Trump Executive Order renames Gulf of Mexico

Modern navigational systems have largely moved away from dependence on printed maps.
Quite untrue. Printed charts are still heavily used, since they require no batteries and no power to use them.
Here's a breakdown of how navigation has evolved:

  • GPS and Digital Maps: Most modern navigation is based on GPS (Global Positioning System) technology, which uses satellites to determine the exact location of a device. This data is then overlaid on digital maps provided by services like Google Maps, Apple Maps, or Waze. These digital maps are updated regularly to reflect changes in road infrastructure, traffic patterns, and other navigational data.
Navigational charts are not printed by Google or a satellite.
Navigational charts are not road maps.
  • Real-Time Information: Digital navigation systems offer real-time traffic updates, route optimization based on current conditions, and the ability to reroute if there are disruptions like road closures or accidents. This capability far surpasses what printed maps can offer.
  • User Interaction: Modern systems allow for user input, such as searching for specific locations, saving favorite places, and receiving voice-guided directions, which are features not possible with printed maps.
  • Offline Capabilities: While digital maps typically require internet access, many apps now offer downloadable maps for offline use, which somewhat mimics the availability of a printed map but with the added benefits of digital technology.
Street maps don't refer to bodies of water.
 
There are international treaties on the naming of geographic features not within the borders of nations, those treaties spell out how the signatories of the treaties name things like the Gulf of Mexico.

You can call it anything you want to call it, but its not what the international community calls it. Its not what appears on maps.
No treaty required for the naming of any geographic feature, Pretender.
The new name will appear on all maps published by the U.S. government.
 
Modern navigational systems have largely moved away from dependence on printed maps. Here's a breakdown of how navigation has evolved:

  • GPS and Digital Maps: Most modern navigation is based on GPS (Global Positioning System) technology, which uses satellites to determine the exact location of a device. This data is then overlaid on digital maps provided by services like Google Maps, Apple Maps, or Waze. These digital maps are updated regularly to reflect changes in road infrastructure, traffic patterns, and other navigational data.
  • Real-Time Information: Digital navigation systems offer real-time traffic updates, route optimization based on current conditions, and the ability to reroute if there are disruptions like road closures or accidents. This capability far surpasses what printed maps can offer.
  • User Interaction: Modern systems allow for user input, such as searching for specific locations, saving favorite places, and receiving voice-guided directions, which are features not possible with printed maps.
  • Offline Capabilities: While digital maps typically require internet access, many apps now offer downloadable maps for offline use, which somewhat mimics the availability of a printed map but with the added benefits of digital technology.


@Grok
When did Google, Apple or Waze become government agencies?
 
Are you saying that ongoing oil leases in the Gulf of Mexico won't require change to the documents referring to them as now being in the Gulf of America? If the document says the Gulf of Mexico and there is no Gulf of Mexico then wouldn't the lease be null and void? How about any treaties that reference the Gulf of Mexico?

Or are you saying, we just need to only name it the Gulf of America in documents that Trump sees?
Biden pause drilling in the Gulf of Mexico so...
 
One of Trump's first actions was to attempt to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America.


(b) As such, within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior shall, consistent with 43 U.S.C. 364 through 364f, take all appropriate actions to rename as the “Gulf of America” the U.S. Continental Shelf area bounded on the northeast, north, and northwest by the States of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida and extending to the seaward boundary with Mexico and Cuba in the area formerly named as the Gulf of Mexico.

What a waste of time and money. The EO also calls for replacing everyone appointed to U.S. Board on Geographic Names within 7 days.

I'm surprised he hasn't designated that the government create a US Board of Food Names so that he can rename French Fries to Freedom Fries.
Oh I love it
I didn't bother reading any of your bullshit because that would be a complete waste of time, but I've been watching this incredible announcement that Trump just made about another half a trillion investment. What's much more important is what the investment is and what it represents. This will be tough for Libtard Drones to process, because it's good news, but I know you'll find your way to make it really bad news and proof that Trump is evil.

Soldier on morons
 
One of Trump's first actions was to attempt to rename the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America.


(b) As such, within 30 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of the Interior shall, consistent with 43 U.S.C. 364 through 364f, take all appropriate actions to rename as the “Gulf of America” the U.S. Continental Shelf area bounded on the northeast, north, and northwest by the States of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida and extending to the seaward boundary with Mexico and Cuba in the area formerly named as the Gulf of Mexico.

What a waste of time and money. The EO also calls for replacing everyone appointed to U.S. Board on Geographic Names within 7 days.

I'm surprised he hasn't designated that the government create a US Board of Food Names so that he can rename French Fries to Freedom Fries.

I hope we name the Panama Canal the AMERICA CANAL! And then, and then and then we can rename Canada as AMERICA NORTH. Then we'll rename England "America's Baby Daddy Land". And, and, and, Scotland where Trump's mommy was from will become New York 2. And and and then we'll rename all the stars after famous American billionaires. But then we gotta take a nap! Mommy said so.
 
You do raise an interesting point. Brandon just tied up and banned oil exploration and drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
That no longer exists so............................
Drill baby Drill in the gulf of America.

Hey, dipshit. Oil companies are shutting down operations in the Pemian Basin in Texas because they already have enough oil and they see flat petroleum prices for the foreseeable future.

