3 ms·

Soooo just to be clear here with your argument: The USA was doing something to guarantee that stuff can flow through it, then they start a war, now they can no

Soooo just to be clear here with your argument: The USA was doing something to guarantee that stuff can flow through it, then they start a war, now they can no longer guarantee this? Did they suddenly loose the power to protect this flow? Just because USA is war mongering, doesn't mean no one else would have stepped up or that it wouldn't be better without all of this involvment.

jvanderbot 5mo ago
Everything I said was true : Bretton woods exists, and my opinion flows from that. Feel free to disregard it or correct the facts, I think that'd be a good discussion. And yeah, USA might do dumb things that put them into a bind, but ultimately the peaceful flow of traffic through Hormuz is a goal worth pursuing for the world economic health.
- AntiUSAbah 5mo ago
  I'm happy to endulge in a good discussion. My argument is not that deep for sure, but you are only referencing Bretton woods. The problem with US petro dollar is always the same: we don't know what would have been if it wouldn't exist. But my main point was very specific to the strait of hormuz and how it was flowing without the help of the USA, now stoped because of the influnece of the USA and how the USA can't restart it. So your point is not valid for the current state of the strait of hormuz. You are also moving the goal post now as you state that the peaceful flow of traffic is worth it. Of course it is but now we have to do it and its not the USA helping some other country to fix their problem, in this case every other country needs to do something to fix US Americas problem they created. USA also got very rich and powerful thanks to the petro dollar, which now shifts to China and now China is benefiting from this. This system was never fair though.
  - jvanderbot 5mo ago
    Playing devils advocate, the results are not always intended. I think the intent was to secure the area / prevent a state from becoming hegemonic, esp a state which has proven to be prone to harassing shipping and allies in the area (to say the last), as well as a state which is directly aiding an invasion of Europe/former USSR independent states. So, circling back to my original comment, the Iran war is in line with the principles of keeping peaceful free trade safe (perhaps only for "us"), but alas, as you say, free trade has paused while we try to do that. That's it. I dont think that's a hugely controversial statement or obviously false.
    - AntiUSAbah 5mo ago
      Lets be honest here, Trump attacked Iran for 2-3 basic reasons: 1. he thought it would go like venezuela 2. he did this for his business partners. Iran in its pre Trump state existed with the Khamenei family for quite a long time.

jvanderbot 5mo ago

Everything I said was true : Bretton woods exists, and my opinion flows from that. Feel free to disregard it or correct the facts, I think that'd be a good discussion. And yeah, USA might do dumb things that put them into a bind, but ultimately the peaceful flow of traffic through Hormuz is a goal worth pursuing for the world economic health.

AntiUSAbah 5mo ago
I'm happy to endulge in a good discussion. My argument is not that deep for sure, but you are only referencing Bretton woods. The problem with US petro dollar is always the same: we don't know what would have been if it wouldn't exist. But my main point was very specific to the strait of hormuz and how it was flowing without the help of the USA, now stoped because of the influnece of the USA and how the USA can't restart it. So your point is not valid for the current state of the strait of hormuz. You are also moving the goal post now as you state that the peaceful flow of traffic is worth it. Of course it is but now we have to do it and its not the USA helping some other country to fix their problem, in this case every other country needs to do something to fix US Americas problem they created. USA also got very rich and powerful thanks to the petro dollar, which now shifts to China and now China is benefiting from this. This system was never fair though.
- jvanderbot 5mo ago
  Playing devils advocate, the results are not always intended. I think the intent was to secure the area / prevent a state from becoming hegemonic, esp a state which has proven to be prone to harassing shipping and allies in the area (to say the last), as well as a state which is directly aiding an invasion of Europe/former USSR independent states. So, circling back to my original comment, the Iran war is in line with the principles of keeping peaceful free trade safe (perhaps only for "us"), but alas, as you say, free trade has paused while we try to do that. That's it. I dont think that's a hugely controversial statement or obviously false.
  - AntiUSAbah 5mo ago
    Lets be honest here, Trump attacked Iran for 2-3 basic reasons: 1. he thought it would go like venezuela 2. he did this for his business partners. Iran in its pre Trump state existed with the Khamenei family for quite a long time.