upvote

points

by ck23 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby snickerbockers3 hours ago|
next
[-]
We shouldn't even be giving them defensive weapons because that only enables them to wage war without consequence. In this specific case its a moot point since we joined this war in the most direct way possible but in general every time we shoot down one country's missiles but not the other we are participating in the war, especially when the side we protect is the aggressor.
reply
upvoteby trimbo3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> this is going to destroy world economy on every angle

Oil prices were around $100 for a lot of the early 2010s. It's been three weeks. Calm down.

reply
upvoteby jart1 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Even at $100 oil is the cheapest it's ever been historically. OPEC nations don't measure inflation in terms of U.S. CPI. They use gold as their benchmark. In 1969 a barrel of oil was worth $400 in today's money. What's incredible is even with the recent price rally, you can still buy oil at $71/barrel if you're willing to wait a few years to get your oil, due to the extreme backwardation of oil futures. That's an 82% discount over the historical norm. Also in real terms oil was worth about $500/barrel in the 2000s.
reply
upvoteby mkoubaa2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Its going to get a *lot* worse.
reply
upvoteby giraffe_lady3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Any effective defensive weapon is an offensive weapon, in that it allows you to commit other resources to offense, or defend against a retaliation in response to an escalating offense on your part.
reply
upvoteby cousin_it3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Yeah, any kind of aid (e.g. food or medicine) allows the people you're aiding to spend more on the military if they want. I guess the only way around it is to set limits on someone's military capability and make aid conditional on not crossing these limits.
reply
upvoteby bluGill3 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
Why are you blaming Israel? Iran has been fueling the fires for year by send piles of money and weapons to anyone who had a serious plan to attack Israel.

Not that Israel is perfect, but there is plenty of blame to go around and recognizing that reality is required before we can even try to think of a solution. (I don't have one)

reply
upvoteby cwillu3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Because they're the ones that poured water onto the burning pan of oil. Nobody is claiming that they created the problem in its entirety, but they have made it significantly worse this month.
reply
upvoteby bdangubic3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
and why do we care? we elected “America First” President, not “Isreal First, America who gives a hoot”
reply
upvoteby vel0city22 minutes ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I give a lot of the blame to the government of Israel because it seems (according to the Trump administration) there was no real reason to attack except for Israel was going to attack and we would become targets if they did.

High ranking people in Trump's own administration (or at least until very recently) have openly stated Israel was the main reason why we got involved.

Sure seems to me in terms of our current situation, Israel really wanting to get involved in a strike is the but-for cause. At least according to what the Trump administration has stated.

reply
upvoteby pphysch3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
There are vague allegations of Iran being the "leading state sponsor of terror" on one scale, and then Israel openly doing a genocide and starting wars of aggression and assassinating countless civilian and military leaders on the other scale, with a growing number of American bodies as cannon fodder.

It is up to you to decide where justice lies.

reply
upvoteby cwillu3 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Nah, there's nothing vague around their funding and training of various militaries and militias in the area. There's more than enough war crimes on both sides to go around, and any concept of justice that is predicated on prosecuting one side exclusively is simply bankrupt. If Israeli civilians are fair game because of Israel's war crimes, then American civilians are fair game for the same reason. And I reject any theory of justice that bites that particular bullet.
reply
upvoteby pphysch56 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
No one denies that Iran has strategic partnerships in the region. The question comes down to whether you believe armed resistance is ever legitimate or you blanket-dismiss it as "terrorism", in order to justify the territorial encroachment, ethnic cleansing, or mass murder that is brazenly perpetrated by Israel.
reply
upvoteby krior3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Are you blaming Israel for american troops in Iran? Is the US not a sovreign nation anymore?
reply
upvoteby josefritzishere3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
This is a valid question, and the answer is unfortunately no. There's a lot to unpack there but basically the president is acting unilaterally and in a manner which advance the interests of foreign nations.
reply
upvoteby krior7 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
He is still the president of the USA. Every American over the age of 18 is responsible for his actions.
reply
upvoteby josefritzishere1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Minus 2? If anyone has an explanation as to how war with Iran is to the benefit if the U.S. I'd genuinely like to hear it.
reply
upvoteby krior9 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Why does it matter if it is for the benefit of the US? Doing something irrational does not absolve of responsibility.
reply
upvoteby bluGill1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
War? Time will tell, but I'm not hopeful. I have no clue what Trump could have done instead that would work out, but war isn't looking like a good answer (no surprise to me - though I didn't expect it to get this bad so fast)

Iran has been funding a lot of the "attack Israel" groups in the area. When your income depends on hating Israel it is hard to see a more moderate view. In turn this gives the extremists in Israel a better line of why elect them over someone more moderate. (Lets me clear I'm not trying to clear Israel of their crimes here, only suggesting that Iran bares some blame for those crimes).

The above, but applied to other countries and not as extreem. Iran is funding many anti-democracy groups in the region.

Iran has a lot of smart, well educated people - who can't get enough water to drink. If Iran had a better government those people could develop things of use to improve the world, but instead many are stuck as poor despite having the ability to not be.

Changing Iran would not solve all the problems, but it would ease a large share and maybe leave room for a better world. The only question is how to do this - world history doesn't have a good record for changing evil governments.

reply