Monday, February 21, 2011

A Crude Awakening

1. When Senator Obama mentioned that the U.S. uses 25% of the world's oil but only produces 2%, he could have been making one of two points, or maybe both points at once! The first implication is that America needs to reduce the amount of oil we use. The second implication is that America should start contributing more to the oil industry from our own lands. He could have also been implying that IF we are to continue using oil at this rate, we need to drill here in America. I think Obama was trying to compel us to reduce our consumption of oil.

2. No, this movie did not change my mind about the drilling in the Arctic. If anything it resolved my belief that doing such would be wrong. If America suddenly comes upon an abundance of oil, what will other countries do to get it? Not to mention that the jobs it would provide would only be temporary and casualties are not unheard of. When the drilling is over all that would be left is destroyed land and decaying equipment. Why ruin something so beautiful when we know we won't be able to get it back in the aftermath?

3. I believe that politicians skip parts of the truth when it comes to oil. For example, an America united against terrorism has a much greater cause (as a whole) to go to war than going to war for oil. There would be to much controversy within the people, and within the House and the Senate to go to war over petrol. If I were running for office, I could gain support and manipulate the public into a direction of my choice by NOT explaining the whole issue. As a politician, I would basically have wealth to gain by not explaining the whole truth.

4. Man, if I lived in a country that didn't use oil and I saw this movie, I'd be both angry and sad for many different reasons. I would be angry that so many nations are taking part in destroying the world I live in, when I'm contributing nothing. And it would make me sad to see such dependence on oil when I had grown up without it and known that it isn't essential to existence.

5. If I were a land owner in Saudi Arabia earning money by selling oil to the U.S., I would probably be angered by watching this film. The film is fairly one sided in it's opinion on the matter and it doesn't much examine the effects the oil industry has on such individuals earning their money from oil. I would be angry that the producers were spreading propaganda that could lose me my lively hood. From my point of view oil would be a good thing. It's what keeps me and my family fed and clothed with a roof over our head.