It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How's that DRILL(Y) BABY DRILL(Y) thing workin' for ya!? ;)

page: 1
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 05:54 PM
link   
The latest update of the oil disaster off of Louisiana is that the spill is much worse than we were told. 5000 gallons a day pouring into the gulf, and landfall is expected within hours. Bobby Jindal just declared a state of emergency, and Obama is mobilizing military resources. Most experts are saying that this could end up being worse than the disgusting Exxon-Valdez horror. Hell, part of me thinks that this is such an unprecedented situation, that the oil could continue to gush into the ocean INDEFINITELY. Supposedly, BP is drilling a secondary $100,000,000 well to somehow help remedy the situation. All of this is completely untested, as the previous attempts have been utter failures.

I just absolutely love how the BP spokeswoman is saying how this is an unprecedented situation dealing w/ a leak 5000 feet deep, and they are trying their best. Yeah, well I remember constantly being bombarded w/ messages concerning how far the technology has come, how safe the deep sea platforms are, and how all contingencies have been both planned and accounted for.

So, any of you former petroleum-industrial-complex supporters willing to admit you were wrong about the indisputable safety of off-shore drilling? Anyone who happily chanted 'drill baby drill' in unison w/ Palin feel like coming clean? Anyone willing to admit the folly of this approach, or are people going to move from being an oil-industry supporter to corporate apologist?

Honestly, how anyone could think taking such a huge risk for reducing our dependence on foreign oil by the tiniest drop in the bucket (taking 20 years to even get that) is beyond me. Is it not clear that our resources and efforts demand to be directed at non-crude based solutions? I do understand that the concept of 'opening off shore drilling' provides a psychological benefit that does keep crude-oil futures depressed, but in terms of actual solutions, we are deluding ourselves if we think oil is the answer.

Best,
SN

[edit on 4/29/2010 by skunknuts]




posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 06:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by skunknuts
So, any of you former petroleum-industrial-complex supporters willing to admit you were wrong about the indisputable safety of off-shore drilling? [edit
on 4/29/2010 by skunknuts]


Obviously sending a torpedo in to the underwater pipe of an offshore oil rig causes problems. I just didn't think progressives would stoop so low but then again environmental terrorism is chic today.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by skunknuts
So, any of you former petroleum-industrial-complex supporters willing to admit you were wrong about the indisputable safety of off-shore drilling? [edit
on 4/29/2010 by skunknuts]


Obviously sending a torpedo in to the underwater pipe of an offshore oil rig causes problems. I just didn't think progressives would stoop so low but then again environmental terrorism is chic today.


right?

Like crashing planes into buildings to declare war, so your defense holdings go up in multiples.

Goddamned Progressives!



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ararisq

Originally posted by skunknuts
So, any of you former petroleum-industrial-complex supporters willing to admit you were wrong about the indisputable safety of off-shore drilling? [edit
on 4/29/2010 by skunknuts]


Obviously sending a torpedo in to the underwater pipe of an offshore oil rig causes problems. I just didn't think progressives would stoop so low but then again environmental terrorism is chic today.


Yeah, I'm sure BP wouldn't exploit your ridiculous, paranoid, unsubstantiated sci-fi scenario if it had even an INKLING of a chance to be true. This is over the top, even for Beck.

Since you brought up 'progressives,' why are conservatives so unable to accept responsibility for the messes they create and support?

Best,
SN



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   
Its astounding how there are still people who insist that if we continue to drill for more oil our fuel crises would be solved. I mean how deluded are people? These oil corporations, some which host GDP's larger than entire countries, have been holding the nations hostage for decades. They hold immense influence and control to the extent that we saw a war waged against Iraq, twice. I mean its a resource that is largely responsible for many of the international issues facing the world. I mean why on earth would you insist on staying on a fuel substance that is only used to control?

We run out of fuel in one place! Oh never mind we'll just drill on our own soil until every last drop, to the LAST day when we find ourselves needing to go alternative and all heck breaks out. We have the technology to go alternative, we have electric and bio/natural alternatives. This isnt just about being 'environmental' as many people would negatively view it as. This is about breaking free of the global oil monopoly. If you want to continue to use oil because your car sounds great, thats all dandy, but it is not a sustainable option long term. It is costing independence, it is costing the environment, it is controlling and dictating our foreign policy and if we don't all begin to push and demand alternatives we will remain as such. I support the idea of lifting taxes on any product, machine or car that runs on alternative (or for the part).

I don't have any problem with the 'nuclear' alternative. As far as I can see it we have responsible people who can manage the resource well, we can control it. There are other options, so instead of wasting time on consuming every last drop why not use common sense and move off from this one source. Federal government should offer more incentives to those studying for alternatives.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 


Besides this incident it has worked out pretty well don't you think?

Just because one bad thing happens doesn't mean you should stop. If we did that in life then we would all sit at home to afraid to leave the house.

Citing this accident as a reason to stop drillling is kind of ignorant because you are forgetting about the many many many years of drilling that has gone on without one incident.

You get into a car accident are you going to stop driving?



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:11 PM
link   
I think the enviromental terrorism angle needs to be investigated a little more thoroughly. Two enemies of the Obama agenda going down within a week......hmmmmmmmmmmmm???????



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Miracle Man
reply to post by skunknuts
 


Besides this incident it has worked out pretty well don't you think?

