Many of the dollars we spend on imported oil are going to nations that support radical Islamist terrorists against whom we're engaged in a global war. We are in fact fighting a war on terrorism and paying both sides of the war. We are sending troops and dollars to fight for freedom and democracy all over the world, and we are sending money to the people who don't like us. Instead of both parties fighting each other in government, and citizens bickering shouldn't we come together, and set America free by focusing on existing technologies for cheap alcohol based fuels. Don't you think we must all come together immediatly to reduce our dependence on foreign fuel rather than waste another quarter of a century coming to terms with our dependence on foreign oil. Why not stop spending your time debating the war, debating whose the best, and email your congressmen on this issue, and talk about ways to make this happen!
2007-03-26 08:02:13 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
too true and yes I think they should all agree.. and I'd say most Americans who aren't extreme on their view would agree if they don't have ties to big oil... the largest hurdle will be getting around the oil companies lobbyists
2007-03-26 08:08:08 · answer #1 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes we should stop debating the war and work on alternative fuel sources. In fact, there are people doing that right now, but the oil companies and govt quash those efforts. The American press fuels the propaganda by making up stories why these other fuel sources won't work.
The truth is not being told to the American people. And all people have to do is listen to someone like Rush Dimbaugh and not research for themselves, get head up and believe the lies, and fall for the big corporate propaganda, and those alternatives won't shine through.
The problem is Americans don't think for themselves...
2007-03-26 15:17:53 · answer #2 · answered by mariee64 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Conservatives will agree with you on foreign dependence, but then why can't we use the oil that is right under our feet? As we speak, China and Cuba are drilling for oil in the gulf of Mexico and basically stealing our oil. We should be using it but instead, we let them drill it (using much "dirtier" technology) and then sell it back to us to fund communism. Don't you think that if the environmentalists used a brain, they would rather us drill it then Cuba and China??? Do you think Fidel is using the latest clean technology? Or is it just that they would they rather fund commies, who are ideological soul-mates?
2007-03-26 15:39:58 · answer #3 · answered by boonietech 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you are being too idealistic. If we could make it happen, we would. The US government, with all of it's rules, regulations, limitations is chiefly responsible for our inability to get out of this rut. No drilling where we have known reserves of oil.
Alcohol substitutes will not work. I saw one study that determined we would not be able to make enough alcohol to replace oil if we covered every inch of the US with corn crops.
I think the answers are nuclear energy and hydrogen. We can build plants on vacated military forts, then use the electricity generated to make hydrogen. It would be costly. The chance of getting bleeding heart liberals to agree to this are zero.
2007-03-26 15:10:29 · answer #4 · answered by regerugged 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I completely agree with you, and in a perfect world this oil dependency would have already been remedied with alternative fuels, etc. But in reallity there is too much $$$ involved for many parties (mainly oil companies & politicians). It's all about the Benjamins.
2007-03-26 15:12:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
How rational.
You will NEVER get the GOP to agree with your ideas, because they are bought and paid for by BIG OIL.
BIG OIL will do everything it can to keep the world dependent on OIL for as long as possible, because their number one priority is to MAXIMIZE PROFITS.
Bush and Cheney are employees of BIG OIL and the lie-based quagmire in Iraq was launched principally because of the OIL.
2007-03-26 16:01:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I disagree simply because I like to debate the tuff ones.
Dead Fox is wrong, and saying he is wrong does not prove he is right, it proves he is twice as wrong.
2007-03-26 15:08:55 · answer #7 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, all parties and all people of different political views should unite to combat this.
2007-03-26 17:47:17 · answer #8 · answered by cynical 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think we should all agree that opposing views are expected and encouraged in America.
I dare you to tell me I'm wrong. You'll prove me right.
2007-03-26 15:07:05 · answer #9 · answered by ? 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with almost nothing you've said.
2007-03-26 15:17:09 · answer #10 · answered by Shrink 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