I believe that if the numbers were looked at, the Persian Gulf would be about as important to our economy today as the Mississippi was in Jefferson's day, and more important than our trade through the Mediterranean that Jefferson went to war over.
We could have lived without the Mississippi of course (and the coast along the Floridas and the West Indies, and the Mediterranean trade)- just as we could get by without the Persian Gulf today- if we were/are willing to make the sacrifices neccessary.
Jefferson (or any Founder) wasn't - 'Paleocons' today seem to be.
Times do change, maybe the 'paleocon' foreign policy will soon replace our traditional aggressively growth-oriented one with a "go along to get along" or "live and let live" one. The planet is getting awful crowded and growth and freedom may suffer from it.
You mean drill on land that is actually in the union? The natural resources are already on our land. More than enough to replace the supply we receive from the Middle East (which is less than 20% of the total supply). So not exactly the 'vital' resource the Mississippi River was to the growth of this nation of states. Must be some other reason we're over there. Since it's not to find WMDs, which didn't exist at the levels originally 'thought', and the latest excuse is to 'spread democracy' sure sounds like the regular neocon cock and bull line to me. Something Jefferson would have disagreed with.