|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On August 11 2026 03:31 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 02:50 KwarK wrote:On August 11 2026 02:16 RvB wrote:On August 11 2026 01:54 KwarK wrote:On August 10 2026 23:12 oBlade wrote:On August 10 2026 22:34 Billyboy wrote:On August 10 2026 18:58 oBlade wrote:On August 10 2026 09:10 Billyboy wrote:I wonder if Republicans are getting tired of winning so hard yet, Tehran is demanding the US end its attacks on Iran and its regional allies, end the blockade of Iran’s ports, remove US military forces around Iran, lift US sanctions, unfreeze Iranian assets and compensate for war damages. Imagine still believing that Trump was the better choice. Has anyone ever lost a way harder that they started and had every advantage? It’s actually wild. Oh wow well if Tehran is "demanding" it that's pretty bad since if Tehran demands something everyone just has to do it, I mean it's Tehran after all. And when their demands aren't met, what exactly will happen? I would presume the US will keep spending bombs and interceptors plus the billions on force posturing they are unwilling to use until the economic and political pressure is too much for Donnie and he capitulates and declares victory. And mush brains like you will cheer for him. Your guess? You just told me Iran is demanding the US end its attacks on Iran, and that if the US doesn't, then the US will use bombs on Iran. That's definitionally what would happen. I already got that part. Iran has nothing attached to these demands? "Meet our demands by... never... or else we will do... nothing." What remaining card are they going to play and why were they so generous as to not play it in the last 6 months? Firstly, you don’t believe in Iran. Your stance is that the old nation no longer exists post regime change. Secondly, the closed strait is a slow escalating burn. They don’t need a new card, the closure does nothing for a while due to the large stockpiles but as those stockpiles are eroded the releases slow and the damage escalates. The assertion that pressure won’t increase is nonsense, it’s constantly increasing. More time also gives markets more time to adjust. The oil price is not consistent with a slow escalating burn. From the start of the war until the second half of May the price was consistently close to 100 dollars a barrel. It has not breached 90 dollars since even though inventories are much lower right now. Look at the US SPR graph if you want to see why it went down in May. The price goes up when releases slow and goes down when they increase. If we imagine a scenario where each week 2% of whatever remains is released then we would see what you expect, a slow rise. But that’s not how the releases have been done. My argument was that the pressure increases over time as stocks are drawn down, not necessarily the price. Let's say tomorrow Trump went crazy and decided to sell from the SPR to any buyer for $50/barrel. The price would sharply drop but the pressure would sharply increase as the timeline on the impending emergency changed. You can't equate oil price to pressure 1:1. Take a look at how large oil markets are and compare it to the strategic reserves. They're not nearly enough to cause price movements like that for any significant amount of time. It helps at the margin and can prevent large price spikes. An increase in production by other producers and a very large reduction in demand are much bigger factors. You mean like China slashing its oil imports and supplementing with its own strategic reserve in order to free up room on the market?
Its not just the US that has been covering the shortfall from the lost export via the strait.
|
On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months.
|
On August 11 2026 03:16 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 03:02 Jankisa wrote:On August 11 2026 02:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 11 2026 02:16 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 23:30 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 10 2026 23:21 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 23:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 10 2026 23:10 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On August 10 2026 22:01 Jankisa wrote:
[quote]
Hey mate, can't help but notice that you went quite for a bit after I answered your question which you demanded before you'd answer mine, so let's try again:
"If you lived in Michigan, who would you vote for in the Senate race, Abdul El-Sayed or Mike Rogers?" The post you ignored was on El-Sayed’s quotes and Hasan Piker’s involvement in the race that made both primary candidates unpalatable to me. You dodged with some pretty comical and unexplained “McCarthyism” and “Israelmaxxing” non-sequiturs, but perhaps you’re now ready to actually reply to my post. If that is beyond you still, then I will also wait until you’re ready in the interests of rewarding dialogue and not trolling. + Show Spoiler +
I explained my stance, you as every dishonest actor ever are just moving goalposts.
