Dependence on oil is the biggest, most dangerous catch 22 the Unites States has ever been faced with. Our whole infrastructure is built upon our need
for and use of oil. This, of course, makes us more and more dependent upon foreign sources. Dependence is growing while known world-wide reserves are
dwindling. There's no two ways about it.
We have two choices and both are excruciatingly painful. Either push hard now to invest in and develop true alternatives to oil or re-instate the
draft and commit ourselves to endless war for. That's what it boils down to. Neither is preferable. Conservation means overhauling our entire
infrastructure (which will kill certain sectors of industry and be alarmingly expensive and time-consuming); or we can just get used to the idea that
we rule the world by the barrell of a gun. I for one have carried an M-16 onto the battlefield and have no love for war. I have no fear of it, and if
I had to fight for my country's safety I would; but, if there are other alternatives to that approach, I would definitely go for that first. No
matter what the cost. We have no right to try and dominate the world, stealing other country's resources b/c we are a spoiled rotten nation. That is
cruel and it makes us no better than red China or Communist Russia. America has vast resources and a pioneering spirit. Whenever we have put our minds
to something, we've found there is nothing we cannot accomplish.
America can sustain and protect itself, as we have for 200 some years - if we're willing to look homeward and to the future, turn away from war, roll
up our sleeves, invest and do the hard work required - as our forefathers were willing to do. If we're too candy-a$$ed to approach this realistically
and in earnest, the United States of America will go straight down the toilet - where some currently believe it belongs.
The answer is CONSERVATION not WAR!
Here's an excellent essay written by Michael Klare. It appeared in the January 2004 issue of Foreign Policy in Focus
. I encourage everyone to
read it and pass it around. Our very lives may depend on it.
Bush-Cheney Energy Strategy: Procuring the Rest of the World's Oil By Michael Klare
(Foreign Policy In Focus - PetroPolitics Special Report , January 2004)
Professor Michael Klare is the author of Resource Wars: The new Landscape of Global Conflict and the forthcoming Petropolitics. This article is
reprinted with permission from Foreign Policy in Focus .
Friday, January 16, 2004 Posted: 1:23 AM EST (0623 GMT)
When first assuming office in early 2001, President George W. Bush's top foreign policy priority was not to prevent terrorism or to curb the spread
of weapons of mass destruction—or any of the other goals he espoused later that year following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon. Rather, it was to increase the flow of petroleum from suppliers abroad to U.S. markets. In the months before he became
president, the United States had experienced severe oil and natural gas shortages in many parts of the country, along with periodic electrical power
blackouts in California. In addition, oil imports rose to more than 50% of total consumption for the first time in history, provoking great anxiety
about the security of the country's long-term energy supply. Bush asserted that addressing the nation's “energy crisis” was his most important task