That theory of letting the others deplete their resources has been the mantra for many administrations but it's not working because technology keeps improving with drilling and refining to make that a mute point.
[...]
As far as your thoughts about getting totally off fossil fuels, it can't happen unless there are some batteries that haven't been developed yet. Vehicles and aircraft need to move at night. Military units need a common fuel that allows 100% reliability to operate. They can't stop operations if the sun isn't shining for days at a time and a wind generator isn't possible in the size needed.
The US is in the forefront of oil and gas technology.
I'm not even disagreeing with you on either point, but I think I might be looking further out past my lifetime. In a couple posts earlier I've mentioned that we are definitely not ready for a complete cutover for two reasons --- efficiency of generation and, to your point, the storage capability. They go hand in hand because even if we can store it and run off it for a period, the generation side has to be able to pump the battery back up before the next "on battery" period. Again, why I think have nuclear as a baseload make sense. I'd have to look the numbers up before I feel like I could say it with authority, but I think even now with the advances in O&G nuclear is still a cleaner source. Cost might be higher though because it does get more regulations since "it's so scary".
To your other point, I don't disagree there. I just would rather us be at the forefront of oil and gas technology AND be at the forefront of renewables. Seems like we don't have to be one or the other.