4 ms·

I'm no fan of this administration but another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increa

by jayd16 6mo ago

I'm no fan of this administration but another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increases. Actually it shows that the US could eliminate the leadership at its leisure even if it can't hand select the replacements. I'm also not sure the powers that be in the ME hate the rising oil prices. Again, not a fan of the situation and while I think it is the US's loss I do not really see how it is a win for Iran.

jauco 6mo ago
It’s not the ME countries who are profiting, because they can’t export. So it’s a net loss. (Saudi and oman win a bit, but in no comparison to the iraq kuwait loss) The winners are mostly: Russia, Iran itself and (margibally) the US. But mostly Russia.
- gambutin 6mo ago
  Over the past few months their oil facilities have been heavily attacked. It’s hard to believe they’re actually making a big profit from this in the short term.
- thelastgallon 6mo ago
  The biggest winner is China. Countries/people who have any common sense will switch to solar, induction stoves (replacing LPG/LNG), batteries, electric vehicles (of all kinds). China is the only supplier of solar, batteries, EVs and all things electric with everyone else being a rounding error.
  - igor47 6mo ago
    I've been waiting for people to have common sense in this domain for decades. The short term always wins
    - omnimus 6mo ago
      But that's what has changed. Even short term solar is becoming the obvious solution. Look at countries like Pakistan and their solar hyper growth. Everybody thought it has to be western countries (mostly europe) switching to solar first. But west might actually be last to get off fossil because they can afford it and populist politics will force fossil. It's like burning fossil for nostalgia.
      - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
        Ya, look at what happened in Nepal, poor access to oil via India, who imports it themselves, but lots of hydro potential. China being next door with an actual rail and truck connection, and cheap EVs. The developing world has the potential to achieve developed living standards for a much cheaper price, while the west rots away catering to vested interests.
  - helsinkiandrew 6mo ago
    China also benefits that demonstrated its influence (by persuading Iran to negotiate) and from its supply of cheap Iranian oil: https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2041682779948380317 https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2041682779948380317
- throwaway_5633 6mo ago
  Russia has banned the export of gasoline starting April 1st, because hits on infrastructure by Ukraine are causing internal shortages. They may be profiting in some other way but it’s unlikely through major exports. https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/russia-to-introduce-ban-on-gasoline-exports-from-april-1-govt-says/articleshow/129851440.cms https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/ru...
- hdgvhicv 6mo ago
  The US isn’t winning. The owners of us oil companies may have won a little. Commodity gamblers won a lot by knowing what Trump would say and betting before he said it. The US government and population have lost a lot of wealth.
fatbird 6mo ago
$2MM per tanker for safe passage is an extra $100 billion a year in revenue, which is peanuts next to the world's de facto acknowledgement that Iran now has sovereign control of the Strait of Hormuz and can charge whatever it wants. The ceasefire also includes lifting all sanctions on Iran, and notably says nothing about its nuclear program, which becomes de facto acceptance of its right to continue it to its logical endpoint of Iran becoming a nuclear power. Before this started, it was impossible to imagine that Iran could achieve all this. It's hard to how this isn't a massive win for Iran.
- roncesvalles 6mo ago
  1. $2MM is their initial demand, expect it to be negotiated down. 2. There is a lot of missing details. Most ships transiting the Hormuz are Asian. Will Iran also charge China, their ally, or will they get a discount? And countries like Pakistan and India who have been neutral to slightly Iran-leaning? Can the US even "sign" such an agreement on behalf of the world? As far as non-parties to the conflict are concerned, Iran's toll is literal highway robbery. 3. "Lifting all sanctions" is again Iran's initial negotiating position. Most likely, the final agreement will keep some sanctions.
  - fatbird 6mo ago
    $2m is the current toll that Iran has already successfully charged any ships it allows. It amounts to an extra $1/barrel, so it's a trivial tax in comparison to what the supply shock is causing in fluctuations. China has already paid, and will happily pay going forward if it stabilizes the supply chain. Expect it to go higher as negotiations cement Iran's highway robbery. Which, yes, it is highway robbery, but it's robbery no one is able to stop without invading and occupying Iran to execute proper regime change... which no one, least of all the US, is stepping up to do. The U.S. has lost all negotiating leverage. It's been demonstrated that they're unable to militarily impose their will on Iran, and they're far more sensitive to economic disruption than Iranians are--who are, as I type this, forming human shield rings around vital bridges and facilities, ready to die if the U.S. bombs them. Negotiations are, at this point, about the U.S. coming away with some face-saving outcomes.
darkoob12 6mo ago
The Islamic regem lost all its legitimacy in Jan. Even some loyalist where angry at them but they gain support of part of the people and found a reason to exist as the defender of the country. They will survive and become stronger particularly if they get an economic lifeline out of this peace deal.
- spwa4 6mo ago
  [flagged]
  - watwut 6mo ago
    > Europe and even China owe a great debt of gratitude to the US Absolutely not, USA actions harmed Europe and Europe knows it. > Putin will be absolutely furious, since he's now betrayed by both the EU In what alternative universe?
  - fakedang 6mo ago
    Not sure which world you're in, but Iran has put forward a 10-point demand plan, and it looks like the US (or rather Trump) will likely accept all of them instead of getting stuck in a quagmire before elections.
    - spwa4 6mo ago
