Obama needs to send in the Navy

[marylanddem]

to shut down the freaking oil gusher - BP is just playing games to keep it open. Sickening spectacle before our eyes.

[Captain Hilts]

1. YES. USN and CG. nt

[sailor65]

2. What expertise do you think the Navy has in this area?

The Navy and CG are both outstanding branches of service but this is not what they do.

[ThomWV]

17. But, but, but, ... they have SEALS, doesn't that count for something?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

100. SEAL the leak? Good idea!

:thumbsup:

[Dr.Phool]

107. They HAD SEALS.

The Canadians clubbed them to death.

[stray cat]

3. How would the navy solve the problem versus the coast guard

They can't even operate subs at that depth without crushing them

[marylanddem]

4. BP is obviously keeping the well open for future use.

Obama needs to takeover whatever the hell kind of operations they have going out there with BP's "siphoning" freaking games.

[Rabrrrrrr]

24. No they aren't - if corked, they can tap into that reservoir from another location.

considering what it's costing them not to cork it, compared to the lower cost (at this point) of drilling a new hole, it's ludicrous to think that not corking the damn thing is somehow a cheaper option.

[Statistical]

48. That is stupid.

A new deep water well costs about $100 million. This oil field is so large BP will likely drill 4, 5, 6, maybe as many as a dozen wells into this field.

To date BP has spent $450 million on the spill (and we haven't even looked at long term cleanup costs).
New well costs about $100 million.

So why are they doing that? They like losing a lot of money? They would rather have one broken spewing well than 5 brand new functional wells?

:rofl:

[Lagomorph]

72. The siphoning is being done to...

...reduce the pressure coming from the well. They are also counter drilling to intercept the the well shaft below the leak. Once they get the pressure reduced they can plug the thing and stop the leak. Everyone will slink away until the heat's off, then go back to tap the well for production.

[BeFree]

5. I figure that BP figures...

...along with Cheney, that if they kill the gulf, there will be no reason not to go ahead and drill baby drill. Sure, they hate that the well is spewing all that oil, but it hardly costs them anything. The people who buy gas will pay for the cleanup. Not BP execs. They still get their M$ paychecks.

So, the gulf gets sterilized via the oil and now its good for nothing but oil?

Sounds like a plan.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

62. PATHETICALLY POSSIBLE

[SammyWinstonJack]

118. A plan BP execs love, I'm sure. Disgusting greedy bastards.

:grr:

[Codeine]

6. Since when does the Navy

have special - or any - expertise in underwater oil wells? :shrug:

[marylanddem]

8. Well, obviously BP doesn't...

[Codeine]

10. They have more than anyone,

not that it's proving enough. But what exactly does one expect the USN to accomplish there?

[BeFree]

29. heh

Navy has underwater experience, right? RIGHT?

BP has profit experience and obviously hasn't a damn clue about the mess they caused.

Send in the Navy. I want an Admiral heading this up.

[Codeine]

34. "Underwater experience"

The kind that can seal off an oil gusher? You realize this gusher is at a depth far beyond the ability of a normal military submarine to operate? Something like the Triest could get there, but it doesn't have the ability to do anything but look at the oil spewing at that point.

I'm still not sure what you'd like the military to DO once they're in charge? :shrug:

[BeFree]

38. You're not sure?

I'm sure the Navy could have fixed this already.
I guess, unlike you, I place more faith in the US Navy, not BP.

[Codeine]

39. They don't have the tools to fix this.

It's hysterical to see DUers suddenly believe that the military is a magical force capable of fixing anything.

[BeFree]

41. BP doesn't have the tools, it's obvious.

What makes you think the Navy is less capable than BP?

[Codeine]

44. BP certainly isn't cutting it, I'd agree.

But the Navy wouldn't do any btter, simply because deep-sea oil drilling is well out of their rubric.

[BeFree]

47. Bullshit

First the Navy has no other motive. No profit involved with the Navy.

BP won't even allow the most capable of Oceanographers to be involved.

