How desperate are the USA?

[Señor]

I wasn't quite sure where to post this between here and "living in the future" but I decided to post it here because there is more traffic.

I've recently been reading Power Down by Richard Heinberg. While some of it paints a largely one-sided argument against the Bush regime (in favour of Al Gore), there are some good points in there and it got me to thinking.

Many believe that the US went into Iraq for reasons to do with oil, in order to have a base to monitor oil-rich middle eastern countries and to prevent Saddam Hussein from being manipulative with his oil. If true and I think it certainly is a factor then it shows that the US are willing to go to any measures to secure oil for themselves.

Furthermore they came close to a nuclear war with Russia in the 70s when the Russians said they would help the Arabs with regards to their oil.

This leads me to two things. One that the US perhaps need to look a little bit closer to home and schemes to reduce energy use in their own backyard would be cheaper and save them going to war.

Secondly, the United States' next big move will probably have a big knock-on effect for the rest of us and spark something big style. They have form for it.

So, what do you think they may do to secure more oil for themselves, if anything at all? Do you think it is something we should worry about? Will the country and whoever is in charge at the time when it may be necessary be willing to go to war over oil?

[madibe]

Will the country and whoever is in charge at the time when it may be necessary be willing to go to war over oil?

If Sarah Palin and her mob has its way I'm sure there is little doubt. Now that would be a Tea Party

[Lord Beria3]

Alan Greenspan once said (former central bank chief) that America went to Iraq because of oil. Enough said.

Regarding your post, yes, America has and will certainly use its military force to ensure that it get enough oil for its own economy (and its allies) and probably also to shape the flows of energy to potential rivals, including China.

At the same time, two factors will inhibit future military force in the Middle East; the first the growing and massive US fiscal deficit which at some point will start to creep into Pentagon expenditure and the willingness of the elite and populace to implement war plans. The second is the moral, economic, military and diplomatic cost of Iraq, which will put of the US General Staff from ground invasion for a long time to come.*

*Air campaigns are anather matter.

The other factor to consider is the ability of rivals to the US to take on the country. Realistically, the only potential rival long-term is China, but the chances of China being able to build a blue-sea navy and succeed in defeating the US in the Persian Gulf is very remote.

My dissertation was on this subject, and I remember quoting one Chinese general who said that it would take 20 years to build a navy capable of defeating the US, which by that time the oil would have run out!

So, to conclude the possibility of future US military wars is possible but barring a nuclear war between the great powers, it will likely remain a regional contest.

[snow hope]

The US has shown in the last decade what they are prepared to do to secure access to the oil they require. In the previous few decades, they have shown much more, if you look into it. We all know the phrase, "the American way of life is non-negotiable", I believe this was first stated by George Bush Sr back at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992.

If anybody thinks they/we invaded the Middle East - namely Iraq and Afghanistan, in order to spread democracy, I seriously question their understanding of what is going on in the world, at best they are naieve.....

The Americans have been in Saudi Arabia for half a century, we have been in Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, etc for many decades.

Oil is absolutely essential to our way of life and that has been clear to the powers that be, since before World War II. In 2006 George Bush Jr said in an address to the nation, "America is addicted to oil".

Ten years ago I broke my addiction to cigarettes, I did it because I realised it was killing me and I had to do it.

To answer the question, America will do what ever it needs to do to feed its addiction. I don't see any sign of the addiction being broken, maybe it will one day, but for the forseeable future it will have to feed the addiction!

[kenneal - lagger]

Many believe that the US went into Iraq for reasons to do with oil, in order to have a base to monitor oil-rich middle eastern countries and to prevent Saddam Hussein from being manipulative with his oil. If true and I think it certainly is a factor then it shows that the US are willing to go to any measures to secure oil for themselves.

Oil was part of the reason. Another part was that Sadam Hussein was proposing to sell his oil in any currency but the dollar. If that had caught on, the US would have been bankrupted by now. "The American Way Of Life" is paid for by the world's requirement for dollars to trade oil and a few other things. As long as this requirement exists, the US can finance its way of life by printing dollars and inflating away the deficit.

This leads me to two things. One that the US perhaps need to look a little bit closer to home and schemes to reduce energy use in their own backyard would be cheaper and save them going to war.

Again, the American Way Of Life does not involve the reduction in use of anything, voluntarily. An American large company will not countenance any law that will reduce its market share or its profits. American politicians know that their funding depends on this so would not vote for anything that accomplished that. That's why it is impossible to get a Climate Change Bill through the legislature.

Secondly, the United States' next big move will probably have a big knock-on effect for the rest of us and spark something big style. They have form for it.

So, what do you think they may do to secure more oil for themselves, if anything at all? Do you think it is something we should worry about? Will the country and whoever is in charge at the time when it may be necessary be willing to go to war over oil?

