Enough fuel for the troops? Enough defense spending for the commanders?
I tend to think that the American military/intelligence world scares easily. Then overreacts. So what to think when last April they announced another major threat to the country and its defenses?
“Surplus oil production capacity could entirely disappear, and as early as 2015, the shortfall in output could reach nearly 10 million barrels/day.”
“A severe energy crunch is inevitable without a massive expansion of production and refining capacity.”
So are we likely to see that massive expansion?
“Assuming the most optimistic scenario for improved production through enhanced recovery, the development of non-conventional oils (oil shales or tar sands) and new discoveries, petroleum production will be hard pressed to meet the expected future demand.”
The military runs on petroleum.
“The implications for future conflict are ominous . . . should states see the need to militarily secure dwindling energy resources. Another potential effect of an energy crunch could be a prolonged U.S. recession which could lead to deep cuts in defense spending . Commanders could then find their capabilities diminished at the moment they may have to undertake increasingly dangerous missions. Should that happen, adaptability would require . . . the willingness to recognize and acknowledge the limitations of America’s military forces.”
Scare tactics? A call to protect defense spending? Maybe. But these conclusions from the US Joint Forces Command 2010 planning document echo what we’re hearing from all those groups who don’t consider they have common cause with the Pentagon.