Libya: Is it Really About Oil Again? Yup.

The United States, a traditionally isolationist, non-warlike people, is willing to go to war and slaughter people for no other reason than cheap gas.
Bullshit, you say.  OK, here's my argument:
According to the US Department of Energy:

"Oil is the lifeblood of America's economy.  Currently, it supplies more than 40% of our total energy demands and more than 99% of the fuel we use in our cars and trucks." 

  War is legal when it is in self-defense.  None of our wars has ever been started in self defense. OK, maybe Pearl Harbor was our justification for declaring war on Japan. So that's a maybe, but Japan was never in a position to seriously threaten our mainland.
  Technically, wars are now also legal if they are carried out according to a UN resolution. But let's look at the UN. Every country is a member, but the UN security council is the group that votes on war resolutions, and the USA and its best friends UK and France are permanent members of the security council with veto power.  So UN resolutions are not exactly voted on by every country in the world democratically.
  That being said, the 2003 Iraq war wasn't even approved by the UN security council. Nor are the many military actions undertaken by the CIA and covert military forces in, say, Pakistan.  We also introduced a computer virus called Stuxnet into Iran's nuclear power plants at Natanz last year. We interfere in South America and Africa.  All without UN approval.
  Bottom line: we as a people are willing to break international law and routinely use deadly force to keep gas cheap.  America.  Fuck yeah!

  Think about it - since gas prices have gone up lately, opposition among American voters to the war in Afghanistan has plummeted:

and

  Notice the last rise in gas prices in the bottom chart since Jan 2009, right after the big dip. Now add on another level and a half on that chart, because the average price as of this writing is $3.79.  In Chicago they have busted through $4 and headed to 5. 

  My point is that we know, in our heart of hearts, that our country wages war to artificially drive down the price of gas. And we are so far pretty OK with that.  And that sucks. 

  See, as long as we were getting cheap gas, war was considered a necessary evil.  Now that we're starting to see European style market prices for gas, the wars aren't worth it.

  So wrong, on so many levels. 

  The best thing to ever happen to this country would be a serious disruption in oil supplies and $50-75 a gallon gas. Then we would take the problem seriously, create an alternative energy and transportation infrastructure, and stop waging war for oil. We'd be walking, biking, pooling, tele-commuting - the thing about us is we are wildly creative and love to solve problems with new tech and innovative ideas. 

  Many think this will happen after a looming catastrophe, like peak oil, middle east unrest, the rise of BRIC powers, currency devaluation or whatever. Why not just start with the solution now?  Instead of subsidizing oil exploration, subsidize electric cars. Instead of paying Israel and Egypt $3 billion a year each to not fight each other, fuck em - spend that $6 billion on mass transit and a smarter grid.

  Don't wait for politicians, guys.  Politically speaking, it's easier to keep the oil game going.  Remember,  a disruption in oil supply affects 40% of our economy and probably 90% of the immediate transportation needs of every voter in America. Check this out, from the Dept of Energy (some of these disruptions took down presidents):

Global Oil Supply Disruptions Since 1951

Interesting list - it was hard to paste it into this post so click here if it's hard to read -  most disruptions due to populist uprisings (eek!), some due to war with Israel (oy!), and others due to civil wars and regular war. The oil embargo in 1973 caused economic "stagflation" and really hurt Nixon, the Iranian revolution sank Jimmy Carter, and Iraq was GW Bush's downfall. Oil disruptions are political Ebola.   
  Now, Obama says the justification for the war in Libya is protecting American commerce.  By which he means oil.  What the hell else does any of us buy from Libya??  According to the CIA world fact book, its exports are: crude oil, refined petroleum products, natural gas, chemicals.  We are not one of its top 5 trading partners. It exports only 5-6% of its goods to us, and US goods are less than 4% of Libya's imports. So it's oil, guys.  They don't make Playstations or IKEA furniture.
  Do you really buy into the excuse that Col. Gaddafi was going to bomb Charlotte or whatever? Show us the intel, Mr President, Mrs. Clinton. Or at least leak it to Julian Assange or something.
  Regardless of the motivation, I am ashamed of Obama for not letting the whole Congress vote on the incursion into Libya.  I would like for him and the nation to see how a growing coalition of conservatives and liberals (like Reps. Kucinich and Ron Paul) are against all this foreign intervention just to keep oil prices stable. Showing a less than unanimous vote on CSPAN for the war would encourage people to take sides.  People need to be able to believe in a sustainable future without oil and war without being labelled unpatriotic.

catch the fever