• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

let's get this right:

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
obama has NOT refused the assistance of foreign countries on the oil spill, despite what the ignorant palin and others like her have been saying.

enough, already.

Oil Spill, Foreign Help and the Jones Act | FactCheck.org

Also, contrary to reports such as the one on "Fox & Friends," international assistance has been accepted. To date, 25 countries and four international organizations have offered support in the form of skimming vessels, containment and fire boom, technical assistance and response solutions, among others. A chart provided by the State Department shows that as of June 23 offers from six foreign countries or entities had been accepted. Fifty more offers were under consideration — including multiple offers from a single country or entity. One offer had been declined: France offered a chemical dispersant that is not approved for use in the United States. President Barack Obama described this process in his May 27 press conference:
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
In over two months, 25 countries and 4 international orgs offer assistance and Obama accepts 6? I wouldn't be braggin' about those stats.

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that he turned down all offers of assistance. I think the complaint has been that he turned down too many. The Dutch skimmers are a prime example.

Another stupid move on his part, was his refusal to deploy oil skimmers located in other parts of the country, "because they might be needed for an oil spill somewhere else".

You can apologize all you want for Obama, but he cocked this up royally.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
In over two months, 25 countries and 4 international orgs offer assistance and Obama accepts 6? I wouldn't be braggin' about those stats.

I don't think anyone has ever claimed that he turned down all offers of assistance. I think the complaint has been that he turned down too many. The Dutch skimmers are a prime example.

Another stupid move on his part, was his refusal to deploy oil skimmers located in other parts of the country, "because they might be needed for an oil spill somewhere else".

You can apologize all you want for Obama, but he cocked this up royally.
did you actually read the article? i don't think so.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Just because it calls itself "factcheck" does not mean its correct.


Why was the dutch skimmers refused for 58 days?
 

apdst

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2009
Messages
133,631
Reaction score
30,926
Location
Bagdad, La.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Just because it calls itself "factcheck" does not mean its correct.


Why was the dutch skimmers refused for 58 days?
Because if the spill had been arrested too soon, Obama wouldn't be able to use it to push his agenda?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,917
Reaction score
50,837
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Just because it calls itself "factcheck" does not mean its correct.


Why was the dutch skimmers refused for 58 days?
Because they violated EPA regulations. U.S. reconsiders Dutch offer to supply oil skimmers

The Dutch offered to fly their skimmer arm systems to the Gulf 3 days after the oil spill started. The offer was apparently turned down because EPA regulations do not allow water with oil to be pumped back into the ocean. If all the oily water was retained in the tanker, the capacity of the system would be greatly diminished because most of what is pumped into the tanker is sea water.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
additionally:

Q&A: Did U.S. reject foreign help on gulf oil spill cleanup? - Los Angeles Times

Did the Dutch offer assistance immediately after the Deepwater Horizon exploded?

The State Department says the Dutch government and private businesses offered various types of assistance on April 30, 10 days after the explosion. It included proposals to sell equipment as well as offers of technical advice.

Romania, Norway, Spain, Sweden and Britain made similar offers that same day, according to a summary provided by the State Department. The Netherlands' offer consisted of "state-of-the-art skimming arms made by the Dutch company Koseq," said a statement issued by the Dutch Embassy. The Netherlands also offered to help Louisiana build sand berms intended to keep the oil from washing ashore.

Did the U.S. reject the offers?

On May 5, the State Department issued a statement acknowledging that it had received several offers from countries. "While there is no need right now that the U.S. cannot meet, the U.S. Coast Guard is assessing these offers of assistance to see if there will be something which we will need in the near future," the statement said.

The offer of skimmers was accepted on May 23, when BP purchased three Koseq sweeping arms.

As of June 21, the other Dutch offers were considered "under consideration," and the response team had also accepted aid from Mexico, Canada and Norway.
 

liblady

pirate lover
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 7, 2009
Messages
16,165
Reaction score
5,060
Location
St Thomas, VI
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
That's your response? Really?
yes, that's my response. you are so hell bent on blaming obama for non existent evils that your vision has blurred.
 

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,356
Reaction score
8,095
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
yes, that's my response. you are so hell bent on blaming obama for non existent evils that your vision has blurred.
But yet Bush and Katrina made so much sense to you.
 

