Now, maybe Bloomberg has idiot editors that don't check these things, but maybe they have checked their facts, and they went with the story because they have confidence in it.
Your irritation and, dare I say, petulance
("Quit grasping at straws and learn to live differently") is misplaced. You have no fucking IDEA how I live, but I can fairly state that I'm more "sustainable" than most.
I saw an interesting article with SOURCED assertions in it, and I posted it. You come at me with an outdated cite from the same publication, all pissed off, like I'm the one who wrote the fucking thing.
For something you want to believe isn't there, it's sure generated a lot of speculation, not the least amongst our old allies over in the sandbox region. Of course, the conspiracy theorists would say the whole thing was a giant ruse to compel the sandbox crowd to play nice for a change, least they find that the new sherriff in town is a less friendly Russian or Chinese one:
http://www.metimes.com/Editorial/2008/04/24/us_in_the_arab_world_a_golden_age/5371/
Assume for a moment that Haroldo Lima, the head of Brazil's National Petroleum Agency, is right in his claim that a new offshore oilfield of some 33 billion barrels has been found under the Atlantic Ocean near Rio de Janeiro. Called the Carioca field, it would be the world's third largest. It follows the discovery last year of the 8 billion barrel Tupi field, also offshore, and in February the finding of a massive new gasfield called Jupiter.
Between them, these two new oilfields contain more than double the known U.S. oil reserves. The U.S. currently imports around 10 million barrels a day, half of it from the Western Hemisphere countries of Canada, Mexico and Venezuela. Assume that the remainder could come from Brazil's new fields, which alone would be sufficient to meet U.S. import needs for over 20 years, and some interesting political implications start to emerge.
If the United States can meet all its energy imports needs from its own hemisphere, what would be the effect on U.S. grand strategy, troop deployments and its current role in the Middle East?
A major part of the rationale for the strong U.S. military presence in the Gulf and in the Arabian Sea would disappear. The need to shore up the friendly governments of the Gulf Cooperation Council against the threat of aggression or radical ideology from Iran would be considerably reduced.
The expense of keeping the entire equipment for an armored brigade and an armored cavalry regiment in vast warehouses in Qatar, ready to drive direct to battle once the troops and tank crews fly in, would become questionable. The four large merchant vessels that sit off the island of Diego Garcia, available for swift replenishment of a U.S. Marine Expeditionary Force, might well go home.
America's Arab allies may be ill-advised to count on the presence of U.S. forces being permanent. America's enemies in the Middle East might foresee a day in which the Great Satan boards his ships and goes home, leaving the region to its fate....If the Americans turn away, and India and China rush in to fill the vacuum and secure their access to oil, the Arab world may yet come to look back on the American era in the region as a golden age.