Well, whether you reply or not, I think it's pretty obvious that your hand-wringing and cosplaying being against what is happening in USA is performative + Show Spoiler +, you don't really need to reply that you'd vote to keep Trump in power based on red scare style propaganda that has consumed your brain for that much to be obvious. Another day, another hypocrite trying to hide who they are. Who here do you think this doesn't apply to? Micronesia seems like a great example, there are many other US based posters who are pragmatic and consistent in their stances and views on how to put an end to the rise of fascism in the USA. You, on the other hand would definitely, in my book, fall under the performative category since you don't really seem to care enough to focus on the actual problem and only want to push your pet issues and pursuit revenge against the Democrat party. So "pragmatic and consistent stances" (those seem like somewhat conflicting traits?) is how you distinguish opposition to the rise of fascism in the US from those just doing so performatively? Based on that you identified dyhb as a performative hypocrite. You sure that's what you want to go with? Yeah. A pragmatic person, even if they have deep distaste of who a candidate associates with, if this candidate is from the only viable opposition party and this party has nominated them, will tow the party line and, especially when faced with fascism happily vote (or say that they would) for the candidate they perceive as problematic. Someone who is a liar or a hypocrite will write low quality posts trying to present themselves as victims of injustice instead of answering a simple question. This stance (vote blue no matter who in the face of fascism) is the only pragmatic stance, if you or anyone else can't hold it consistently you only oppose fascism performatively. This really shouldn't be that hard to understand. It's not hard to understand. It's petty and stupid. Saying "I'd vote blue no matter who" is quintessential performative opposition to fascism. Nevertheless, everyone pissing and moaning about dyhb is eventually going to demand everyone fall in line behind dyhb's "performative opposition to fascism" because dyhb's perspective more closely aligns with the leadership of Democrats' party. Any reasonable analysis of US political history recognizes that voting is incidental to significant political progress anyway. That means if you're not even an active member of the Democrats' party (which afaict no one here claims to be), it's pretty asinine to be here performatively pretending one is opposing fascism through supporting Democrats/advocating "vote blue no matter who". Ah, yes, here we go, right in the crux of the issue, the fact that you, deep down understand that your hand wringing is actually performative and the rage you feel when you start understanding that above anything else, the most concrete thing you, as an American, can do to help your country not be a fascist shitthole is to vote and organize for Democrats. + Show Spoiler +And of course that makes you lash out, mock, gawk and even play lawyer for bad faith actors, because you can't do that, you are a spurned lover who can't get over yourself in order to actually be useful to the project of democracy and humanism, your own ego and deeply held belief that you are right is much more important to you then anyone else's well being, and this is what you, oBlade and dyhb have in common. That's just factually wrong. I learned that, in part, the hard way after over a decade of more organizing and supporting of Democrats than anyone here has ever claimed. That, combined with learning more about decades/centuries of the history from the generations of others that also learned those same sort of lessons the hard ways. Shitposting with oBlade and spamming variations of "vote blue no matter who is the only option" is exactly the kinds of performative opposition the fascists need you all to do for them to keep winning (regardless of who wins the elections).
Meh, honestly, why do you even quote my posts if you are going to keep on spamming your bs?
I guess it's because I'm the last one who bothers to reply to you.
If you had any ability to self-reflect you might be able to notice that your tactics and approach are obviously very flawed and extremely annoying, but unfortunately you don't so here we are.
You are stuck in the world of 10 years ago and you can't bring yourself to re-asses the situation and move on because your ego won't allow it.
|
On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah.
Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/
This example was last month, it is not new.
Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'.
|
On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow.
Same in the side of Hamas and Hezbollah. These negotiations are purely performative, neither side want peace which requires compromise, they only want total victory.
|
On August 11 2026 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah. Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/This example was last month, it is not new. Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'. I regarded all the stupid Trump promising that Israel will do something relating to Hezbollah in Lebanon as Trump stupidity. He's negotiating on behalf of the US relating to Iran.
I'm talking about the Gaza peace deal, not angry phone calls. They can have as supplicating relationship or angry relationship or whatever, but I figured on more playing nice on Gaza-US-Israel for the sake of his electoral chances. Which aren't great so far as I am reading.
|
On August 11 2026 04:10 Jankisa wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 03:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 11 2026 03:02 Jankisa wrote:On August 11 2026 02:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 11 2026 02:16 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 23:30 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 10 2026 23:21 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 23:12 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 10 2026 23:10 Jankisa wrote:On August 10 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:
[quote]The post you ignored was on El-Sayed’s quotes and Hasan Piker’s involvement in the race that made both primary candidates unpalatable to me. You dodged with some pretty comical and unexplained “McCarthyism” and “Israelmaxxing” non-sequiturs, but perhaps you’re now ready to actually reply to my post. If that is beyond you still, then I will also wait until you’re ready in the interests of rewarding dialogue and not trolling. + Show Spoiler +
I explained my stance, you as every dishonest actor ever are just moving goalposts.
