16 ms·

That's it? Momentary gasoline price is all that matters now? Not geopolitical interests, alliances, _Doing The Right Thing_? If that's the only angle you care a

• ericmay 7mo ago
  Plus if gas prices rise more people might switch to EVs, drive less often, and/or hopefully begin to understand the fragility of our car-only infrastructure and mandatory car ownership and demand better urban planning and transportation options.
  • debo_ 7mo ago
    We had a version of this called "carbon pricing" that didn't involve wanton murder.
  • skeeter2020 7mo ago
    Can't wait to get my new iPhone shipped here on an electric cargo ship, and it shouldn't be too much more expensive for my food transported by a fleet of electric semis and trains. Totally worth exploding billions of ordnance and killing a few thousand people!
• lukan 7mo ago
  Oh, now worries, I can take my bicycle or train whenever possible (like right now). And since I am european, I do not just worry about gasoline, but also that the US actually might attack us at some point, Trump did threaten again over greenland and the last time - it was not just words, danish troops took it serious and were ready to shoot. "https://www.euractiv.com/news/denmark-considered-destroying-greenland-runways-amid-fears-of-us-attack/ https://www.euractiv.com/news/denmark-considered-destroying-..." Unpleasant if this escalates. Also, the gasoline prices are only "momentary" up, if the whole area does not burst into flames. Then it doesn't matter if the trait is closed, as no more oil is being produced. The only bright side is, this is a great push for renewables.
  • flyinglizard 7mo ago
    Since WWII you're living under the umbrella of the US, as client states. There was no reason Europe could not amass a significant military power that would grant its sovereignty, but money went to increasing quality of life instead. Trump the 45th even implored EU to do so and bolster NATO.
    • RealityVoid 7mo ago
      That's rich, the guy threatening the existence of NATO more than any other factor is trying to bolster NATO. I struggle to imagine how you square this in your mind.
      • y-curious 7mo ago
        You don’t think that the person you’re replying to is Donald Trump, do you? He’s not wrong even though I can see why amassing independent defense didn’t feel necessary all this time
        • RealityVoid 7mo ago
          > You don’t think that the person you’re replying to is Donald Trump, do you? I'm confused how this interpretation could ever come about. No, I mean his point about "Trump trying to bolster NATO" is comic, as Trump is actively weakening NATO, no matter his stated goals wrt. improving funding and having member states "carry their load". _Especially_ his threats to Greenland and Canada, for no apparent reason. It's really mind-boggling. Perhaps my fault, since I expect mental consistency from post-truth populists and authoritarians.
          • jfengel 7mo ago
            Turns out consistency is overrated. We talk as if it's a bare minimum, but there isn't actually any penalty for violating it. We've still got some kind of karmic notion that inconsistency is bad for you in the long run. Maybe it is, but that run keeps getting longer and longer.
• jchip303 7mo ago
  [dead]
• RealityVoid 7mo ago
  None of which is being handled by the current admin with a modicum of professionalism or competency, so I guess at times you just have to pick _one_ from the laundry list of complaints here.
• malfist 7mo ago
  What part of "doing the right thing" is bombing an all girls school?
  • flyinglizard 7mo ago
    Do you think some evil military planners sat in the Pentagon, saw that school, said "let's shoot at it for shits and giggles" and pressed the button? Or are you trying to pollute a grown up conversation with sensationalism and punchy hooks? In reality someone made a mistake. It can happen. It should be investigated. It should not deter from achieving the military objectives.
    • bertylicious 7mo ago
      What are the military objectives?
      • Qem 7mo ago
        Prop up the friendly apartheid regime.
    • user3939382 7mo ago
      Yes. Evil military planners used AI to generate a list of thousands of kill sites and then engaged them without verification. They attacked a public park by accident because it has the name “police” in it. Recklessly slaughtering children is “grown up” now?
      • Qem 7mo ago
        Another school was attacked[1] because it had "Shahed" in the name, like the drones. This is the First Slop War: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/6/elementary-school-in-tehran-hit-irans-foreign-ministry-says https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/6/elementary-school-in...
    • stephenr 7mo ago
      > In reality someone made a mistake. It's never just one mistake. It's usually a chain of mistakes and bad decisions that make the final mistake possible. I'd estimate that there were likely 77,168,458 mistakes/bad decisions made by individuals before this mistake could happen.
• user3939382 7mo ago
  We robbed S Korea of a radar system they paid for which they found highly insulting. We’re causing an energy crisis in Japan. We repealed the sanctions on Russia to try to level oil prices which is the last straw for Ukraine. Europe refused to participate. Fascinating you see this as doing the right thing and motivated by alliances plural.
• 10xDev 7mo ago
  -Sent from Tel Aviv.
• DeathArrow 7mo ago
  Oy, vey! You mean Epstein first policy instead of America first?
• CapitalistCartr 7mo ago
  [flagged]
• austin-cheney 7mo ago
  I would say gasoline is not all that matters. This has also made clear Israel is not a US ally. They are a disobedient client state. Given how much money the US has given Israel compared to how tiny their GDP is it is also clear the US financially owns Israel. If I were US president I would annex Israel so that they no longer determine US foreign policy. Of course Israel would agree to be annexed because otherwise they can be easily isolated like the way they isolate Gaza.
  • andrepd 7mo ago
    > They are a disobedient client state Who, the US? Quite obedient I'd say.
• ekjhgkejhgk 7mo ago
  The purpose of this war is to do the fighting for Israel. Is that what you mean by "doing the right thing"?