      Yeah, they did. Did you compare to their original 5 point plan? Their 10 point plan sounds like they've given up removing US bases, taxing Hormuz AND the safety of their proxy armies. No "right" to nuclear bombs (sorry "power stations"). No reparation payments. No removal of US bases. Any agreement with Iran doesn't matter anyway, because Iran hasn't held up it's previous agreements, so there's no real long term point to any agreement. I wonder if they'll let the US clean up their nuclear stockpile and their centrifuges. That is the real question that matters to the west: does the US (or someone trustworthy) get to go in and remove that shit? Does the US (or someone trustworthy) get to go in and demine Hormuz? (oh sorry, did propagandists claim Iran didn't mine Hormuz? Well, they lied. And we could point out that that is yet another islamist warcrime ... but what's the point? Frankly it's a pathetic warcrime compared to what they do to people in Iran itself, Syria and Yemen)
locknitpicker 6mo ago
> (...) another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increases. I'm afraid you are yet to experience the real impact of this war. The actual effect of closing the strait hasn't hit your wallet yet. It's a repeat of the same old tariff bullshit. Also, Iran did inflicted heavy damage on some of the infrastructure of US's allies. You will start to feel that in a few months. The only party that clearly stood to benefit from this event was Putin's regime. Orban is not the only vassal at his command.
- datsci_est_2015 6mo ago
  “Mild commodity price increases” - I’ll try to remember the OP’s comment in July. Inflation tends to be a ratchet, not a wave. But that’s too complicated for the below-average voter…
ElProlactin 6mo ago
> I'm no fan of this administration but another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increases. Oil spiked over 40% at its peak and US gas prices are up 25-35%, and that's before things got to the point where there were "real" supply issues. I don't know how you can reasonably consider this "mild". > Actually it shows that the US could eliminate the leadership at its leisure even if it can't hand select the replacements. Everyone and their brother has known that the US can assassinate virtually any world leader if it really wants to. The question you haven't answered is: to what end? > I'm also not sure the powers that be in the ME hate the rising oil prices. Notwithstanding the fact that this situation only increases the attractiveness of oil alternatives, you're missing a few points, including: 1. If oil prices rise too much, too fast, it leads to demand destruction. Nobody captures the higher profits for long because the global economy falls into recession if oil stays above a certain price point. 2. Price stability is just as important as price. 3. Significant long-term damage was done to oil infrastructure and Iran demonstrated how easily infrastructure can be effectively targeted despite all of the advantages its neighbors have in terms of American support, American defense technology, etc. Your comment also doesn't consider the geopolitical costs of this "excursion". The administration's actions have further alienated America's strongest allies (except for Israel) and added fuel to the "America is undependable" fire. This is good news for China: https://en.sedaily.com/international/2026/04/05/china-overtakes-us-in-global-approval-ratings-as-american https://en.sedaily.com/international/2026/04/05/china-overta... > China surpassed the United States in global leadership approval ratings last year, as Donald Trump's second administration began its term in earnest, according to a new Gallup survey. > The polling firm reported Thursday that the median global approval rating for Chinese leadership stood at 36% in its 2025 world survey, exceeding the 31% recorded for U.S. leadership. It marked the first time in 20 years that China's approval rating topped that of the United States by more than 5 percentage points.
- jayd16 6mo ago
  Not really in disagreement with any of this. I'm just pushing back on "this is a win for Iran".
  - 6mo ago
myvoiceismypass 6mo ago
The $2m toll per strait crossing, at 120 ships a day, is going to pay dividends in perpetuity for them. Their economic situation is now actually better than it was pre-war.
- pixelesque 6mo ago
  $2 split between Iran and Oman...
abdelhousni 6mo ago
You weren't paying attention because that's what the US does since decades... Just now it impacts Western countries directly (Ukraine and Iran come to mind)
wesleywt 6mo ago
The US have been removing leaders for decades.
mrtksn 6mo ago
That's not a US specific strength though, anybody with the ability to strike someone with shorter range than theirs can do that. I.e. Netherland can destabilize South America through attacking Panama and its very unlikely that Netherlands will be bombed. Sure, when US Brazil etc. are pissed off enough, Netherland can just TACO like the US did. China and Russia can do the exactly same thing to Iran too and Iran won't be bombing Moscow or Beijing either. It might demonstrate madness though, which in same cases can be useful.
- midtake 6mo ago
  This is an insane take. Why would Netherlands do this when America exists? And even if they didn't rest on their laurels and let America do it, they would not be able to establish a kill chain the way USA can, and so they would need American support. And even if they forewent the support, they would be denounced on the global stage and suffer massively economically. You are massively underestimating just how much liberty USA has to say YOLO and do whatever it wants. Russia has established that it cannot in fact do this! That is why the two week special operation has gone on for so long. China? It remains to be seen. For now the best assumption is that USA is in a league of its own when it comes to imposing its will on other nations.
  - mrtksn 6mo ago
    > Why would Netherlands do this Maybe the Dutch are willing to risk it all to annoy the libs so they will elect and transfer all the power to a complete clown and attempt to make some money on the stock market and betting sites in the process.
  - watwut 6mo ago
    > For now the best assumption is that USA is in a league of its own when it comes to imposing its will on other nations. It literally lost and wasted huge amount of resources in the process. Everyone else politely nodded until insulted too much, but otherwise ignored what USA wanted. When insulted, they exchanged some words while continuing to practically ignore what USA wants.
  - 6mo ago
prabubio 6mo ago
US, in the past (eg - iraq) has shown that it can destabilize a region without any effects to the US, not even a mild price increase domestically. So this one is a big degradation from that earlier stance.
- hdgvhicv 6mo ago
  And that’s before you compare to the damage bin laden did with 20 people and a million dollars American has been getting weaker and weaker for 25 years.

