- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Trump willing to end war without opening Hormuz Strait - WSJ
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:01 am to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Having our largest trading partner decline is a brilliant strategy for our economy
This is another point that the “we’re a net exporter of oil, we don’t need the strait open” people don’t seem to understand.
Pushing the rest of the world into a potential recession because of oil price shocks would affect us as well, even if we are not hit as hard directly by the actual oil price shock.
0
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:01 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No,
Well then it has no place in a discussion about the literal opposite of isolationism.
quote:
but ever since the action was taken they (maybe you?) have whined incessantly about "forever wars."
Well yeah we're seeing various negative externalities of the opposite strategy of isolationism, which isn't a problem for isolationism conceptually.
Forever wars is only one possible negative outcome for choosing the opposite of isolationism. It isn't the only possible negative outcome.
You're creating a false choice and ignoring how we got to that false choice.
quote:
There's nothing dumb about asking you to please make up your fricking minds.
Holy shite
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:01 am to rmnldr
quote:
citing officials with knowledge on the matter,
OMB crowd getting set up to get “pwned” yet again.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 8:07 am
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:02 am to SDVTiger
quote:
You were crying about this last year.
I literally proved you wrong on this in this thread.
quote:
Of course you want to avoid it now
Avoid what? I posted a contemporary post about it from last year proving that you're lying. I have no problem proving I'm right and you're wrong. It happens all the time.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:03 am to Ingeniero
It’s actually kind of ridiculous to get too tore up about anything trump says at this point, by the end of the day he will come probably full circle and threaten to blow more shite up if they don’t open the strait immediately, then tomorrow it shouldn’t surprise anyone if we just invade the place.
The reason he keeps changing his mind is because there is no right thing to do here, He is in a tough spot, he can’t just leave the strait closed- that would likely wreck the world economy (and ours). He can’t really attack the island because it’s a big fricking bomb and a death-trap for our troops, he can’t really blow up the island because that will also cause a massive oil shortage, if we invade it will be very costly in American lives and massively unpopular back home.
The reason he keeps changing his mind is because there is no right thing to do here, He is in a tough spot, he can’t just leave the strait closed- that would likely wreck the world economy (and ours). He can’t really attack the island because it’s a big fricking bomb and a death-trap for our troops, he can’t really blow up the island because that will also cause a massive oil shortage, if we invade it will be very costly in American lives and massively unpopular back home.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:03 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
Pretty sure you know what the real question is.
You're trying to criticize isolationists while ignoring that their preferred policy isn't causing the issues.
You want isolationists to fit their preferred policy into a framing where the literal opposite of isolationism is causing chaos, and then critiquing them.
quote:
After all, you've got an IQ of 140, right?
Higher.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:04 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:Well then I'll rephrase:
Perhaps you should try to comprehend what I wrote.
For every 100 barrels of heavy crude that we import, we export 135 barrels of light sweet crude. Light sweet crude normally sells for about $20 a barrel more than heavy crude. Currently that differential is expanded.
All of which renders your observation about our heavy crude imports completely effing meaningless.
The US will make bank in this environment.
Is that clear enough, or do you need it in pictures with an attached Dr Seuss rhyme?
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 8:05 am
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:04 am to GTnerd
quote:
The reason he keeps changing his mind is because there is no right thing to do here, He is in a tough spot,
Maybe so, but he wasn’t in this spot 60 days ago…
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:05 am to GTnerd
quote:
He is in a tough spot,
This is why you don't create chaos in the Middle East. It's a lesson we should have learned 20 years ago. Wars in the ME = quagmires with no good options.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:06 am to GTnerd
quote:I hope so.
Jesus H. Is this real?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:06 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
The US will make bank in this environment.
While I will personally benefit and many around me will, this will have devastating national economic impacts.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:08 am to slackster
quote:
Maybe so, but he wasn’t in this spot 60 days ago…
Oh Absolutely- he shite in his own bed and now he’s just rolling around in it
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:09 am to biscuitsngravy
quote:
biscuitsngravy
Sitting here wondering how anyone takes the MSM seriously any more, after a 10-year established history and precedent of continuous egregious lies about Trump.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:09 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Light sweet crude normally sells for about $20 a barrel more than heavy crude. Currently that differential is expanded.
Is it? I see it around $12-$15.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:09 am to GTnerd
That's a good post and there have been some military/intel/academic realists in the independent media sphere who predicted this and have been saying it over and over.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:12 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Well then it has no place in a discussion about the literal opposite of isolationism.
Multiple choice question: The United States withdrawing troops from Iran is closer to an
A. Interventionist action
B. Isolationist action
quote:
Forever wars is only one possible negative outcome for choosing the opposite of isolationism. It isn't the only possible negative outcome.
Yes, but of all of the criticisms by isolationists, which one has been parroted more often the last month than any other? Ding, ding, ding.
quote:
You're creating a false choice and ignoring how we got to that false choice.
No, I'm addressing the specific whining of late.
I get that isolationists can say, "Well we never should have been there in the first place," but then I will simply ask them (you?) the same question I asked the guy upthread. Please link me to the military intelligence, including the classified material, that proves that the US had no legitimate interest in this action.
That's what all you YOU guys ignore.
You objectively do not know whether any given military action was justified or not, nor do you know the likely consequences if we hadn't taken action.
Neither do I, for that matter. Neither does anyone who isn't a CIC or a JCOS.
So there is no way to judge the "negative externalities" against the likely outcome had we not intervened, and acting like there is is he Dunning Kruger Effect on display.
And that is my overall point. You guys who think you know what the US should or shouldn't be doing at any given time with regard to these things are full of shite. It's like watching people criticize a guy working a math problem on a board when half the numbers are hidden from the audience, but acting like they know when the guy makes a mistake.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:13 am to GTnerd
He can’t just keep flip flopping based on how he feels that day. A global energy crisis has spawned out of this. NATO countries are openly breaking with us and are already or soon to be cutting deals with Iran behind our backs.
We should’ve never initiated war without letting NATO know. Especially now that Trump is telling them they’ll have to open the strait themselves.
This is disastrous to American legitimacy. And it shows that our military is incapable of actually removing the Iranian threat without a significant loss of life by our personnel.
We’re very close to handing Iran a strategic victory.
We should’ve never initiated war without letting NATO know. Especially now that Trump is telling them they’ll have to open the strait themselves.
This is disastrous to American legitimacy. And it shows that our military is incapable of actually removing the Iranian threat without a significant loss of life by our personnel.
We’re very close to handing Iran a strategic victory.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:13 am to rmnldr
Un-named sources say:
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:14 am to rmnldr
quote:
This is disastrous to American legitimacy
Stop being a bitch.
quote:
We’re very close to handing Iran a strategic victory
Or retarded.
This post was edited on 3/31/26 at 8:15 am
Posted on 3/31/26 at 8:14 am to rmnldr
quote:
We’re very close to handing Iran a strategic victory
We know the USA will have total victory now
Page 11 of 17
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News