> >There is a difference between actually cutting off supplies (by
> >blockade or by some other means) and a permanent threat to do so
> >that provides leverage to the US.
>
> The U.S. could, at any time, cut off anyone's oil supplies.
Yes, if the US wants to fight wars on a permanent basis with the rest of the world. Does the US have resources to go to war with China, India or Russia? US can't handle Afghanistan or Iraq.
> Or
> destroy any country completely.
Yes. US can do this, but at what cost and risk? Why would the US deliberately choose high risks/high cost options, if the objective can be achieved by other means? US wouldn't be able to able to destroy Russia militarily without destroying itself.
> So what's so special about
> controlling oil?
US is trying to control various things. Fissile materials, missile technology, access to the US market, financial resources (IMF) etc. The control over oil supply is one more instrument for maintaining a system of domination over allies and potential enemies.
Ulhas