Yet here you are bucking up BP and putting down the Navy. Shameful display, Codeine, shameful.

[Codeine]

50. Show me where I "bucked up" BP or "put down" the Navy.

Lord I hate that sort of cheap nonsense. Don't assign positions to people they do not hold.

BP sucks ass, demonstrably so. Acknowledging that they probably know more about oil wells than the USN is neither praising them nor denigrating the Navy.

I'd appreciate it if you'd refrain from claiming I've argued a point I clearly haven't in the future. :hi:

[BeFree]

52. Read your posts

You have more faith in BP than the US Navy. Case closed.

[Rabrrrrrr]

64. I don't know what posts you were reading, but I read them, and saw nothing of what you accuse.

If I say "The Army is not as well-equipped as the National Forest Service to put out a forest fire" that doesn't mean I'm dissing the army.

It means that I have enough brain to know that not every organization has expertise in absolutely everything under the sun.


You seem to think that because the well is under water, and since the Navy works in water, therefore ipso facto, the navy has expertise in oil drilling.

That's as fucking dumb as insinuating that since the army is on land, and forest fires are on land, therefore the army has expertise in putting out forest fires.

Might just as well say to the kindergarten teacher, "Hey - I'm supposed to give a lecture on quantum mechanics tonight, but I can't make it - but you're a teacher, why don't you fill in for me?"

And then someone else will say "But that teacher doesn't know anything about quantum mechanics; that's a stupid idea!"

and then you'll say "Oh, so you think teachers are fucking stupid? Why do you insult teachers?"

:eyes:

Goddamn.

[Codeine]

65. Classic DU debate tactic.

When all else fails, the poster you've disagreed with is a corporate apologist.

[boston bean]

91. no, you just don't want Obama to get too involved for it might bite him in the ass.

More pragmatism that sucks!

You want BP in control because it sheilds Obama.

Well to freakin late, Obama already gave his stamp of approval to BP and more offshore oil exploration, which could only lead to more oil wells offshore.

Reality: Obama and his admin could be leading, instead they are just letting BP do what BP does. And BP has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they don't know what to do. Never mind the Navy, why isn't our government in charge?

Do you always trust big oil? Do you think they know it all? Or has your pragmattical side decided it is better to allow the murdering assholes continue to cover up and save their asses, versus our government taking the rein?!

[Rabrrrrrr]

124. Wow- even more ignorance

Initial premise of this thread was to bring in the navy.

A bunch of us point out that the navy has no expertise.

By pointing that out, we are now being vilified as people who think the navy isn't worth a shit; or people who want BP to be in charge of everything; or people who are afraid to let Obama handle this because he might fail and then look bad; or that we're corporate apologists; or, as you so ludicrously and ignorantly said, "we want BP in control because it shields Obama". Christ, I don't even know what that means.

fucking hell.

No - we're saying that having the navy come take care of the thing is fucking dumb because, as the navy would quickly agree, they don't know how to do anything for it! They don't do anything with oil, and so, obviously (at least, obviously to anyone who thinks with their brain, not their copy of "how to be a holier-than-thou knee-jerk purist smug self-righteous liberal by despising corporations and blaming for every evil in the world in 1 easy step", or anyone beyond first grade), have no capacity to help with an oil well issue.

Goddamn.

That's it.

Try to tone down the hyper emotions and follow a simple thought process for what it means, not for what you wish it means.

[Statistical]

49. The Navy is good at what they do.

Working 5000 ft below surface (roughly 3x the crush depth of their deepest subs) isn't one of them.

[BeFree]

51. Gawd!!

Yes, the Navy is absolutely terrified of the crushing underwater pressures!! Swim away, Navy, swim away!


Who do you think developed deepwater subs? EH?

Are you wearing some bass-ackwards tin foil?

[Statistical]

53. Who said the Navy is terrified? Oh yeah only you.

It simply isn't their relm of expertise.

Navy developed deep diving capabilities to gain a tactical advantage over the enemy but there is little advantage beyond designing a sub that can dive 2000 ft and one that dive 5000ft. The 5000ft sub would require much heavier pressure hull and as a result be larger, more expensive, slower, and less capable.

