3 ms·

Trump's stupidity is why italians are suffering from this oil crisis. It makes sense for them to not want to support it in anyway

by samrus 6mo ago

ericmay 6mo ago
[flagged]
- ceejayoz 6mo ago
  > If the US had pulled out as Iran demanded and said "not our problem" you'd now have an Iran full-on supporting Russia, providing missiles, drones, and more, control over 20% of the world's oil supply where they can exact tolls, turn Gulf States into vassals (for those who can't get a nuke), and would continue to directly pay, arm, and supply groups throughout the Middle East and elsewhere to destabilize other countries and kill people including in Israel, Lebanon, Yemen, and more. You're describing the current situation. The tolls are new, as a response to the war! They've been supplying Russia with drones for years! They've been funding groups throughout the Middle East for decades!
  - ericmay 6mo ago
    [flagged]
    - ceejayoz 6mo ago
      > They very well may have been planning to do so in the next 5 or so years. Our accelerating that doesn't seem like a big win so far. > They could at a whim, just say "give us X or we close the straight". They've been able to do that for decades. > but maybe Iran shouldn't be doing these things Few disagree. But you're falling for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism.
      - ericmay 6mo ago
        > Our accelerating that doesn't seem like a big win so far. Maybe this can help. It's 2025 and Iran has 1,000 missiles (just random rough numbers). It's 2030, and Iran now has 5,000 missiles and bought a bunch of hypersonic missiles from China. Sure, we can just "not accelerate" this, but then we're not going to do anything about it in 2030 because nobody is going to accept being on the receiving end of so much destruction. > They've been able to do that for decades. Not quite - they've had varying levels of capability here. Until recently they haven't had the missile and drone stockpile that they have today and have been building.
- convolvatron 6mo ago
  its not either or. if we expected support from European countries, we could have given them a heads up and understood their position in advance. it was not an emergency situation. we had an agreement, I know that doesn't mean shit to the current administration, but not every country is willing to go cowboy, and give up their sovereignty just because the US doesn't like rules and laws anymore. the US would clearly be in a better position now if it hadn't said 'screw you guys' and started shooting.
  - ericmay 6mo ago
    I largely don't disagree with you, but at the same time had Trump asked they would have told him no anyway because Europe has little to no ability to help here and they're scared. As European prime ministers and officials have said already, and I'm paraphrasing "what can a few frigates do that the mighty US Navy cannot?". It rings true, as did the comment from the I believe Polish prime minister (or perhaps the foreign minister, either way) which said 600+ million Europeans are asking 300+ million Americans to defend them against 180+ million Russians. Something doesn't quite add up here.
- oytis 6mo ago
  I mean, they are controlling Hormuz Strait now - they were not before the war. In addition they are now free to sell their own oil, because the sanctions have been lifted. And I can't see why they would stop supporting Russia with drones either. They also got to keep their enriched Uranium. I don't think I can name a single reasonable objective that US have achieved with this war.
  - ericmay 6mo ago
    > And I can't see why they would stop supporting Russia with drones either. They also got to keep their enriched Uranium. I don't think I can name a single reasonable objective that US have achieved with this war. It's been 3 weeks... we're going to stop the enrichment. We can stop the drone supply by blowing up the factories. > I mean, they are controlling Hormuz Strait now - they were not before the war. In addition they are now free to sell their own oil, because the sanctions have been lifted. They were de facto "controlling" the straight anyway because of their missile stockpile, they just hadn't yet exercised their leverage. They're free to sell their oil to the extent the US allows them to based on whatever decisions are being made. Obviously we can just blockade the straight too, even more effectively than Iran has been.
- pepperoni_pizza 6mo ago
  This is a brilliant example of DARVO: The US and Israel decided to attack Iran but somehow they had no choice and are actually the victims in all of this.

Trump's stupidity is why italians are suffering from this oil crisis. It makes sense for them to not want to support it in anyway

by samrus 6mo ago

Trump's stupidity is why italians are suffering from this oil crisis. It makes sense for them to not want to support it in anyway

ericmay 6mo ago

[flagged]

ceejayoz 6mo ago
> If the US had pulled out as Iran demanded and said "not our problem" you'd now have an Iran full-on supporting Russia, providing missiles, drones, and more, control over 20% of the world's oil supply where they can exact tolls, turn Gulf States into vassals (for those who can't get a nuke), and would continue to directly pay, arm, and supply groups throughout the Middle East and elsewhere to destabilize other countries and kill people including in Israel, Lebanon, Yemen, and more. You're describing the current situation. The tolls are new, as a response to the war! They've been supplying Russia with drones for years! They've been funding groups throughout the Middle East for decades!
- ericmay 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - ceejayoz 6mo ago
    > They very well may have been planning to do so in the next 5 or so years. Our accelerating that doesn't seem like a big win so far. > They could at a whim, just say "give us X or we close the straight". They've been able to do that for decades. > but maybe Iran shouldn't be doing these things Few disagree. But you're falling for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politician%27s_syllogism.
    - ericmay 6mo ago
      > Our accelerating that doesn't seem like a big win so far. Maybe this can help. It's 2025 and Iran has 1,000 missiles (just random rough numbers). It's 2030, and Iran now has 5,000 missiles and bought a bunch of hypersonic missiles from China. Sure, we can just "not accelerate" this, but then we're not going to do anything about it in 2030 because nobody is going to accept being on the receiving end of so much destruction. > They've been able to do that for decades. Not quite - they've had varying levels of capability here. Until recently they haven't had the missile and drone stockpile that they have today and have been building.
convolvatron 6mo ago
its not either or. if we expected support from European countries, we could have given them a heads up and understood their position in advance. it was not an emergency situation. we had an agreement, I know that doesn't mean shit to the current administration, but not every country is willing to go cowboy, and give up their sovereignty just because the US doesn't like rules and laws anymore. the US would clearly be in a better position now if it hadn't said 'screw you guys' and started shooting.
- ericmay 6mo ago
  I largely don't disagree with you, but at the same time had Trump asked they would have told him no anyway because Europe has little to no ability to help here and they're scared. As European prime ministers and officials have said already, and I'm paraphrasing "what can a few frigates do that the mighty US Navy cannot?". It rings true, as did the comment from the I believe Polish prime minister (or perhaps the foreign minister, either way) which said 600+ million Europeans are asking 300+ million Americans to defend them against 180+ million Russians. Something doesn't quite add up here.
oytis 6mo ago
I mean, they are controlling Hormuz Strait now - they were not before the war. In addition they are now free to sell their own oil, because the sanctions have been lifted. And I can't see why they would stop supporting Russia with drones either. They also got to keep their enriched Uranium. I don't think I can name a single reasonable objective that US have achieved with this war.
- ericmay 6mo ago
  > And I can't see why they would stop supporting Russia with drones either. They also got to keep their enriched Uranium. I don't think I can name a single reasonable objective that US have achieved with this war. It's been 3 weeks... we're going to stop the enrichment. We can stop the drone supply by blowing up the factories. > I mean, they are controlling Hormuz Strait now - they were not before the war. In addition they are now free to sell their own oil, because the sanctions have been lifted. They were de facto "controlling" the straight anyway because of their missile stockpile, they just hadn't yet exercised their leverage. They're free to sell their oil to the extent the US allows them to based on whatever decisions are being made. Obviously we can just blockade the straight too, even more effectively than Iran has been.
pepperoni_pizza 6mo ago
This is a brilliant example of DARVO: The US and Israel decided to attack Iran but somehow they had no choice and are actually the victims in all of this.