Anonymous
Anonymous asked in News & EventsCurrent Events · 1 decade ago

Iraq war protesters, if the Middle east and Venezuela cut off all shipments of oil to the US in the winter?

Would you want a "War for oil" then?

Update:

Let's throw Mexico in there for good measure...

Update 2:

Using the math on your source, I would say that if we relied soley on Canada, we would be short by about 78% of our monthly needs...

Match much?

Update 3:

Larry, I am saying no such thing, I am not qualified to make such an admission, I am assuming that is the case, under the guise of Spreading freedom, our freedom from high gas and heating oil prices, electricity prices etc...

I am asking how long the sanctimonious would remain so when their car is on E, their home is freezing ( with their families in them) and food rots in the field because it cannot be brought to market...

Update 4:

Jeffery, you seriously have studied history for fourty years?

Then I can assume you would also know that we don't buy much oil from iraq, and that most Alaskan oil is sold to Japan (Ever study logistics?) Oil is one big pot. The source ships to it's closest point of refinement, and then from there it goes to the nearest point of sale.

After fourty years of history lessons I will also assumethat you know that having 350K+ troops in the middle east is a pretty big stick to carry to the table when you are stablizing a major resource.

If Canada decided not to deliver to US tomorrow, and we needed the oil, A President Obama would be forced to go to war with Canada over energy, simple fact of economics. And those I refer to as the "Sanctimonious" now would be leading teh charge and replace their "No war for Oil" signs with "Kill Canada" signs...

6 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Okay, I'll bite. Let's say that all of the Middle Eastern countries that the US gets oil from, and Venezuela, and Mexico decided to cut shipments to America this winter, even though there is no conceivable reason why they would do that and many reasons why they wouldn't. Are you suggesting then that it is a good thing that the US is in Iraq, so that they can get oil from that source, a source from which the US currently gets only 6% of its oil imports? Or are you suggesting that if such a highly unlikely event as you suggest were to occur the US would or should go to war with . . . whom? Mexico? Venezuela? Saudi Arabia? It is one thing to propose a hypothetical situation based on what is likely, but to suggest a wildly improbable scenario simply to make your point, whatever that is, is absurd.

    But let's take a trip down the rabbit hole and assume your ridiculous scenario comes to pass. If the US were threatened in this way then yes, going to war might be a reasonable response. No President could simply sit idly by and allow America to grind to a halt and freeze in the dark. But saying this does not mean that the invasion of Iraq was justified. The US was not threatened with your apocalyptic scenario, and was certainly not threatened by Iraq. It is one thing to fight a war for oil out of necessity, which would be the case in your scenario, and another to fight such a war out of greed and lust for empire, which is what the Iraq invasion was about, at least in part.

    Oh, by the way, your math is a little off. The figures on the EIA site that Larry links to are oil imports, totalling about 9.4 million barrels per day, or just under half the 20 million barrels of oil the US consumes in a day. The rest comes from domestic US production. That means that Canada contributes about 10% of America's daily oil use, so that if the US were to have to rely on Canada alone, along with domestic oil, she would be short by about 40% of her monthly needs, not 78%. While increased production in both Canada and the US could probably make up some of that shortfall, at least for a while, there would probably still be a deficit. But it wouldn't be as bad as you have suggested, and it is doubtful that the oil-producing countries, most of which depend almost entirely on oil as a source of income, could last very long before they had to start selling to their best customer again.

    Source(s): Forty years of studying history, particularly military history, and quite a few years working for ExxonMobil, and I don't mean clerking in a gas station.
    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    So... you're saying that what we are involved in

    IS a war for the oil then... right ?

    hmmmmm... interesting...admission

    I might point out to you that the USA has

    oil reserves that would last us an easy three

    years if every foreign shipment was shut off today !

    Not only that ... but we have enough oil in our fields

    to supply the daily needs of this country for an easy

    thirty-five years if it came to that.... We have been

    "dependent" on foreign oil simply to run the numbers

    on out into ... whenever... for a long long time now....

    So, its not like we have this expedient unwaivering need

    for this oil to that level to begin with ...

    And... Mexico... jezzzzzzz... they are so far up DC's

    stuff at present that one can't sneeze without the other

    having to reach for Klenex !!

    Let's face it... the war in Iraq was created because of

    Haliburton's vast holdings of Weapons of Mass Construction

    ☼ ////

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I thougt the largest foriegn supply came from Mexico! May#2 Canada, Im sure they will try to kill us, asshole! What if frogs had wings? They wouldnt bump theyre *** so hard when they jumped!

    Source(s): I think you hate America!
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Mr. pig....lets just see, i've downgraded from a job making 65k to 23k, recently lost home to mortgagee crisis and take a bus and walk to work...i never run my heat and i grow own my garden kill & catch my own meat...i also support our troops....but i support the right to free speech....That being said we have to get out of bed with opec....how can we very proud americans let another country or countries deterime our economy!!!!!!!!1

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 3 years ago

    it rather is lots extra value-effective to license technologies than it rather is to launch a conflict over it. And from what i will tell, Spain's use of renewable potential has much less to do with proprietary technologies and extra to do with a dedication to it, alongside with rules and tax breaks. Like Eartha suggested, attempt setting up all that stuff in a pipeline.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Seeing as Canada sells more oil to the US than anyone else I think that these 2 suppliers would make little difference

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_...

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.