Well, whether you reply or not, I think it's pretty obvious that your hand-wringing and cosplaying being against what is happening in USA is performative + Show Spoiler +, you don't really need to reply that you'd vote to keep Trump in power based on red scare style propaganda that has consumed your brain for that much to be obvious. Another day, another hypocrite trying to hide who they are. Who here do you think this doesn't apply to? Micronesia seems like a great example, there are many other US based posters who are pragmatic and consistent in their stances and views on how to put an end to the rise of fascism in the USA. You, on the other hand would definitely, in my book, fall under the performative category since you don't really seem to care enough to focus on the actual problem and only want to push your pet issues and pursuit revenge against the Democrat party. So "pragmatic and consistent stances" (those seem like somewhat conflicting traits?) is how you distinguish opposition to the rise of fascism in the US from those just doing so performatively? Based on that you identified dyhb as a performative hypocrite. You sure that's what you want to go with? Yeah. A pragmatic person, even if they have deep distaste of who a candidate associates with, if this candidate is from the only viable opposition party and this party has nominated them, will tow the party line and, especially when faced with fascism happily vote (or say that they would) for the candidate they perceive as problematic. Someone who is a liar or a hypocrite will write low quality posts trying to present themselves as victims of injustice instead of answering a simple question. This stance (vote blue no matter who in the face of fascism) is the only pragmatic stance, if you or anyone else can't hold it consistently you only oppose fascism performatively. This really shouldn't be that hard to understand. It's not hard to understand. It's petty and stupid. Saying "I'd vote blue no matter who" is quintessential performative opposition to fascism. Nevertheless, everyone pissing and moaning about dyhb is eventually going to demand everyone fall in line behind dyhb's "performative opposition to fascism" because dyhb's perspective more closely aligns with the leadership of Democrats' party. Any reasonable analysis of US political history recognizes that voting is incidental to significant political progress anyway. That means if you're not even an active member of the Democrats' party (which afaict no one here claims to be), it's pretty asinine to be here performatively pretending one is opposing fascism through supporting Democrats/advocating "vote blue no matter who". Ah, yes, here we go, right in the crux of the issue, the fact that you, deep down understand that your hand wringing is actually performative and the rage you feel when you start understanding that above anything else, the most concrete thing you, as an American, can do to help your country not be a fascist shitthole is to vote and organize for Democrats. + Show Spoiler +And of course that makes you lash out, mock, gawk and even play lawyer for bad faith actors, because you can't do that, you are a spurned lover who can't get over yourself in order to actually be useful to the project of democracy and humanism, your own ego and deeply held belief that you are right is much more important to you then anyone else's well being, and this is what you, oBlade and dyhb have in common. That's just factually wrong. I learned that, in part, the hard way after over a decade of more organizing and supporting of Democrats than anyone here has ever claimed. That, combined with learning more about decades/centuries of the history from the generations of others that also learned those same sort of lessons the hard ways. Shitposting with oBlade and spamming variations of "vote blue no matter who is the only option" is exactly the kinds of performative opposition the fascists need you all to do for them to keep winning (regardless of who wins the elections). Meh, honestly, why do you even quote my posts if you are going to keep on spamming your bs? I guess it's because I'm the last one who bothers to reply to you. If you had any ability to self-reflect you might be able to notice that your tactics and approach are obviously very flawed and extremely annoying, but unfortunately you don't so here we are. You are stuck in the world of 10 years ago and you can't bring yourself to re-asses the situation and move on because your ego won't allow it.
I don't even know what you mean by "spamming your bs"?
Surely you can't mean me consistently holding a pragmatic frame/views based on historical materialism rather than performative unconditional support of electoralism/Democrats.
What's the actual desirable posting alternative to my posting around here besides joining the rest of you in dog piles on people you all insist are not worth engaging and have repeatedly explained to each other that what you're doing is what oBlade types want anyway?
|
On August 11 2026 04:23 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah. Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/This example was last month, it is not new. Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'. I regarded all the stupid Trump promising that Israel will do something relating to Hezbollah in Lebanon as Trump stupidity. He's negotiating on behalf of the US relating to Iran. I'm talking about the Gaza peace deal, not angry phone calls. They can have as supplicating relationship or angry relationship or whatever, but I figured on more playing nice on Gaza-US-Israel for the sake of his electoral chances. Which aren't great so far as I am reading. Netanyahu's re-election is tied to his ability to keep the country at war and appease the hardliners by committing genocide and establishing greater Israel.
