I will try to say this as succinctly as possible, rather than explaining every nuance. Hopefully it will come across very shortly:
Are the wars that we pay attention to today (and there are many we simply ignore, much to the frustration of some of our hottest Hollywood celebrities) in fact wars for oil?
I believe they are. Not in the traditional way that most critics of the current administration say President Bush and his oil cronies are trying to make a buck, but because we here in the United States have allowed ourselves to become less than self-sufficient. Wherever you are dependant on others, there is leverage to be used against you. When you are dependant on friends, your bonds become stronger and you work closer together. When enemies or hostiles supply your dependencies, what you need becomes leverage to make you do what they want.
The bitter fighting in the holy lands (middle east, if you can’t stomach the other term) demands the attention of the United States because we have blocked ourselves from providing the energy we need to drive our cars, watch our televisions, light and cool our buildings, cook our food.
This is a war fought not over the oil under the sands of Iraq or Iran, but over the oil here in our own country that we will not drill. Though it may be sad to say, if we were providing for our own energy consumption, we could ignore what is going on in and around the holy lands the same way we ignore what goes on in great stretches of Africa.
It’s not that I don’t believe “unalienable rights” really do belong to all people, but I don’t believe that most people in this country are up to the massive effort it would take in order to provide those rights to all people: namely, to actually take over the world and deliver those rights. The main argument that seems to be put forth every time a section of the world is freed is that it won’t work, that Arabs or Persians cannot handle freedom, that Islam is incompatible with it.
By that argument, not only would Japan and Germany be inexplicable, but the frighteningly parallel brand of Catholicism embraced only a few hundred years ago would have made our present circumstances impossible. After all, it is not the Republic of Heaven that is spoken of in Christianity’s Koran.
Understand me, and those who think like me, for a change. Our frustration comes not from our perception of your unwillingness to defend our nation or the oppressed around the world, nor from the desire to find alternative ways to fuel our economy. Our frustration comes from policies that cause the problem in the first place, then refuse to allow the mess to be cleaned up, and finally to tout a desire to defend the worst, most wild aspects of our culture – AND to presumably help the oppressed around the world – while in actuality putting up every possible block to achieve those very aims.
Yes. This is a war. This is a war for oil. This is a war for OUR oil, the oil that can be found under Colorado, Alaska, within or near our shores.
But for some this is a war for the ballot box, pure and simple. It is a war to recover power for power’s sake. It is an example of ends and means. We want the ends, such as actual, viable, lasting peace; or even just a handle on our own needs – a feeling of confidence that we can get from place to place, eat a hot meal, see the latest fad TV show; while others want the means: whatever it takes to make sure it is done THEIR way, or by THEIR leader, whether it works or not.
2 comments:
By our very nature as Americans, I believe that we simply couldn't stop poking about in the affairs of other countries. Sometimes our interference is kindly meant. I would venture to say that MOST of the time it is. But it's part of who we are. And when we feel that we've wronged someone, even when they blatantly deserved it, we go overboard to make amends. We try to rebuild them greater than they were before whatever damage we inflicted, however much they asked for it.
Drilling for oil here would change the problems, and certainly affect the foreign oil dependency issue, but not our nature of global involvement, welcomed or otherwise. We would likely just pick different issues.
-k
I agree, and actually think this fits with my original point, though probably as a refinement or clarification of something I did not state well. This is the one place where I believe we as a nation are not self-sufficient; we are dependant on others to the point that we are currently at their mercy. I don’t believe this would continue forever, for at a certain point of pain the production of corn or other based petroleum substitutes becomes viable. It’s still because it reached a certain pain threshold (over which it must stay for that to still be a viable option) but while we are dependant on others, our involvement in their affairs isn’t optional.
Our desire to meddle in the affairs of the world (as you stated, kindly meant and from our perspective for the gain of all people) would still continue, but would not take on the magnitude that would necessitate our involvement in what could well be a World War.
Post a Comment