by jayd16 6mo ago

jauco 6mo ago

It’s not the ME countries who are profiting, because they can’t export. So it’s a net loss. (Saudi and oman win a bit, but in no comparison to the iraq kuwait loss) The winners are mostly: Russia, Iran itself and (margibally) the US. But mostly Russia.

gambutin 6mo ago
Over the past few months their oil facilities have been heavily attacked. It’s hard to believe they’re actually making a big profit from this in the short term.
thelastgallon 6mo ago
The biggest winner is China. Countries/people who have any common sense will switch to solar, induction stoves (replacing LPG/LNG), batteries, electric vehicles (of all kinds). China is the only supplier of solar, batteries, EVs and all things electric with everyone else being a rounding error.
- igor47 6mo ago
  I've been waiting for people to have common sense in this domain for decades. The short term always wins
  - omnimus 6mo ago
    But that's what has changed. Even short term solar is becoming the obvious solution. Look at countries like Pakistan and their solar hyper growth. Everybody thought it has to be western countries (mostly europe) switching to solar first. But west might actually be last to get off fossil because they can afford it and populist politics will force fossil. It's like burning fossil for nostalgia.
    - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
      Ya, look at what happened in Nepal, poor access to oil via India, who imports it themselves, but lots of hydro potential. China being next door with an actual rail and truck connection, and cheap EVs. The developing world has the potential to achieve developed living standards for a much cheaper price, while the west rots away catering to vested interests.
- helsinkiandrew 6mo ago
  China also benefits that demonstrated its influence (by persuading Iran to negotiate) and from its supply of cheap Iranian oil: https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2041682779948380317 https://x.com/shanaka86/status/2041682779948380317
throwaway_5633 6mo ago
Russia has banned the export of gasoline starting April 1st, because hits on infrastructure by Ukraine are causing internal shortages. They may be profiting in some other way but it’s unlikely through major exports. https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/russia-to-introduce-ban-on-gasoline-exports-from-april-1-govt-says/articleshow/129851440.cms https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/ru...
hdgvhicv 6mo ago
The US isn’t winning. The owners of us oil companies may have won a little. Commodity gamblers won a lot by knowing what Trump would say and betting before he said it. The US government and population have lost a lot of wealth.