Ikari

Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
75,413
Reaction score
43,429
Location
Colorado
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Which, BTW, is bull****. I know there were very stringent rules to make sure we weren't' polluting or anything, fine. But in this case, it's a hell of a lot better than what we're starting with and should have been reasonably considered as part of a solution. This is why government is stupid sometimes....most of the time.
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,917
Reaction score
50,837
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
:lol: Oh well in that case...... :doh



Seriously, I think the spill violates far more sense of sanity than an EPA regulation that too could be waived.
Something I heard on the TV news, so no link to verify, but they where saying this weekend I think that there is a chemical used as part of the process which can be more damaging than the oil. This was on TV, and a talking head type, so take that for what it is worth.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Something I heard on the TV news, so no link to verify, but they where saying this weekend I think that there is a chemical used as part of the process which can be more damaging than the oil. This was on TV, and a talking head type, so take that for what it is worth.



It's worth nothing. heresay of a talking head? come now....it could have been beck you heard. :ssst:



fact is though, isn't this epa reg now waived and this skimmer now in service?
 

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,917
Reaction score
50,837
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
It's worth nothing. heresay of a talking head? come now....it could have been beck you heard. :ssst:



fact is though, isn't this epa reg now waived and this skimmer now in service?
Again, as I understand it, the concern was looked at and it was decided to be worthwhile to use it. A process which takes time.

I would note that I actually make it a point to mention when I am basing something on hearsay, instead of doing things like crying "Jones Act" when it has nothing to do with anything, but I heard it did by people who agree with me.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Again, as I understand it, the concern was looked at and it was decided to be worthwhile to use it. A process which takes time.

I would note that I actually make it a point to mention when I am basing something on hearsay, instead of doing things like crying "Jones Act" when it has nothing to do with anything, but I heard it did by people who agree with me.


I see, so you get what my response to you was going to be... Why did it take 58 days.... Well, I find your answer deplorable. 58 days to decide to use a skimmer that may put a little oil back in the see but take out most of it?


Gee, I don't need "58 days" to make that decision. :doh



but don't let that stop you from starting the trolling to hide from your hackiness :2wave:
 
Last edited:

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
106,917
Reaction score
50,837
Location
Georgia
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
I see, so you get what my response to you was going to be... Why did it take 58 days.... Well, I find your answer deplorable. 58 days to decide to use a skimmer that may put a little oil back in the see but take out most of it?


Gee, I don't need "58 days" to make that decision. :doh



but don't let that stop you from starting the trolling to hide from your hackiness :2wave:
You are not in a position to make important decisions like that, so it's easy to make that claim. There is a post in the thread in BN-MSM thread on the super skimmer which explains the process. You will note that it does use 1 or more dispersant, and some of those are highly illegal here in the US.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
You are not in a position to make important decisions like that, so it's easy to make that claim.


this is a weak ass argument. One that comes off pretty hacky imo.... If we were to follow this ideology, shut DP down because none of us are in a position of authority!!! :roll:



There is a post in the thread in BN-MSM thread on the super skimmer which explains the process. You will note that it does use 1 or more dispersant, and some of those are highly illegal here in the US.

Then by all means post a link to it. Which dispersant does the dutch skimmer use that is "highly illegal".... Please back up your claim.
 

Barbbtx

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 7, 2010
Messages
8,467
Reaction score
1,993
Location
W'Ford TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Just because it calls itself "factcheck" does not mean its correct.


Why was the dutch skimmers refused for 58 days?
I admit I read this on factcheck a while back. I used to think they were pretty reliabable. This fact check sounded like something right out of the WH.
I believe the reasons for not lifting the Jones act is a load of bull. It has to do with the Labor Unions and not because it wasn't necessary. Bush waived it within days of Katrina.
I think his lack of response was also his wanting the spill to get pretty bad before doing anything. Better to further his crap and tax agenda, then to actually keep the oil from reaching shore. Looks like this may be another one of his successes. Dang, I wish he'd fail once in a while.
 

ReverendHellh0und

I don't respect you.
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
79,901
Reaction score
20,981
Location
I love your hate.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I admit I read this on factcheck a while back. I used to think they were pretty reliabable. This fact check sounded like something right out of the WH.
I believe the reasons for not lifting the Jones act is a load of bull. It has to do with the Labor Unions and not because it wasn't necessary. Bush waived it within days of Katrina.
I think his lack of response was also his wanting the spill to get pretty bad before doing anything. Better to further his crap and tax agenda, then to actually keep the oil from reaching shore. Looks like this may be another one of his successes. Dang, I wish he'd fail once in a while.


I don't buy into the alinksy conspiracy stuff. I think the guy is about as competent as carter. 58 days over some dispersant? Why didn't we hear about that 50 days ago and now and only now do we here about this supposed dispersant....


Fact is, GOVERMENT responses to disasters whether man made or natural is abysmal....


katrina and BP spill should teach us not to rely on the Government.
 
Top Bottom