We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
Why is your question limited to western democracies and the Gulf States? What about China, India and other Asian Pacific countries? Almost 90% of the crude and condensate passing through the Strait goes to Asian Pacific markets.
I'll take a shot at answering your question as it is written. Just a wild guess, though. Here goes: Because those countries weren't consulted before the US and Israel launched the war, because nothing they did or didn't do prompted Iran to close the Strait, and they're concerned that their involvement could invite retaliation from Iran???
We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
What are you talking about? The Europeans are refusing to take part in a military blockade in an attempt to force Iran to capitulate. They are not making a conscious decision to keep the strait closed. They want a diplomatic solution. Likewise, the Gulf states are desperate to get traffic the strait back to normal, but they don't want to be the ones to go on the offensive.
The U.S. is the aggressor here. We, along with Israel, started this war. We sought no consultation whatsoever from our allies. Now, we find out that they disagree with our tactics, and you're assuming that's because they are just trying to stick it to Trump? That's a childish and wholly unrealistic understanding of foreign affairs. What's really going on is that none of them want to get bogged down in a long military conflict when they all believe that cooler heads would allow a diplomatic solution to get things back to normal more quickly.
The U.S. is the aggressor here. We, along with Israel, started this war. We sought no consultation whatsoever from our allies. Now, we find out that they disagree with our tactics, and you're assuming that's because they are just trying to stick it to Trump? That's a childish and wholly unrealistic understanding of foreign affairs. What's really going on is that none of them want to get bogged down in a long military conflict when they all believe that cooler heads would allow a diplomatic solution to get things back to normal more quickly.
Good luck finding cooler heads.
We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
1. Europe sucks as an ally
2. And not sure how much they could help even if their leaders weren't a bunch of socialist dumba#%es and wanted to
We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
Why is your question limited to western democracies and the Gulf States? What about China, India and other Asian Pacific countries? Almost 90% of the crude and condensate passing through the Strait goes to Asian Pacific markets.
I'll take a shot at answering your question as it is written. Just a wild guess, though. Here goes: Because those countries weren't consulted before the US and Israel launched the war, because nothing they did or didn't do prompted Iran to close the Strait, and they're concerned that their involvement could invite retaliation from Iran???
first, I was mostly just trying to generate discussion. But I mentioned the Gulf states and the western democracy mostly because the gulf states are the ones taking bullets from Iran right now And because Western democracy have been our historical allies in large, unfolding geopolitical issues and strategies.
I am not a certain as you that our European allies were not “consulted.“ I guess it could depend on the definition of “consult.“ I am fairly certain that, even if they were consulted and advised against it, Trump would have acted in exactly the same fashion anyway. Which still brings us back to “ the need for oil“ versus “everything else” - And at least the idea that greater past opposition to Iranian nuclear programs and current Iranian efforts to shut down the Strait might produce the quickest end?
I mean, c'mon. Rubio said the quiet part out loud. Israel was going, so we had to. Nobody else had to. Then, instead of working to sell it to the allies, we tweeted mean stuff at them. They're a bunch socialists who were already capitulating to Russia before we forced their hand in Ukraine when we said no more from us, this is your war. Then there's all the tariff execution, where we looked like there was no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. Why should we expect anything other than the reactions we've gotten?
If you tell people over an extended period of time you don't need them, they're likely not gonna help when it turns out you do.
Hope is not optimism, which expects things to turn out well, but something rooted in the conviction that there is good worth working for. - Seamus Heaney, Irish poet and likely Hoosier basketball fan.
POTFB
I mean, c'mon. Rubio said the quiet part out loud. Israel was going, so we had to. Nobody else had to. Then, instead of working to sell it to the allies, we tweeted mean stuff at them. They're a bunch socialists who were already capitulating to Russia before we forced their hand in Ukraine when we said no more from us, this is your war. Then there's all the tariff execution, where we looked like there was no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. Why should we expect anything other than the reactions we've gotten?
If you tell people over an extended period of time you don't need them, they're likely not gonna help when it turns out you do.
Because we have foot the bill for several decades now to keep global peace, them safe, and shipping lanes opening. In return they have done nothing but increase their welfare state and turn into socialist states. Not to mention this benefits them 10x more than it does the U.S. F%ck Europe, they're behaving like spoiled 30 year olds living in Daddy's basement.
Your post makes sense at first—why can’t “we” get help? Instead of following that with some intelligent analysis of what “we” are failing to do, you incoherently switch to asking about “these nations.”We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
What solve are you trying to problem?
We’ve been footing the bill for own benefit. We’re protecting the world we own.I mean, c'mon. Rubio said the quiet part out loud. Israel was going, so we had to. Nobody else had to. Then, instead of working to sell it to the allies, we tweeted mean stuff at them. They're a bunch socialists who were already capitulating to Russia before we forced their hand in Ukraine when we said no more from us, this is your war. Then there's all the tariff execution, where we looked like there was no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. Why should we expect anything other than the reactions we've gotten?
If you tell people over an extended period of time you don't need them, they're likely not gonna help when it turns out you do.
Because we have foot the bill for several decades now to keep global peace, them safe, and shipping lanes opening. In return they have done nothing but increase their welfare state and turn into socialist states. Not to mention this benefits them 10x more than it does the U.S. F%ck Europe, they're behaving like spoiled 30 year olds living in Daddy's basement.
