The next topic will be - Columbus journeys caused by peak oil?
PeakOil is You
WW II caused by peak oil
Re: WW II caused by peak oil
by Narz » Tue 26 Jun 2007, 22:20:48
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alcassin', 'C')ould you read "Mein Kampf" first? Not everything is beause of oil
The next topic will be - Columbus journeys caused by peak oil?
The next topic will be - Columbus journeys caused by peak oil?
“Seek simplicity but distrust it”
-
Narz - Intermediate Crude
- Posts: 2360
- Joined: Sat 25 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
- Location: the belly of the beast (New Jersey)
Re: WW II caused by peak oil
by Keith_McClary » Thu 11 Oct 2007, 01:50:30
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('waegari', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('agmart', 'H')itler knew about peak oil and sent the German army south to seize the Azeri oil fields because of it.
WW II began on September 1, 1939 in Poland. Quite a detour.
But Hitler also promoted the Volkswagon (people's car). If he were around today it would be an electric car, touted as bringing world peace.
-
Keith_McClary - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 7344
- Joined: Wed 21 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: Suburban tar sands
Re: WW II caused by peak oil
by fluffy » Thu 11 Oct 2007, 03:58:18
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mrflora', 'W')hile Hitler was probably not aware of the Peak Oil Theory, he was well aware of the No Oil Fact - Germany had no domestic source of oil and had to import 100% of its needs.
Of course, Rommel advocated a "southern strategy" of attacking the British in Egypt, capturing the Suez Canal and Saudi Arabia, and advancing northward into Iraq.
Of course, Rommel advocated a "southern strategy" of attacking the British in Egypt, capturing the Suez Canal and Saudi Arabia, and advancing northward into Iraq.
That is one of the scarier 'what-ifs' of WWII.. If Germany had gone all-out against British interests in Africa and the Middle East from late 1940 to early 1942, Hitler would almost certainly have had access to Middle east oilfields, and there would have been no Desert victory for the UK/US because the front would have been shut down. Delaying the attack on Russia until early May 1942, with additional forces built up in the meantime, would have made it interesting indeed..
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mrflora', '
')The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was precipitated by a U.S. embargo on exports to Japan including crude oil (the U.S. supplied 7 out of 8 barrels of oil used by the Allies). The Japanese had a choice of a Northern or a Southern Strategy and chose to go south in order to capture the oilfields of Indonesia. The Japanese could perhaps have scored a strategic victory over the U.S. in the Solomon Islands in late 1942, but elected not to use their most powerful battleships in action because they consumed too much oil.
Regards,
M.R.F.
Tactical victory, yes. From a strategic viewpoint, Japan was never really in the game; the US could always outproduce Japan in terms of Ships, Planes, Tanks, trained pilots, etc (and repair ships much, much faster), so whatever happened in 1941-43, by late 1943-early 1944 Japan would be swamped by US forces. Japan was always 'spending capital' when fighting the pacific war..
-
fluffy - Lignite
- Posts: 289
- Joined: Mon 26 Jul 2004, 03:00:00
- Location: UK