fatbird 6mo ago

$2MM per tanker for safe passage is an extra $100 billion a year in revenue, which is peanuts next to the world's de facto acknowledgement that Iran now has sovereign control of the Strait of Hormuz and can charge whatever it wants. The ceasefire also includes lifting all sanctions on Iran, and notably says nothing about its nuclear program, which becomes de facto acceptance of its right to continue it to its logical endpoint of Iran becoming a nuclear power. Before this started, it was impossible to imagine that Iran could achieve all this. It's hard to how this isn't a massive win for Iran.

roncesvalles 6mo ago
1. $2MM is their initial demand, expect it to be negotiated down. 2. There is a lot of missing details. Most ships transiting the Hormuz are Asian. Will Iran also charge China, their ally, or will they get a discount? And countries like Pakistan and India who have been neutral to slightly Iran-leaning? Can the US even "sign" such an agreement on behalf of the world? As far as non-parties to the conflict are concerned, Iran's toll is literal highway robbery. 3. "Lifting all sanctions" is again Iran's initial negotiating position. Most likely, the final agreement will keep some sanctions.
- fatbird 6mo ago
  $2m is the current toll that Iran has already successfully charged any ships it allows. It amounts to an extra $1/barrel, so it's a trivial tax in comparison to what the supply shock is causing in fluctuations. China has already paid, and will happily pay going forward if it stabilizes the supply chain. Expect it to go higher as negotiations cement Iran's highway robbery. Which, yes, it is highway robbery, but it's robbery no one is able to stop without invading and occupying Iran to execute proper regime change... which no one, least of all the US, is stepping up to do. The U.S. has lost all negotiating leverage. It's been demonstrated that they're unable to militarily impose their will on Iran, and they're far more sensitive to economic disruption than Iranians are--who are, as I type this, forming human shield rings around vital bridges and facilities, ready to die if the U.S. bombs them. Negotiations are, at this point, about the U.S. coming away with some face-saving outcomes.

darkoob12 6mo ago

The Islamic regem lost all its legitimacy in Jan. Even some loyalist where angry at them but they gain support of part of the people and found a reason to exist as the defender of the country. They will survive and become stronger particularly if they get an economic lifeline out of this peace deal.

spwa4 6mo ago
[flagged]
- watwut 6mo ago
  > Europe and even China owe a great debt of gratitude to the US Absolutely not, USA actions harmed Europe and Europe knows it. > Putin will be absolutely furious, since he's now betrayed by both the EU In what alternative universe?
- fakedang 6mo ago
  Not sure which world you're in, but Iran has put forward a 10-point demand plan, and it looks like the US (or rather Trump) will likely accept all of them instead of getting stuck in a quagmire before elections.
  - spwa4 6mo ago
    Yeah, they did. Did you compare to their original 5 point plan? Their 10 point plan sounds like they've given up removing US bases, taxing Hormuz AND the safety of their proxy armies. No "right" to nuclear bombs (sorry "power stations"). No reparation payments. No removal of US bases. Any agreement with Iran doesn't matter anyway, because Iran hasn't held up it's previous agreements, so there's no real long term point to any agreement. I wonder if they'll let the US clean up their nuclear stockpile and their centrifuges. That is the real question that matters to the west: does the US (or someone trustworthy) get to go in and remove that shit? Does the US (or someone trustworthy) get to go in and demine Hormuz? (oh sorry, did propagandists claim Iran didn't mine Hormuz? Well, they lied. And we could point out that that is yet another islamist warcrime ... but what's the point? Frankly it's a pathetic warcrime compared to what they do to people in Iran itself, Syria and Yemen)

locknitpicker 6mo ago

> (...) another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increases. I'm afraid you are yet to experience the real impact of this war. The actual effect of closing the strait hasn't hit your wallet yet. It's a repeat of the same old tariff bullshit. Also, Iran did inflicted heavy damage on some of the infrastructure of US's allies. You will start to feel that in a few months. The only party that clearly stood to benefit from this event was Putin's regime. Orban is not the only vassal at his command.

datsci_est_2015 6mo ago
“Mild commodity price increases” - I’ll try to remember the OP’s comment in July. Inflation tends to be a ratchet, not a wave. But that’s too complicated for the below-average voter…

