Amazon.com Widgets

Does it make sense for the United States to open "terror-free" gas stations, which refuse to buy oil from the Middle East?

  • It makes sense to offer the choice to buy terror-free gas, since it exists.

    Several people would be happy to buy terror-free gas, even if it were more expensive. It would be equivalent to buying organic foods that are locally grown and harvested. Why shouldn't people have this choice, considering that these sources of fuel exist and are currently being consumed, as well? It would be just as easy to make stations that exclusively sell domestic fuel.

    Posted by: J Lamb 43
  • I agree with this statement, because I believe the United States should stop financially supporting the Middle East by buying their oil.

    The United States cannot afford to financially support our enemies in the Middle East any longer. We must think of other options that do not result in giving money to corrupt governments and regimes. If "terror-free" gas stations are created, companies and the U.S. government will be forced to look into other alternatives of getting oil.

    Posted by: PrettyVince50
  • I do not oppose "terror-free" gas stations, because we live in a free country, and people should be free to do or open what they want.

    I am a capitalist, therefore I believe in letting the market decide. If people do not want "terror-free" gas stations, then boycott them, and they will fail without government interference. When government interferes with the market, it is no longer a "free market" system. By very definition, in order for the market to be free, the consumer decides what fails and what does not.

    Posted by: SulkyEzekiel
  • Yes, because I think that the United States should take steps to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

    Although I think the term "terror-free" gas stations sounds a bit extreme or right wing, I do believe the United States should reduce dependence on foreign oil. To do this, we need to develop domestic energy, clean energy, or drill our untapped reserves in Alaska. If we stop buying foreign oil, it will help destabilize Middle East dictatorships that breed resentment and lead to terrorism.

    Posted by: Maynard1981
  • Yes, that would be great, since they are basically holding us hostage to their whims.

    If the United States opened gas stations like this, it would force oil importers to buy from other countries. We wouldn't be forced to pay whatever outrageous price they decided to charge us, based on their greed and our need. We can buy from other countries and help the economies of countries more friendly with the United States.

    Posted by: PinkMych
  • I disagree with "terror-free" gas stations. Limiting purchases in this way is too broad.

    The Middle East is a major supplier of oil for most of oil companies in the country. Refusing to buy oil from middle eastern countries will only hurt people by causing an increase in the price of gas and oil products. This will cause an increase in every industry that uses oil as the production cost will be higher. We need to keep prices for gas a low as possible to strengthen our economy.

    Posted by: N34I3HeIP
  • No, it does not make sense for the US to open "terror free" gas stations, which refuse to buy oil from the Middle East.

    Last time I checked, the Middle East was not the enemy; terrorists are the enemy. People need to recognize this more vividly. I don't condone the level of gas consumption we use anyway, but I don't think that our suppliers are terrorists. That is possibly the most racist statement ever.

    Posted by: LorenaH
  • No, this type of approach would only alienate people.

    If gas stations would like to only use oil from a certain area, or region, that's fine. It would be similar to products that are "made in the USA" or car dealerships that only sell cars that are manufactured in a certain country. But setting up gas stations countrywide that don't buy oil from a region, that we are trying to establish peace in, would only further separate people. And this is not the place of government to decide this. Would the government go on to tell us to not patronize gas stations, or doctor's offices, that are owned by individuals of Middle Eastern decent? The sentiment of the majority of people in this country is not one of hate towards the Middle East. It is dislike towards certain individuals whom are out to deliberately hurt others. "Terror free" gas stations would only serve to jeopardize peace in the Middle East and in the U.S.

    Posted by: MohaI0v35
  • It does not make sense for the U.S. to open "terror-free" gas stations, unless many variables can be studied.

    This proposal tries to empower the American people to make choices that further curtail terrorism. But, there are too many variables involved with the oil supply and its relationship to terrorism. First, it would be necessary to have the means to verify the source of every gas station's petroleum products. Second, it identifies the entire Middle East with terrorism, while we have allies in the Middle East, and surely the governments of Middle Eastern countries would deny connections with terrorism. Third, there would need to be consideration given to OPEC and other petroleum trade agreements. Then, it would be necessary to verify that the other sources of oil have no connections to terrorism. And, finally, the economic impact of this choice would need to be investigated.

    Posted by: baltute
  • It doesn't make sense because nations need to sell oil, and not all terrorists are from the Middle East.

    Not all Middle Eastern countries are terrorist states. Also, Venezuela, which has a dictator, isn't in the Middle East, and we still buy oil from them. Besides, if the countries do turn around, like Libya, they will need the money from oil sales to build their economy. Also, the West has a disastrous history of meddling in foreign oil, especially in the Middle East.

    Posted by: HumdrumMilo83
  • A free market economy is the best economy, and we should buy oil from wherever it is cheapest, "terror-free" or not.

    Having gas stations that do not serve oil from the Middle East is one of the worst ideas I have heard this year. These gas stations will invariably be more expensive because this will hike up the demand for other oil, which will raise its price. As a result, consumers who are against the Middle East will have to pay more for gas, a solution that no one wants. A free economy is the most efficient economy, and I strongly believe that we should keep things the way that they are.

    Posted by: LongBo86
  • Terror-free gas stations are wrong, as it assumes that all middle easterners are terrorists.

    If one were to prove that gas funded terrorism this still would not be grounds for terror-free gas stations. All trades, including banking and other business, in one way or another fund illegitimate activities, knowingly or not. This has been true through history and impossible to prevent. To single out a group would be unnecessary, is immoral and likely to incite hate.

    Posted by: daveyxh
  • No, "terror-free" gas stations do not make sense, because we don't produce enough oil ourselves for this to work.

    As long as Americans insist on driving 6.0 liter SUVS, and the government drags its feet on building an efficient high-speed railway system in the U.S., we will have to depend on "terror-supporting" countries for our oil. Opening a few "terror-free" gas stations is like shooting a bb gun at a tank. The tank, in this case, being those oil-producing countries.

    Posted by: R3ciP3Saye
  • It makes no sense for the United States to open "terror-free" gas stations, which refuse to buy oil from the Middle East because it will simply stir up more aggression.

    It makes no sense for the United States to open "terror-free" gas stations, which refuse to buy oil from the Middle East because it will simply stir up more aggression. The United Arab Emirates and Kuwait are not anti-American and so they would be unduly punished for being associated with terrorists when they're not. That is unacceptable and unfair. Everybody who comes from the Middle East is not a terrorist. So to have any business that goes out of its way to reject a whole region of the world is just asking for trouble. This would stir up more trouble than we want, and the result would not help us anyway. It's too simplistic.

    Posted by: JeffP4ri5
  • I don't think it makes sense for the United States to open "terror-free" gas stations, because it would dramatically increase the cost of oil.

    I disagree with opening terror free gas stations for three main reasons. First of all, terror free gas stations would limit the places we could get our gas from. This would undoubtedly raise the price of gas at those stations, thus driving up the price of gas for all of us. Secondly, that assumes that all middle eastern countries are terrorist states, perpetuating hate and racism in the United States. Thirdly, this would put pressure on the government to find oil in Alaska, or other protected areas. I think we should leave things as they are.

    Posted by: JayceC

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.