America is not addicted to oil. Use of oil as a major energy source is not irrational or unwise. To the contrary, it made rational economic sense, historically at first and afterward, to use plentiful, extremely cheap petroleum. Oil remains the rational first choice. It is a mistake to say that we are addicted to oil, because the word, addicted, implies irrational choice and emotional dependency. Neither of these pertain to our consumption of oil.
We are, however, addicted to many illegal drugs--pot, coke, heroin, meth, and so on. The term, addicted, is here appropriate. Drug addiction is an enormous problem, because it is a major force of social disintegration. A large chunk of our social problems--robbery and violent crime, gang warfare, family destruction, individual ill health--would disappear if we could end the various drug addictions.
We need a moral revolution as large as any of the great moral revolutions of the past, such as anti-slavery and temperance, to destroy drug addiction. Such a revolution is needed to create the culture of life and health that rejects drugs and censures drug use, and to renovate the nation's medical insurance and health industry to deal with mental illness that brings half of all addicts to use drugs in the first place.
Update. April 5, 2006. Reason magazine (38 May 2006, no. 1) has two articles that are relevant to my points. "Peak Oil Panic" by Ronald Bailey debunks the notion that we and other petroleum users are facing a declining reserve of oil. "Speed Misreading" by Jacob Sullum, while debunking the claim that meth use is responsible for most emergency room admissions, does add evidence to the notion that illegal drug use--meth, cocaine, heroin, and pot--is responsible for a great many (percentage unspecified) hospital emergency admissions.