Saying the nation is on the verge of technological breakthroughs that would "startle" most Americans, President Bush on Monday outlined his energy proposals to help wean the country off foreign oil.
Less than half the crude oil used by refineries is produced in the United States, while 60 percent comes from foreign nations, Bush said during the first stop on a two-day trip to talk about energy.
Some of these foreign suppliers have "unstable" governments that have fundamental differences with America, he said.
"It creates a national security issue and we're held hostage for energy by foreign nations that may not like us," Bush said
Like I mentioned before when the President spoke of energy in the State of the Union address, I think the President is issuing a warning to those allies who think they can use their oil as leverage over us.
I think the warning is that we can take steps to end that dependence and if you don't cooperate, we can advance that day with additional money for research.
Further, any messing with us now when we are prepared to deal with Iran will be remembered when your country is largely a toxic waste field because the oil you currently sell at high prices will be a cheap component of plastics.
Really, this is the only way this speech makes sense. It isn't directed at our people since prices at the pump and home heating costs are the only thing we are paying attention to--not some distant time a decade or two away.
So will our energy allies play ball when we deal with Iran to avoid the President's implicit threat?
We may find out soon.
UPDATE: So does the Secretary Rice Middle East tour have anything to do with firming up support for action? Egypt for diplomatic support (and no free trade until you cooperate), Saudi Arabia for oil pumping commitments, and the UAE for using our state-of-the-art command center for an Iran strike?
ANOTHER UPDATE: Oops. Scratch the UAE reference. I was thinking of our command center set up in Qatar for the Iraq War.
AND ANOTHER UPDATE: With the President strongly backing the UAE port deal, threatening even a veto over Congressional opposition, I still have to ask what is so important about the UAE to justify this strong defense? Given that Iran is the number one issue of the day and the UAE is just across the Gulf, I suspect there is a link. But I don't know what it is.
ONE MORE UPDATE: The UAE has facilities right across the Gulf from Iran that would be mighty useful:
GEN. PACE: Sir, the military-to-military relationship with the United Arab Emirates is superb. They've got great seaports that are capable of handling, and do, our aircraft carriers. They've got airfields that they allow us to use, and their airspace, their logistics support. They've got a world-class air-to-air training facility that they let us use and cooperate with them in the training of our pilots. In everything that we have asked and work with them on, they have proven to be very, very solid partners.
And the military doesn't seem upset. Granted, the military is looking much more at Iran than our own ports, but with Iran theoretically in our cross hairs, the UAE could be significant and may explain the President's strong defense of the issue. So just what have we asked of them recently?
