Hardrada. The English King Harold defeating Hardrada at Stamford Bridge.

No armies of occupation Little Hawk, as at the time there were no standing armies, so it was impossible to occupy another country (That only ever came into the picture when the French introduced the "Levee-en-masse" during the Napoleonic War). You must be confusing actual historical reality with "war-gaming". Another reason why your claims regarding "British conquests" are rather ridiculous, even at the height of the British Empire, Britains Army numbered around 120,000 men. Do you honestly expect to sell anyone on the likelyhood that an army of only 120,000 men conquered roughly three quarters of this planet? The sub-continent of India (Population around 350 million) was administered by a Civil Service of under 1000 people. I shudder to think of the size of Army that would have been required to "conquer" India - Alexander the Great tried and failed, the descendents of Ghengis Khan the Moguls only partly succeeded. Britain on the other hand never even attempted it.

Oh and your poor and incorrectly identified example of Britain going forth aggressively to establish an Empire, i.e. The 100 Years War, would of course have been an English endeavour, wouldn't it? Great Britain did not come into existence until 1707.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 02:41 PM

This thread departed from the original subject.
The shortage in a region of China was the result of insufficient refining capacity and transport, a lack which rapidly is being remedied.
There are occasional regional shortages in the U. S., largely because no new refineries are being built.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Dec 07 - 05:03 PM

The whole historical period you are alluding to is quite fascinating, Teribus. Perhaps we should start a separate thread about it?

And then there's the British Empire, anther fascinating subject. Why not start a thread about that also?

Then we could get other people's viewpoints as well, and not have to keep interjecting off topic stuff into this thread, which is about the fuel shortage in China.

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Dec 07 - 01:13 AM

In that case why did you introduce both topics, incorrectly IMO into the thread?

Subject: RE: BS: China Running Out of Fuel
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 03 Dec 07 - 02:15 AM

Thst's ONLY iyho, actually...