IBD: Hormuz or Keystone?

“No carrier battle groups would be needed to escort oil from Canada’s tar sands to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries”.

Investor’s Business Daily editorializes,

… Environmentalists say the pipeline would endanger the Ogallala aquifer in Nebraska and other states along the route.

Yet they ignore the fact that there are 50,000 existing miles of pipeline already crisscrossing the U.S., including Nebraska. The technology is neither new nor unsafe. One of these is the Keystone 1 pipeline, which already carries crude from the oil sands.

War has an environmental impact as well, and it does not make sense to deny ourselves tens if not hundreds of thousands of genuinely shovel-ready jobs while putting a like number of American young men and women in harm’s way to protect a key oil supply route.

No carrier battle groups would be needed to escort oil from Canada’s tar sands to U.S. Gulf Coast refineries…

One thought on “IBD: Hormuz or Keystone?”

  1. Dear Steve: IF…we continue to defend Mid-east oil, it will NOT be for OUR benefit. The cheif buyer of Iranian oil is Red China, with the EU next. NONE to speak of, for us. Isn’t it GREAT that we defend Chinese oil access… with OUR men, planes, and ships? Defending their(Red Chinese) oil access AFTER transferring many of our top-secrets via corporate/other agreements/security-breaches?.. And after that, isn’t it NEXT, almost as GREAT that we defend EU-oil access… with our:men, planes, and ships? Although the EU is broke, they could have been building their OWN NATO since the “pretend-fall” of the Russians in ’89, but they didn’t want to and didn’t have to,because we would defend them. WHY do you think the Saudis just bought a bunch more of F-15s? They’re NOT going to depend on the USA to defend them from Iran-Iraq-Pakistan, because they’ve seen O’Bama abandon Israel, and know they could be abandoned, next. Or we could simply go broke, and be UN-ABLE to defend anyone overseas, our troops trapped abroad like Xenon’s Greeks who centuries ago had to fight their way OUT of Persia(Iran). Ike stopped the Anglo-French-Israeli take-over of the Suez Canal in ’56, and was NOT considered isolationist/or even anti-Israel. If we only defended Israel with supplies, that would be a great, great help, in the next mid-east conflict, and if we do much more, we’re going to want to “call the shots,” which may not be appreciated, in what may be Israel’s last(because they ca win), best, fight. Israel (and covertly, Saudi Arabia), can defeat Iran all by themselves, with Iran left a glowing ruin under 200 or so Israeli nukes. Seeing as how the US/EU Media is OWNED by the Globalists,and we have been TRYING to goad Iran into going to war with us, I think Iran’s
    REAL pronoucement, was “manuvers to keep the strait of Hormuz UN-blocked”, not, “manuvers to ‘block it'”, which would cut-off Iranian trade to spite its Iranian face, maybe causing the Mullahs to lose power. Even O’Bama insiders SWEAR that the Canadian pipeline WILL be built, but it must be delayed until after the vote, so when Barry betrays the Greens,it will be too late…for them.

Comments are closed.