Liverpool FC Forum

[Reg]

I'm staggered at Obama's attacks on BP. Yes its an environmental disaster and yes there needs to be a major financial commitment to clean it up but the more Obama rants and raves the more desparate he appears.

He now demands $20 billion be put into an escrow account to rebuild communities and businesses. He seems ony willing to stop once BP is bust.

Seeing how sensitive the US has become to environmental concerns, can we now expect to see the yanks open an escrow account and put $3 trillion in it for the peoples of Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Or other accounts with trillions of dollars for the pensioners who lost their savings and pensions in the collapse of amercian banks, mortgage lenders and insurance companies over the last 3 years?
 
The more you look at this, Obama seems scared and running, he's desparate.

Be desparate but dont take out your problems on BP who are just a shareholder in the problem oilfield. (PS US shareholders own 39% of BP)

[Lando_Griffin]

him - the bloke's an idiot. Grasping tw*t.

[In and Out]

BP won't go bust and it's in America's interest that they don't.

[Reg]

him - the bloke's an idiot. Grasping tw*t.

I was pro-Obama but I've lost faith in the guy, he's clearly out of his depth.

In and Out - I agree but it doesnt exlain Obamas behaviour.

[In and Out]

:censored: him - the bloke's an idiot. Grasping tw*t.

I was pro-Obama but I've lost faith in the guy, he's clearly out of his depth.

In and Out - I agree but it doesnt exlain Obamas behaviour.

Finger pointing is what politicians do best mate.

to be fair to him, he want's to keep the spotlight firmly on BP. And after all it is their fault.

[fivecups]

Anyone think BPs shares are worth a dabble? Or is there a real risk they could go bust?

[tubby]

Did anyone see that Senator James Carville laying into Obama? Dramatic and funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO1lO1CVkTE

[Reg]

Anyone think BPs shares are worth a dabble? Or is there a real risk they could go bust?

Yeah I'm watching that as well but no point trying to spot the bottom, I think this story has more in it until they stop the oil leak, who knows by then the shares could be at 250 odd? Once the damaged is quantified I guess the fund managers will get back in. You might want to consider buying shares for the kids as a long term punt.

[Reg]

Did anyone see that Senator James Carville laying into Obama? Dramatic and funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lO1lO1CVkTE

Sweet jaysus, we need to explain to that fella about Hicks and Gillett and let him lose on the media!

What a superbly ugly and miserable looking guy!

[tubby]

Yeah if we can get him into our side and drop him of at RBS headquaters we should be fine!

He has an evil look about him though.

[tonyeh]

It's a bit of posturing by Obama. Nothing more. He has to be seen publicly to be "outraged".

There's a lot of gobshites (like the guy above) on at the moment moaning about Obama and how this "British" oil company has ruined many American lives etc. Of course, BP is "British" in name only, but it is stil in Obama's best interest to point fingers at a "foreign" business interest and look angry, even if it's only to salve people like James Carville.

[Bad Bob]

It's a bit of posturing by Obama. Nothing more. He has to be seen publicly to be "outraged".

There's a lot of gobshites (like the guy above) on at the moment moaning about Obama and how this "British" oil company has ruined many American lives etc. Of course, BP is "British" in name only, but it is stil in Obama's best interest to point fingers at a "foreign" business interest and look angry, even if it's only to salve people like James Carville.

Yes, there is a lot of truth to this.  Obama needs to appear angry and aggressive for the American public--particularly because he was starting to get heavily criticized for not being angry enough a few weeks ago.  As time drags on and as more and more residents of the gulf coast suffer the negative economic effects** of the oil spill (especially in terms of lost tourism dollars and fishing catches) there is a lot of anger towards BP that Obama needs to be seen as in tune with.  And, it should be known that BP has been very slow to compensate fishermen and others who have had their livelihoods completely disrupted by the spill so I don't think the anger is OTT.

The fact that the British aspect of BP is being emphasized is disappointing, however.  Not because it'll do immeasurable long term harm to the nation's image (I don't think it will) but because it gives American consumers an easy out when it comes to facing up to the harsh realities of oil dependency.  The fact is that the gulf is filled with oil platforms owned by the big oil companies and a natural disaster like this was always on the cards.  If it had been an incontrovertibly American firm (and, yes, I know that BP is an American firm in the US oil fields for all intents and purposes) than the public might have had to decide whether the corner cutting done in the name of securing cheap domestic oil was worth it.  Sadly, the focus in this instance can be deflected onto them 'evil Brits' and the status quo can be more or less preserved.


**I don't mean to minimize the environmental effects of this disaster, which are enormous, but most Americans (like most people) tend to get more concerned by tangible economic hardship than by seeing pelicans covered in oil or tar balls washing up on white sandy beaches.  For the average citizen, the economic will almost always trump the environmental.

[laza]

.  For the average citizen, the economic will almost always trump the environmental.

Correct

Which is why the world is doomed

[Big Niall]

I'm not sure what the point of the thread is. Surely B.P is liable for the cost of cleaning up this mess they caused? However, B.P is a plc so the british government shouldn't have to pay a penny.

I'm not sure on the specifics, any other companies involved should obviously be stuck with their share of the bill.

You'd be mad to buy B.P shares now. They could be worthless  soon just like Lehman brothers.

[LFC2007]

I'm not sure what he's done wrong, tbh. He referred to BP by its former name "British Petroleum", he said he needs to know whose "a'ss to kick", and that he is not amused by Tony Hayward or with the initial response from BP. In the first instance he can be excused but on all the others he has a fair point. Tough talk it may be but why should that be a problem? My foremost concern is that the cleanup operation is successful and secondly that compensation is fairly distributed. It should go to those who have been directly affected and secondly to those who suffered an indirect loss of earnings. But they can't be held responsible for the loss of earnings on other rigs that were were ordered to suspend their operations and that may or may not harbour similar risks to those on deepwater horizon. That decision reflects on the weakness of the system as a whole and not BP per se.

The Yanks have to ask themselves a few questions, too. Like why hasn't the wealthiest and one of the most technologically advanced nations on the planet the means to plug a leak in waters that deep, without having to wait several months for a relief well to be completed? It always seems to take a disaster, sometimes even more than one, before the right lessons are learned.