So, How's That Libyan Thing Going For You Lately?

Again, the effect of corruption in the highest echelons of power...in this instance, it's OPEC calling this shout using AGW as the excuse to do so.

Washington and the power structure around it work exclusively for big money. PERIOD.

Canada is being put in an isolation position in the World it seems...Could this call also have to do Harper's position on Israel/Palestine of late?

in support of Section 526, the provision of the 2007 energy bill that requires federal agencies to make sure that the fuels they buy do not create more pollution and exacerbate global warming.

I guess subsidizing ethanol, which is a fuel which creates more pollution during the production process than gasoline, isn't the same as buying it then?
Strange.

What about the jet fuel they use for planes and helicopters which is made from coal?
Can they still buy that without violating Section 526?

Good news for us. When the Americans roll their solar power tanks up to the perpetually cloudy Pacific Northwest we'll be ready.

2012! Make or Break!

The GOP better get things right this week!

I liked it better when the DOD concerned itself with killing bad guys.

China invading the US using stock piled Canadian oil. Nah, that would never happen.

DOD is simply currying favour with their political masters. That their political masters demand such favours is repugnant and the DOD has a long memory for such humiliations.

There has always been signifigant politicization at the highest levels of most military.

Prior to D-day the brits were busy producing specialized armoured vehicles(Percy Hobart's "funnies") with the intent of supplying everyone. Omar Bradly refused them because the US didn't need them ("they weren't from here") and the Brits were finished.

The result was Omaha was nearly a failure....the US only got off the beach because the Germans withdrew to avoid being outflanked by the well equiped Brits and Canadians rapidly expending beach-head.

Earlier the US armour board refused the Brit 17 pounder gun as a trailed equipment or Sherman main armament....because....leaving their armour hopelesslyt out-gunned until the final hour with the arrival of a handful of Pershings....while the commonwealth troops fielded most most effective tank killer in Northern Europe.

Here we have the DOD intent on curing a non-existant problem despite that policy being a strategic military faux pas.

The main impediment the Luftwaffe encountered was fuel shortage due to priority air-attack on synthetic fuel plants and especially the Romanian Oil Fields/refineries.

The failure of "The Battle of the Bulge" was, significantly, the failure to capture Allied fuel dumps intact.

RE the solar powered tanks...it is predictable in an emergency situation that a major military operation(invasion of Alberta/Saskatchewan) would be executed to swiftly secure the oil sands.

This a poltical statement by the administration, not a genuine military doctrine.

This is going to hasten Texas breaking away.

Well with the Commander in Chief and his gang of sycophants running the show it's really not surprising.

I would not wish to exacerbate global warming, just LOCATE the damn thing and ship it here, thank you, shivering in Vancouver.

Substitute Obama Administration for Department of Defense. One needs to remember that the Defense Department is run by political appointees. The Armed Forces have as much say in this as you do.

Near future. Pipelines going south cut off. Pipelines going west [to china] full.

@ sasquatch:

Well it's a good thing Canada has some german made Leopard tanks that run on 'dirty oil'.

When the Yanks tanks run dry the "Canuckleheads" can roll up to the White House and burn down the White House 1812 style.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ety2FEHQgwM&feature=related

The war of 1812 Song (Original)

Cheers

Hans Rupprecht, C in C

1st St. Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North"

Bear: "China invading the US using stock piled Canadian oil. Nah, that would never happen."

Ha. wait for it.

Almost as bad as buying at Walmart to support Canadian and US jobs.

LOL - The US spends 6 times as much as china the next biggest on defense. All of it borrowed from China. If they are so concerned with co2 maybe they should just cut back a little.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

LOL - The US spends 6 times as much as china the next biggest on defense.
~Kevin

Apart from China being a Communist country(we only have their commie word for how much they spend on anything) or that they steal nearly 100% of their technology and don't spend much on R&D,... their labour costs are less than 1/10 of the U.S. to manufacture any military hardware and the pay their draftee military service members get is probably close to zero...only having to feed, clothe, and shelter their troops.

