(may be broke/outdated!)
Would the Feds have treated this more like a natl disaster if the oil washing up on our shores came from an entity considered an international source rather than an economic ally?
If BP were considered a neutral or enemy foreign power rather than a friend, would this mess be paramount to terrorism? Should England share part of the responsibility? I suspect Mexico would have to if MP (the pretend company Mexican Petro) ruined our water and shore. does anyone agree?
Unspillable.com is your gateway into to the intriguing world of energy mysteries, revolutionary fuels, and the science driving alternative energy solutions. Delve into the depths of covert agendas and unexplained phenomena surrounding energy sources while uncovering the latest advancements in renewable technologies. From debunking conspiracies to exploring the cutting edge of sustainable energy, we’re your go-to resource for unraveling the secrets shaping our energy landscape.
© 2024 All Rights Reserved
4 Responses
He would have never caused this disaster in a foreign country. I worded that carefully.
This is not a natural disaster. This is a total mismanagement of oil drilling by BP. They are quick to cash in on the billions in profits, but lax when it comes to safety checks and cleaning up their own mess. They need to be severely fined for each day this debacle continues.
The important question is, would Bush have handled this differently? And if not, would the liberals have given him a free ride like they are Obama? I think they would be screaming bloody murder if Bush was president. Calling for impeachment, prison time, firing squad, international tribunal. Amusing isn’t it?
I think the administration would have been forced to treat it differently, due to the international law involved.