Peace is the greatest threat to Netanyahu, not whether or not he sucked Trumps dick recently.
|
An added dimension to that is Netanyahu is also trying to win the votes of the Hasidic community by letting them keep their military/tax exemptions, and also the militarist right that want to draft the Hasidic community so they can annex more land from Lebanon and Palestine. There's a bit of a balancing act where he has to depict Hamas as simultaneously an existential threat to Jews everywhere but also "they're militarily exhausted, we don't need to draft more people."
|
United States44226 Posts
On August 11 2026 03:31 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 02:50 KwarK wrote:On August 11 2026 02:16 RvB wrote:On August 11 2026 01:54 KwarK wrote:On August 10 2026 23:12 oBlade wrote:On August 10 2026 22:34 Billyboy wrote:On August 10 2026 18:58 oBlade wrote:On August 10 2026 09:10 Billyboy wrote:I wonder if Republicans are getting tired of winning so hard yet, Tehran is demanding the US end its attacks on Iran and its regional allies, end the blockade of Iran’s ports, remove US military forces around Iran, lift US sanctions, unfreeze Iranian assets and compensate for war damages. Imagine still believing that Trump was the better choice. Has anyone ever lost a way harder that they started and had every advantage? It’s actually wild. Oh wow well if Tehran is "demanding" it that's pretty bad since if Tehran demands something everyone just has to do it, I mean it's Tehran after all. And when their demands aren't met, what exactly will happen? I would presume the US will keep spending bombs and interceptors plus the billions on force posturing they are unwilling to use until the economic and political pressure is too much for Donnie and he capitulates and declares victory. And mush brains like you will cheer for him. Your guess? You just told me Iran is demanding the US end its attacks on Iran, and that if the US doesn't, then the US will use bombs on Iran. That's definitionally what would happen. I already got that part. Iran has nothing attached to these demands? "Meet our demands by... never... or else we will do... nothing." What remaining card are they going to play and why were they so generous as to not play it in the last 6 months? Firstly, you don’t believe in Iran. Your stance is that the old nation no longer exists post regime change. Secondly, the closed strait is a slow escalating burn. They don’t need a new card, the closure does nothing for a while due to the large stockpiles but as those stockpiles are eroded the releases slow and the damage escalates. The assertion that pressure won’t increase is nonsense, it’s constantly increasing. More time also gives markets more time to adjust. The oil price is not consistent with a slow escalating burn. From the start of the war until the second half of May the price was consistently close to 100 dollars a barrel. It has not breached 90 dollars since even though inventories are much lower right now. Look at the US SPR graph if you want to see why it went down in May. The price goes up when releases slow and goes down when they increase. If we imagine a scenario where each week 2% of whatever remains is released then we would see what you expect, a slow rise. But that’s not how the releases have been done. My argument was that the pressure increases over time as stocks are drawn down, not necessarily the price. Let's say tomorrow Trump went crazy and decided to sell from the SPR to any buyer for $50/barrel. The price would sharply drop but the pressure would sharply increase as the timeline on the impending emergency changed. You can't equate oil price to pressure 1:1. Take a look at how large oil markets are and compare it to the strategic reserves. They're not nearly enough to cause price movements like that for any significant amount of time. It helps at the margin and can prevent large price spikes. An increase in production by other producers and a very large reduction in demand are much bigger factors.
I suggest you do exactly that. We're talking about a net deficit of about 13m barrel/day through Hormuz after pipelines. And we're talking about stockpiles of over 2,000m barrels. China alone has 1,400m barrels. Once you add marginal production onlined/upscaled after the price hikes the stockpiles are more than sufficient for the time period you're saying they wouldn't be.
Weird that you would ask me to take a look at the numbers when they so utterly disprove your point.
|
On August 11 2026 04:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:23 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah. Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/This example was last month, it is not new. Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'. I regarded all the stupid Trump promising that Israel will do something relating to Hezbollah in Lebanon as Trump stupidity. He's negotiating on behalf of the US relating to Iran. I'm talking about the Gaza peace deal, not angry phone calls. They can have as supplicating relationship or angry relationship or whatever, but I figured on more playing nice on Gaza-US-Israel for the sake of his electoral chances. Which aren't great so far as I am reading. Netanyahu's re-election is tied to his ability to keep the country at war and appease the hardliners by committing genocide and establishing greater Israel. Peace is the greatest threat to Netanyahu, not whether or not he sucked Trumps dick recently.
