Iran vs US & Israel

[tha123]

Originally Posted by DSHFilut

We are paying so much because we are not drilling in Alaska because of politicians whom are mostly democrats refusing to drill there to preserve natural habitat. Even both of our candidates are against the drilling in Alaska. They just want us to make more fuel efficient cars, which is not going to solve anything. We need to cut all ties to Middle East oil and start using what we have at home no matter where we have to drill.

I agree totally, and we do need to start drilling in Alaska. Screw polar bears.

[OME6A]

Originally Posted by DSHFilut

We are paying so much because we are not drilling in Alaska because of politicians whom are mostly democrats refusing to drill there to preserve natural habitat.

If it's for the sake of protecting the environment, then I'm all for it. Oil is antiquated and archaic. We're long overdue for replacing it with something that is renewable and efficient. We'll never get to that point until we're forced to make it happen.

[DSHFilut]

Originally Posted by OME6A

If it's for the sake of protecting the environment, then I'm all for it. Oil is antiquated and archaic. We're long overdue for replacing it with something that is renewable and efficient. We'll never get to that point until we're forced to make it happen.

I 100% agree with you we can not depend on oil forever, and from what I can see hydrogen fuel cells seems to be the best way to go. The only problem with this is we need time to develop this technology we need time to put the hydrogen fueling stations around the U.S. So while we are waiting for this technology to take off we are going to need oil like it or not. In the mean time if we can cut off the middle east and use our own oil until we start implementing this new technology it will be much cheaper for all of us at the pumps.

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by OME6A

If it's for the sake of protecting the environment, then I'm all for it. Oil is antiquated and archaic. We're long overdue for replacing it with something that is renewable and efficient. We'll never get to that point until we're forced to make it happen.

That's the problem. The liberals want to save the environment (drilling wouldn't even threaten environments much) instead of paying much cheaper for gas.

We need time to develop ways to replace oil, but until then, we need to use our own oil and pay as little as possible.

[Pvt.Dirt]

Originally Posted by Scuba Steve

That's the problem. The liberals want to save the environment (drilling wouldn't even threaten environments much) instead of paying much cheaper for gas.

We need time to develop ways to replace oil, but until then, we need to use our own oil and pay as little as possible.

I agree, and I'll add to this. If we drill our own oil we'll save money, and with that money we could further enhance new technology such as hydrogen stations. Now if the next president does something like this, hopefully he'll use that saved money to enhance this technology, and not something totally different.

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by Pvt.Dirt

I agree, and I'll add to this. If we drill our own oil we'll save money, and with that money we could further enhance new technology such as hydrogen stations. Now if the next president does something like this, hopefully he'll use that saved money to enhance this technology, and not something totally different.

Exactly, but the liberals don't want this. They want to "save" environments (even though drilling does not kill everything like they claim) instead of not only making oil cheaper for us, but also eventually stopping the use of oil, which in turn would help the environment much more than not drilling.

[DSHFilut]

Originally Posted by Pvt.Dirt

I agree, and I'll add to this. If we drill our own oil we'll save money, and with that money we could further enhance new technology such as hydrogen stations. Now if the next president does something like this, hopefully he'll use that saved money to enhance this technology, and not something totally different.

But see the problem is neither Obama nor McCain will do something like that. You have Obama wanting better fuel efficient cars and McCain is an environmentalist and is apposed to drilling. I am not sure what McCain's wants to do about the gas crisis but all I know is he is apposed to drilling in Alaska.

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by DSHFilut

But see the problem is neither Obama nor McCain will do something like that. You have Obama wanting better fuel efficient cars and McCain is an environmentalist and is apposed to drilling. I am not sure what McCain's wants to do about the gas crisis but all I know is he is apposed to drilling in Alaska.

Compared to Obama, he is much more likely to drill in Alaska. MUCH more.

[Jimdalf]

Originally Posted by Scuba Steve

On a side note, I couldn't help but laugh my *** off at this add on the top of the page...

I've got an ad for El Al... Google are targetting single muslim males and people who want tickets for Isreal's national airline. Smooth packaging!

Any untapped reserves in the USA are strategic resources. While they remain untouched the US maintains a measure of oil power which threatens the sole economic output of the middle east. Its your reserve which should be maintained for times of actual hardship. Which you are quite a ways off right now.

And anyway, the same middle men/profiteers that control oil right now would have the same mastery. The price would go down a little but it wouldn't be worth the sacrifice.

The thing about a war with Iran is that occupation Iraq-style doesn't have to be an option. We could just defang the Iranian military and obliterate their infrastructure, withdraw into Iraq and continue the low intensity conflict. We would greater numbers of pissed off Arabs but without the support of the Iranian government it wouldn't be much worse than it is right now.

What we don't need is an Isreali pre-emptive strike. In 1982 the Iraqi's had no leverage, they were still fighting the Iranians, but if Isreal try to repeat Osirak it would **** the whole thing up. We couldn't support the aggressors and maintain public support at home, and would be chucked out of Saudi Arabia on our arses.

[Big Red 11]

Christ Scuba, quit it with the "but the LIBERALS etc etc" stuff - this isn't a matter of A vs B. Don't blame our nation's problems on some vaguely defined group of people. Yes, many people would like to preserve what little natural habitats this planet has left. And I disagree that tapping into Alaska would buy us time to develop alternate energy. You know as well as I do that if the price of gas were to drop any significant amount, public pressure would ease up on developing alternative energy. Though, I would agree with the idea of keeping gas prices from rising too dramatically.

Originally Posted by DSHFilut

They just want us to make more fuel efficient cars, which is not going to solve anything.

Please explain this. More fuel efficiency means less demand for oil, which is what you're trying to support.