The Navy no longer owns any manned vessel capable of going that deep and if it could what good would that good? Too look at it.

Only use for the Navy would be if we determine the leak can't be sealed by any conventional method and use a nuclear device to crush the well closed. Given it is a nuclear device it would be under the control of the military and would require Navy involvement.

Lets pray it doesn't come to that.

[BeFree]

56. You don't know WTF you are talking about.

The Navy pioneered the deep water subs. They did so that they could rescue sunken subs. They have more experience underwater and at these pressures than anyone in the world.

BP obviously, when compared to the US Navy, are boy scouts.

[Statistical]

58. Nobody has experience at this depth.

Navy subs don't go this deep.

Ever since the development of robotic submersibles NOBODY goes this deep in a manned vehicle.
The cost & risks simply make it stupid to try.

The Navy doesn't own a single vessel capable of diving 5000 ft. There is no reason to.

[Codeine]

60. They had a few rescue vehicles, the Mystic class,

with an extreme operational limit of 5000 feet. They've since been decommisioned in favor of a robotic rescue vehicle, but it's still in development.

[madmax]

27. +1

[Renew Deal]

46. They could easily bomb it with a nuke!

It almost worked in Armageddon, it might work here. :nuke:

[AllentownJake]

7. When the Military arrives

The Russian solution will be implemented. Which is literally nuking the leak.

[BeFree]

9. Military response?

The Coast Guard is on it.

Nat Guard Troops are placing booms, etc. So the Army is on it.

The Air Force is spraying dispersant. AF is on it.

The oil is coming from underwater and the Navy ain't on it? WTF?

[marylanddem]

11. Thank you - and BP appears to have control of the waters around the well...

I mean, around the gusher.

[Karenina]

13. Perhaps they would be most useful in collecting, assessing

and documenting current conditions underwater, providing the government with an "independent" information source.

[marylanddem]

15. Exactly - thank you! and monitoring whatever the hell BP is doing, which

appears to be playing games and NOT shutting down the well permanently, which I really believe they have the technology to do - but don't want to because they want to keep their options open.
This is beyond beyond beyond shameful...

[Karenina]

26. There are safer alternatives to the dispersant they're using

Safer AND MORE EFFECTIVE. Unfortunately (for us "stakeholders" in a healthy environment) BP has a contract with a company producing the most toxic crap and deployment has everything to do with the money flow while basta to do with the consequences. The shareholders of the poison are making a KILLING!!! :woohoo:

[Cetacea]

88. And the ingredients are a trade secret, correct?

[Karenina]

98. Of course!

[Contrary1]

12. The Navy may already be on it...

It's not like the government tells us much of anything.

[marylanddem]

14. I hope you're right...

From the news reports, it seems like BP is absolutely in control of whatever the hell is going on out there. I pray you're right, as a matter of fact.

[Scuba]

16. To do what? ...

...Aircraft carriers and other warships are not designed to fix things.

[marylanddem]

18. I believe the Navy is involved with protecting our waters, right?

Not everything is about military-industrial kickbacks.

[Rabrrrrrr]

22. And how, exactly, are they prepared to protect us from the black menace of floating oil?

or the menace of an uncorked oil spring?

[Confusious]

77. What, get the carriers out there to mop up oil?

Or maybe the destroyers? The navy doesn't have many of the small fast ships that are needed for this.

[AnArmyVeteran]

19. But I guess it would be a feel good moment to see them firing their weapons into the gulf or at BP

jk of course...

[Rabrrrrrr]

20. Our aircraft can do barrel rolls, right? So they must have barrels. They can scoop up the oil, then.

The fact that they aren't is just proof of the conspiracy.





:crazy:

Seriously, though, good answer - it was exactly my first thought, too. "Send them in to do what, exactly, other than float there and do nothing because they aren't trained in how to salvage an oil rig or stop an oil flow?"

Some people, I swear to God, don't use their brains.