Winning would be the best for him. The rest is your angry fantasy. If Israel could defeat Hezbollah, have them completely removed from Lebanon, normalize relations and move their army completely out of Lebanon. That would be a huge victory for Netanyahu.
That the people of Israel are blood thirsty group and only genocide will satisfy them, is hateful nonsense.
|
Having an enemy at the gates is infinitely more politically valuable than actually beating them. Winston Churchill led the Tories to a landslide defeat after winning WWII. There are numerous such examples.
|
On August 11 2026 04:48 LightSpectra wrote:
Having an enemy at the gates is infinitely more politically valuable than actually beating them. Winston Churchill led the Tories to a landslide defeat after winning WWII. There are numerous such examples.
But actually fighting them tends to be bad politically. It’s not like there are not plenty of enemies at Israel’s gate without Hezbollah.
|
On August 11 2026 04:46 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:30 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 04:23 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah. Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/This example was last month, it is not new. Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'. I regarded all the stupid Trump promising that Israel will do something relating to Hezbollah in Lebanon as Trump stupidity. He's negotiating on behalf of the US relating to Iran. I'm talking about the Gaza peace deal, not angry phone calls. They can have as supplicating relationship or angry relationship or whatever, but I figured on more playing nice on Gaza-US-Israel for the sake of his electoral chances. Which aren't great so far as I am reading. Netanyahu's re-election is tied to his ability to keep the country at war and appease the hardliners by committing genocide and establishing greater Israel. Peace is the greatest threat to Netanyahu, not whether or not he sucked Trumps dick recently. Winning would be the best for him. The rest is your angry fantasy. If Israel could defeat Hezbollah, have them completely removed from Lebanon, normalize relations and move their army completely out of Lebanon. That would be a huge victory for Netanyahu. That the people of Israel are blood thirsty group and only genocide will satisfy them, is hateful nonsense. I said hardliners, not all jews.
And I can say that because it literally happened and is still happening in Gaza. And you can add the long history of illegal Israel settlements claiming land from Palestinians that continues to this day.
Certain groups within Israel absolute are bloodthirsty genocidal maniacs.
The facts are there, the UN human rights council agrees with me.
A new report alleges that Israeli authorities and security forces have "deliberately carried out acts inflicting death and severe bodily and mental harm on hundreds of thousands of Palestinian children", and that the killings continued even after last October's ceasefire in Gaza.
The commission says it has reasonable grounds to conclude that those acts "form part of a deliberate strategy to destroy the future of the Palestinians in Gaza by targeting their children". www.bbc.com
|
On August 11 2026 04:53 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:48 LightSpectra wrote:
Having an enemy at the gates is infinitely more politically valuable than actually beating them. Winston Churchill led the Tories to a landslide defeat after winning WWII. There are numerous such examples. But actually fighting them tends to be bad politically. It’s not like there are not plenty of enemies at Israel’s gate without Hezbollah.
I disagree with "actually fighting them tends to be bad politically". That only seems to be true if the leader is losing against them for preventable reasons (e.g. incompetence).
I don't know enough about modern warfare to say if the IDF could just roll into southern Lebanon and crush Hezbollah in a few weeks, but I know enough about real estate to say Israeli settlers couldn't build houses on the land they're taking fast enough if Hezbollah were quickly annihilated. A perpetual "defensive" war where they get a hundred acres every time some idiot shoots a rocket across the border is a dream come true for a far-right demagogue.
|
On August 11 2026 04:30 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:23 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 04:13 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 04:08 dyhb wrote:On August 11 2026 03:55 Gorsameth wrote:On August 11 2026 02:51 dyhb wrote:Interesting development in the road up to the upcoming Israeli elections and US midterm elections: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected President Trump’s plan to establish permanent peace in Gaza, a rare public break with the U.S. leader, who just weeks ago hailed “a historic agreement” to disarm Hamas.
The plan calls for the militant group to lay down arms in tandem with the gradual withdrawal of Israeli troops from the enclave, which the Israeli leader said Sunday couldn’t happen until Hamas was fully disarmed.
Netanyahu’s decision, spelled out in a government meeting and video statement, risks angering Trump, with whom he has had fractious relations behind the scenes for months. The collapse of the peace process in Gaza would rob Trump of what his administration has described as a major foreign-policy achievement of his second term at the same time as the president is embroiled in the Iran war.
