Would taking control of the oil reserves in Iran and Venezuela guarantee the USA a good future?

Question

If we have control of the oil in Mexico, Venezuela, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Iran and Alaska plus control of the Russian pipeline running through Afghanistan and Yemen/Sudan supply route to China, would it mean the USA can remain as the sole superpower for another century?

Would it be worth it, launching a simultaneous invasion of Iran and Venezuela?

Answer 1

no. The US needs to become oil independent else global warming destroy it.

Alternative energies such as methane and methanol are the only option for the US to survive

Also war doesn't leave a good moral legacy.

That oil isn't being deprived it's being sold - the US oil companies own a huge chunk of it already.

Why kill to have something you already have access to.

It is a very sad legacy, imo. What is done is done though.

We need to work as a team not all for 1 and we're '#1

But we are in this together lets not bloody one another and lets stop pumping smog into Canada

The US isn't a super power it is a desperate child. No amount of desperation and selfishness will change that. Regardless of how many depraved buddies and bullied subjects it has.

Atleast that notion of the US is.

Only Freedom and Cooperation will save America and let it be a member of the global community as a grown up state.

We don't need more tyrants - tyranny is a form of infamy not super and not power - power is for results - the lack of results via tyranny will be destruction and waste of resources. Power is for creating something beneficial not for chaos - chaos is without control. Chaos is not an application but an underlying fundamental aspect of anarchy of the interaction of a community. Only reasonable cause for public benefit is going to maintain anything.

All you are getting with that premise is misguided and goalless selfishness, barely aware of your own base of being outside your own existence.

Answer 2

No, only war. Instead, why not look to our own resources: Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico. Scientists estimate that between the two, there is enough usable oil for the U.S. to be self-reliant for about 150 years. The problem is that tree-huggers are afraid that a few underground pipes are going to drive the Caribu into extinction and oil companies do not want to spend the money to build oil rigs in the ocean when we are getting it so cheap (yes we still have cheap oil compared to the rest of the world) from South America and Canada.

Answer 3

This "nomames" dude is full of crap, women as sex slaves? you got issues. Oh and no i don't think it'll be the best thing to do, i dont think the U.S should keep messing with other countries just for oil, why can't the U.S just do what everyone else does and buy it from other countries? Why does the U.S thinks they can go and take control of things in other countries? Yes U.S is the one of the best country in the world but that doesn't mean it can go every where and try to take other countries stuff. Plus i don't think Chavez would let anyone mess with Venezuela haha so Good luck with that! the guy is nuts!!

Answer 4

Maybe I'm stating the obvious, but that oil doesn't belong to us. We wouldn't be any better than a putrid bunch of filthy pedophile rag heads who attack civilian targets because they come from a culture that to weak, stupid, and cowardice to attack military targets.

Plus, fighting on that many fronts would be insane. Being the strongest nation in the world isn't enough to take the rest of it on; not by a long shot. The two or three strongest countries couldn't do it.

Besides - who would protect South Korea from a full invasion from the North if we start re-allocating troops all over the globe? It sure as hell won't be China, Russia, or India.

Answer 5

Yes, that could be. Adolf Hitler also thought of the exactly the same thing in World War II. He wanted to capture the Baku oilfields of Russia in the Caucasus. This could have realized his dreams of a Thousand-Year Reich. But the Germans have to fight their way to the Caucasus through Stalingrad. And unfortunately, the Germans were defeated at Stalingrad. So, they were not able to take the Caucasus.

Answer 6

And how do you suppose we do that. As soon as one bomb drops on Iran all they have to do is light up there oil wells, and pour millions of gallons of oil in to the Persian gulf, and Caspian Sea. Also I will guarntee you we could not take out all of there artillary, and missiles before they struck oil facilities in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Same thing for Venzuala I am sure MR. Chavez would rather burn his oil fields then see the US get it.

Answer 7

Regardless of what the uniformed may think,
Oil is not the deciding factor on whether or not you're a superpower.
Not only would that be horrbily lacking in any morals or ideals, it's 100% strategically unsound
No matter how slow it is to get here, hybrid cars and solar power plants are coming, obsoleting oil.

Answer 8

It wouldn't guarantee us a good future, but it sure would feel good, jk. It would mean cheaper oil, that's all, and the P.R. pricetag would be too costly. We don't conquer countries because we want to exploit their resources -- we conquer them because they deserve it, like Iraq and Afghanistan. As of 7/30/07, we haven't gotten any free oil from either of them, but their governments are democratic now and their women have been emancipated.
The U.N. would probably whine if we started taking over the world, anyway. Who wants to hear more of their whining?

Answer 9

A lot of good it would us. We haven't built a refinery in over 30 years thanks to the " environmentalists " and do-gooders.

We barely can refine what we have now.

Besides Venezuela and Iran are both heading towards internal revolutions, and should collapse within 5 to 10 years anyway.

Answer 10

You have a comic book idea of american power. The USA is in hock to China and has to take into account the reactions of other countries to its military adventures.
The fiasco in Iraq has destroyed US credibility in the world.