A short-sighted and dangerous decision
Despite the efforts of Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens (R), the US Senate voted down a proposal this week to drill for oil in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, pictured above.
I think this is a massive, massive mistake.
The negative impact that American reliance on Middle Eastern oil barons has on national security is well-documented.
A significant portion of the money that Americans pay to the governments of countries like Saudi Arabia for their oil finds its way into the hands of Wahabbi Islamist preachers as the opulent and corrupt Saudi royal family buys off the clerics. While average Saudis live in poverty and the Saudi leadership lives in luxury, the Wahabbis deflect criticism away from the Saudi government and towards the US and Israel as the root of all of Saudi Arabia's problems. When criticism of domestic governments does come up, the preachers state that it is the US - through military support, CIA activities, government aid and other support - that keeps these regimes in power to keep the oil flowing. (In my view, this latter claim carries a lot of truth.)
With the dollars that are diverted to the Wahabbis, extremist mosques are built and funded, books and literature that preach hatred of all things Western are produced and distributed, and Wahabbist educational academies that focus not on math and science but on fundamentalist Islamic studies are expanded. A lot of these efforts are not limited to the Middle East, as many of these educational materials find their way into Western mosques as well. This process creates the dangerous and destructive belief system which led people like Mohammed Atta to carry out the 9/11 attacks, and also leads born and raised Westerners like the London bombers to get sucked in to extremist and radical Islam.
Without American petro dollars, corrupt Middle Eastern dictators wouldn't have the funds to buy off the Wahabbis and this process would be significantly slowed.
That's why I think that the US needs to become more energy self-sufficient. A way to do this would be to explore resources like those in Alaska. There is nothing more beautiful than a picture of a herd of caribou running across an open plain, but there is nothing more terrifying than the picture of a terrorist attack which was funded, at least in part, by American dollars.
In the interests of national security, I hope that the US Senate rethinks this vote in the future.
posted by Road Hammer @ 8:53 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
I've heard there is little to no oil in this area. Alaska wants federal cash thats why they pushed so hard for it
So American petrol dollars do or do not help fund terror?
I thought a dedicated NYT disciple like you would have already bought into the Friedman argument I outlined hook, line and sinker ... ah yes, but when it comes from a right winger, it's "fear mongering".
Which budget is before Congress that cuts medicaid and student loans?
Damn that Hurricane Katrina and the $29B in reconstruction costs.
Until capitalists discover a new energy source, I think the US gov should take steps to be more energy self-sufficient.
It'll be them that does it before some ass-backwards, government-funded regional development program does.
I point to the economic juggernaut of Cape Breton Island as evidence.
The only innovation that has ever come out of there is shitty pub music about boats with holes in them and fish plant closures.
well said Hammer. Cape Breton's people are amongst the laziest, most dependent on government dime, (majorly Caucasian) citizens of our country. just look at the billions wasted on that island.
I was being facetious and tongue-in-cheek but the bottom line is that it's going to be the private sector, not government, that will come up with alternatives to oil.
Post a Comment
<< Home