6 ms·
It's a little bit sickening that so many of these initial comments are joking about the US going to war over the lithium.
by ijustlovemath 4y ago
It's a little bit sickening that so many of these initial comments are joking about the US going to war over the lithium.
- amval 4y agoWhat is the part that sickens you?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- cced 4y agoDo people really have to say that jokes about war which inevitably lead to the death of many in order to have bigger and better phone batteries at a reduced cost is sickening?
- kevviiinn 4y agoHumor is one way of dealing with things we can't control, my guess is that most of those commenters would love to not go to wars every few years. We don't exactly have co from over what the government t does whether we like to believe it or not
- comboy 4y agoYou can't fix the problem by not talking about it. It wasn't an unfortunate natural disaster.
- krapp 4y agoYou can't fix the problem, period, certainly not by talking about it. The internet offers catharsis, not praxis. Americans have no more ability to affect their government's imperial capitalist agenda than they do to command the tides, others outside of the US even less so.
- comboy 4y agoI disagree. I think you are close to the truth, but Iraq war was not seen in a very negative light by US citizens, or people in EU for that matter. Which was what media pushed. But people can think on their own. Somebody in the thread may want to argue that the war was a good or necessary thing, somebody will say otherwise and maybe the first one will check Wikipedia, and learn new facts that may change his mind in the future. Bit idealistic, but if each person can make 2 people more educated, the we have an exponential function.
- beebeepka 4y agoWhat? Only the most disgusting racists were "ok" with the invasion of Iraq, for the sole reason it made brown muslims people hurt
- alluro2 4y agoAll polls closely prior to the attack on Iraq show 55-67% US public support. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_in_the_United_States_on_the_invasion_of_Iraq https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_opinion_in_the_United...
- beebeepka 4y agoNot sure what made you think I was talking about how the US felt about it. They obviously loved it very much. As luck would have it, the US became net exporter just a few years after the conquest
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- panick21_ 4y agoA very large part of this is because of literally outright lies about how Iraq was connected to 9/11. The administration knew that this was the only way they could convince anybody. The hardest part of my job is connecting Iraq to 9/11 - Bush
- cced 4y agoYou're trying to portray people that joke about war as though they are trying to bring a thoughtful discussion. They aren't and you aren't being helpful by muddying the discussion by presenting them as such. These are reddit quality comments that don't belong here.
- galactus 4y agoI think the target of the jokes is the hypocrisy of the ghouls behind those wars, who insist they are about freedom and democracy. No one is laughing at the suffering of the victims.
- lm28469 4y ago> jokes about war It's called history
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoThat we can't have a conversation without derailing the thread into America bad territory.
- RobotToaster 4y agoThe truth is often sickening.
- shmde 4y agoWhere's the lie. Didn't US of A invade Iraq for the sole purpose of oil ?
- chii 4y ago> US going to war over the lithium. there's nothing strange about a country going to war over a resource. Has been happening for a long time in history, and there's no reason that anything in the modern world changed human nature. Except that lithium isn't valuable enough to go to war over at the moment. Now, the threat of being able to develop and fire nukes, on the other hand, is something that might be war-worthy.
- nicoburns 4y ago> there's nothing strange about a country going to war That doesn't make it any less sickening. War is always a travesty.
- echelon 4y agoWe've grown up in our latte sipping bubbles, far removed from geopolitical competition for resources. America's postwar boom years resulted in a hegemon that largely avoided conflict. Now that power is more widely distributed amongst peer competitors, we're going to see the resource hungry animals we evolved as come to the forefront. There will be a great deal of contention, and some of it will be heated. If I had to bet, we'll see more war this century than in the last. Ukraine is just a harbinger of what's to come.
- gpderetta 4y agoTo put your comment in perspective: we had two world wars, such as the world had never seen before, last century.
- echelon 4y agoI wouldn't rule out nuclear exchange this century. We've already had news cycles normalizing the debate over tactical nukes on the battlefield.
- FlyingSnake 4y ago> a hegemon that largely avoided conflict I'm sorry but this ignores the history. Vast swathes of Africa, Latin America and Asia were in conflicts and turmoil, sometimes due to the same hegemon and her allies. The only region that was mostly conflict free in the post WW2 era was Europe and North America.
- fsloth 4y agoIt's not sickening, it's a poignant reflection of history, especially since the current status of Iran was effectively caused by a previous western coup to capture the oil production.
- edflsafoiewq 4y agoThe current state of Iran is a result of the Revolution.
- Namari 4y agoHe must be talking about the Shah of Iran
- fsloth 4y agoYes, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27état Of course it’s hard to say what course history would have taken without this but I fail to see how the current theocracy / securocracy could have had a foothold without it (revolutions always just swap elites).
- edflsafoiewq 4y agoThat was 70 years ago. It has been 44 years since the Shah's government was overthrown in the Revolution. How long will people continue to pretend the entire modern history of Iran is the deterministic result of Western actions? That in the Shah and even in the Revolution, Iran possesses no agency of its own, a passive object only of Western force? But to the point: there is absolutely zero chance of the US going to war to secure lithium reserves. And that is leaving aside, in the first place, the fact we are on the cusp of a Li->Na transition. It is the laziest kind of armchair commentary, pattern matching ("foreign country", "resource", "America liberate") with zero grounding in reality.
- fsloth 4y ago
- josefresco 4y agoWhile it might be sickening, more importantly it's against the guidelines[1] of Hacker News because it does not contribute to the conversation. As a result, I've flagged this thread. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- stiltzkin 4y agoWell it happened before as one Irak. History speaks.