Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Military spending as a big part of Oil subsidies

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Why is it that a big part of Military Spendings are not considered as Oil Subsidies.
I think The US Army wouldn't care at all whats going on in the Middle East and other Oil rich places in the world if the US wouldn't rely on that Oil.
According to wikipedia the Military Budget in 2011 was 668 Billion.
Lets just Assume that only 20% (Im lowballing here) of the spendings are related to stable energy supply and control in these areas.
That still would be around 120 Billion

Not to mention the trade deficit the US has with buying all that oil from Overseas.

So from Macroeconomic point of view each Gallon of Petrol is actually more expensive than it appears to be.
 
Why is it that a big part of Military Spendings are not considered as Oil Subsidies.
I think The US Army wouldn't care at all whats going on in the Middle East and other Oil rich places in the world if the US wouldn't rely on that Oil.
According to wikipedia the Military Budget in 2011 was 668 Billion.
Lets just Assume that only 20% (Im lowballing here) of the spendings are related to stable energy supply and control in these areas.
That still would be around 120 Billion

Not to mention the trade deficit the US has with buying all that oil from Overseas.

So from Macroeconomic point of view each Gallon of Petrol is actually more expensive than it appears to be.


Not really. Unfortunately there is a threat from the Middle East that doesn't have to do with oil, so even with complete oil independence, the Military spending in that region won't change for a long time.

Even today the U.S. only gets about 12% of its oil from Middle East. It sources 73.5% from the Americas, and small amounts from Africa. (Non-America imports would also drop to 0 imports if the keystone pipeline gets built, so careful what you wish for...)
 
Almost nothing the US did with respect to Iraq over the last 25 years worked to maximize the flow of oil. Sanctions on Saddam's Iraq reduced Iraqi oil exports, and both Iraq Wars damaged oil infrastructure heavily, and the anarchy since the second US invasion hasn't helped, either. Iraq's total oil production has only recently returned to the levels of 1990. Saddam would have gladly sold as much oil as he could. So it if US mideast policy over the last 20 years has aimed to maximize oil production and reduce world oil prices, one would have to say it has been a dismal failure.
 
Almost nothing the US did with respect to Iraq over the last 25 years worked to maximize the flow of oil. Sanctions on Saddam's Iraq reduced Iraqi oil exports, and both Iraq Wars damaged oil infrastructure heavily, and the anarchy since the second US invasion hasn't helped, either. Iraq's total oil production has only recently returned to the levels of 1990. Saddam would have gladly sold as much oil as he could. So it if US mideast policy over the last 20 years has aimed to maximize oil production and reduce world oil prices, one would have to say it has been a dismal failure.

The policy was not made to maximize oil production but to ensure dollar hegemony for one of the most used commodities in the world.
 
I agree with TD1, without oil the middle east holds no more interest for us than Africa. We would care but not fight wars. No aircraft carrier task force or fleet would be stationed permanently. Many fewer lives would be lost.
I anticipate the day that nuclear provides the bulk of our energy needs and oil is left for future generations for lubrication and plastics etc.
 
The commonly economic LCA cited figure for military expenditures for oil is between 3 cents to 66 cents per gallon. Caveat is it depends on what you decide to include, and if you include direct or indirect expenditures.
 
Almost nothing the US did with respect to Iraq over the last 25 years worked to maximize the flow of oil. Sanctions on Saddam's Iraq reduced Iraqi oil exports, and both Iraq Wars damaged oil infrastructure heavily, and the anarchy since the second US invasion hasn't helped, either. Iraq's total oil production has only recently returned to the levels of 1990. Saddam would have gladly sold as much oil as he could. So it if US mideast policy over the last 20 years has aimed to maximize oil production and reduce world oil prices, one would have to say it has been a dismal failure.

I completely agree. There are so many people who claim Iraq War was an oil one... But as a matter of fact, ironically congress(or senate) voted down a proposal that would have lead to increased oil production in Alaska right during Iraq War... Voted down over environmental concerns. Oil was the last thing US invaded Iraq over. And btw there are no oil in Afghanistan at all. Or anything, barely any natural resources.
 
U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan

I completely agree. There are so many people who claim Iraq War was an oil one... But as a matter of fact, ironically congress(or senate) voted down a proposal that would have lead to increased oil production in Alaska right during Iraq War... Voted down over environmental concerns. Oil was the last thing US invaded Iraq over. And btw there are no oil in Afghanistan at all. Or anything, barely any natural resources.

According to a report by the NY Times U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan - NYTimes.com the United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”
 
According to a report by the NY Times U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan - NYTimes.com the United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

“There is stunning potential here,” Gen. David H. Petraeus, commander of the United States Central Command, said in an interview on Saturday. “There are a lot of ifs, of course, but I think potentially it is hugely significant.”

Discovered in 2010? And when war started? :wink:
 
Not really. Unfortunately there is a threat from the Middle East that doesn't have to do with oil, so even with complete oil independence, the Military spending in that region won't change for a long time.
Well, not really. Most of the threats from the Middle East (the threat from the nutty government of Israel is an exception) are *entirely* about oil. But in an indirect way...

Oil is one of the main things propping up the dictatorial and unpopular governments of the region. The dictatorial and unpopular governments breed disaffected and angry people. The chummy relationship of the US to the oil dictators, particularly in Saudi Arabia, gives the US a bad reputation. Meanwhile, the dictatorial and unpopular governments spread money from the oil around to their people... which pacifies many, but merely leaves others, such as Mr. Bin Laden, as disaffected and angry *rich* people... and you can see where this is going.

The only straightfoward way to stop this pattern is to get the *entire* world to stop using oil. By making alternatives cheaper.