Drilling in the Gulf would be pointless if we are SHUTTING DOWN OPERATIONS ON LAND.

Gawd, you dumbasses who don't know ANYTHING seem to talk SO MUCH.
 
Drilling in the Gulf would be pointless if we are SHUTTING DOWN OPERATIONS ON LAND.


The question of whether drilling in the Gulf would be pointless if land-based operations are being shut down involves several considerations:

  1. Energy Supply and Demand:
    • Diverse Sources: Even if land-based operations are curtailed, the Gulf of America can still be a significant source of oil and gas, contributing to the national and global energy supply. Diversifying sources can help stabilize energy prices and supply.
  2. Economic Impact:
    • Job Creation: Offshore drilling creates jobs, particularly in coastal states where these operations are based. Shutting down land operations might increase unemployment in some areas, but offshore drilling could mitigate some of that economic impact.
    • Investment: Companies might redirect investments from land to offshore if land drilling becomes unviable, potentially balancing out economic effects.
  3. Environmental Considerations:
    • Risks: Offshore drilling has its environmental challenges, including potential oil spills and impacts on marine life. However, if land drilling poses significant environmental risks or if regulatory pressures increase on land, offshore might be seen as a less environmentally damaging option in some contexts.
    • Regulatory Response: If land operations are being shut down due to environmental concerns, the same scrutiny might apply to offshore operations, potentially leading to new regulations or restrictions.
  4. Technological and Operational Aspects:
    • Technological Advancements: Offshore drilling technology might continue to evolve, making it more efficient or less environmentally impactful compared to older land-based methods.
    • Capacity: Offshore platforms can often produce at higher capacities than many onshore wells, potentially offsetting any reduction from land closures.
  5. Policy and Strategic Decisions:
    • Energy Policy: If the policy is moving towards reducing overall fossil fuel dependency, then both land and offshore might see reduced activity in the long term. However, short-term strategies might still include offshore drilling to meet current energy needs.
    • National Security: Domestic oil production, whether on land or offshore, can be seen as a matter of national security to reduce dependency on foreign oil.
  6. Market Dynamics:
    • Oil Prices: The decision to drill offshore could be influenced by oil prices. High prices might make drilling more economically viable even if land operations decrease.

Given these points, drilling in the Gulf wouldn't necessarily be pointless if land operations were shut down. Instead, it could represent an adaptation to new circumstances, focusing on areas where production can still be economically and environmentally sustainable under new conditions.

@Grok
 
GhyRwm6WgAAApYv
 
The question of whether drilling in the Gulf would be pointless if land-based operations are being shut down involves several considerations:

  1. Energy Supply and Demand:
    • Diverse Sources: Even if land-based operations are curtailed, the Gulf of America can still be a significant source of oil and gas, contributing to the national and global energy supply. Diversifying sources can help stabilize energy prices and supply.
  2. Economic Impact:
    • Job Creation: Offshore drilling creates jobs, particularly in coastal states where these operations are based. Shutting down land operations might increase unemployment in some areas, but offshore drilling could mitigate some of that economic impact.
    • Investment: Companies might redirect investments from land to offshore if land drilling becomes unviable, potentially balancing out economic effects.
  3. Environmental Considerations:
    • Risks: Offshore drilling has its environmental challenges, including potential oil spills and impacts on marine life. However, if land drilling poses significant environmental risks or if regulatory pressures increase on land, offshore might be seen as a less environmentally damaging option in some contexts.
    • Regulatory Response: If land operations are being shut down due to environmental concerns, the same scrutiny might apply to offshore operations, potentially leading to new regulations or restrictions.
  4. Technological and Operational Aspects:
    • Technological Advancements: Offshore drilling technology might continue to evolve, making it more efficient or less environmentally impactful compared to older land-based methods.
    • Capacity: Offshore platforms can often produce at higher capacities than many onshore wells, potentially offsetting any reduction from land closures.
  5. Policy and Strategic Decisions:
    • Energy Policy: If the policy is moving towards reducing overall fossil fuel dependency, then both land and offshore might see reduced activity in the long term. However, short-term strategies might still include offshore drilling to meet current energy needs.
    • National Security: Domestic oil production, whether on land or offshore, can be seen as a matter of national security to reduce dependency on foreign oil.
  6. Market Dynamics:
    • Oil Prices: The decision to drill offshore could be influenced by oil prices. High prices might make drilling more economically viable even if land operations decrease.

Given these points, drilling in the Gulf wouldn't necessarily be pointless if land operations were shut down. Instead, it could represent an adaptation to new circumstances, focusing on areas where production can still be economically and environmentally sustainable under new conditions.

@Grok

LOL. If they're shutting down operations in the Permean Basin then why would it make sense to drill just a few additional miles away?
 
Hey, dipshit. Oil companies are shutting down operations in the Pemian Basin in Texas because they already have enough oil and they see flat petroleum prices for the foreseeable future.

Drilling in the Gulf would be pointless if we are SHUTTING DOWN OPERATIONS ON LAND.

Gawd, you dumbasses who don't know ANYTHING seem to talk SO MUCH.
Best tell that to the oil companies.
 
Back
Top