[marylanddem]

25. OK - just let BP alone, then. Look the other way. No engineering expertise in the

Navy is what you;re saying? So the freaking rocket scientists & engineers that Obama wants are just extraneous company for BP too? .Oh wait, I forgot, nobody but BP has expertise...Some people ARE stupid.

[CountAllVotes]

31. no shit

they are stupid.

Got any extra pantyhose or cat fur lying around to solve the problem with?! Jesus fucking christ is all I can say! :grr: :argh:

:dem:

[Schema Thing]

33. yes. People who think the administration and BP aren't doing everything

...they can think of to solve this ARE stupid.



Hell, even the Bush administration would've been doing everything they could to stop it, at this point. They just wouldn't be nearly as capable.

[Rabrrrrrr]

63. Godamn, you read a lot of bullshit idiocy in simple statements.

I never even mentioned engineering or rocket scientists, and here you are, claiming that i think the navy has none of either.

I also never said anyone other than BP has expertise.

The problem, of course, is that navy, while filled with engineers and scientists, and while filled with a great many people with shitloads of expertise, they don't have engineers, scientists, or experts in the world of deep sea oil drilling - because, why would they?

The navy isn't an oil company, so it doesn't need those people.

I hope you're not so goddamned stupid that you think "engineers" and "scientists" are utterly interchangeable.

Good luck with that the next time you ask your civil engineer to design your nuclear reactor.

Fucking hell. Use your brain. And for God's sake, stop putting words in people's mouths that they didn't even come close to saying.

[Confusious]

78. No one said that but you.

"Oh wait, I forgot, nobody but BP has expertise."

The navy has expertise, but just not in this area. They blow shit up. They don't do fing wells.

If anything is stupid, it's that thought. It's like asking a doctor of English to do surgery. It's a doctor!

[Pirate Smile]

21. If that would solve it then it would have already been done. Our navy doesn't

have the equipment or expertise to fix it because it isn't part of their job to drill or plug wells.

I wish they did know how to fix it.

[DailyGrind51]

23. Send in the USN, then nationalize all BP gulf coast operations!

[Gaedel]

103. If the government nationalizes BP....

then the government acquires total ownership of the problem. Not too many of the people in the administration want to be the "go to" guy on this.

[CountAllVotes]

28. these greedy bastards can't plug up a 21" hole

if they cannot and do not care to do this they need to be pulled away from the site of the spill and YES, Obama needs to get off his ass and send in the military to deal with this DISASTER! :grr: :argh:

And oh yeah, Obama needs to do this YESTERDAY! :mad:

:kick:

[Codeine]

30. With what?

What specialized oil well equipment does the USN possess?

[CountAllVotes]

32. how would I know?

I am not in the U.S. Navy are you?

They can drop a small nuke on the sucker to shut it off, that out to do the damn job!

:dem:

[Codeine]

35. I love how DU suddenly loves nuclear weapons!

Jesus, you think oil is fucking up the Gulf, just imagine a nuclear device?

[CountAllVotes]

37. yep, that will kill what is left for certain

just what these SOBs want IMO.

BASTARDS they are.

How do they stop leaks in Saudi Arabia?

Does anyone dare ask them? I'm thinking they might have a clue as to what to do.

:kick:

[Statistical]

55. Saudi has no oil wells 5000 ft beloew the surface.

Nobody has ever drilled this deep (on land or under water) before in the history of mankind. Thus the oil in this well is at a higher pressure than anything encountered so far.

[tammywammy]

113. No shit.

This place cracks me up.

[DailyGrind51]

93. They capped tons of nuclear debris left after H-bomb tests in the Pacific 40 years ago.

They never did THAT before either!

[Marr]

36. I don't really see what the Navy could do.

Seems to me that the best position is to make it clear to BP that they will have to pay for all the damage, so they have a incentive to get the problem corrected.

[BeFree]

40. heh

So, you have less faith in the US Navy than you have for BP?

Are you really saying that BP is more trustworthy than the US Navy?

