[JohnDenver]

As fuel supplies get tight, OPEC looks at the per capita consumption numbers, and realizes that the U.S. is the problem. They decide to do an intervention on the Big Junky. They reduce output to 50% of its current level, and tell the Americans they need to get their house in order and start conserving, and sign the Kyoto Treaty.

As usual, the Americans go INSANE. It's an act of war. Blood! That's the solution. The American way of life is not negotiable! Rev your monster trucks! Kill OPEC!

These threats are pretty scary for the drug dealer (OPEC), so he decides to defuse the Big Junky by cutting off all supplies. Now the game is on. Can the U.S. subdue OPEC with its army, and secure the oil before it goes into severe withdrawal symptoms? I'm thinking: probably not. Can the U.S. win four or five Iraq's at the same time using only its own production and the SPR (Strategic Petroleum Reserve)? I think they're going to run out of gas before they get enough oil to recover their strength. And if the U.S. even gets close to seizing an OPEC country, the locals can just demolish the oil infrastructure, like lunatics. Blow it into little tiny pieces. The Big Junky's going to be mighty dope sick while he tries to pacify that country. He'll probably pass out, still without a good fix, and be set upon by vicious biting flies.

[Jack]

One possible response might be dispersal of I-131. Or smallpox. Or other things that would prune the existing population. Not that I would ever advocate such draconian measures, of course.

[Doly]

But a dealer would never cut the supply of their main customer, would they?

[Wildwell]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', 'O')ne possible response might be dispersal of I-131. Or smallpox. Or other things that would prune the existing population. Not that I would ever advocate such draconian measures, of course.

[JohnDenver]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', 'B')ut a dealer would never cut the supply of their main customer, would they?

[Wildwell]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', 'B')ut a dealer would never cut the supply of their main customer, would they?

[Permanently_Baffled]

This is the paradox of the resource war option. Everytime there is a war involving a producing country the output drops dramatically (Iraq War, Kuwait War, Iranian revolution etc).

In the past there was spare capacity , but now there isn't. So anymore invasions for oil (or WMDS) will result in a massive price shock which leads to economic shock with undermines the funding of the military etc etc.

What would be ironic is that if a price shock caused by military action caused so much economic damage that oil demand plummeted and the oil that was "secured " by force didn't have a customer! LOL

PB

[Barbara]

I think Iraq is the first and last of oil wars. From now on, I'm sure any producing country put explosives in their wells just in case.
There will be no use to go and try to steal oil by force.

[0mar]

That's what really scares the peeps in power. Their entire scheme can unravel if OPEC decides to cut off the wells.

[katkinkate]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Doly', 'B')ut a dealer would never cut the supply of their main customer, would they?

[sklump]

Actually this is just one of many, many scenarios you can play out in my game, "Peak Oil".

Just such an oil shock served to starve out an ongoing War On Drugs event. Total production declined from 81 to 63 Gb worldwide, that turn.

The game is still too long though to be truly playable by casual gamers.

[Hawkcreek]

--