Who knows what they will do, which is probably one of the reasons why our government doesn't want to ditch Trident! We might not be able to finish a war with Trident but we could make it impossible for the US to come through an attack on us unscathed. Hopefully, it would make them think twice about blackmailing us in some way.

[Ludwig]

I believe America will go to war over oil... It has nothing to lose.

Civilisations collapse when the ideas they are founded on die - for America, this idea is a high standard of living and perpetual economic growth. It will keep fighting to sustain this moribund idea as long as possible, because to abandon it would be to abandon the very foundation of its existence.

[MacG]

I belive the US is collapsing right now, and wont go anywhere at all. What I belive I can glimpse trough the fog of war is that the 'American way of life' is enjoyed by fewer and fewer people. There is no other way to understand how growth is going on in the BRIC zone despite flat oil extraction. Somewhere someone is reducing oil consumption, and my guess is that it is the US. Soon we will know.

[snow hope]

Chris (clv101) said in another thread that American consumption of oil has dropped by 2m barrels/day over the last couple of years. That is no small drop...... mind you they have a lot of excess consumption from which they can reduce more without real pain I would imagine. Not sure at what point it would start to hit them hard. Any ideas?

[PS_RalphW]

US oil consumption has dropped 10% in the last 3 years, and has now levelled out European and Japanese consumption has also fallen, and continues to fall.

The US is by far the most profligate of any large nation, and as such is both the most vulnerable to an oil price shock, and also has the easiest pickings when it comes to saving energy. However, as you have said, they are ideologically opposed to using less of anything.

Refusal to adapt is how civilisations fall.

[nexus]

These three American blogs are interesting:

http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com/
http://cluborlov.blogspot.com/
http://www.kunstler.com/blog/

[Señor]

Oil was part of the reason. Another part was that Sadam Hussein was proposing to sell his oil in any currency but the dollar. If that had caught on, the US would have been bankrupted by now. "The American Way Of Life" is paid for by the world's requirement for dollars to trade oil and a few other things. As long as this requirement exists, the US can finance its way of life by printing dollars and inflating away the deficit.

Again, the American Way Of Life does not involve the reduction in use of anything, voluntarily. An American large company will not countenance any law that will reduce its market share or its profits. American politicians know that their funding depends on this so would not vote for anything that accomplished that. That's why it is impossible to get a Climate Change Bill through the legislature.

Who knows what they will do, which is probably one of the reasons why our government doesn't want to ditch Trident! We might not be able to finish a war with Trident but we could make it impossible for the US to come through an attack on us unscathed. Hopefully, it would make them think twice about blackmailing us in some way.

I definitely think they were worried about how Hussein would use his oil to screw them over. He had already threatened the flow of oil to America. Considering no WMDs were found the motives do point strongly towards oil.

Also, you hear quite a lot about China becoming a world force because of their population but people rarely consider the state of their military, which as said, simply can't compete with the US. I imagine the US have an eye on Russia.[/quote]

[Totally_Baffled]

Just to be clear, Greenspan said that the US invaded Iraq over their potential threat to the persian gulf/straits of hormuz and the vast amount of oil that is shipped through it.

He did NOT say the US went to war to in effect to "steal" or secure Iraq's oil for themselves/their allies.

Big difference (thats not to say we have to believe him )

As for future US oil wars, I would say the US must be very worried about how ineffective their military is/was in securing oil given the recent war in Iraq.

The US uses 18 mbpd, Iraq produces 2 mbpd - good luck in "securing" the other 16 mbpd!!!

[contadino]

Plus, after all the expense (lives and financial) of the Iraq war, it now looks like it is going to be a government setup and supported from Tehran.

The oil contracts are gonna get ripped up and re-negotiated, and I'd put money on the Chinese & Russian companies getting a much larger slice of the pie than the current arrangement.

Oh, and the Iraqi government is already saying that they won't be requesting any more military help from the US when the current contract expires in 2011, so those bases in the desert are going to get closed down.

[Ludwig]

Oh, and the Iraqi government is already saying that they won't be requesting any more military help from the US when the current contract expires in 2011, so those bases in the desert are going to get closed down.

Is the Iraqi government anything but a US puppet government? I don't think so.

By "military" help, do they mean just the US army? As we speak, tens of thousands of official soldiers are being replaced "security contractors"- i.e. mercenaries funded by the US taxpayer. These are pretty much unaccountable to any authority - they are not subject to US military law, nor to US domestic law[1], nor - thanks to provisions made by the Bush government - to Iraqi law. All works out rather nicely.

The situation is described in all its disgusting detail in that brilliant book "The Shock Doctrine".

[1] This is because the Iraqi Coalition Provision Authority, which oversees Iraqi contracts, has been declared "not part of the US Government" and therefore not subject to US government laws.

[frank_begbie]

When you think about it, things seem to happen very conveniently

9/11, so we can invade Iraq.

The Credit Crunch, so we have a depression and so lower our oil use.

Not that I'm being cynical