This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
US was escorting oil tankers through the straits even before the MOU and its subsequent collapse. Iran is not capable of exercising control over the Strait. All they can do is threaten to bomb and drone neutral merchant ships (and despite all their rhetoric they have done precious little of this).
Meanwhile, the US has Iran under blockade. It’s Iranian ports that are empty. America has the mouth of the Gulf bottled up — so what does it mean when ships are still transiting the gulf? It means that America is allowing traffic through.
Iran will never control the Strait and will certainly never be allowed to toll the Strait. Declarations of the opposite should be viewed with the same credulity we give Baghdad Bob announcing that Saddam will push the Americans back any day now.
I’ve been over this before in this thread but this is fake news. The two missile types running low are stockpiles of an old interceptor from the 90s, and test units of a new prototype being used on the battlefield.
I guarantee that America will continue to deploy interceptors as needed in Iran and across the world. As this happens you should consider how it is you came to believe fake news.
I’m afraid this reads more like cuck porn than an argument.
Your belief is that the American military can win any time it wants to, but simply chooses not to? Or that America knows deep down it would lose so that’s why it doesn’t even try? That’s not even remotely close to anything happening in the real world, that is an emotional reaction being projected onto world events.
In reality, Iran is weaker than ever, facing economic crisis, cannot control traffic through the Straits, cannot stop trade from rerouting around the Straits, cannot meaningfully damage the American military, cannot break the American blockade. Oil is barely more expensive than when the conflict started, contrary to all predictions that Iran would have the global economy by the throat and would bring oil to $200 a barrel. America, meanwhile, is totally unphazed.
You need to up your reading comprehension. I clearly said 'the latter'. That's why the US carrier group is lurking south of the straits, just outside the edge of Iranian anti-ship missile range. That's why US soldiers left their Gulf bases to hide in hotels before Iranian missiles demolished them.
If the US is so powerful and strong and the Iranians so weak, why not simply sail north, through the straits, stay there for days and weeks escorting shipping and show everyone there's nothing to fear? Why haven't they done this? That would immediately ease the insurers concerns and sort everything out.
America has been escorting ships through the strait.
America is constantly operating within range of Iranian missiles
You seem to be advancing a weird sadomasochistic view of war where America not going out of its way to increase risk means it must be running scared.
The fact that Iran can’t kill American soldiers and can only hit empty bases is a good sign that they lost.
As I understand the strait did not need American escorting until the decisive victory of America. If true, then for how long does America need to expend extra effort escorting ships through the strait before it stops looking like America gained something?
The entire global supply chain is held up by the implicit promise that America will escort merchant vessels. Iran is now threatening neutral vessels, so America is escorting them.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The whole point of using the cuck language is to expose the contradiction in your argument.
So why not sail through to show exactly who controls it? Why is anyone talking about Iran getting 7% tolls, or splitting profits with Oman, or charging 1-2 million per ship? Nobody would do this if there was a carrier group sitting right there in the straits. Why are there drones hitting ships? Why is traffic crossing the straits at 2% of prewar average? Why are they effectively closed if the US is so powerful and Iran so weak? What the hell was going on with Yemen a couple years back? Why did Trump start blaming his allies for not sending their navies to the straits back in month 2?
Why are there drones attacking US shipping in Suez last week for that matter?
You said yourself that all Iran could do was plink away at a few cargo ships and they barely did much of that... Are we to believe that a US navy carrier battlegroup is weaker in battle than a few civilian cargo ships? This sounds like an easy win! What kind of coward shrinks back from a few measly drones? Protect the shipping, save the day.
You keep saying that America is so powerful. But when it comes to showing that power and reaping rewards, mysteriously it becomes 'going out of their way to increase risk'. It's just cope. When Communist China was threatening Taiwan in the 50s and 90s the US sailed a carrier group through the straits to deter and show power.
It's your perspective that ironically necessitates the US military being absolute lily-livered crybaby pussies, that's my point. My theory explains it perfectly. The US isn't run by effeminate cuckolds. They know that if they tried to secure the straits in actual fact, asserting their presence and escorting more than a tiny handful of ships, it would probably fail, get a bunch of sailors killed and cost more than it gained.
Because Iran is a third-world country blustering and bloviating as they are being defeated, and a lot of panicans and Europeans are choosing to take that seriously. Really: You are asserting that Iran's ludicrous claims to toll the strait are evidence that Iran can toll the strait, and that I have to explain this somehow. I don't pay it any attention at all. I take it as seriously as the Navy Seal with 300 confirmed kills threatening to wipe me out.
This is what the American military is currently doing. American ships and personnel are under constant threat. You have invented some new requirement that American ships have to go where you, an amateur, with no skin in the game, with no military intelligence -- that American ships have to go where you believe they should go, or else they're chicken. In point of fact you have no idea where American ships are actually stationed at any particular moment.
But we do know for a fact that American ships have physically escorted merchant ships through the straits, so we can at least conclude with certainty that you are wrong.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link