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?
The topic is closing the strait of Hormuz being a better deterrent to the attacking forces than having nuclear weapons.
So, staying on topic, again: how is Iran’s control over the strait of Hormuz going to deter the US or Israel more from bombing Iran than Iran having nuclear weapons does?
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?
Iran closing the strait isn’t a targeted measure against the Aggressor and hence unethical.
To be fair they could also destroy desalination plants and kill many millions directly.but that’s a worse war crime.
That’s all true but not the topic of discussion.
The topic is closing the strait of Hormuz being a better deterrent to the attacking forces than having nuclear weapons.
So, staying on topic, again: how is Iran’s control over the strait of Hormuz going to deter the US or Israel more from bombing Iran than Iran having nuclear weapons does?