4 ms·

I'm not sure why you are being down-voted. Without oil independence, the US probably wouldn't be enthusiastic to point SA by the finger.

by csomar 6y ago

Chris2048 6y ago
b/c it's a positive spin on the Trump administration; That there may be truth to a dependence on Saudi oil and/or political influence in the greater scope isn't accounted for.
- objektif 6y ago
  What type of greater scope is that? How much oil you think is enough for you to witness chainsaw dismantling of your family?
  - Chris2048 6y ago
    Talking about international relations as if they were people isn't a valid model. Imagine a wild-west world without a common justice system, where the justice you receive is based on the justice you can afford to obtain; that is the resources you have. That is the international world. So, what do we do about SA? refuse to buy oil from them, weakening the US global position and hope that causes less harm than the actions of SA itself? Go to war with SA, payed for in dead American soldiers, and hope that the reputation of the US doesn't suffer as a result, esp as Americas enemies spin the even as another example of American Imperialism / justify their own invasions?
gameswithgo 6y ago
Perhaps some of us feel that the new government is happy to do the right thing even when it isn't economically advantageous
mustacheemperor 6y ago
In addition to the other commenter's suggestion, some people may simply find it reprehensible to defend the sweeping under the rug of a state-sponsored violent chainsaw murder of a WaPo journalist for the sake of realpolitik. Lots of grey comments all over in this thread. Not a very balanced discussion...Or maybe balanced in how much everyone is downvoting one another?
- dmix 6y ago
  I mean they still aren’t really doing anything about it other than US intelligence formally acknowledging it happened. Nothing will fundamentally be different from before today without actual consequences, it was already globally known and well established. The Turks had a wiretap in the murder room! Not much to get upset about. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/us/politics/biden-mbs-khashoggi.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/us/politics/biden-mbs-kha...
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Unfortunately, I don't think we're quite past the point where any comment related to US politics is presumed to be partisan activism for or against the previous administration. Hopefully in a few months it'll have simmered down.
8note 6y ago
The big thing is that that was Obama/Biden's policy with all the fracking
jandrese 6y ago
It doesn't seem to be relevant. The US may have been trying to go energy independent, but their actions towards SA were not indicating that in the least. If anything the administration seemed to be trying to improve relations with oil dictators like MBS and Putin.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  MbS shares interests with his friends in Israel, but those interests are opposed to those of Putin. That's the main reason we fought (and got our asses kicked) in Syria. Fortunately we're fracking now so as soon as we wrest control of the reins of power over our government from Middle Eastern lobbyists we can forget about all those stupid wars we're fighting. So, probably in about a century...
  - jandrese 6y ago
    If we don't want to bake the planet to death we need to transition away from burning oil as an energy source well before the next century. There will still be uses in making plastics and lubricants, but cars and to a lesser extent ships and airplanes need to be getting off of the stuff. Short haul trips can go pure electric, long haul stuff probably needs to switch to biofuels.
    - jessaustin 6y ago
      It seems that pacifists like me and climate people like yourself should be natural allies. Can we agree that USA should not fight wars in the Middle East, since that seems to increase the burning of fossil fuels?

I'm not sure why you are being down-voted. Without oil independence, the US probably wouldn't be enthusiastic to point SA by the finger.

by csomar 6y ago

I'm not sure why you are being down-voted. Without oil independence, the US probably wouldn't be enthusiastic to point SA by the finger.

Chris2048 6y ago

b/c it's a positive spin on the Trump administration; That there may be truth to a dependence on Saudi oil and/or political influence in the greater scope isn't accounted for.

objektif 6y ago
What type of greater scope is that? How much oil you think is enough for you to witness chainsaw dismantling of your family?
- Chris2048 6y ago
  Talking about international relations as if they were people isn't a valid model. Imagine a wild-west world without a common justice system, where the justice you receive is based on the justice you can afford to obtain; that is the resources you have. That is the international world. So, what do we do about SA? refuse to buy oil from them, weakening the US global position and hope that causes less harm than the actions of SA itself? Go to war with SA, payed for in dead American soldiers, and hope that the reputation of the US doesn't suffer as a result, esp as Americas enemies spin the even as another example of American Imperialism / justify their own invasions?

gameswithgo 6y ago

Perhaps some of us feel that the new government is happy to do the right thing even when it isn't economically advantageous

mustacheemperor 6y ago

In addition to the other commenter's suggestion, some people may simply find it reprehensible to defend the sweeping under the rug of a state-sponsored violent chainsaw murder of a WaPo journalist for the sake of realpolitik. Lots of grey comments all over in this thread. Not a very balanced discussion...Or maybe balanced in how much everyone is downvoting one another?

dmix 6y ago
I mean they still aren’t really doing anything about it other than US intelligence formally acknowledging it happened. Nothing will fundamentally be different from before today without actual consequences, it was already globally known and well established. The Turks had a wiretap in the murder room! Not much to get upset about. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/us/politics/biden-mbs-khashoggi.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/26/us/politics/biden-mbs-kha...
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Unfortunately, I don't think we're quite past the point where any comment related to US politics is presumed to be partisan activism for or against the previous administration. Hopefully in a few months it'll have simmered down.

8note 6y ago

The big thing is that that was Obama/Biden's policy with all the fracking

jandrese 6y ago

It doesn't seem to be relevant. The US may have been trying to go energy independent, but their actions towards SA were not indicating that in the least. If anything the administration seemed to be trying to improve relations with oil dictators like MBS and Putin.

jessaustin 6y ago
MbS shares interests with his friends in Israel, but those interests are opposed to those of Putin. That's the main reason we fought (and got our asses kicked) in Syria. Fortunately we're fracking now so as soon as we wrest control of the reins of power over our government from Middle Eastern lobbyists we can forget about all those stupid wars we're fighting. So, probably in about a century...
- jandrese 6y ago
  If we don't want to bake the planet to death we need to transition away from burning oil as an energy source well before the next century. There will still be uses in making plastics and lubricants, but cars and to a lesser extent ships and airplanes need to be getting off of the stuff. Short haul trips can go pure electric, long haul stuff probably needs to switch to biofuels.
  - jessaustin 6y ago
    It seems that pacifists like me and climate people like yourself should be natural allies. Can we agree that USA should not fight wars in the Middle East, since that seems to increase the burning of fossil fuels?