Is energy independence the cure for most of the diseased US foreign policy?

Answer 1

Agreed. My impression is the US could have been energy independent a decade ago if it were a priority. Instead, the US energy companies would rather make money from buying wholesale and selling retail to the populace.

Answer 2

No, it would help, but that is not all that ails America. An end to U.S. hegemony would be a huge step in curing their foreign policy, and energy independence would be a part of that. The other major problem the US has is the trade deficit. America can't afford to stop trading with China, however, they won't be able to afford trading with China much longer at the current rate...


Fathead, being at hated by most of the world is usually a sign that a county has terrible foreign policy...

Answer 3

there are different forms of "energy" most people of course refer to petreoleum products but there are others. so i assume you mean the same. one thing people never factor in is that the countries we do buy from is that there whole economy is based on oil production. an entire section of the world going bankrupt sounds like a bad idea to me! what would the saudia arabians do without oil they live in a sand ridden desert with NO other resources. it sounds like a recipe for war. when people go poor they do whatever they can to get out of it, and fight is usually the solution

Answer 4

That's part of it.

The rest is getting the Democrats with a solid hold on the House and the Senate. There will be a Democrat as president and likely it will be Hillary.

Considering the last seven years, that can't be even as close to as bad as it's been.

Answer 5

No, because the security council members would still go on doing what the they need to do to sell weapons to people we don't want to have them.

Answer 6

Your premise is false. You have not proven the existence of any "diseased US foreign policy".