We can ally with Stalin, but can’t get help keeping Hormuz open from a bombed out Iran?
“Trump is a jerk” does not seem to be worth closing Hormuz, right?
what are the “long plays” these nations are pursuing?
What are you talking about? The Europeans are refusing to take part in a military blockade in an attempt to force Iran to capitulate. They are not making a conscious decision to keep the strait closed. They want a diplomatic solution. Likewise, the Gulf states are desperate to get traffic the strait back to normal, but they don't want to be the ones to go on the offensive.
The U.S. is the aggressor here. We, along with Israel, started this war. We sought no consultation whatsoever from our allies. Now, we find out that they disagree with our tactics, and you're assuming that's because they are just trying to stick it to Trump? That's a childish and wholly unrealistic understanding of foreign affairs. What's really going on is that none of them want to get bogged down in a long military conflict when they all believe that cooler heads would allow a diplomatic solution to get things back to normal more quickly.
I think you are using the term “blockade” too broadly.
Trump isn’t intentionally blocking the entire strait to the entire oil-addicted world. He is trying to block Iranian efforts to use it. However dull, and whether he properly foresaw the certainty of the closure or planned properly for its reopen, this is his current economic weapon and negotiating ploy. And despite his usual intransigence, he appears to be more than willing to escort neutral ships through the gulf. Is that a worthy goal?
And, it seems at least possible (even to a childish foreign affairs thinker) that the quickest route to the diplomatic solution NOW, based on CURRENT circumstances, not just feelings about the past, is for Gulf states and western democracies to weigh in heavily in favor of an open strait with more than platitudes - maybe even with action over “cool words”- like air or naval support to protect the alleged “neutrals” - because you can look and look and look and look and look and keep looking and still not find those “cooler heads” that you adults think should prevail. Who are the “cool heads” you see that I am missing? You think Trump and Iran heads are getting cooler? If we are supposed to fix this quicker by using “the cooler heads,” and are not just satisfied with poking Trump in his non-consulting eyes, tell me who they are and how they can be cool. China? Russia? They “cool”?
sitting back and doing nothing is not going to reopen the strait - it will just leave the US and Iran to continued partisan intransigence - and extend the economic damages of the neutrals and maybe even strengthen Trump’s post-war positions
So - Do NATO and the Gulf states want the cease fire to become a quick end, or do they want to tell Trump “you broke it - you fix it - we will not risk consequences or bad blood with Iran to help you now.”
I’ll sit at the kids table and await the adult ACTION, but pointing out how Trump caused all this is not really helping.
We’ve been footing the bill for own benefit. We’re protecting the world we own.I mean, c'mon. Rubio said the quiet part out loud. Israel was going, so we had to. Nobody else had to. Then, instead of working to sell it to the allies, we tweeted mean stuff at them. They're a bunch socialists who were already capitulating to Russia before we forced their hand in Ukraine when we said no more from us, this is your war. Then there's all the tariff execution, where we looked like there was no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. Why should we expect anything other than the reactions we've gotten?
If you tell people over an extended period of time you don't need them, they're likely not gonna help when it turns out you do.
Because we have foot the bill for several decades now to keep global peace, them safe, and shipping lanes opening. In return they have done nothing but increase their welfare state and turn into socialist states. Not to mention this benefits them 10x more than it does the U.S. F%ck Europe, they're behaving like spoiled 30 year olds living in Daddy's basement.
We don't own the world. We're just the dumbasses footing the bill. All the other nations get the benefit of it. It's fine if Europe wants to be good allies, provide military support, and not turn into socialist nations. Unfortunately, they went the socialist route and they're not longer good allies. They just drive a wedge in between the U.S. and Russia, which pushes Russia into a closer alliance with China. The enemy is China.
Edit: Trump gets Europe is dead weight and NATO is no longer advantageous to the U.S. He tried for a decade to get them to get their heads out of their a#%es, but they're not changing. We should slowly leave NATO and strengthen relationships with Australia, Japan, Saudi, Israel, and South Korea. And lock down the Americas, which we have already done.
The one and only time that NATO invoked Article 5 to defend a NATO member was after 9/11. A couple thousand NATO military personnel fought and died in Afghanistan and in Iraq. We’ve gotten a ton of assistance from NATO over the years. It’s not one way.I mean, c'mon. Rubio said the quiet part out loud. Israel was going, so we had to. Nobody else had to. Then, instead of working to sell it to the allies, we tweeted mean stuff at them. They're a bunch socialists who were already capitulating to Russia before we forced their hand in Ukraine when we said no more from us, this is your war. Then there's all the tariff execution, where we looked like there was no rhyme or reason to what we were doing. Why should we expect anything other than the reactions we've gotten?
If you tell people over an extended period of time you don't need them, they're likely not gonna help when it turns out you do.
Because we have foot the bill for several decades now to keep global peace, them safe, and shipping lanes opening. In return they have done nothing but increase their welfare state and turn into socialist states. Not to mention this benefits them 10x more than it does the U.S. F%ck Europe, they're behaving like spoiled 30 year olds living in Daddy's basement.