Remember, that Dar al Islam is seeking to force the entire world to submit to Islamic rule. That is, and always has been, a goal of Islam. Most Muslims would agree that Islam will rule the world, and that Muslims should work towards that end (the big disagreement is in how - most reject the idea of using violence to achieve this end).

Now, let's say the US military did not guarantee Gulf Oil. And let's say that Ahmedinijad and the Mullahs who control Iran decided that they really could get us over a barrel - so to speak - if they cut supplies. They'd have the world by the balls, and they know it. The global economy would collapse without oil right now. BILLIONS would die.

So yes, the US needs to become energy independent. No question. Yes, the government should be providing the private sector with every incentive to get there from here as fast as possible (preferably before there isn't any oil left). But no, policy at this time should not be changed. The US military must guarantee the oil flows.

By the way, the article is wrong in assuming that the oil would flow anyway, without US military involvement. You can't prove a negative.

Victory in Pattani

...that the oil won't flow without the U.S. military being involved.  Klare was trying to show that the U.S. military can actually impede the flow of oil.  Militaries are designed to destroy things (a necessary thing to do when faced with another military trying to destroy your country), they are not designed for governing, which is the job of governments, however one may feel about them.  That's why the U.S. has generally dealt with anti-humanitarian dictatorial regimes, like Saudi Arabia, because the Saudis are the ones governing their territory.  Attempting to physically control something as flameable as oil, via military means, sounds pretty risky.

The truth is, the Iranians were attacking oil supplies in the 80s in the gulf. The idea that our guarding them increases the threat is ridiculous. That the invasion of Iraq might have added to the threat is another question altogether. But the invasion of Iraq was not tied to guarding oil supplies.

As for dealing with regimes which are not humanitarian, what's your choice? There is none.

Victory in Pattani