Skip to main content

View Diary: Breaking: Obama Puts 4-Star General Under Investigation for Leaks to New York Times (212 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think the "oil" angle is mistaken, at least (3+ / 0-)

    as it is usually presented by the left. (See "Iraq" also.)

    The US does not really have any interest in "taking" Middle East oil. We barely get any oil here from the Middle East anyway--nearly all our oil comes from Mexico, Canada, and Nigeria.

    What the US does have a big interest in, though, is the ability to cut off the flow of oil at will to any nation we want (and of course one nation looms biggest of all in that--China). But then, we don't need to occupy Iran or own its oil production facilities to do that, either---we already have implemented a military strategy to cut off China's oil at will (and unlike us, China is VERY dependent on Middle East oil). Virtually all of the oil that goes from the Middle east to China passes through the bottleneck of the Straits of Malacca, near Malaysia. Way back in 1995, PNAC was already calling for a massive buildup of US Navy forces in the Pacific, with the specific, sole, and clearly-stated purpose of allowing the US to intercept and stop all oil shipments to China at will. And every President since, beginning with Clinton and including Obama, has embraced that strategy. US Navy forces have multiplied enormously in the region, as the US has kissed up to dictators in Myanmar and to semi-democratic governments in Indonesia to keep a naval presence in the area, ostensibly to combat "pirates" and "Muslim terrorists".

    That has not gone unnoticed by the Chinese, who responded specifically and pointedly by building up its own deep-water Navy, including developing its own aircraft carriers, attack submarines, and anti-ship missiles--all with the clear goal of allowing China to remove the US Navy in the event of a blockade in the Malacca Straits. It is the most intense but under-reported military buildup in the world.

    So the US does indeed want control of Middle East oil, but for specific geo-military-political reasons, not for oil company profits.

    •  You are right agree with most all (0+ / 0-)

      The USN dominates the oceanic trade lanes and were it to come to WW3, no nation disfavored by the US would get much oil from sea trade. And this is achieved regardless of the type of government in Tehran. Invading Iran is not a requirement for disrupting her oil deliveries, if needed. And the bulk of the USN has always operated in the Pacific, ever since WW2. controlling the sea lanes is no new thing. It dates back to the creation of standing navies, circa 1600.

      But the Chinese naval buildup is not designed to chalenge the US in the Indian Ocean. The strait off Singapore is indeed a major chokepoint, but the USN cold stop Mideast oil at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, where China's navy could not interfere. So in a shooting war China's navy is not going to ensure she gets oil from the sea.

      China is looking to extend a naval buffer zone around her mainland to make it difficult for enemy carrier forces to operate in striking distance, and to extend China's air coverage umbrella to the disputed islands.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site