View Single Post
  #52  
Old 12-28-2007, 11:12 AM
Botnst's Avatar
Botnst Botnst is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,587
Quote:
Originally Posted by MBlovr View Post
What is your fundemental disagreement with him concerning the oil states?
Sometime in the mid-1800's the human population exceeded it's ability to sustain itself without industrialization of farming, storage, processing, and transportation. For the subsequent 150 years (and undoubtedly continuing into the future for some indeterminable time), science has provided improvements in farming, storage, processing, and transportation that has kept pace with or exceeded the demand.

There have been exceptions including the chronic near-starvation in the Sahel and the blundering centralized planning of the USSR and Red China. Taken together, these natural and made-made events cost the lives of hundreds of millions of people. Absent industrial farming, storage, processing and transportation the chronic starvation we witness in the Sahel would expand beyond Africa and become planet-wide, until the human population returned to about half of our present population. That's a lot of rotting meat.

Currently, oil is the #1 source of hydrocarbons for fuel, pesticides, and lubricants. About 75% of the proven petroleum reserves occur in one location: the Middleast. http://www.rff.org/rff/News/Features/loader.cfm?url=/commonspot/security/getfile.cfm&PageID=10701 Without that source the world would depend on petroleum from the rest of the planet until it could develop outer sources or alternative methods for industrial farming, transportation, storage, and manufacturing. Given several years lead-time we could probably adjust, even though the world economies would all collapse, leading to a cascade of subsequent and related problems. It would be far, far worse than the 1927 crash and would affect every person on the planet, even without starvation.

It would imperil the stability of the governments of all nations. The people everywhere on the planet would demand one thing of their various governments -- secure supply of petroleum.

In time the industrialized nations could adapt to the changes, but the transition would undoubtedly involve crushing poverty and starvation for millions, perhaps billions.

Bin Laden and others recognize this weakness and have been seeking to destabilize the countries of the region. Iran recognizes this weakness and along with Venezuela's president, has been calling for OPEC to exercise it's power while it can. Several years ago there was another president of an oil-rich state calling for a pan-Arab oil state to confront the oil-dependent states. He had tried and failed to invade one oil-rich state in pursuit of that goal. He tried and succeeded in militarily conquering a different one a few years later. He, along with Al Qaeda, called for regime change in ALL oil-rich Arab states except his own, of course. Despite long-term blockades he continued to plan for eventual conquest of the oil-rich Gulf states.

Had he succeeded he would have controlled 75% of the world's proven oil reserves.

B
Reply With Quote