Oil Disaster vs. 9/11

[chuck10x]

Politics aside,
The Oil Spill was negligence on the part of B.P.
911 was an act of Terrorism.
Katrina was an act of nature.
No comparison at all.
What should have been done from the beginning was to get all the help necessary to fix the problem.
Blame and ALL costs are the responsibility of B.P.- along with criminal charges.

 

[MercuryJones]

Politics aside,
The Oil Spill was negligence on the part of B.P.
911 was an act of Terrorism.
Katrina was an act of nature.

There's one other difference:

With 9/11 the Republican president continued to kiss the ass of the Saudis;
With the oil spill Republican Congress apologized to BP;
No Republican apologized to Katrina, as far as I know.

 

[laikaNYC]

There's one other difference:

With 9/11 the Republican president continued to kiss the ass of the Saudis;
With the oil spill Republican Congress apologized to BP;
No Republican apologized to Katrina, as far as I know.

One Republican Congressman counts as the entire caucus? and why would any Republican need to apologize for Katrina. You shouldn't inject politics into a disaster like that.

 

[MercuryJones]

One Republican Congressman counts as the entire caucus?

Of course not. But the Republican Study Committee counts as a great deal more than that.

 

[chuck10x]

There's one other difference:

With 9/11 the Republican president continued to kiss the ass of the Saudis;
With the oil spill Republican Congress apologized to BP;
No Republican apologized to Katrina, as far as I know.

One republican apologized, And his party forced him to retract that apology.
I purposely left Politics out of my post because it serves no purpose.
The leak has to be stopped as soon as possible and the damage fixed.
There will be plenty of time later to point fingers.
B.P. I hope will be charged with criminal negligence in the leak and deaths of those 11 employees.
The failure with Katrina started at the local level- The Mayor and the govenor and escalated under Bush and "Good Job Brownie", Plenty of blame to all involved.

 

[JayHawk]

The Belgian dredgers say that the entire operation could have been executed much more rapidly using the sophisticated vessels that they have. Jan De Nul and DEME proposed to BP that their fall pipe vessels be used, which are unique ships equipped with a two kilometre long fall pipe that are normally used to dump rock at great depths when laying pipelines on the seabed. ‘The diameter of the pipe on such a ship is much broader than the funnel BP is now using to suck up the oil,’ says Noel Pille of Jan De Nul. ‘That means we can collect more oil, which can be pumped underwater into an oil tanker. Moreover, at the bottom of the fall pipe there is a type of unmanned submarine, which can perform tasks at great depths. With our assistance the entire process could have been speeded up greatly.’

This PROVEN technology could have been removing oil from the word 'GO' with simple emergency action by the commander N Chief.

People who want to apologize for Obama's bungling effort are as bad as Bush apologist for his failings... just on here more agree with what Obama says he is for....

Additionally, Some have insinuated that BP not be removed so they are held accountable. That is ridiculous. Do you get the drunk out of the wrecked vehicle in a alcohol related car crash and ask him to help pull the cars apart and do some life saving work on the victims?

NO you wouldn't.

The popular excuse is that BP has the technology but so do the other companies operating in deep water. BP should have been removed from the beginning. Then possibly so much dispersant would not have been used to disguise the size of the spill for public image. Instead it could be easy to find and remove from the gulf.

Oh and to the OP's question? This is entirely like 9/11although the nation will not be movilized behind the cause due to inept leadership.

 

[MercuryJones]

One republican apologized, And his party forced him to retract that apology.

And that's curious, since the Republican Study Committee which includes 114 Republican legislators released a statement which included "“BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics. "

Not so different than what Barton retracted - though he didn't really retract anyway.

 

[NickCole]

This PROVEN technology could have been removing oil from the word 'GO' with simple emergency action by the commander N Chief.

People who want to apologize for Obama's bungling effort are as bad as Bush apologist for his failings... just on here more agree with what Obama says he is for....

Additionally, Some have insinuated that BP not be removed so they are held accountable. That is ridiculous. Do you get the drunk out of the wrecked vehicle in a alcohol related car crash and ask him to help pull the cars apart and do some life saving work on the victims?

NO you wouldn't.

The popular excuse is that BP has the technology but so do the other companies operating in deep water. BP should have been removed from the beginning. Then possibly so much dispersant would not have been used to disguise the size of the spill for public image. Instead it could be easy to find and remove from the gulf.

Oh and to the OP's question? This is entirely like 9/11although the nation will not be movilized behind the cause due to inept leadership.

The failure of leadership from Obama in this --and in everything from the stimulus to health care to financial regulation legislation, from DADT to DOMA to ENDA, on and on-- is breathtaking.

And every single apologist is responsible for the downward spiral that's resulting. The disdain and disgust I've had for ObamaNation is only amplifying as the truth becomes stunningly obvious and they continue to protect and defend this force of destruction.

 

[chuck10x]

And that's curious, since the Republican Study Committee which includes 114 Republican legislators released a statement which included "“BP’s reported willingness to go along with the White House’s new fund suggests that the Obama Administration is hard at work exerting its brand of Chicago-style shakedown politics. "

Not so different than what Barton retracted - though he didn't really retract anyway.

The "Shake-Down" of the fund is a drop in the bucket for B.P., But, It is a start.
What was the final cost of the Exxon-Valdez spill?
To inject politics into it- Has Sarah Pallin made any comments in comparison?

 

[JayHawk]

^ That and after Exxon Valdez a cap was placed on the damages a company has to pay. That cap is 75 million. BP dropped 2billion on the table and will pay no more. Just wait till the 2B is gone. It is what I guess. BP is waiting for American anger and attention to focus elsewhere. We are too ADD a country to stick with this spill for the 25 years it takes to see everything resolved.

 

[MercuryJones]

The "Shake-Down" of the fund is a drop in the bucket for B.P., But, It is a start.

I may have misunderstood, but I thought that point of the $20B was to make $ available to those with damages more quickly and easily than would occur otherwise - it is not intended to be a cap on damages, and is unrelated to fines.

To inject politics into it- Has Sarah Pallin made any comments in comparison?

She's calling for prayer.

 

[JayHawk]

The CAP by law is 75 million. The 2B is a big number that can make politicians say they did something.

Have you ever been involved in a lawsuit? Any money accepted becomes agreed restitution. BP will not only argue that but since the govt is overseeing the distribution it will claim angry people who werent paid but have a calim should see uncle sam not BP.

 

[MercuryJones]

The money wasn't accepted by the government as restitution in a lawsuit - it's in escrow, pending later necessary increases.

 

[JayHawk]

No it wasnt accepted in such a form. That doesnt mean it wont get argued using US law as the standard for argument in the future.

Regardless how this falls within the topic I have no idea.

 

[MercuryJones]

BP has already acknowledged the 20B is not intended to represent a cap on damages.

 

[JayHawk]

Review the Exxon Valdez spill to see how ALL the damages are covered... or not so much