site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1mo ago (text post)   2383 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for May 3, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Is anyone else starting to freak out about the whole Hormuz situation? 13% of the world's oil, 22% of global LNG and a sizeable chunk of fertilizers is blocked. That means 13% fewer big machines running. That is a major decrease in the global economy. Yet markets seem surprisingly stable and people don't seem to be freaking out despite the impending cliff.

Is Trump actually crazy enough to cause a major crash in the global economy or is he willing to admit defeat and pull out? How bad will this crisis actually get?

There are two separate issues you've mixed together. The increasing supply crisis. And your hate for the West, the US and Trump. Trump didn't block the strait. Iran did. Only putting blame and responsibility on Trump is a sign of bias.

There are two separate issues you've mixed together. The increasing supply crisis. And your hate for the West, the US and Trump. Trump didn't block the strait. Iran did. Only putting blame and responsibility on Trump is a sign of bias.

If I was your older brother, the appropriate response to this would be to grab your arms, give you a couple good whacks, and tell you to stop hitting yourself.

  • -13

You and @TowardsPanna - stop this. Engage in the question, not in petty bickering with each other.

Good thing your wish to engange in violence based on a pretty brief and innocent internet post is only a hypothetical.

The point is that forcing somebody to do something and then blaming them for doing it is petty and sadistic.

If somebody controls an important pass, and you slaughter their family and make it clear that you will continue to slaughter until you get unconditional obedience, then closing off the pass is the obvious and natural response.

Some Americans seem to have got so fed up with being criticised unreasonably that they have lost the capacity to see when they are being criticised reasonably. Others seem to believe that Red Americans (as opposed to the hated Blues) can do no wrong and should be acclaimed throughout the world as the righteous God-Kings they obviously are - or else.

Nobody forced Iran to declare US a "Great Satan", build a vast collection of proxy armies, commit terrorist acts and pursue nuclear weapons, while openly declaring they are going to use them to perpetrate genocide. They chose to live this life. Now they are living the life they have chosen. Their choices led them to the situation where the only choices for their opponents would be either live under a permanent threat of nuclear attack or take measures to preclude this threat before it realized. Iranians had multiple opportunities to get off this train, instead they doubled and tripled down - because their apocalyptic ideology and their belief the West is weak and decadent and can be bullied if one is determined enough - mandated this strategy. Of course, the West did a lot to support that assumption, but this is not an excuse.

is the obvious and natural response.

As much obvious and natural response as shooting you is an obvious and natural response of a robber who is caught by you unexpectedly returning home in mid-robbery. Yes, it is obvious, and yes, it is natural for a violent criminal to resort to violence. I am not sure how you get from "obvious and natural" to "commendable and desirable". It is natural for a criminal to do crime. It is natural for a bunch of crazy apocalyptic cultists to behave like crazy apocalyptic cultists. How that "natural" is any good?

Some Americans seem to have got so fed up with being criticised unreasonably that they have lost the capacity to see when they are being criticised reasonably.

That's empty rhetoric. Of course everybody believe their criticism it the most reasonable one. It does not make it so. You have to actually prove it, you can't just state it and then stand and expect everybody to go "oh, how couldn't we see it before, the is the reasonable one, it's all different now!" Just because you call yourself "reasonable", does not score you any points in the actual reasonableness. On the contrary, when you engage in rule lawyering and defend your criticism with arguments like "oh, you just lost the ability to be criticized and that's why you are not agreeing with me" one is tempted to conclude you do not expect your argument to be strong enough to stand on its merits, without supporting it with attacks on the opponent's mental capacity, instead of addressing their arguments.

While we're talking about relative morality and sibling relationships, Iran is, in my mind, the little brother who constantly flicks your nuts, talks about how they'll beat the shit out of you when they're older, and then runs crying to mommy (the U.N.) when you hit them back.

This is a crappy war we shouldn't have started, but I understand why it happened. I also have very little sympathy for a murderous theocracy so incapable of dealing with reality and so hateful to the average human that it's decided to go scorched earth at every fork in the road.

If somebody controls an important pass

Question: does Pakistan also control the Strait of Hormuz? It's within range of their ASBMs, so what's stopping them from threatening to close it every time they get into a scrap with India?

Maybe they are not insane enough for that?

Pakistan throwing missiles at ships crossing the Strait wouldn’t change the strategic calculations at all for India, and Pakistan would immediately collapse under the retaliation of the countries annoyed at its actions. So no, Pakistan doesn’t control the strait.

Iran forced the US military into an unfavourable ceasefire and now seems to be even coercing a peace treaty by doing the same, and so far they seem to be taking the punishment fine. So yes Iran is obviously the country with by far the most control of the Strait.

Nothing, I guess, if they really do have that ability. I would dispute equating "conducting a sneak-assassination of the entire leadership plus an extended bombing campaign, aimed at some combination of overturning the country's government + preventing them from developing weapons that might actually hurt their attackers" with "getting into a scrap". But yes, if India did that and Pakistan succeeded in closing the Strait of Hormuz, I would naturally blame India.

The US is currently blockading the straight. The straight was open until Trump and Netanyahu started the war that brought us the completely predictable result of the straight being closed. The straight won't be open until they sign a peace deal with Iran.

I don't hate the west. I do hate wars that flood the west with migrants, stop oil supplies and cost a fortune. The wars in the middle east are anti west.

I beg you - it's the strait of Hormuz.

Yeah, it's a lot harder to find the gays of Hormuz.

Yet another consequence of the brutal Iranian regime.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats