Imminent

Where have we heard this particular word before? It appears in BusinessWeek via Peak Oil:

"It's a huge difference [of opinion] based on a very, very different world view. If you believe that the geological depletion of oil is imminent, then you are looking at $100," he says. "If you don't believe that geological depletion is imminent, you arrive at a different conclusion. And I certainly don't think it's imminent."

Yes, during the build-up to the latest Iraqi conflict, "imminent" use of WMD's by Iraq was bandied about to justify invasion. If we reword to reflect an anti-war outlook:

"It's a huge difference [of opinion] based on a very, very different world view. If you believe that the geological depletion of oil Iraq's use of WMD's is imminent, then you are looking at $100 a terrorism risk," he says. "If you don't believe that geological depletion use of WMD's is imminent, you arrive at a different conclusion. And I certainly don't think it's imminent."

What is so sad about this appropriated conclusion: reasonable if phrased in the context of Iraq, but totally misguided in terms of a global energy outlook. Instead of neo-cons we're now talking about neo-econs, who think market-forces will hold sway. Indeed, much like the curiously held views of PNAC members, many in the classical business environs have an entirely different outlook than geologists, scientists and other astute observers, with the battle royale over the outlook on oil just getting started.

The imminence of WMD use is being replaced by the imminence of oil depletion. To some, 20 years is imminent, while to others, 10 years is not imminent. While we argue over the number of angels on the head of a pin, nature's wells will keep depleting, market forces be damned.