Price Of Oil Causing The Downfall Of The US As A Superpower

Less than a month ago, the United States similarly lost its claim to superpower status when a barrel [of] crude oil roared past $110 on the international market, gasoline prices crossed the $3.50 threshold at American pumps, and diesel fuel topped $4.00. As was true of the USSR following the dismantling of the Berlin Wall, the USA will no doubt continue to stumble on like the superpower it once was; but as the nation's economy continues to be eviscerated to pay for its daily oil fix, it, too, will be seen by increasing numbers of savvy observers as an ex-superpower-in-the-making.

Oil was the basis for the rise of [the] first giant multinational corporations in the U.S., notably John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company (now reconstituted as Exxon Mobil, the world's wealthiest publicly-traded corporation). Abundant, exceedingly affordable petroleum was also responsible for the emergence of the American automotive and trucking industries, the flourishing of the domestic airline industry, the development of the petrochemical and plastics industries, the suburbanization of America, and the mechanization of its agriculture. Without cheap and abundant oil, the United States would never have experienced the historic economic expansion of the post-World War II era.

As long as most of [their] oil came from domestic sources and the price remained reasonably low, the American economy thrived and the annual cost of deploying vast armies abroad was relatively manageable. But that sea has been shrinking since the 1950s. Domestic oil production reached a peak in 1970 and has been in decline ever since -- with a growing dependency on imported oil as the result. When it came to reliance on imports, the United States crossed the 50% threshold in 1998 and now has passed 65%.

...the U.S. Department of Defense is the world's single biggest consumer of petroleum, using more of it every day than the entire nation of Sweden.

Every day, the average G.I. in Iraq uses approximately 27 gallons of petroleum-based fuels. With some 160,000 American troops in Iraq, that amounts to 4.37 million gallons in daily oil usage, including gasoline for vans and light vehicles, diesel for trucks and armored vehicles, and aviation fuel for helicopters, drones, and fixed-wing aircraft. With U.S. forces paying, as of late April, an average of $3.23 per gallon for these fuels, the Pentagon is already spending approximately $14 million per day on oil ($98 million per week, $5.1 billion per year) to stay in Iraq.

Meanwhile, our Iraqi allies, who are expected to receive a windfall of $70 billion this year from the rising price of their oil exports, charge their citizens $1.36 per gallon for gasoline.

When questioned about why Iraqis are paying almost a third less for oil than American forces in their country, senior Iraqi government officials scoff at any suggestion of impropriety. "America has hardly even begun to repay its debt to Iraq," said Abdul Basit, the head of Iraq's Supreme Board of Audit, an independent body that oversees Iraqi governmental expenditures. "This is an immoral request because we didn't ask them to come to Iraq, and before they came in 2003 we didn't have all these needs."

The average G.I in Iraq now uses about seven times as much oil per day as G.I.s did in the first the Gulf War less than two decades ago.

Under the military "transformation" initiated by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in 2001, the future U.S. war machine will rely less on "boots on the ground" and ever more on technology. But technology entails an ever-greater requirement for oil, as the newer weapons sought by Rumsfeld (and now Secretary of Defense Robert Gates) all consume many times more fuel than those they will replace.

As a result of our addiction to increasingly costly imported oil, we have become a different country, weaker and less prosperous. Whether we know it or not, the energy Berlin Wall has already fallen and the United States is an ex-superpower-in-the-making.

coyotemike said:
... focus on fixing our own problems instead of fucking up the rest of the world?

khoos said:

Oh Pretty Pretty Please...

bald_eagle said:
It had more to do with industrialization

RudieCantFail said:

But... that would actually make sense!

coyotemike said:
We can still mess with Canada

khoos said:

You can take away our oil, But you'll never take away our Tim Hortons!

coyotemike said:

No, we just make fun of you for creating Geddy Lee.

hookipa said:
****neil pert drum solo.

_Margot_ said:

khoos said:

Doesn't Oil play a HUGE role in that?

hookipa said:
****neil pert drum solo.

SockPuppet said:

Peart, dude. Peart.

hookipa said:

may i burn in rush elevator music hell for all eternity.

_Margot_ said:

You leave Geddy Lee out of this.

coyotemike said:
If we're no longer a superpower, does that mean we can get rid of our nukes and focus on fixing our own problems instead of fucking up the rest of the world?

livertarian said:

I like the cut of your jib, though I don't see how getting rid of our nuclear weapons is going to help us much. We are in the Nuclear Age, and so far, deterrence has worked.

But as for our foreign policy, hell yes, let's get out of other people's business.

Of course, regardless whether you vote (D) or (R) this year, we will remain status quo on our UN involvement, which means we will most definitely continue mucking around in other countries' affairs. Sad.

SockPuppet said:

How many warheads do you think are needed for deterrence?

RudieCantFail said:

Nuclear arms statistics at a glance.

We have enough nukes to blow up the entire planet, a hundred times over.

Fucking ridiculous, innit?