[NoRoadtrippin]

Mr. Peregrino,

I have read that post as well. And disagree with the principle of most of it on the same grounds. It would take some detail to go through it all though and so I chose not to respond in that thread when it was originally posted.

I agree that America should not place itself at a disadvantage when seeking natural resources. However, I don't think that necessarily corresponds with consumer demand for the newest digital camera or cell phone. I am not lobbying for the government or military to forgo necessary items, I am advocating the idea of responsible consumerism.

As Americans, we have decided it is an "unalienable right" to buy whatever we want, from whoever we want, whenever we want, at the price we want. I disagree with this. I believe in the idea that I have a responsibility to consider my purchases and the message they send. I have a responsibility to consider whether or not my unending demand for the latest and greatest contributes to the oppression of others. Is it a direct and quantifiable connection? Not always. But my overarching idea here is that I am not my number one priority. I serve America in the military because I believe in the idea that there is value in sacrifice. I pay a little more or pass on a purchase for that same reason. Even if it means I have decided it is someone other than an American is more important. They are still people..stupid and weak though they may be.

Ultimately, I am not convinced that many of the conservation arguments would put us at a "handicap." What if we did all buy electric cars? Or had solar farms and wind mills that replaced coal? Yeah, oil and coal may last longer than some liberals want us to believe, and the developing world may use it up even more quickly than we can if given the chance. But wouldn't our national security actually be strengthened by a lack of reliance on so much oil? I mean what if we could treat SWA like we often treat Africa now and we just stayed out of their piddly wars except for those tip of the spear actions now and again? Consolidation of resource needs within our own borders does not place us at a handicap. Global warming is not an element of my argument. Intelligent consideration of the things we rely on to make it through a day is what I am after. If everyone both liberal and conservative ends up happy in the end because we reach the same end through different goals then great, all the better. Let's all get along.

I understand this article is not about that topic so much as the linked thread is, but I think the two are at least related.