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.
And those who advocated building canals and roads in America to connect the interior of the country with the coast- instead of getting involved in foreign wars- were what? 'Neocons'?
Fascinatingly agile words 'paleocon' and 'neocon'. No wonder they attract simple-minded ideologues and their ignorant sheep like a flame does moths!
As an aside, if America had given up our claims to traffic on the Mississppi, as we almost did during the war, the plans to build canals from the Ohio River through Virginia would quite likely have succeeded.
That would have made quite a difference in the War Between the States.
Instead of siding with the Northern states they had developed commercial ties with because of the Erie Canal, the western states would have developed those ties with the South instead.