War for oil. Why not?
If anyone actually reads this, I'm probably about to draw the hatred of every liberal in the world. The reason for this is that I am going to blog about something from a strictly strategic point of view with regard to historical perspective. Liberals are so committed to their Utopian world view that they seem to not realize that this world is far from safe and peaceful. They also refuse to allow into the public discourse the use of the United States Armed Forces as a strategic asset for the greater good of the United States.
Throughout world history great powers have used their military advantage as a means to increase the power and prosperity of their nations. Liberals call this imperialism, but it seems far more like common sense to me.
The US Army seems to understand that strategic assets are far more important than squalid populations. When we invaded in 2003, what did we protect? The people? The government infrastructure? The cultural heritage? No we protected the oil fields!
I will blog in the future as to how this strategy was the reason why we lost the support of the populace, and got stuck in an intercene conflict for the foreseeable future, but for now I'd like to look at an alternative to our current methods of war fighting and nation building. If the United States were to use its military advantage to secure strategic interests only(and let local populations do as they wish) then our forces would fight only small conventional battles in which casualties would minimum because our armed forces are nearly invincible in conventional warfare.
The reason this comes to mind is that Hugo Chavez s convinced that we are going to invade his country, and he is seeking advice from the FARC, a Colombian communist rebel group, on unconventional warfare tactics. If the blowhard Chavez were to do something drastic, like cut off the oil that we enrich him with, but that we depend on for the entire US economy then the possibility of invasion would rise exponentially. If we were to invade yet another oil-laden country can we at least admit that oil is the one strategic interest worth fighting for?
Historically, great military powers simply either killed or enslaved the local populace when they wanted a strategic interest someplace in the world. The United States commits itself to the Marshall Act model in every conflict it seems. The guise for this is that if we don't install a popular government it will become a safe haven for terrorists.
I think we should secure the strategic interest, and then share the profits if the locals play nice with us, or just take it as our own if they don't want a peaceful, profitable relationship with The USA. I'm sure local populations would quickly settle their intercene conflicts, install a government and life goes on. Survival of the fittest. This would be a far kinder and gentler form of imperialism than any previous nation with The United States' superior military advantage to its rivals. We are no longer having problems with countries that might actually have the ability to harm us. Think about it. The United States has bellicose enemies that only have any voice because of the strategic interest beneath their feet. Take away Chavez's oil or the mullahs in Iran's oil and they will throw their militaries at us and then quickly lose all military assets within a few weeks. After that, let them deal with their populace if they continue to antagonize The United States of America and no longer have oil revenues to prop up their corrupt regimes. Once they realize that we wont be policing their streets then the fear of guerrilla warfare goes away. We simply protect the strategic assets. Think something like the Panama Canal Zone for Americans exploiting the mineral wealth. The United States Armed Forces wouldn't have any problem defending strips of land that aren't lined with IED's.
Oh well, I know America is far too idealistic a nation to conduct itself like the great world powers of the past. There is also the threat that we would push our nuclear armed semi-allies too far by pursuing a nationalistic foreign policy. By semi-ally I mean Russia because the are the only nation on this planet with a huge nuclear arsenal that is not a close ally of the USA. Well actually, the only other nation with a huge arsenal of nukes, period.
If The Romans, British, Spanish, etc. had a need for a large amount of a certain natural resource then they would have taken it. AHH, the good old days!LOL!Thanks for reading the rant of a hard working American that is sick of listening to idiots propped up by oil money that we could take away any time we want.