(Additionally, wiki isn't a credible unbiased source to cite when it involves comparing a communist country to the U.S. on a politically charged issue like defence spending)

One of my general chuckles with anti americanism over the decades has been "when the U.S.A. wants our water they will come and get it". This usually changed the topic under discussion much to my enjoyment.

However the comment by Chip @ 12:00 has not only brought the chuckle back but a loud guffaw. Thanx Chip; Cheers;

Makes about as much sense as when Obama instructed NASA to - wait for it - reach out to Muslims.

But more seriously we should be talking about the military prowess of Gadaffi's bevy of blue eyed blonde haired Ukranian beauties aka Galnya Kolotnytska.

http://www.redragonline.com/2010/11/picture-of-galyna-kolotnytska.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/271847/war-libya-dumb-and-dumber-victor-davis-hanson

War in Libya: Dumb and Dumber
The only thing worse than starting a stupid war is losing it.

Almost daily over the last four months we were told that Moammar Qaddafi was about ready to throw in the towel and give up.

Libya, after all, is not a distant Afghanistan or Iraq with a population of some 30 million. Yet this tiny police state of less than 7 million people, conveniently located on the Mediterranean Sea opposite nearby Europe, continues to thwart the three great powers of the NATO alliance and thousands of “Arab Spring” rebels.

In March, President Obama ordered the use of American bombers and cruise missiles to join with the French and British to finish off the tottering Qaddafi regime. Obama was apparently stung by liberal criticism that the U.S. had done little to help the rebels in their weeks-long effort to remove Qaddafi — after only belatedly supporting the successful revolutionaries in Tunisia and Egypt.

Four months ago, intervention seemed to the Obama administration to be a quick, painless way of ridding the world of a longstanding international menace while gaining praise for helping “democratic” reformers. Oil, of course, is always a subtext in any Middle Eastern war.

But almost immediately contradictions arose. Sometimes we ordered Qaddafi to leave; at other times we insisted we were only helping the rebels. Bombs seemed to be aimed at the Qaddafi family, even as we denied that such targeted killing was the goal — and were reminded that U.S. law forbids the assassination of foreign leaders.

The rebels were variously described as would-be democratic reformers, inept amateurs, hard-core Islamists, and mixtures of all three. Months later, no one seems to have the answer, though many of the insurgents share a deep-seated racial and religious hatred of Qaddafi’s African mercenaries. Who knows whether post-Qaddafi Libya will become an Islamic republic, a Somalia-like mess, another Arab dictatorship, or a Turkish-style democracy?

The more NATO forces destroyed Qaddafi’s tanks, artillery, planes, and boats, the more the unhinged dictator seemed to cling to power. Western leaders had forgotten that Qaddafi lost a war with Egypt in 1977, lost a war with Chad in 1987, and came out on the losing end of Ronald Reagan’s bombing campaign in 1986 — and yet clung to power and remains the planet’s longest-ruling dictator. Terror, oil, cash reserves, and a loyal mercenary army are a potent combination.

The Obama administration asked for legal authorization from the Arab League — the majority of whose member states are not democratic — and from the U.N., but to this day strangely has not requested authorization from Congress. As Obama sought legitimacy from international organizations, he failed to note that no U.N. or Arab League resolution actually had allowed him to conduct a full-scale air war against Qaddafi’s ruling clique. The Chinese and Russians are both happy to keep pointing that out.

Both conservatives and liberals were flabbergasted by the sudden preemptive war. Conservatives who supported the messy efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq were reluctant to champion a third one in Libya without congressional authority and with no clearly stated mission or methodology. When we entered an on-again/off-again cycle of operations, Republicans charged that a weakened, fiscally insolvent America was sort of “leading from behind.”

Liberals were appalled that the president, who, as a senator, had always praised the War Powers Act, was now ordering his legal team to find ingenious ways of bypassing it. If this was to be a multilateral, un-Bush war, why then did it split NATO apart? Roughly half the members declined to participate. Both Germany and Italy soon openly opposed the effort. And now the instigator, France, seems to want to bail out.

