February 25, 2006

The Close Call That Shouldn't Have Been

Today's attempted attack on the Saudi oil processing facility should have been a huge wake-up call for everyone.

ABQAIQ, Saudi Arabia (AP) - Suicide bombers carried out a bold attack on the world's largest oil processing facility Friday but were stopped from breaking in by guards who fired on their cars, exploding both vehicles and killing the attackers.

Al-Qaida purportedly claimed responsibility for the attack, the first on an oil facility in Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qaeda has been threatening to do something like this for quite awhile, which is probably why the attack failed miserably.

However, if we do not get our own oil out of our own ground, or figure out an economcially feasible way to get off foreign oil, we could be seriously screwed if one were to suceed.

Posted by: Vinnie at 12:29 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 144 words, total size 1 kb.

1 what u gotta think is if they cant keep their own lands safe from terrorists how on earth are they gonna keep US ports safe ? later g

Posted by: girish at February 25, 2006 12:41 AM (05ati)

2 ANWR is just waiting for the enviro dolts to shut up and get out of the way. As I recall however, a year or so back, my President left that issue on the table, for some "reason".

Posted by: forest hunter at February 25, 2006 12:59 AM (Fq6zR)

3 We can't drill in our own back yard because the enviro groups, the Democrat party beholding to them, most in our MSM portraying it as destruction rather than safe production, and a percentage of weak-kneed moderate Republicans. No matter what Bush wants its simply impossible to get passed now. We're gonna have to experience huge price hikes doing serious damage to our economy as a result of foreign dependency before the majority of citizens demand it.

Posted by: Javapuke at February 25, 2006 01:16 AM (hg4kb)

4 I'm almost looking forward to a price increase in oil. The irresponsibility of Americans vehicle of choice is only taylored to looking as big, and expensive as possible with little to no consideration on mpg (at least before the oil price spike) Out of the immediate people I know that drive huge trucks, or SUV's none of them have more than two children, or use them to carry large amounts of cargo. At least two of these people have told me we should do something about our oil dependency, due to the price of gasoline -- there was not the same concern when gas was ninety-nine cents a gallon! The only way to make Americans care about breaking the dependency on foreign oil and stop them suckling the oil teet is to make it too expensive. Sad but true.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 02:32 AM (CcXvt)

5 Dave, we own a F-150 and an Expedition. What a person in this country drives is really none of your, or my, business. To say that what we drive is "irresponsible" is as wrong as to say that those who chose to have the Clydesdale draw a wagon rather than a Shetland Pony was irresponsible because the Clydesdale has far bigger road apples. We have the resources to sustain our chosen way of life sitting underneath our feet, and currently inaccessible for whatever reason. I also agree that the greeniacs have played a large part in blocking our access to the resources bubbling below, but, we also have to acknowledge the fact that there are a large number of people on our own side willing to capitulate to their demands. If I'm not mistaken, it was our side that blocked installing more oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico. I believe that, for now, we have to get our own oil, from our own soil (hey, there's a bumper sticker!), until we have viable, affordable (g'bye hybrids!) alternatives. One last thing, it isn't just us. China and India are starting to place huge demands on oil. The have a quarter of the world's population, all by themselves. So our truck and SUV are but a drop within a drop within a drop of that. Be careful of berating people of their vehicle of choice, lest someone starts berating you of your air conditioner of choice, or heater of choice, or refrigerator of choice. You get the picture.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 04:03 AM (f289O)

6 I have a Jeep Wrangler and a Tahoe. My husband drives farther to work so he drives the Jeep. I work three miles from home and use less gas than the guy next door with a Civic. Being a home owner, and owning two other properties that need work all the time, I refuse to give up my Tahoe. Everytime I go to Home Depot (which is nearby too) I need that vehicle. Whatever the gas costs, I'll pay it. Try bringing a toilet back in a compact car, or lumber, or eight-foot lengths of PVC. If someone wants to give me grief about my big car, I have one word for them: Shutthehellupandhelpmeloadthismulch.

Posted by: Oyster at February 25, 2006 06:57 AM (YudAC)

7 I have a fuel efficient car, sadly. Today, I will pour a gallon of gasoline down the drain, to show solidarity with my fellow gas-guzzling citizens and to flout the stupid collectivist ramblings of Dave. Also, hey, I found the greatest solution ever to our oil problems. Stop shackling American businesses with tons of retarded/ing regulations and a fearful legislative environment where any big company has to buy off politicians just to not get his business effectively outlawed. I think that would work wonders for American efficiency.

Posted by: MiB at February 25, 2006 07:39 AM (tFcEO)

8 Kindly do not pour your gasoline down the drain. That is environmentally unfriendly, and you certainly don't want that! Besides, the EPA and the environmentalists will come visiting, so have the tea and cookies ready.

Posted by: Tom at February 25, 2006 08:38 AM (+Ip9P)

9 Oil can be extracted from coal for about $30 a barrel and from tar sands for about the same. Hydrogen is a pipe dream, electric cars impractical and alcohol at best a supplement. Environmentalists are the major obstacle to self-sufficiency. America and Canada have enormous petrochemical reserves. What we suffer now is a shortage of cheap, easily extractable oil. What we have is a huge reserve of more difficult to extract and therefore more expensive oil.