ElProlactin 6mo ago

> I'm no fan of this administration but another way to look at things is that the US can essentially destabilize a region while facing mild commodity price increases. Oil spiked over 40% at its peak and US gas prices are up 25-35%, and that's before things got to the point where there were "real" supply issues. I don't know how you can reasonably consider this "mild". > Actually it shows that the US could eliminate the leadership at its leisure even if it can't hand select the replacements. Everyone and their brother has known that the US can assassinate virtually any world leader if it really wants to. The question you haven't answered is: to what end? > I'm also not sure the powers that be in the ME hate the rising oil prices. Notwithstanding the fact that this situation only increases the attractiveness of oil alternatives, you're missing a few points, including: 1. If oil prices rise too much, too fast, it leads to demand destruction. Nobody captures the higher profits for long because the global economy falls into recession if oil stays above a certain price point. 2. Price stability is just as important as price. 3. Significant long-term damage was done to oil infrastructure and Iran demonstrated how easily infrastructure can be effectively targeted despite all of the advantages its neighbors have in terms of American support, American defense technology, etc. Your comment also doesn't consider the geopolitical costs of this "excursion". The administration's actions have further alienated America's strongest allies (except for Israel) and added fuel to the "America is undependable" fire. This is good news for China: https://en.sedaily.com/international/2026/04/05/china-overtakes-us-in-global-approval-ratings-as-american https://en.sedaily.com/international/2026/04/05/china-overta... > China surpassed the United States in global leadership approval ratings last year, as Donald Trump's second administration began its term in earnest, according to a new Gallup survey. > The polling firm reported Thursday that the median global approval rating for Chinese leadership stood at 36% in its 2025 world survey, exceeding the 31% recorded for U.S. leadership. It marked the first time in 20 years that China's approval rating topped that of the United States by more than 5 percentage points.

jayd16 6mo ago
Not really in disagreement with any of this. I'm just pushing back on "this is a win for Iran".
- 6mo ago

myvoiceismypass 6mo ago

The $2m toll per strait crossing, at 120 ships a day, is going to pay dividends in perpetuity for them. Their economic situation is now actually better than it was pre-war.

pixelesque 6mo ago
$2 split between Iran and Oman...

abdelhousni 6mo ago

You weren't paying attention because that's what the US does since decades... Just now it impacts Western countries directly (Ukraine and Iran come to mind)

wesleywt 6mo ago

The US have been removing leaders for decades.

mrtksn 6mo ago

That's not a US specific strength though, anybody with the ability to strike someone with shorter range than theirs can do that. I.e. Netherland can destabilize South America through attacking Panama and its very unlikely that Netherlands will be bombed. Sure, when US Brazil etc. are pissed off enough, Netherland can just TACO like the US did. China and Russia can do the exactly same thing to Iran too and Iran won't be bombing Moscow or Beijing either. It might demonstrate madness though, which in same cases can be useful.

midtake 6mo ago
This is an insane take. Why would Netherlands do this when America exists? And even if they didn't rest on their laurels and let America do it, they would not be able to establish a kill chain the way USA can, and so they would need American support. And even if they forewent the support, they would be denounced on the global stage and suffer massively economically. You are massively underestimating just how much liberty USA has to say YOLO and do whatever it wants. Russia has established that it cannot in fact do this! That is why the two week special operation has gone on for so long. China? It remains to be seen. For now the best assumption is that USA is in a league of its own when it comes to imposing its will on other nations.
- mrtksn 6mo ago
  > Why would Netherlands do this Maybe the Dutch are willing to risk it all to annoy the libs so they will elect and transfer all the power to a complete clown and attempt to make some money on the stock market and betting sites in the process.
- watwut 6mo ago
  > For now the best assumption is that USA is in a league of its own when it comes to imposing its will on other nations. It literally lost and wasted huge amount of resources in the process. Everyone else politely nodded until insulted too much, but otherwise ignored what USA wanted. When insulted, they exchanged some words while continuing to practically ignore what USA wants.
- 6mo ago

prabubio 6mo ago

US, in the past (eg - iraq) has shown that it can destabilize a region without any effects to the US, not even a mild price increase domestically. So this one is a big degradation from that earlier stance.

hdgvhicv 6mo ago
And that’s before you compare to the damage bin laden did with 20 people and a million dollars American has been getting weaker and weaker for 25 years.