The definitive history of the role of oil in modern warfare has not been written, but a lot can be learned from Robert Zubrin’s new book, Energy Victory.
“For nearly a century,” Zubrin writes, “control of oil has been the decisive factor determining victory or defeat in the struggle for world dominance.” That was true in World War I and World War II. Zubrin believes oil will be pivotal in the global conflict now underway as well.
In 1914, the United States was responsible for 67 percent of worldwide oil production. When war broke out in Europe, the Germans used U-boats in an attempt to stop America from sending oil to France and Britain. Worried that he would not have enough fuel for the trucks needed to move his troops, French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau declared: “Gasoline is as vital as blood in the coming battles.”
President Woodrow Wilson did manage to get American oil convoys safely across the Atlantic. “The crack German infantry were as tough as they come,” Zubrin writes, “but there was no way they could cope with a new army equipped with fleets of rampaging gasoline-powered land battleships and assisted by unmatched swarms of fighter aircraft.” At a victory banquet in London on Nov. 18, 1918, Lord Curzon declared: “The Allied cause had floated to victory upon a wave of oil.”
Hitler learned from the Kaiser’s mistakes. A few decades later he had tanks – Panzers, in need of large quantities of fuel to blitz France, Poland and other corners of Europe. Nazi fuel requirements expanded further following the invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. With that in mind, the Germans set their sights on Baku, the heart of the Soviet oil industry. “Unless we get the Baku oil,” Hitler said, “the war is lost.” They didn’t and it was.
Erwin Rommel’s fabled Afrika Korps was crippled by fuel shortages and prevented by Allied troops from capturing the then-underutilized oil fields of the Middle East. By 1944, Zubrin recounts, though the Nazis produced tens of thousands of aircraft and tanks, “they were nearly all useless due to lack of fuel.”
In the Battle of the Bulge, thirst for oil led the Nazis to try to capture American gasoline supplies in eastern Belgium. A Panzer assault was foiled when American soldiers blew up bridges and set drums of oil ablaze to create a screen of fire and smoke. Before long, the Panzers literally ran out of gas. American aircraft destroyed them where they parked.
Oil was no less pivotal in the Pacific theater. In the 1930s, the growing Japanese empire was in dire need of petroleum resources, the closest of which were in Southeast Asia. When the Japanese invaded Indochina, the U.S. responded by declaring an oil embargo against Japan.
After Pearl Harbor, American submarines in the Pacific made Japanese oil tankers their priority, second only to aircraft carriers. Fuel shortages prevented Japan from training pilots adequately. One result, Zubrin says, was the “Great Marianas Turkey Shoot” in which the Japanese lost 273 planes. The U.S. lost 29. The reason the Americans prevailed in the crucial Battle of Leyte Gulf — despite the Japanese battleships' “hundredfold advantage in firepower and armor” over the screen of destroyers protecting the U.S. troopships — appears to have been that the imperial fleet ran short of fuel.
Since World War II, oil production has increasingly shifted to the Middle East. Today, Iran’s oil wealth is being used to finance terrorism and build nuclear weapons (whatever the most recent intelligence estimate claims). Arabia’s oil is being used to spread the Saudis’ supremacist and virulently anti-Western ideology. We give the Islamists money; they give us petroleum — and Osama bin Laden, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the hijackers of 9/11. Some bargain.
The problem is we can use nothing but oil to fill the tanks of our cars and trucks. The solution is diversity – creating a variety of fuel choices. The quickest way to achieve that, Zubrin argues, is simply by mandating that all new cars be Flexible Fuel Vehicles. Entrepreneurs will then compete feverishly to make alternative fuels available.
The definitive history of the role of oil in modern warfare has not been written. But then, we don’t yet know how the story ends. We do know this: Since the Iranian revolution of 1979, Islamism and terrorism have proliferated, as has America’s dependence on a uniquely strategic commodity controlled by regimes whose ultimate goal is “Death to America!” Few of our elected leaders appear to grasp this. Fewer still have proposed any serious steps in response.
Did you know oil and wars have always been linked?classical music
While there are some accurate points there are some inaccurate points as well, especially concerning the WW2 pacific theater. The Great Marianas Turkey Shoot, was a result of how Japanese trained their pilots, not fuel. Poor air tactics along with an inadequate training system that wasn't suited for war caused the problem, not oil.
