I would have to say that Japan was an ally of Great Britain, before the US entered the war. Our president Woodrow Wilson was a racist SOB who had no love for Japan and no desire to reward Japan for its role in the victory.
Those are excuses for, not the actual reasons.... They used that as an excuse for their concurring actions, but that doesn't change the fact that the real reason Japan went to war was over their need for energy(OIL).
We had no need for oil at the time... we had more than enough and we naively believed that it was essentially limitless.
Sorry that you feel slighted by it... it wasn't meant for a response and it isn't politically motivated... it was factual and I have no allegiance to any politician... because not a single one is or will be worth it. I am being about as apolitical as one can get.
Wars don't start because of resources... they are simply used to arouse support. Wars are started by leaders that seek dominion over others, period. Self-defense, or the defense of another, is the only rational act in war.
Not true. The Peak Oil "experts" claimed that the world was running out of oil. For example, the Bureau of Mines reported in 1914 that US oil reserves would be exhausted by 1924. And in 1939, the Interior Department said global reserves would only last 13 years. (They were all wrong, and they still are.)
I actually went to a job info session with Schlumberger a couple years ago. Oilfield consulting and management services company for those who don't know. During the session some dude asked the recruiter about Schlumberger's plans for the future if oil is a finite resource, and the recruiter just smiled and said they're definitely planning like it is. My view - if you see a sudden jump in the petroleum industry's investment in alternative energy...be worried
That makes me sad, because historically OKC was the low price point for diesel anytime I travelled out west. I'd stop on the way out and stop in OKC on the way back, usually at one of the mega truck stops that line the outskirts of the metro area.Well, RUG dropped below 3.00 here.
That was the opinion of some people, that didn't make it the sentiment of everyone. I know that exploration in Indiana yielded petroleum with natural gas resources (which is often the case). And they thought things were so plentiful that they had an eternal torch of gas that they burned because it was awe inspiring. The thing was huge. They depleted the NG well in just a few years (flambeau is the name of the torch).
Is it the few large U.S. based oil companies that have over 75% of their operations in other countries or is it the largest oil companies like PDVSA, PMEX, Saudi Refining, Lukoil, etc, etc and others that are the dominant oil companies in the world? 
A pejorative term for the 6 major oil (petroleum) companies. These companies are ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, and Total S.A.I constantly see references to "big oil" on this site and wonder what the folks are referring to.
Three of which are foreign companies and the other three have majority operations outside of the U.S. As we all know, really BIG OIL are the ones I mentioned previously (along with other I did not reference) Glad you defined it so precisely...
Peak Oil is not subjective -- the amount of global oil resources varies according to the price of oil. The higher the price, there more oil there is that can be recovered.
Exactly. How much oil is feasibly recoverable is based on the cost-basis that would be required to recover it. If oil is only selling for $90 barrel, it doesn't make sense to recover oil that costs $90+ at the point of refinement, and actually even lower costs still wouldn't make sense until you can overcome the risk of non-recovering, poor quality, and room for profit (at this point, it is an "economic profit," at a precise definition, meaning oil is a commodity and there isn't much room for profit... just enough that individuals receive the minimal benefit for their investment dollar to enter that environment).
The Venezuelan oil industry is in big trouble, because the government has not invested in any aspect of oil production or refining. The only reason it still has an industry is because of investments made by privately owned companies before they were nationalized.
I will not comment on the current health of the Venezuelan oil companies but I will say that they have been investing in oil production and drilling. how do I know this? PDVSA purchased a huge number of compressors from my company to build new FPSO vessels used for production of oil and gas. so to say they have zero investment is not true. just saying.
Zero investment may not be correct but it has been on the news over the last month that the profits and money intended for raises of the state run oil company were being used for campaigning for Vascez's return to office.