Netanyahu, who has come under pressure from the Trump administration to agree to the deal to disarm Hamas, also faces uphill elections in the fall and his hard-right coalition partners have vociferously objected to the terms of the agreement. “Israel rejects the 15-point document. The IDF will not carry out any withdrawal until Hamas is disarmed. And when I say the disarmament of Hamas, I mean heavy weapons, less heavy weapons, light weapons, all the weapons,” Netanyahu said at the opening of an Israeli cabinet meeting, using an abbreviation for the Israeli military. WSJWithdrawal prior to disarmament appears to be the sticking point. Netanyahu has sabotaged or rejected every single peace negotiation in the region. It is as interesting a development as the sun rising tomorrow. The break with Trump is interesting to me at this juncture. Trump's more popular than Netanyahu in Israel, and Netanyahu is facing an election in two and a half months. Netanyahu has broken repeatedly with Trump during this Iran war when Netanyahu repeatedly sabotaged the peace (surrender) deals that Trump's team negotiated by continuing attacks on Hezbollah. Trump having angry calls with Netanyahu has been in the news several times already. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trump-confirms-he-called-netanyahu-crazy-phone-call-2026-06-03/This example was last month, it is not new. Netanyahu has Trump by the balls, the exact reasoning you can argue over. Whether its Epstein tapes from him being a Mossad asset or just the US Jewish lobby but until Trump announces the US is leaving Israel to sort it themselves I'm not buying any 'rift'. I regarded all the stupid Trump promising that Israel will do something relating to Hezbollah in Lebanon as Trump stupidity. He's negotiating on behalf of the US relating to Iran. I'm talking about the Gaza peace deal, not angry phone calls. They can have as supplicating relationship or angry relationship or whatever, but I figured on more playing nice on Gaza-US-Israel for the sake of his electoral chances. Which aren't great so far as I am reading. Netanyahu's re-election is tied to his ability to keep the country at war and appease the hardliners by committing genocide and establishing greater Israel. Peace is the greatest threat to Netanyahu, not whether or not he sucked Trumps dick recently. Israel is a multiparty parliamentary democracy. Netanyahu has other opposition leaders that also reject any deal that enacts troops withdrawals prior to full Hamas disarmament. I don't think any opposition candidate has said that Hamas will willingly disarm as part of a deal. So i think you're being too one-dimensional on this. It's more about withdrawal under what terms and what ongoing negotiations should look like.
On August 11 2026 04:45 LightSpectra wrote:
An added dimension to that is Netanyahu is also trying to win the votes of the Hasidic community by letting them keep their military/tax exemptions, and also the militarist right that want to draft the Hasidic community so they can annex more land from Lebanon and Palestine. There's a bit of a balancing act where he has to depict Hamas as simultaneously an existential threat to Jews everywhere but also "they're militarily exhausted, we don't need to draft more people."
Haredim military exemption is way MORE of a consideration than Trump's deal/deals and any one-dimensional analysis. Not really Trump-related, but a good thing to know and understand if you think Netanyahu just has to be war war war to stay in power.
|
On August 11 2026 05:03 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2026 04:53 Billyboy wrote:On August 11 2026 04:48 LightSpectra wrote:
Having an enemy at the gates is infinitely more politically valuable than actually beating them. Winston Churchill led the Tories to a landslide defeat after winning WWII. There are numerous such examples. But actually fighting them tends to be bad politically. It’s not like there are not plenty of enemies at Israel’s gate without Hezbollah. I disagree with "actually fighting them tends to be bad politically". That only seems to be true if the leader is losing against them for preventable reasons (e.g. incompetence). I don't know enough about modern warfare to say if the IDF could just roll into southern Lebanon and crush Hezbollah in a few weeks, but I know enough about real estate to say Israeli settlers couldn't build houses on the land they're taking fast enough if Hezbollah were quickly annihilated. A perpetual "defensive" war where they get a hundred acres every time some idiot shoots a rocket across the border is a dream come true for a far-right demagogue.
They can’t without a full invasion. And there are not any settlements in Lebanon (there are advocacy groups saying they should). Hell until very recently most of the Israel territory was evacuated because of the Hezbollah rocket attacks and the “reason” for the IDF heading into Southern Lebanon was to take it back from Hezbollah since the UN didn’t enforce the treaty. Currently Israel has an agreement to leave those areas and give security responsibility back to the Lebanese government, I think this has only happened in two small “pilot sites”, so whether or not long term that happens or not is up in the air.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
