[Agamemnon]

You know . . . . that's pretty stupid. Desperate too.

In this world, anyone who wants to buy oil can do so. Can we agree on that?

The USA can't stop that. Can we agree on that?

I'm not exactly sure about that. I don't think North Korea can just buy oil from wherever it wants. Could South Africa during apartheid sanctions access the world's oil markets? I don't recall. I'd disagree, and say that not every state has _equal_ access to oil reserves. Just as in microeconomics, the theory of the system probably doesn't match up with the reality of it.

China's oil imports are up 40% in the last 12 months and a few other supply related issues (strikes in Nigeria and Norway, declining production in Venezuela, leal issues in Russia) has sent prices staggering higher. Can we agree on that?

I'd add lack of confidence in future reserves and production volume, but generally, we could agree on that.

The USA is a slave to oil. Can we agree on that?

Further to that, the USA is a slave to oil and vastly dependent on foreign sources for about 60% of its consumption I think. Can we agree on that?

Definitely.

Since the price of oil is based on a global market, can we agree that removing Chinese demand from the global equation via Sudan supplies would actually decrease demand elsewhere?

I think the author argues that the goal is to obfuscate Chinese development by limiting their access to oil, not to keep the price of oil down, though I may have missed something here.

Can we agree the USA economy would benefit from lower oil prices?

Maybe in the short term, but if world-wide oil prices are low, it gives China a massive advantage as cheap oil fueling their explosive economy would work out very well for them, probably a lot better in ratio than the United States. If the priority is to limit the Chinese from expanding, then lower oil prices, while better for the US economy, might not be better for the US... is what the crazy author might argue.

Can we also agree that China is sniffing around Canadian resource companies as a way to secure supplies as well? And is interested in a fair-sized investment in the Athabasca oil sands?

Can we therefore agree that China's interest in global commondities is just that - global?

Makes sense...

If China wants to develop oil reserves in Sudan, more power to them. If the USA wants to destroy China maybe it should remove it from "most favoured nation status" as a trading partner.

I suppose... though, again, if the priority is to limit Chinese power, it would probably make the most sense to tie the Chinese economy to the US', and make it dependent on US foreign investment and currency, so Most Favored Nation status makes sense from a realist perspective. Keep your enemies close and all that.

I think this author believes it makes perfect sense for the US to, on the one hand, embrace the Chinese economically to interlink the financial institutions (which are modern states lifeblood), and on the other hand do everything to screw around with their global ambitions (like allying w/ Taiwan, stopping the pipeline production, sticking around in Japan, South Korea, the Phillippines, etc.)