The Left had also decried Western attacks on oil-exporting Muslim countries, but now liberal-in-chief Barack Obama was engaging in just such an attack. Indeed, the anti-war president who had promised to end the Bush Mideast wars had suddenly expanded them into a third theater. The more the war dragged on, the more the Arab world was torn between hating Qaddafi and hating Obama’s bombs.

The odious Qaddafi has been an international pariah for most of his tenure — funding terrorists, killing Americans, and murdering dissidents. But even as the first bombs were dropped, he was a monster in the midst of rehab. In late 2010 his jet-setting family was being courted by Western intellectuals, reestablishing diplomatic relations with the United States, offering oil concessions to the West, and being praised as a partner in the war against radical Islamic terrorism.

Then, with a snap of the fingers, in early 2011 Qaddafi was suddenly reinvented as a Saddam Hussein–like ogre and dodging Western cruise missiles and bombs targeting his person.

What is next?

The general consensus, from both Left and Right, is that we should finish the misadventure as quickly as possible. Apparently, the only thing worse than starting a stupid, unnecessary war against a madman is losing it.

—Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The Father of Us All: War and History, Ancient and Modern. © 2011 Tribune Media Services, Inc.

There must be a dumb blonde joke in there somewhere...

Cheers

Hans Rupprecht, C in C

1st St. Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North"

grok
"Makes about as much sense as when Obama instructed NASA to - wait for it - reach out to Muslims."

Yup Yup!!!!

The Dems regard returning service men as a security threat.....not muzzies.
BTW
OBOZO enquired of the military if they would assist enforcing the UN small arms treaty....the answer was not no...it was an emphatic "HELL NO!"

The answer is reassuring...the question is troubling....

Meanwhile Germany is restarting a mothballed nuclear reactor and building new coal fired plants.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/07/germanys_giant_green_reversal.html

I love it -- just one more nail in Obama's re-election coffin.

The current deep thinkers in the DoD approve the policy becuat "it supports the development of lower carbon fuels helps nascent biofuels companies gain a foothold in the fuels market."

Apparently the vaunted DoD has become a branch plant of the US State Department which has long been infiltrated by leftists and one-worlders.

Their role is now to assist their Federal Gov't masters in choosing winners and losers in the 'new reality' of not only energy, but wait for it..... climate change.

God help America.

it's the same thing with exploration of Polish shale gas. EU (read: germany) prefer to buy gas from Russia and puts obstacles all the way just so they WILL be dependent on Middle East and Russia - their "great friends" --because shale gas is "dirty"
I guess "small minds" think alike.

walterF
I guess one dirty power (Germany's coal plant power) is not equal another dirty power ( Polish shale gas power)

I feel like orwels 1984 but a lot stupider thinking going on and not enough of us are noticing!

The Yank military don't want our "dirty oil"?
No problem, I'll be grinning while their soldiers continue to die in Central Goathumpistan.
You go, American Empire...you go! Buhahahah..ha

No biggy, There are 1.3 billion screaming chinamen who'd love to buy our oil.

"...more" pollution? Is that's what "M" stands for in Einstein's E=MC^2? "More"...hmmmmm, strange number. Kind of like Pi, I guess.

Ethical Oil: The case for Canada's oilsands

http://ezralevant.com/2010/09/ethical-oil-the-case-for-canad.html

America under Obama has gone nuts. Alberta has always lowered its prices for the States. More so than Canadians. For good reasons. Like defense & such.
Now we have these cowboys coming along to bring yet more debt to the average American while pontificating about being green.
I would rather buy Ethical Oil than blood Oil.
As for Alberta we always stand by Americans in tough times , but there is no lack of Countries wanting our oil.
By the way Canada only produces 2 % of World pollution. So this too is nothing but lies by Obama. Is there no ally he has not dissed?

Wow... when did the US DOD become a bunch of tree hugging wimps. The Army, of course, were always a bunch of pussies ;-), but did the Marines sign off on this... if so there's truly no hope.

