What would the middle east be like?

Joined
Jul 17, 2003
Messages
2,258
Reaction score
0
If there were no oil?

I'm sure big corporate countries (America, GB, etc etc) wouldn't be there. Would there be more or less bloodshed? Is it the religion or the black gold? Thinking about it, I can't imagine there would be as much violence there, but then I think of the Crusades. But that wasn't about oil, it was about dirt.
 
It would be a very old, essentially stable collection of theocratic states.
Perhaps there would have been a couple of limited wars amongst them- or even amalgamation.
 
It would be extremelly poor. In fact it may have been in worse shape than many countries in Africa if it didn't have any oil.
 
Thats true. THe middle east lives off of oil money. They make next to nothing without it so they would be very very poor and living there would be very very hard.

As to if we would be there. It is hard to say. I am guessing we would be over there handing out food and what we can like we have done in other poor countries. There may or may not be more bloodshed due to more crime since they would be poorer. Might be something like somalia in the bad parts.
 
it would be an absolute cesspool. even the richest arab nations are worrying about losing oil.. it is the ONE natural resource they have and effectively the only thing keeping them above the poverty line. we would interact, after the middle east loses its oil, with them as much as we do with any subharan african nation. its just the truth.
 
They'd be poor by our standards, but I think they'd be more of an "old" society.. kind of like japan was pre-dating early 1900's
 
gh0st said:
it would be an absolute cesspool. even the richest arab nations are worrying about losing oil.. it is the ONE natural resource they have and effectively the only thing keeping them above the poverty line. we would interact, after the middle east loses its oil, with them as much as we do with any subharan african nation. its just the truth.

You know something, I actually agree with you on this.
 
Who cares? As soon as Western nations either get fed up with the oil haggling or those nations run out of oil, they're ****ed. They will be stuck so far back, their economies will crumble and there will be massive civil strife as moderate and extremist Muslims battle for control. I suspect there will be a mass emigration from Muslim countries to European ones and cause some turbulence in Europe, much like the U.S. faced during the Civil Rights era.
 
southernman17 said:
Who cares? As soon as Western nations either get fed up with the oil haggling or those nations run out of oil, they're ****ed.

As soon as they run out of oil.. we're all ****ed..

Thats
a good reason to care.
 
bliink said:
As soon as they run out of oil.. we're all ****ed..

Thats
a good reason to care.
unlikely. i would suspect that the oil companies would, seeing their only method of profit dwindling, diversify into other areas of energy... after all, it would be the only way of ensuring the continuity of their industry. whether thats compressed air technology, hydrogen fuel cells, etc, is to be seen.

as soon as they run out of oil, no, its just THEM that are ****ed. it wont be for years and in the meantime it will be hot issue here, and it will get resolved.
 
Well not necessarily bliink, Western nations are developing alternate sources of fuel you know. Do you really think the West is that shortsighted?
 
southernman17 said:
Well not necessarily bliink, Western nations are developing alternate sources of fuel you know. Do you really think the West is that shortsighted?
We've been shortsighted for the last 50 years, only until now have we even begun to really consider oil replacements. Not only that but we are not adopting anything new at a speed that could be considered even half-assed.
 
well mind you, to supply the entire US with renewable enegery, we would have to cover roughly 10% of all of texas with windmills, thats just wind mills of course.
 
Eg. said:
well mind you, to supply the entire US with renewable enegery, we would have to cover roughly 10% of all of texas with windmills, thats just wind mills of course.
Nuclear Fissian, Microwave, Nuclear Fusion (experimental reactors are finally being built after years of useless debate over where to put them), Geothermal, all of these are things that had energy companies concentrated on more in the last 30 years would be far further along than they are now. There is more to "alternative energy" than wind and solar.
 
Eg. said:
well mind you, to supply the entire US with renewable enegery, we would have to cover roughly 10% of all of texas with windmills, thats just wind mills of course.

Shit, that's it? That's can't be right...

If that were true, it would seem that a state would do it, and then sell the energy to the other states... assuming it's legal to do so.
 
Top Secret said:
Shit, that's it? That's can't be right...

If that were true, it would seem that a state would do it, and then sell the energy to the other states... assuming it's legal to do so.
those windmills can only be built in a TINY fraction of the US where the wind conditions are just right. so its not exactly as easy as that. plus they are expensive as shit.
 
The hot air of all the politicians will be our alternative fuel source.
 
For them it's religion, for us it's black gold. But that's an interesting question about what would happen if they had no oil. Let's hope we can find a alternative power solution that we'll actually use.
 
The Mullinator said:
Nuclear Fissian, Microwave, Nuclear Fusion (experimental reactors are finally being built after years of useless debate over where to put them), Geothermal, all of these are things that had energy companies concentrated on more in the last 30 years would be far further along than they are now. There is more to "alternative energy" than wind and solar.

lol.. lets see a fusion generator in your car :p
 
Surely the only reason they're so dependant on oil is because A. it's there and B. it's been in demand for a while now and their economy is pretty much centered around it? I agree with Bliink - if there'd never been any oil there they would be old, quite crap, and pretty stable.
 
I wouldn't get too comfortable with oil. The chances are that these oil companies will invest in future tech, and nothing useful comes out of it.

By useful, I mean an energy source that isn't too much more expensive than oil. Fusion - that'll be expensive in the early stages of development.

It's going to be hard to refine a new energy source cheaply enough to beat oil.

Also, yeah I think the middle-east would be really poor without all the oil. Look at Saudi, Kuwait for example, they've got quite a fistful of dollars, but it's all from oil. And hence, they're our best friends, no matter what they get up to in their free time.

I'm not a fan of these theocracies.
 
**** energy, if we really wanted to we could use alernative energy sources we could easier then most people imagine, they may be a lot more expensive then oil,but it's not something that would hurt us that seriously. Now Oil itself is used in immense amount of materials, pretty much everyting in your house has some ingedients made out of/partly out of oil. Not to mention medicen. And that is what is going to hurt us the most, finding alternatives to that, the alernatives for energy supply are just more expensive, but allredy exist and can be made if necesairy.

My point is that no matter how much more expensive alternate energy sources seem, in the long run it will be far cheaper to switch as soon as possible to alternative energy sources, cause the alternatives for all the other uses of oils are relativly more expensive then alternative energys ources.
 
Without oil, the middle-east would'nt be so well established in the currency of capitalism. Its empire as a whole would be force to consolidate either another resource to bring their region the goods they needed, or remove the practise of acting like spoiled rich boys when they don't get something they want.
 
Back
Top