[Codeine]

42. It's not about either "faith" or "belief."

It's about who has the tools and the expertise. The navy doesn't do wells. It doesn't do much of anything at this depth short of a few super-submersibles. This isn't the sort of thing at which they would excel.

[BeFree]

54. Oh?

Who first developed deep water submersibles?

Who rescues sunk submarines? Are you for real?

[Codeine]

61. Their sub rescue vehicles have been decommissioned

and 5000 feet was their absolute extreme operational limit. Once there they wouldn't have been able to effect repairs, because they weren't built for that. I'm not sure you're getting just how deep we're talking here.

[Confusious]

79. As someone who's family has served in the NAVY

You are off your rocker.

[Cetacea]

89. Nice.

Very helpful words.

[Confusious]

90. So if a person has no clue and is acting like an ass

I should say "Thank you, you're so helpful!" Doesn't do much for me, doesn't help him.

I wished we lived in fantasy world where everyone is smart, nice and mentally competent, but we don't. Sometimes people need to be told they are full of shit. Maybe they'll do something about it if enough people tell them.

We seem to excuse ignorance. People are proud they are ignorant and replace knowledge with insistence. "The person who insists the most is right."

Sorry, not here.

[Cetacea]

95. Not here?

Well, I don't tolerate phrases that are discriminatory against the mentally ill. Not here.

You had the opportunity to use the words you listed that addressed intelligence but instead you choose one of the most demeaning insults you could come up with. What puzzles me is why some have to be so rude and insulting? If you are secure in your logic than so be it.

BTW, you might be interested in some of the new threads breaking on this disaster and BP's exceptional refusal to share data with scientists.

[Confusious]

101. As dolly parTon once said,

Get down off the cross honey, somebody else needs the wood. ( you can substitute man, dude, etc for honey, I was giving the quote verbatim )

As someone who has spent most of his life sitting in shrinks chairs diagnosed with major depression disorder and compulsive obsessive disorder, let me say this: I don't need your help in deciding what words I use, and what I think is discriminatory towards me. If you want to help, try getting insurance to cover shrink visits. Trying the "politically correct" technique of using word games is a WASTE OF TIME.

Thank you and good night.

[Renew Deal]

43. What incentive does BP have to keep it open?

It's bad press for them every single day. There's no reason to keep it open.

[BeFree]

57. well

If they kill the gulf then there is no reason not to drill baby drill.

Or, they will say that they dumped millions of barrels and everything is just dandy, so drill baby drill.

That is their incentive: more drilling.

[Renew Deal]

59. That's a stretch

And a bit unbelievable.

[Confusious]

80. Lightyears of a stretch. nt

[Cetacea]

81. I'll bet y'all thought letting people die in New Orleans was a stretch, too.

Just exactly how many outrageous scenarios do you need to live through?

[Confusious]

86. Just how many do you believe?

Katrina was just plain incompetence. If they did it on purpose, they made themselves look like fools and killed their parties chances. I don't know if you remember, but the republicans lost the 2006 elections after that, because of the appearance of incompetence. and what did they gain? 1 lily white rep from New Orleans, and the rest of the country thinking they were racists dirtbags that couldn't do anything right. That's a payoff!

BP fucks up here, no one is going to want to let them drill anywhere. OR, are you saying there is massive collusion to send one oil company down the tubes so that the others can say the gulf is dead, lets drill?

People aren't going to want to allow anyone to drill off their shores after this. not for the next 20-30 years at least.

Some things are just soooooooooooo beyond common, plain, logical, whatever you want me to call it, sense to believe.

[Cetacea]

87. This type of theory begins when people at the top lie.

I don't blame anyone for being suspicious or considering massive collusion. I myself doubt massive collusion, however we are talking about billions of dollars being made between a few people with a lot of power. Drilling isn't going to stop no matter how many fish are killed. Americans have business logic, not environmental logic.

[Confusious]

92. Yes, but that theory rivaled roswell

There's been a ban on offshore drilling for years. Even bush didn't try to overturn it. This will probably put the ban back into place.