• znort_ 7mo ago
  good point. i'm more than happy to pay 10x for my diesel and electricity and even change my whole lifestyle for the foreseeable future in support of iran doing the right thing: kicking the murderous usrael regime out of western asia where it should never have been in the first place, if it weren't for their god damned blood soaked petrodollars.
  • flyinglizard 7mo ago
    You and both I agree that only violence will solve the conflict between Iran and Israel. They can't really coexist in the same sphere. May the best country win :)
• bambax 7mo ago
  Trump is now threatening to destroy Iran's power plants if the straight isn't reopened. Is this "doing the right thing"? And doesn't this show he cares more about oil prices than regime change? But the most important question is, what's next? If depriving tens of millions of people of energy doesn't work, what will he do next? One hypothesis is he'll threaten Iran with a nuclear strike. In response, either China or Russia or both, will say that's a line that cannot be crossed. And then, we will either all die, or be living in a world saved by authoritarian regimes from the irresponsibility of the US. It will be interesting! But probably extremely unpleasant.
• pjc50 7mo ago
  So .. the plan is Big Afghanistan, to install a puppet regime at massive expense which evaporates the moment the US ground troops leave?
  • samus 7mo ago
    They don't really care what happens afterwards. They openly admitted that a Libya-like situation would be preferable compared to leaving the current regime in power. Whether that's actually a strategically valid assessment is a completely different question.
• hypeatei 7mo ago
  > That's it? Momentary gasoline price is all that matters now? Did you not see the lead up to the 2024 election and all the whining about how Biden, specifically, caused gasoline prices to go up? This is a very important issue to Americans because we use gas cars to go everywhere and all our food is transported using vehicles that consume gas. GP is obviously being rhetorical here because MAGAs wouldn't stop railing on Biden for global COVID inflation (mostly out of his control) but they're now making excuses for Trump starting a war that's spiking gas prices.
• samus 7mo ago
  East Asian economies are severely affected by high fuel prices. People need it to fuel their boats, to get to work, and to heat their homes. And it's the input to many critical industries, most importantly to make fertilizer. Not all countries's stockpiles are large enough to sit this out.
• diego_moita 7mo ago
  > That's it? Yes, that's it. The only reason for imperialism is "what's in it for me". All the rest is bullshit. Source: I am not American, therefore I know American Imperialism when I see it.
• lpapez 7mo ago
  All of those matter, making this whole situation even more unjustified.
• pron 7mo ago
  Is that the goal, though? "Subduing the Iranian regime"? If so, shouldn't they explain that so that the war gets support and so better chances of achieving its goals? How is that goal to be achieved? Because so far it seems like the goal is some personal achievement for Trump, and that shapes the perspective.
• squibonpig 7mo ago
  What's the point? Say the goal is to get rid of the regime by giving the protesters an opening to rebel. Then Trump blew the metaphorical load too early by encouraging the protesters on truth social. Tens of thousands of them being killed destroyed the momentum. Smarter people would have tried to arm them first, or discouraged the protests until we could hit them at the same time. Say the goal is to "do the right thing." Then we shoudn't be tag-teaming with a country doing a genocide, clearly. We'd probably be hesitant to help them destroy their enemy or realize their interests in general. We've had endless opportunity to reign them in and done nothing about it. "Oh, but we need them to project force in the middle east for us." Well then why the fuck are we starting a war? Let's force that ally to reform before starting the war. There was no fucking rush man. Say the goal is to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Well, Iran isn't (wasn't) run by stupid people. They knew we could likely set back their nuclear program before it completed and they knew the best-case-scenario in building nukes would be to get some leverage. They therefore opted to take a deal, using the threat of becoming armed to have some leverage. For us this is a great deal because we don't need to pay the costs of fighting Iran and we don't need to give them a better deal at nuke-point, and for them it's pretty solid because it's less risky. There's no evidence the terms were violated before WE ripped up the deal. "Well however we got into this situation, we're here now and they could have nukes within seconds, I mean minutes, I mean hours, I mean days, I mean months, I mean years..." Maybe before creating an international energy crisis, just bomb the damn nuclear program again. Worst case scenario they get a nuke and what? The whole point of a nuke is leverage, when you use it you lose the leverage. We would be forced to cut another deal with better terms for Iran. Whatever dude, maybe that's not worth fighting another middle eastern war idk maybe I'm crazy. I'm not a big war guy who just loves killing for the fun of it or whatever but even a war of aggression can be competent. I can admit when competence is exhibited and when something I otherwise dislike at least works out well. This shit is the most monumental blunder in decades. It wasn't planned, it has no goal, it will either end in a pointless withdrawal or (most likely) a Vietnam-esque quagmire. Every single problem was foreseeable and foreseen, that's why we didn't do this before. But some fucking moron pedophile gets blackmailed hard enough by a genocidal war criminal to say "what's one more, for old times sake?" and I'm supposed to want to shout hurrah and put my goddamn body and soul on the line for absolutely literally jack shit? Utterly ridiculous.
• mlinhares 7mo ago
  So much bullshit. The best way to dissolve the OPEC is to stop buying oil from them. Period. A country like the US should not be burning oil or any kind of fossil fuel for its electricity, we're rich in rivers, sunlight and have tech enough to build as many nuclear power plants as we want. This is all being done to prop up oil prices, but China is going to be the silent killer here, helping the world move to renewables and OPEC won't be a thing anymore. Its to see a country committing suicide like this.