There are a lot of reasons dedicated bike lanes don't get built in a lot of places and land cost is one of them. To actually connect all the different locations where cyclists need or want to go, municipalities would need to buy tons of privately-owned commercial real estate, very high-dollar real estate, and in most cases would need to demolish existing buildings to make lanes. There just isn't enough open space within cities to connect all the different locales.
Most cities in the US don't seem to have sufficient voting and cycling populati0ns to support the move. In some European cities, in some cultures, cycling has been an accepted means of transport and cars have always been more a privileged item.
But ... in Most European cities, bikes share the road with other vehicles for the same reasons they do in the US---the cost to basically tear down and rebuild most cities to accommodate bicycles in not justified by the number of bicycles which would use the special roads.
By the way ... "countries" do not make cars, companies do. And many European cities which are car-based are not net oil producers, yet still, they have lots of cars and lots of roads.
In fact, other than Denmark and the Low Countries, you'd be hard-pressed to name any nations which have designed and built their transport systems and urban areas around bikes.
Sorry, your politics is not fact-based.