Just because one bad thing happens doesn't mean you should stop. If we did that in life then we would all sit at home to afraid to leave the house.

Citing this accident as a reason to stop drillling is kind of ignorant because you are forgetting about the many many many years of drilling that has gone on without one incident.

You get into a car accident are you going to stop driving?


So you've chosen to be an apologist for big oil. Thanks for playing.

I mean, the gulf of Mexico is ONLY one of many bodies of water. I'm sure all the fisherman, residents, wildlife can just pack it up....ah, just forget it. This 'little' one incident is orders of magnitude worse than BP's WORSE CASE SCENARIO they presented when applying for permits, but whoopty doo, who cares.

The earth is just one planet among many, so who cares if we destroy one puny planet, right?


Best,
SN



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
I think the enviromental terrorism angle needs to be investigated a little more thoroughly. Two enemies of the Obama agenda going down within a week......hmmmmmmmmmmmm???????



What is the other incident you are talking about?

Dude, you are in Louisiana, I can't believe you are grasping at straws to defend the people responsible for f-ing up your state. I'm mean seriously, in your mind is it also feasible that greenpeace hijacked HAARP to steer Katria towards New Orleans to make Bush look bad?

Best,
SN



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
Well if the government didn't put that $#@$^% ocean there we wouldn't have a problem would we?

Its not like socialist healthcare, the people who own the rig aren't going to rely on the government titty to fix the problem.

The owners are going to go down there and take responsibility, a concepts you libtards could learn


I am tired of my tax dollars, being stolen and going to irresponsible people who sit around being lazy.

BTW you commie, I am putting an oil Derrick in my swimming pool, so kiss my butt!

DRILL BABY DRILL!



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 


Call me what you will, but I answered your question and to bad if you don't like the answer.

I never called this incident little nor did I say who cares. My answer is the right one, besides this incident it has worked out pretty well.

You just gotten yourself all worked up to really want an answer to a question you asked, unless of course its one that fits your anti oil way of thinking.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 



Hell, part of me thinks that this is such an unprecedented situation, that the oil could continue to gush into the ocean INDEFINITELY.


I think that is a real possibility...or else it wouldn't still be leaking.

So we can look forward to the Gulf of Oil...Yay.

It will be so attractive to look out at a sea of black oil slicks. Maybe we can light the whole thing on fire and make it a big bonfire.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Deny Ignorance



Well I got to clue you all in on a little fact of life.

The U.S. doesn't own the Gulf of Mexico.

We would like to but we don't, after so far it is INTERNATIONAL territory and we have no say so.

These wells are in INTERNATIONAL waters.

Deny Ignorance



[edit on 29-4-2010 by Oneolddude]



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by skunknuts

Originally posted by Carseller4
I think the enviromental terrorism angle needs to be investigated a little more thoroughly. Two enemies of the Obama agenda going down within a week......hmmmmmmmmmmmm???????



What is the other incident you are talking about?

Dude, you are in Louisiana, I can't believe you are grasping at straws to defend the people responsible for f-ing up your state. I'm mean seriously, in your mind is it also feasible that greenpeace hijacked HAARP to steer Katria towards New Orleans to make Bush look bad?

Best,
SN


If it wasn't for the oil industry Louisiana would be a states equivilent of a ghost town.

The other incident would be the West Virginia Coal mine explosion (bombing?) This is a conspiracy site? Right?



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Oneolddude

Deny Ignorance



Well I got to clue you all in on a little fact of life.

The U.S. doesn't own the Gulf of Mexico.

We would like to but we don't, after so far it is INTERNATIONAL territory and we have no say so.

These wells are in INTERNATIONAL waters.

Deny Ignorance



[edit on 29-4-2010 by Oneolddude]


So BP can do as they wish? Are the wells located in the country of bpastonia? Why do they have to get permits then if we have no say? Where does the oil have to be pumped?

And even if you are completely right, does that make it ok? I would say it makes it even worse, and the US should respond to this as if a foreign entity has done this harm to our homeland.

Best,
SN


[edit on 4/29/2010 by skunknuts]



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:32 PM
link   
reply to post by skunknuts
 


In regards to your title:

From what I hear, that OIL isn't even ours. It's being shipped overseas, to a non-american consumer..


our backyard is getting messy, and it isn't even our oil.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Carseller4
 


If Louisiana was allowed to own the oil off it's coast, it would be the Saudi Arabia of North America



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:40 PM
link   
I think they are STILL lying about the size of the mess...

As I recall, that well was an extremely high producer well...it was providing 500,000 barrels per day.



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:45 PM
link   
this accident reminds me a bit about the disaster from unstopable mud flows that were caused also from a drillling endevour in the past.

let's hope this one can be stopped before it gets too large to do anything about.

www.asianews.it...



posted on Apr, 29 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Who exactly funded the environmental lobbyist movement that has helped to put the onerous regulations in place to make it near impossible to build any new oil refineries in the U.S.?

The goal of the oil cartel is to keep the oil in the ground. They don't want us to drill. The scarcer the resource, the more they can profit.

Oil spill? It reeks of a psy-op.

Now all the environmentalists can cry, "See! We don't need to build any oil refineries in the U.S. - Look what can happen to the environment with these oil spill disasters!"

Do we need alternative sources of energy? Agreed. But for the time being, we still need to become independent of foreign oil. And that means building our own refineries so we can tell the Middle East to go jump in a lake.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2 >>

log in

join