As far as environmental logic there used to be a time in America, before I was born, that rivers caught on fire. That got cleaned up. Used to be lead in the gasoline, that got taken out.

Things have gotten better, though slowly.

[Cetacea]

97. Roswell. Nice buzz word. There will be no ban.

Was nuclear power banned after Chernobyl?
There was a time in America when REPUBLICAN presidents started the EPA...decades ago. There are people out there who HATE environmentalists, aka "tree huggers" and hate regulations. They don't think like you or me. The environmental advances are minuscule relative to the amount of destruction that has been done. If you think there are no conspiracy's in billion dollar industries then you know nothing about business. I am not agreeing that BP and others are actually trying to kill the gulf, but given real events and history I am open to any theories.

[Confusious]

99. I'm sure there are conspiracies in business

But some just make no sense. Like that one.

I'm open to theories that make sense. Which means realistic means, motive, opportunity and science.

If you don't like roswell ( never heard of it being a buzzword ) would you prefer chemtrails?

[Statistical]

45. WTF would the Navy do? Also why the hell would BP intentionally keep the spill open?

They like losing billions of dollars?

BP costs so far are about $450 million which is roughly $25 million a day. Long term cleanup is easily triple that and then lawsuits will be in the billions. Say lawsuits work out to $20-$100 million per day of oil flow.

Basically every day oil flows out of the well cost BP roughly $100 - $200 million.

Just so you know a new well start to finish costs about $100 million.

So why would BP be keeping this spill going? They like losing money?

[Cetacea]

82. Why do people fight wars?

Do you really think that A: BP is going to compensate for this

B: care about shrimp and dolphins?

[Lorien]

66. If that would help, then yes

but no one really seems to be in charge here. BP is obviously totally incompetent and corrupt and they should be removed. Have them pay the bill; that's it. This issue needs REAL leadership and SOLID responses!

[ecstatic]

67. Funny. Did you know that one ship may cause as much pollution as 50 million cars

What an ironic solution! But then again, this entire debate has been ironic. If everyone collectively stopped driving, flying, and taking cruises, we would never have to worry about an oil spill again!

[tranche]

68. Another graduate of DU University.

Yea... send in the Navy, and Jason Bourne, maybe that black cloud monster on Lost.

[Rabrrrrrr]

69. Wait a minute - what about that kid from Twilight Zone, that could make people disappear?

Anyone he thought was bad he zapped away - he could do the same with the oil spill!

Of course, that might be more of a DU Master's Level class than simple university level...

:rofl:

I like the way you think!

:thumbsup:

[Number23]

73. Best post of the thread. Fannnntastic!

Another graduate of DU University.

:rofl:

[Bryn]

76. Send in Dirk Pitt, too!!

Call NUMA. I bet he will get it done pronto!

[Cetacea]

84. Sorry, but the snark isn't very funny right now.

People are obviously stressed over this mess, and ANY ideas should be encouraged, not ridiculed.
(In my opinion).

[Codeine]

104. Snark is always funny,

and stupid should never be encouraged. Contrary to popular belief, not all ideas are of equal value, not every thought needs to be encouraged, and not everyone has something valuable to add to a discussion.

[BeFree]

106. What's f'n stupid...

...is thinking BP is gonna fix this. The idea being expressed here is that BP has failed, and that someone else needs to take control away from BP. The best option, in our opinion, is the US Navy. You have a better idea? Or are you stuck on BP?

[tammywammy]

109. If the best option is the US Navy then we're more screwed than I thought

The Navy has no experience in this area. There aren't subs that can go to that depth and magically fix everything.

[BeFree]

111. Magic?

Now it's all magic? The fix to this has to be magic?

Actually, it is not magic, it is mechanical.

Do you really trust BP more than the Navy to fix this problem?

Do you really think the government should just get out of the way of BP and let them do whatever BP wants?

[tammywammy]

112. Yes, for the Navy with no experience in that

to go down to that depth and fix it would be magical.