During the battle of Leyte Gulf, if Zubrin had studied that he would have found that while the Japanese battleships held an advantage, the ammo used wasn't the correct ammo. The battleships were firing armor piercing rounds, as a result these round went right though the American ships causing less damage than a high explosive round would have. Against a cruiser of battleships these rounds would have done a lot more damage. Kurita, the Japanese commander, had already been attacked by massive air power losing one battleship, the Musashi, before the engagement even began. He already thought the plan was a failure and retreated early.
As for that last part, I think you should look closely at what is going on right now. Like it or not Bush is trying to do something about that. Think of what it would mean to have a country, like Iraq, that holds oil and isn't anti-American.
I do disagree with the conclusion of Zubrin for WW1. Germany was already breaking trench warfare without tanks. The real turning point wasn't tanks, or even planes, but a new mass influx of manpower by the USA. That was the one thing that Germany feared the most.
Many authors like this are good at picking out certain facts, while ignoring others that are just as critical. Do a bit of research and you'll find not everything is what he claims.
BTW, what about Vietnam? Kosovo? North Korea? Afghanistan (by Russia)? Cuban Missile Crisis? Congo Civil War?
War and oil will be linked (only because it’s now what we use for our war machines) but it's only a small part of what causes war.
I see religious tension in the Middle East between Israel and Iran a much greater concern for the next major war than oil.
Did you know oil and wars have always been linked?ms stress opera theater
I read the answers of all the others that responded, and while I agree that all war in mans history has not been tied to oil I will say that since WWI oil has been the deciding factor. Not only that but I would state that if things continue at current rates, oil will be the new reason for wars, instead to being merely the factor that determines the winner of such wars. Obviously, this is simplifying things, as we all know that there are other factors involved in why nations go to war, but at this point and time in history, oil is the tie that binds most if not all of those other factors. I totally disagree with the idea that flex fuel vehicles are the answer, as you will only be trading one combustible for another and will in the end only further entangle peoples daily lives with the true problem which is not oil per say, but energy. You would, regardless of statement to the contrary, cut into world food supplies in a manner that would guarantee war even faster than oil itself ever could. I agree that alternative need to be developed, yet I believe that the answer in the very short term is a better use of current sources until the next technology is perfected. For example, we need better utilize our solar, wind, hydroelectric, natural gas and nuclear power in a manner that drastically cuts our dependence on oil be it foreign or domestic.
until the Volstead act cars ran on Alcohol or gas, Rockefeller paid the temperance league 4 million dollars to get manufacture and sale Alcohol outlawed, after a few years when all cars had to buy gas, Volstead act is repealed, big oil reaps a huge profit, off what was a useless flammable by product of fuel oil production. Big Oil has been corrupting politics since Tea Pot Dome...
Avatar.....it cuts into food only if you think Corn is a food and pursue corn...corn yields only 200 gal. per acre other crops such as sugar yield 2000 per acre, do not recite supposed fact from oil companies research ie. American petrol institute. these are viable and it must be persued in the next few years or asap.
The problem is we can use nothing but oil to fill the tanks of our cars and trucks. The solution is diversity – creating a variety of fuel choices. The quickest way to achieve that, Zubrin argues, is simply by mandating that all new cars be Flexible Fuel Vehicles. Entrepreneurs will then compete feverishly to make alternative fuels available.
Oil wasn't the only US product the Germans tried to stop us from sending.
Wow! was there even a question in there anywhere?
Don't forget to throw RELIGION in the link.
Yes, I know. No War for Oil!
Whoa I thought we fought the British over tea. Now you tell me it was oil,, Dang and it wasn't states rights or slavery, it was oil. Dog I never knew!
"always"?
Nope, that is definitely NOT true.
duh, it's not just oil, war has (until recently) been fought for some sort of economic or strategic advantage. oil, land, political standing, crops, slaves, etc.... there are so many reasons for the beginning of wars through history, one example is Japan in WW2. the home islands are small, crowded, mountainous, and devoid of most natural and strategic resources, which is why Japan invaded China, Korea, Taiwan, the (oil-rich) dutch East Indies, etc.
bottom-line, you make a valid point; but this point has been made before, multiple times. it's nothing new, and it shouldn't surprise most people.
No comments:
Post a Comment