Posted by: Ken Lydell at February 25, 2006 10:26 AM (fEegS)

10 "We can't drill in our own backyard"... Well, if you're referring to ANWR you are a bit confused on the facts. True, environmentalists have fought exploration in ANWR for years. But there was another group opposed to the free market exploiting ANWR. Oil Companies. Not a single bill has been proposed over the years to develop ANWR that didn't include both tax breaks and royalty forgiveness for companies bidding on leases. Today with $55 + per barrel oil I think production in ANWR can be economically feasible without paying companies to explore there. And so I'm all for it. But in the past I was adamantly opposed to subsidizing exploration. Especially in ANWR. If you're wondering why it's not open now, you'll have to ask the GOP because the certainly could have suceeded in opening it up if it had been as big a priority as say, letting the UAE run a few ports.

Posted by: Davebo at February 25, 2006 11:04 AM (KqO+b)

11 You gonna amend your "Howard the Coward" post now, or are ya gonna make a "Bill the Pill" piece?

Posted by: jawablaster at February 25, 2006 11:45 AM (FkiCe)

12 I guess we should all get behind eminent domain then, in case geologists find an oil well below someones house flout the stupid collectivist ramblings of Dave. I'm sure that talking about peoples vehicles of choice is not popular, but it pretty much proved the point: if gas was down to 99¢ again, where it was five years ago no one would care about breaking dependency on foreign oil, just like there was no talk of it back then. The problem is not so much the fact you drive a big vehicle period, just it's consumption habits -- However you can have the same vehicle with cheaper fuel source. My father has two vehicles in the U.K, one a van and the other what we might concider an SUV. The price of Gasoline is around $5.74 a (U.S) Gallon in the U.K, he had both modified to use Propane fuel so much like an hybrid once the propane is gone, it starts using regular gasoline, while on Propane it is significantly lower price per mile to run. He told me the price he paid for modification paid for itself after the first year. What prompted alternatives in the U.K is exactly what I am talking about, unaffordable gasoline, apart from driving smaller engines (I'd never seen an engine the size of a V8!) peoples driving habits were unaffected when petrol was cheap, now money is being poured into cheaper alternatives. China and India are starting to place huge demands on oil. Indeed, which means if we continue to consume a huge portion of foreign oil, and block their access to it we're looking at a war, there will be real wars for oil. I'd prefer by that time we didn't care who got what oil, and domestic was used for things like pesticide and other oil-based production. My support for breaking dependency on oil, doesn't stop at access to cheap gasoline, especially the more expensive it gets the more people will demand an alternative.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 12:24 PM (CcXvt)

13 Vinnie: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HB23Ak03.html No wonder we're trying to solidify ties with member countries of OPEC like the UAE, we're going to need all the influence we can buy.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 01:53 PM (CcXvt)

14 Propane is just another gas that's produced from natural gas processing and crude oil refining. I thought the idea was to get away from oil and gas? If it's strictly for environmental purposes, then yes, it's cleaner. But you still gotta go through the old fossil fuel and gas extraction process to get it. Raising the price of oil may encourage people to buy more fuel efficient cars, but what about all the transportation industry? When it costs twice as much for your groceries and clothing and everything else because the cost of shipping them has become astronomical we've still got issues. "Great, I only spent five bucks to drive around in my car this week but eggs were three dollars a dozen." The impact of raising gas prices has wide-ranging ramifications.

Posted by: Oyster at February 25, 2006 04:28 PM (YudAC)

15 Geez, guys, I literally spent minutes slaving and sweating and typing my fingers into bloody stumps working on that cartoon riot post and ya'll are down here still being all serious and shit. It's the weekend d00ds and d00dettes, let's lighten it up a bit!

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 04:34 PM (f289O)

16 Oyster: I gave an example of how the price of Gasoline caused for a focus on alternatives, not that we should all shift to propane. It isn't a relevation -- UPS vans all over the U.S use it as fuel. There is no reason the transportation industry couldn't follow suite, isn't that the reason that bio-diesel is catching on - requires little(?) / no modification. Read the article I pasted below to Vinnie, the Saudi's are courting two Nuclear nations, this could have severe ramifications for the U.S. If you believe that the U.S would protect certain OPEC members regimes from being toppled, to protect our interests, this is obviously beneficial to both parties; however with China selling them arms, and being closer in the region -- what would those regimes need us for? they can outsource their security to China instead of the U.S. The China/India deals also come at a time when nations are looking to secure their oil in case of problems, wonder what would happen if we all needed more oil (because of war/embargo/etc) and China / India offered to pay much more money over market price? if they no longer need the U.S for protection you can guarantee whoever is protecting them gets the oil they need.

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 04:48 PM (CcXvt)

17 hah, I'm still at work, no lightening up for me for a few hours ;/

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 05:07 PM (CcXvt)

18 We could always just invade. Make the oil producing parts of SA the 51st state, then everyone would just have to suck up to us. Y'know, like we did in Iraq.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 05:22 PM (f289O)

19 Yeah, all that cheap Iraqi oil is the 'bestist'! I think the 51st state is already allotted to Iran :/

Posted by: dave at February 25, 2006 05:33 PM (CcXvt)

20 Well, at least Iran has like, mountains and stuff.

Posted by: Vinnie at February 25, 2006 05:51 PM (f289O)

21 I like pie.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at February 26, 2006 07:26 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
31kb generated in CPU 0.024, elapsed 0.1363 seconds.
119 queries taking 0.1261 seconds, 270 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.