At least BP has experience in this area, and the White House has gotten a group of people together to work on this. Sending in an air craft carrier would be of absolutely zero help.

And where did I say the govt should just get out of the way?

[BeFree]

114. Oh?

Its too deep for the Navy, but not too deep for BP?

WTF?

I am saying the govt. needs to push BP aside and take over. A Navy Admiral who can kick some BP ass needs to take complete control of this Fuckup. You have a better idea? Or are you stuck in BP?

[tammywammy]

116. Yes, BP is more used to working at that depth

The US Navy is not.

No I'm not stuck with BP. As I posted already the White House has a group of people working on this already. The US Navy is not needed. Also, I would hope that BP is in touch with the other oil producers, Exxon, Chevron, etc for their ideas on this.

[hack89]

123. We don't fight wars at 5000 feet

the Navy has no need to go that deep - therefore there is no capability.

[Renew Deal]

120. So you're ridiculous conspiracies are "funny"

and this isn't? OK.

[MadBadger]

108. Smokey Monster cant go on water.

[Rabrrrrrr]

70. Funny - the final word in every subthread is that of logic and reality.

Where are the conspiracy theorists who started this thread and made up "facts" willy nilly to prove their point?

Confronted by reality and logic and actual scientific understanding, they have gone back to hiding in whatever scaredy-cat safe-space they've made for themselves.

[Cetacea]

85. Logic worked out real well in the gulf.

[BeFree]

102. Eh? Hiding? Screw that.

Some of us have lives away from DU.

The facts are that BP has been allowed to screw this thing up and then 25 days later it is still spewing and the environmental damage is growing.

Some of us would like our government to take control away from BP. We think that the Navy is the best option since they do underwater mechanics.

Some of you think BP should be left to their own devices. Insanity is defined as doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results. So, allowing BP to carry on is insane. Why anyone would, for one second, defend allowing BP to remain in control of this situation is practically insane.

An Admiral of the US Navy who is versed in underwater operations should be in complete control of this problem. Can you think of anyone, or any other organization that would be better suited?

Don't even go back to "Leave BP alone!" That's gawdamn insane. Just stop it.

[Mind_your_head]

71. That would be fine, but does the Navy have any expertise in this situation? n/t

[MilesColtrane]

74. Screw the Navy.

Send in Richard Basehart.

[PopSixSquish]

75. While I'm Sure the Navy Will Appreciate Your Faith in Them

They would tell you that they are not the experts in this field and would do more harm than good...

[salguine]

83. Yeah, about a dozen rounds of 5-inch from a destroyer will show that gusher who's boss.

[Statistical]

117. No silly they will pop off a couple of these.

Have them home in on all the racket the oil gusher is making. Shut it up for good. :)

[guardian]

94. "BP is just playing games to keep it open." Huh?

What sort of weird logic is that? What makes you think BP isn't trying to shut down the gusher? Every minute this disaster goes on

1. BP loses valuable resources that can never be sold in the future
2. BP gets more bad press
3. BP will incur bigger clean up costs/fines

Maybe the Navy can help...I don't know. But asserting that BP isn't trying to fix things is simple lunacy.

[Cetacea]

96. Please explain their refusal to share data. Thank you.

[Codeine]

105. The OP believes

that BP wants to kill the entire Gulf so as to make it a free-fire zone for drilling. She has stated that multiple times. :crazy:

[BeFree]

110. ??

And you believe that BP has the best intentions?

Now, who am I to believe? The OP who has doubts about BP, or you who is defending BP?

Hmmmmm...

[Renew Deal]

121. You've become too jaded

If you believe that BP wants to leave this open.

[Tailormyst]

115. And what would you have the Navy do?

Really, this is pretty silly.

[Romulox]

119. Heck of a job, BP! nt

[greencharlie]

122. well...

the oil's been flowing for how long? How many weeks?

And the admin is letting BP and their ilk take care of the spill???

Get in there and fix the thing, make BP pay for it. It took BP a month to do the big concrete thing that failed... and another week to insert a coffee stir stick in the pipe...

FAIL.