Canadians with normal thought processes have always looked at the Americans like a big brother, someone you could tease now and then but we always knew that if a bully showed up we would have big brother to help us. Big brother has until now been relatively easy to deal with, save the Turdo/Cretin years, but now we have a big brother/US who is a belligerant self absorbed/enviro drug addict, what can we do with this adolescent, Oprah installed idiot president of the US? Deal with China, pipe the oil from AB to the coast and to hell with this childish administration until America purges these embarassments in the White House, we have other markets.

During WWII, Churchill said something like: "the Americans always do the right thing, but only after exhausting all other possibilities."

This kind of stupidity shows why we need a pipeline to Kitimat allowing us to export to Asia. The lefties are as determined to destroy the USA as they are to destroy Canada.

The DoD is completely under political control, at least since the beginning of the 20th cen. The last general who succeeded in flouting a President was McClellan.

This directive is simply the latest example of the radical agenda being implemented throughout the US government. Obama is the servant of all the branches of the radical network . All those TelePromptered speeches are probably, by prior agreement, written for Obama by various radical groups. This would explain why he struggles so in explaining " his " agenda extemporaneously : the speeches weren't remotely his, to begin with.

As Canada is friendly to the US, capitalist, and engaged in large scale trade that is very beneficial to middle class America, Canada also is a target in the radicals'/Obama's crosshairs.

?

The US military could easily get all the diesel fuel they need from domestic natural gas, or cheap gas from Mexico or Canada. But that's not their plan. "Securing" foreign oil supplies gives the military a justification for their existence.

In the current oil economy the US gets it's cheapest oil from Mexico and Canada which meets about 2/3 of their needs.

This whole story is nothing more than political posturing.

Is there anyone at the top of the proverbial totem pole doing any actual thinking?

I think I know the answer.

Our oilsands could be depleted in about 20 years, if China had unrestricted access to it. Where do you suppose our economy would go then? I'd rather wait for the US political pendulum to swing back to the right, and get some sensible contracts in place. The Americans have a master plan, capture and deplete middle eastern reserves, then turn a cold shoulder to that little corner of the earth. Once the stream of US dollars to OPEC dries up, I think the war on terror will end rather quickly.

LOL - The US spends 6 times as much as china the next biggest on defense. - Bear in mind that they don't have to spend anything on research. That part of their military expenditure is free - 'borrowed' so to speak!

The Americans have a master plan, capture and deplete middle eastern reserves

You got that right. It's still cheaper to buy Mideast oil than exploit domestic reserves.

Posted over at the NRDC site (for all the good it'll do):

Actually, the highest concentration of ignorance is in the article, not the comments. First, there are no "alternative fuels" or "alternative energy sources" that are anywhere near replacing petroleum for military purposes. Second, if the ecozealots truly cannot see the difference in security between buying oil from your enemies and buying it from your friends, then America deserves to (continue to) decline - which of course is the ecozealots' principal goal anyway. Third, there is no empirical evidence - zero observed data - to support the contention that atmospheric carbon dioxide, let alone the tiny proportion thereof produced by humans, has any significant role in altering temperature. The AGW thesis is a zombie, sustained only by the religious beliefs of the enviromentalists, the scientific malfeasance of its advocates, and the scientific ignorance of the vast majority of politicians. Fourth, the biofuels industry is as artificial as the wind and solar energy industries, entirely dependent on government (re: taxpayer funded) handouts to survive, and noncompetitive in any legitimate sense. It is not an "alternative" to anything except market economics and prosperity.

Look, people have a right to their delusions, so long as they are willing to deal with the consequences; everyone who pulled the lever for Mr. Hopeychange ought to be realizing that right about now. But America's continuing fascination with discredited global warmism and environmentalist voodoo will only hasten its decline. And frankly that's bad for everyone, especially Canada. As a scientist and a former soldier, let me put it simply: any Defence officer or official who suggests structuring the military on any basis other than being able to kill more of the enemy and destroy more of his stuff faster than anyone else ought to be summarily fired as either an imbecile or a traitor, and replaced by someone who understands that the purpose of an army is to WIN WARS.

Well, a lot of us Americans are working hard to free ourselves of our current kakistocracy which can't tell its enemies from its friends, or its friends from its enemies.

Gov sways slower than people but the US is making more enemies north of the 49 than friends. That is sad but true.