Drill, Baby, Drill!

Gasoline prices are going through the roof. With costs at around four bucks a gallon in many localities, it seems a safe bet that many if not most families are going through hardship simply getting back and forth to necessary places such as work and the grocery store. What, then, is our President doing about it?

Encouraging Saudi Arabia to produce more oil.

Does anyone see the silliness in that approach? Is it not obvious that we are being reduced to pleading with other nations to satisfy our energy needs? If we had done more to encourage production in our own neck of the woods, we might not be in the position of begging for alms.

It takes five to seven years, in many cases, to set up production in domestic oil fields. When you consider areas such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, the time frame may be longer. Does anyone remember that it was the 1990's, under President Clinton, when talk of drilling in the ANWR was first proposed? We could have had access to that oil by now, except that keeping a pristine wilderness for polar bears and caribou (read that: creatures less important the human beings) seems a higher priority than our daily bread. This despite the fact that a very tiny area of the Arctic would have been affected by drilling anyway.

If you want to pressure someone else into increasing production and lowering the price of anything, you need to demonstrate that you have options. Domestic drilling would fit that need. It is high time we began work on it with far greater degree than we have lately. In short, if we want more oil out of the Saudis and other oil producing countries, we must show them that we have alternatives. Otherwise, we will continue to be at their mercy.

Libya and Domestic Drilling

The United States, as well as other nations in the world, are apparently considering military force to restore order in Libya while helping topple the long time government of Moammar Gadhafi. It will be interesting to see how such plans pan out.

Some kind of action may be necessary for humanitarian reasons. At least, that is the view of some supposed humanitarians; but would someone please say, 'Somalia?' Because as noble as it sounds, humanitarian endeavors into areas where government is failing if it exists at all are at least arguably the worst reason to enter into any semblance of war. Say what you will about Afghanistan and Iraq, in those places the US and her Allies were at least facing relatively organized governmental structures. There was and has been a certain order in those theaters of war. Does that exist in Libya anymore?

Is a merely peacekeeping role even possible within an anarchic environment? With overwhelming force, perhaps, but does the situation in Libya merit as much? To be blunt, if we need that nation's oil, yes...but we can and should do what we can to exploit our own domestic oil and wells before we could justify that. Does the Obama Administration have the guts to do that?

For let us be blunt once again: isn't the whole interest of the United States in the Middle East, no matter how justified (and under the current circumstances, we think it is) about oil? About energy? Well, why not exploit our own resources? Until the left allows us to do that (and kindly refrain from those tired calls for alternative energy, as nothing widespread and affordable of that kind will be available for at least a generation), we have little option but to keep a stake in Middle Eastern politics. As such, the blood of any US soldiers and sailors, should intervention occur, must be on the hands of American liberal environmentalists.

We say, increase domestic drilling and let Libya sort herself out. Let the Chinese and Europeans who buy a lot of Libyan oil fret over Libya's internal woes. All that will happen if we intervene at all is that whatever actions we take will be called wrong anyway, even by many within our own borders. It's time to drill our own oil, and let the rest of the world worry about their own energy needs.