I can’t say I agree. The strait, as significant as it is, is just a very small piece of the earth. The only thing that is transported through there are oil and oil products. It’s a widely used product and a large portion of the product goes through it, but there are alternative places to get the oil and alternative ways to generate the energy it provides. We’ve seen oil prices go up shortly because of a scare, but we’ve also seen them come down again.
The strait is not a deterring force. They can still get bombed and the only bargaining chip that the strait provides is a financial one. That is a far cry from the mutually assured destruction that a nuclear weapon provides. I can’t remember the last time a war was started against a nuclear power. Maybe some small conflicts between India and Pakistan, but nothing major that comes to mind. I think the war between Russia and Ukraine is now the first time a nuclear power has been bombed on a somewhat larger scale.
Yeah, you’re wrong or uninformed. It is not a minor strait by a long shot and thousands or more will die of it. Economy isn’t just magical numbers on sheets but the real economy is what allows people to carry on existing.
I already acknowledged it was an important product, but if you really think that one product has the same power as a nuclear bomb I don’t know what to tell you. Especially in a time with plenty of alternatives, where the most populous and powerful country is moving towards those alternatives –and away from said product– at breakneck speed, while also pushing the rest of the world towards those ever more affordable alternatives.
So once again, no, I don’t think I’m the uninformed one.
There is no alternative to fossil fuels that you can switch to overnight. Just going cold turkey is genocide. For people will freeze and boil in their homes and possibly starve.
Do you honestly think that 20% of the population of the US and Israel will die when Iran closes the strait or do you just hate to admit you were wrong?
Yes. That is what I already said a few comments ago. If you’re going to have a serious discussion you can at least have the decency to read what is written.
I am talking about the US and Israel because they are attacking Iran, so they are the ones who would have to be deterred from attacking Iran by either closing the strait of Hormuz or getting one (or multiple) of their cities wiped off the face of the earth by a nuclear weapon. That is the problem that was posed.
So let me ask you this: how is people in Africa dying going to deter the US or Israel from attacking Iran? And how would that deter them moreso than the threat of getting nuked?
I can’t say I agree. The strait, as significant as it is, is just a very small piece of the earth. The only thing that is transported through there are oil and oil products. It’s a widely used product and a large portion of the product goes through it, but there are alternative places to get the oil and alternative ways to generate the energy it provides. We’ve seen oil prices go up shortly because of a scare, but we’ve also seen them come down again.
The strait is not a deterring force. They can still get bombed and the only bargaining chip that the strait provides is a financial one. That is a far cry from the mutually assured destruction that a nuclear weapon provides. I can’t remember the last time a war was started against a nuclear power. Maybe some small conflicts between India and Pakistan, but nothing major that comes to mind. I think the war between Russia and Ukraine is now the first time a nuclear power has been bombed on a somewhat larger scale.
Yeah, you’re wrong or uninformed. It is not a minor strait by a long shot and thousands or more will die of it. Economy isn’t just magical numbers on sheets but the real economy is what allows people to carry on existing.
I already acknowledged it was an important product, but if you really think that one product has the same power as a nuclear bomb I don’t know what to tell you. Especially in a time with plenty of alternatives, where the most populous and powerful country is moving towards those alternatives –and away from said product– at breakneck speed, while also pushing the rest of the world towards those ever more affordable alternatives.
So once again, no, I don’t think I’m the uninformed one.
There is no alternative to fossil fuels that you can switch to overnight. Just going cold turkey is genocide. For people will freeze and boil in their homes and possibly starve.
Good thing only 20% of it comes through the strait then!
And the people who freeze and boil are not the ones attacking Iran. Nor do the ones attacking care about what happens to people in other countries.
20% of the population are a whole lot of people.
Do you honestly think that 20% of the population of the US and Israel will die when Iran closes the strait or do you just hate to admit you were wrong?
It’s a very significant amount and many people tend to die even if just the stock market drops a bit.
The real implications of goods availability and the economy is harrowing.
And I don’t know why you are talking about us/is population. Goods are taken from the poorest first. Why do you not care about them but only the rich.
Yes. That is what I already said a few comments ago. If you’re going to have a serious discussion you can at least have the decency to read what is written.
I am talking about the US and Israel because they are attacking Iran, so they are the ones who would have to be deterred from attacking Iran by either closing the strait of Hormuz or getting one (or multiple) of their cities wiped off the face of the earth by a nuclear weapon. That is the problem that was posed.
So let me ask you this: how is people in Africa dying going to deter the US or Israel from attacking Iran? And how would that deter them moreso than the threat of getting nuked?