# Carter Doctrine



## Phoenix15 (Jan 16, 2020)

civilian energy trader here - proper intro has been completed and I've been a long time lurker. Won't be offended if thread is inappropriate/off topic and subsequently deleted (not that the Mods GAF about my feelings anyway).

In 2020 the United States is set to meet domestic demand and even export some oil for the first time in over 70 years. 

How do servicemen feel about the Carter Doctrine? 
Is it even possible for the USA to untangle our web of oil related alliances across the ME?
What would our footprint in the ME look like if we ONLY had forces deployed for anti-terror intel and operations?


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 16, 2020)

What is the Carter doctrine?


----------



## Steve1839 (Jan 16, 2020)

Unilaterally, we'd be okay without ME oil...for awhile...if the anti-frackers get their way, U S energy independence could be short lived.  From a multi-lateral perspective, some of our major allies and trade partners are more reliant on those resources, so I'm thinking we're kinda stuck there.


----------



## Steve1839 (Jan 16, 2020)

DA SWO said:


> What is the Carter doctrine?


I'm a nutshell, the Carter Doctrine states that we will use military force to prevent any nation from achieving hegemony in the Persian Gulf region...this doctrine was largely spurred by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, among other events


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jan 16, 2020)

Steve1839 said:


> I'm a nutshell, the Carter Doctrine states that we will use military force to prevent any nation from achieving hegemony in the Persian Gulf region...this doctrine was largely spurred by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, among other events


Not sure if DA SWO is trolling me... but anyways yes, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan helped spur the Carter Doctrine but I believe it’s main catalyst was the energy crisis of the 70’s.... 

I imagine if you’re trying to pass legislation binding our military to action in that time period you might as well throw in elements of the Cold War. 

If main element of Carter Doctrine was repelling Soviet expansion wouldn’t we have stepped back from the ME in the 90’s?


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jan 17, 2020)

Should’ve made this clear. I don’t trade crude oil so I’m not here to make a quick buck. I trade elecectricty for a utility. Genuinely interested in your opinions and there’s nothing for me to personally gain financially from shared opinions


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 17, 2020)

Phoenix15 said:


> Should’ve made this clear. I don’t trade crude oil so I’m not here to make a quick buck. I trade elecectricty for a utility. Genuinely interested in your opinions and there’s nothing for me to personally gain financially from shared opinions



I don't think anyone is worried about that. I think we're probably all fine with this conversation.

Going back to the original question, I don't think you're going to find a lot of people here who have a lot of familiarity with the Carter Doctrine.  I had to look it up after you posted about it.


----------



## Gunz (Jan 17, 2020)

Carter's "Doctrine" got lost in the avalanche of screaming front-page news and constant TV coverage of the Iranian Hostage Crises, that 444-day ordeal that consumed everybody's attention. The only doctrine most of us in the military at the time wanted to hear about was the release of the hostages and _please_ let's bomb the fuck out of Iran.

It was an extremely frustrating and angry time--especially after the Eagle Claw abort--and if you'd lived through it you'd understand why nobody really gave a shit about much of anything except the hostages.

I heard his 1980 SOTU and don't remember it.  At the time of that speech, Carter was hamstrung by the hostage crisis, the energy crisis and jolted by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. He was perceived as weak, ineffectual. The Doctrine was his attempt to reverse that perception, to take a hard line when everything seemed to be unravelling.

But it was just more weak tea.


----------



## Devildoc (Jan 17, 2020)

The Carter Doctrine was just one policy in a line of a million policies that underscore just how hypocritical the United States has been in its short history, we claim to not be imperialist, but all of these doctrines, all these policies, really are there to protect American interests and give us a theoretical foothold to control or enforce policy in a specific geopolitical region.

I get we need oil. I get we need energy. But honestly we could forgo that entire region and be energy independent. That is now, that certainly was not the case when Carter was president.

But the Carter Doctrine just put to paper what the US policy has been since World War 1 regards to American interests in the Middle East and making sure we had access to oil.


