>>13431749>>13431866One thing to consider is that the US is a net energy exporter (or is close to becoming one) as of 2019:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/imports-and-exports.php. Thanks to fracking (which took off in 2007 - you can see the inflection point of the shale boom in the graph in that link), we produce so much oil that the natgas is sometimes a waste product and it's more profitable to burn it rather than pay the upfront cost to collect it, transport it, and store it, and then sell it for peanuts on the market.
The problem with this is that there's no incentive for Uncle Sam to maintain global supply chains. Our imports as a share of GDP are some of the smallest in the world:
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.IMP.GNFS.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=false. There are only 5 countries here that import less than we do, and three of them are landlocked. And our trade policy has been disconnecting from the system we built in the Cold War (where we essentially paid countries to be our friends) - we went from Bretton Woods to NAFTA, and under Trump we've renegotiated NAFTA to be be even more US-centric (granted Trump says a lot of things, BUT he did go on the record when he threatened to boot Mexico out of the USMCA unless they helped him with his border policies).
This isn't /pol/ so I won't go too far into the politics behind it all but basically at this point I'm summarizing Peter Zeihan's books so you can always read those. All of this is to say that if you are a globalist, and you want to have the country be more dependent on global supply chains, then you want America to be dependent on the rest of the world, and if you want America to be dependent on the rest of the world, then you need to move them from oil, which the US has too much of, to something it needs to import. Rare earths for wind turbines and solar panels is a great example of this because China owns the whole supply (and thanks to Feinstein we sold them ours too).
