A unilateral blockade.
Nuclear weapons cannot be used for most conflicts.
But about 30 middle East countries discovered they can bring the highly leveraged US to their knees by mining/drone attacking the two middle east shipping chokepoints.
Strait of Hormuz — Iran, Oman, United Arab Emirates; very near: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq
Bab el-Mandeb — Yemen, Djibouti, Eritrea; very near: Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Egypt, Sudan, Oman
(maybe add the straits of singapore too)
Anyone who uses this thing called 'oil' needs the strait open. It's remarkable how many people don't understand what an 'international oil market' means.
No. Anyone whose idiotic socialist government made them dependent on external energy needs the strait open. Or anyone whose economy depends on selling oil to the aforementioned idiots.
Oh. So a little thing called the “petrodollar”? kek
Yes that's my point.
This weakens the petrodollar and demonstrates the foolishness of using it.
Israel doesn't care about that, they're perfectly content with sacrificing this entire country if it means getting their stupid "greater israel project" started.
Pedodollar is more valuable anyway
There's not much of a difference between 'external energy' and 'internal energy'. You're still paying $200 a barrel if the price skyrockets. Problem is, you just don't understand economics.
There's an enormous difference. Firstly being resiliency. This isn't hard, so either you're dumber than I thought or you're just feigning ignorance again.
Yes, I'm talking about economic effects. You need to pay for oil at the world market price regardless of whether the oil is external or internal. I guess you may advocate socialism and confiscation in cases of emergency, hence your resiliency, but other than that, I guess I'm too dumb to see your great points.
While most of those governments are indeed made up of idiotic globalist socialists, they didn't have much choice. Not every country has oil that they can simply pump out of the ground.
They had a choice to shutter their nuclear plants.
True, but closing the straight still creates oil scarcity, which universally drives up prices. Great for American oil producers and the American government, but still shitty for Americans
Canada and Venezuala have more oil than all of the ME combined.
Where is it, though? For all the talk about "energy independence", for the US intervention in Venezuela and them winning the Canadian tariff war, why aren't these countries producing at capacity?
In the words of Judge Doom, "I bought the Red Car so I could dismantle it"
That's a facile argument generally used by pro-war people to try to say that messing with the Middle East won't cause problems. Truth is, there are different types of oil based on sweetness etc., for which different types of refineries are specialized. You can't just switch out one type for another.
Furthermore, as I I think I said, it's a world market. That's why "it's good for us because we produce oil" is a very stupid argument. When prices rise, you don't earn more money unless you have stocks in Big Oil, but you do pay more for everything that uses oil as input. Unless you are a petrostate, then higher oil prices are bad for you.
That's why Trump, even though he claimed that high oil prices are good for him (and they may be for his cronies) ultimately relented.
That's funny, because I'm pretty staunchly anti-war. Energy self-sufficiency actually means there is zero reason for us to be there.
No, but you can build infrastructure around them in the long term. I'm not asking "why don't the Americans and their allies start pumping more oil immediately?", I'm asking "why haven't the Americans been building their infrastructure around allied oil since the 70s?" Apparently, despite being at war with them for over 50 years, Iran has had control of their most vital resource (and never crashed them, until now) but the Americans never bothered to diversify their supply chain?
Well, I actually work for a living, so a booming energy sector means employment opportunities for people like me. Not just the (well paying) jobs in the actual industry, but homebuilding, personal services, secondary markets for goods, they all benefit. Canada has seen the full closure of many oil extraction projects since the prices of oil have fallen; it may be a "world market", but the world only needs so much and the Americans have decided that they'll put their money into the ME's reserves.
Which Canada and Venezuela both are.
Yeah, I didn't want to suggest that you're not. It's just one of the pro-war talking points that seeps through because it sounds vaguely plausible.
I'd argue that it doesn't make that much of a difference, without commenting on the costs and benefits of being there.
LOL. Yeah. I assume it's because it wasn't immediately profitable. And of course, these are private companies and if it is more profitable right now to use Middle Eastern oil, then they will. Or maybe they didn't think that anyone would be foolish enough to stick his finger in the hornet's nest.
You're only looking at one side of the equation. This is the equivalent of boomers believing that it's great for housing prices to go up. Truth is, you want housing to be as cheap as possible, and the same is true for energy.
How so? All these things need energy. If energy prices go up, everything gets more expensive. So it's not a net benefit, rather a gigantic loss. The benefits are concentrated and the losses dispersed.
Canada definitely not. Venezuela, maybe. But the US? Definitely not. Oil needs to be a gigantic percentage of your economy for you to benefit from higher prices rather than be hurt by.
we don't need to bend to the whims of any "international" market, we have shitloads of oil at home.
Correct. And now we have first right to Venezuela's.
And Canada's too! The USA has "dibs" on Canadian oil. We can't sell it to ourselves without giving the USA the "right" to buy it at that price too. Good for USA, bad for Canada.
Add to that 10+ years of incompetent communist Federal governments who REFUSE to allow Alberta to prosper. Or SK or MB, or even their darling Maritimes who also have some oil.
Eastern Canada & Quebec would rather buy oil from Saudi Arabia than from Western Canada.
For a bunch that pretends to be capitalist, you sure have difficulty understanding how it works.
If the international oil market says that oil is $200, then foreign buyers will be willing to pay up to $200 for oil, including American oil. This means that you will be paying $200 for oil. The "we produced this at home" participation trophy won't do you any good when you're consuming that oil as an input.
Capitalism is the free exchange of goods and services. It is an explicitly individualist metric, measurable by how much choice the individual has in their conduct of trade.
It is not internationalist banking cartels comprised of foreigners zeroing out your choices for you.
In point of fact the latter has far more in common with centralized economies than with capitalism.
But you're a leftist so you believe that the presence or claim of profit equates to capitalism, because you use that word as a boogeyman.
Ironically, the way the US can be not hurt by rising oil prices is by forbidding exports. But you won't. Because capitalism.
What?! I thought I was Bolshevik! I demand a retraction. Knowing you, you will probably try the save by claiming they're the same thing.
America is energy independent. It's Europe that pretends they aren't dependent on Russian oil.
I've already addressed this idiocy.