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jan 17, 2020)

I was born in 94 so I didn’t live through the TV screaming for 444 days. Makes sense that the energy crisis would play second fiddle to the human element. Sounds like Carter was ACTUALLY ineffectual and history makes it sounds like Eagle Claw alone ensured he didn’t get re-elected. 

Devil Doc I’d say our real interest in protecting oil supply began with Roosevelt meeting King Whatever in the Suez Canal in ‘44 but that doesn’t matter now. 

So if we take energy out of the equation, is our ME footprint just protect Israel and perform counter terror ops across the region? 
Can we finally abandon the house of Saud? How many years would it take to do that? 5? 10?


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jan 17, 2020)

Steve1839 hit true equation: if we step out and the Saudis and Iranians go at it, how much does that disrupt global oil supply and can the US and Western allies stomach the higher prices... very hard to estimate. 

Interesting side note: the East Asian countries are much more reliant on ME Oil now than US and Europe. China is worried (fuck em) and so is Japan. the Japanese just changed their constitution to allow deployment of forces abroad. Guess where they’re going?


----------



## Box (Jan 17, 2020)

Carter didn't even follow Carter Doctrine.   If he really believed in it - and subsequently employed the Carter Doctrine against our "foes" in the middle east, James Earl Carter's second term would have been infinitely more productive than it was.

Hell, the CIA gutted itself under his watch.   Carter held such disdain for the CIA getting to have secrets that his gutting of the CIA human intelligence capabilities could arguably be blamed for "blind spots" in the middle east that prevented us from seeing 9/11 being planned.


----------



## Brill (Jan 18, 2020)

Phoenix15 said:


> I was born in 94 so I didn’t live through the TV screaming for 444 days.



That was how I got addicted to news: Iranian hostage crisis.






2016 election and last three years of “news” Scared me Straight. Now I mock the media...and those that believe the BS...as I once did.


----------



## digrar (Jan 18, 2020)

lindy said:


> That was how I got addicted to news: Iranian hostage crisis.



Desert Storm for me.


----------



## Phoenix15 (Jan 22, 2020)

Box said:


> Carter didn't even follow Carter Doctrine.   If he really believed in it - and subsequently employed the Carter Doctrine against our "foes" in the middle east, James Earl Carter's second term would have been infinitely more productive than it was.
> 
> Hell, the CIA gutted itself under his watch.   Carter held such disdain for the CIA getting to have secrets that his gutting of the CIA human intelligence capabilities could arguably be blamed for "blind spots" in the middle east that prevented us from seeing 9/11 being planned.


out of ignorance for common timelines for policy deployment, how long does it take for those wheels to get turning? could Carter have even truly employed the Carter Doctrine during his administration?


----------



## Devildoc (Jan 22, 2020)

Box said:


> Carter didn't even follow Carter Doctrine.   If he really believed in it - and subsequently employed the Carter Doctrine against our "foes" in the middle east, James Earl Carter's second term would have been infinitely more productive than it was.
> 
> Hell, the CIA gutted itself under his watch.   Carter held such disdain for the CIA getting to have secrets that his gutting of the CIA human intelligence capabilities could arguably be blamed for "blind spots" in the middle east that prevented us from seeing 9/11 being planned.



The Church Committee single-handedly decimated our HUMINT capabilities and put this country back at least 30 years.  But the committee did the lion's share of the dirty work before Carter was president.  That said, Carter gave that engine gas, though, as he gutted the intel community.  

I was 9-13 when he was president, and I remember the oil/energy crisis, the hostages in Iran, all of it.  My wife likes him not politically but because of the humanitarian he is.  Me, I don't give two fucks for him.  I don't care if he _IS_ a Christian, he's also a snively arrogant ass whose presidency is widely seen as an abject failure.


----------



## Gunz (Jan 22, 2020)

Phoenix15 said:


> out of ignorance for common timelines for policy deployment, how long does it take for those wheels to get turning? could Carter have even truly employed the Carter Doctrine during his administration?



The Carter Doctrine was announced during his 1980 SOTU. He had a year left in office. If the Soviets had encroached US interests in the ME, he would've had to back up the rhetoric. As it happened, they didn't, at least not overtly, so he was never tested. I don't think he would've handled it well.


----------

