No, Joe, that was not my contention. Carefully re-read that post. What I said was that as the world's oil reserves dwindle down to the last, they will be grabbed by certain nations to support their armies. That may come in just a matter of decades, if the "vast" reserves you contend are still out there can't be feasibly extracted. That will happen near the end of the fossil fuel age, I'm sure I made that distinction. I also did not single-out the USA as the nation who would make the military oil grab when that time came. I did NOT claim that if you don't have oil you can't have a military. There was no link at all to current or past regional wars over oil. You jumped to that conclusion all by yourself. This is why I don't like these discussions via email. I just don't have confidence that posts will be read carefully. On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
Oh forget it, Siegfried. Quite obviously you didn't look at the world energy reserve map or understand that I was replying to Chuck's comment linking reserves to military power. His contention about military power and oil, including regional wars over oil, was made in the context of the U.S. needs -- see the subject line above; the discussion was about oil leases in Utah. He claimed If you don't have oil you can't have a military and said there will be regional wars over oil.