BynarsAreOk

I think we should consider that the ME oil = world economy narrative may be overestimated.

The US is self sufficient already and they're also supplying the EU. The "world economy" is already in shambles, the EU is in a recession since 2022, yes markets will crash, commodity prices skyrocket, but we should consider that in actual practice the impact on the west may not be as big as people are assuming here.

The calculation may well be the pain is worth it because the US isn't going to be the one suffering the most. If this is what they believe then all this calculation based on "the US can't do X because it would destroy the Gulf oil production" is moot.

Also it goes without saying it is China the one to lose out the most if we have another commodities boom. It is China the one primarily looking for cheap oil and cheap food, not the US.

I think you're closer to the truth here, still saying the hits were on warehouses etc still begs the questions about workers and security on site etc these are military facilities after all.

Obviously the counterpoint is given they would know such a strike is coming eventually its hard to imagine precautions around this aren't already in place.

For once 100% agreement here.

Their "involvement" matters when the Iranians and the Palestinians stop dying. IMO some YT grifter using western MSM headlines which we know more than half the time are made to justify the infinitely expanding US MIC spending is not serious narrative at this point.

Yes Israel is running out of bombs and missiles. So anyway another bomb dropped in Gaza and Iran is still about to get nuked.

https://www.lemonde.fr/videos/video/2025/06/18/guerre-en-ukraine-au-sein-de-la-3e-brigade-d-assaut-ukrainienne-des-centaines-de-soldats-arborent-toujours-des-symboles-neonazis_6614140_1669088.html

No benefit yet. It would only galvanize the lib-baby socialist pipeline on social media.

The right completely dominates YT and streaming now, except for some niches on tiktok. Hasan stands out not because he is particularly great but because he is the only big figure remaining. For example Asmongold is living in a basement, proudly proclaims doesn't take a baths and literaly have dead rats around him. Someone like that already managed to rise to the top of "politics" streaming.

If they're truly concious about this it would be a mistake to open up the left wing social media sphere to creators more radical than Hasan. He does far more good than bad overall, but he is not radicalizing towards any movement yet.

"Whoever wants to win me will have to walk more than me in the streets, talk more with the people and do more than me. And I doubt that among those who are now, there is anyone capable," Lula expressed firmly.

They could do that or you know, just point out you try to cut the already meager social welfare for literally poor and disabled people in the most unequal country in the world. Maybe point out you dance and squirm like a worm trying to justify your neoliberal appointed ghoul keeps raising the interest rate which literally now sits at 15% which is the historical high. Maybe point out there have been severe scandals in your government including the latest social security pension scandal that is making your shit government incredibly unpopular. How you literaly promised to reverse the privatization of Eletrobras but after 3 years you cowardly piece of shit refused to even take the issue to congress.

I'm sorry this is worse than slop, who cares about what this ghoul is saying?

And obviously it's a regime change operation, it's called Operation Rising Lion. Anyone familiar with Persian history will immediately get the reference to the sun and lion, part of Iran's flag until the Islamic Revolution.

Interesting, not sure many people noticed that even here, I certainly didn't.

People just refuse to understand Israel isn't Ukraine and this isn't Graham's "we're killing Iranians ~~Russians~~ for cheap" kind of war.

I don't think the US is going to magically build industries and factories, even for a war effort since that in of itself is taboo. The whole idea that Trump was going to re-industrialize the US was always anti-Marxist. How is the US going to industrialize when ~30% of the Russel index corporations are zombies(unprofitable and only survive through debt) and Trump wanted to deport all the cheap labor etc...

Even stuff libs were saying about how Trump could invoke the defense whatever act to nationalize SpaceX is bonkers. This idea has always been MAGA communist adjacent too as if the US president is ever going to take some US factory by decree. Biden`s BBB was a massive failure already. Everything they do needs to be some congress spending bill for 5 years into the future, the list of issues is endless.

The real problem is the US currently existing arsenal. The US didn't participate in Ukraine, they went out of their way to send the most obsolete Abrams tanks as possible, they scoured eastern EU to find Soviet era fighters, the F-16s are F-16A or whatever literal cold war museum shit.

Meanwhile Israel is getting backed up by real F-35s and B-2 bombers. Its a completely different situation and yeah this is the real danger the F-35 is a meme but you only need some of them to work.

I think the major problem here is you take the mainstream econ theory as truth and validation that you're correct. Just because everyone and their mother repeats the consumption narrative you think that it is correct even though its not.

China has been retreating on the Biden negotiation since late 2023. I mentioned many times, Yellen and Blinken went to China to force the issue that China needed to solve their trade imbalance. The CPC folded and started doing consumption stimulus shit because it is what their mainstream neolib advisors taught them. All of what we the supposed "Marxists" say about building industry suddenly becomes moot because western educated "economists" say otherwise.

I'll give you a very specific example, here this page compiled some of these Western economists saying the exact stuff you repeat here. These are some of the economists pushing exactly for this.

YAO Yang Ph.D., Agricultural and Applied Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1996. Major: Economic Development.

Professor Li holds a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University. In 1985, he obtained his BS from Tsinghua University as one of the first undergraduate class of the School of Economics and Management, where he is serving as a faculty member.

Dr. Feng Lu - Ph.D. in Economics, University of Leeds, UK, 1994

Here is what one of them admit to

Some European think tanks have expressed concerns about China. They worry that, under the pressure of U.S. tariffs leading to a reshaped global trade structure and the gradual closure of the U.S. market, China’s surplus capacity products may flood into other countries and regions, putting pressure on Europe, Asia, and South America, making it harder for them to survive. This concern is somewhat reasonable, and it can even be inferred that if China continues to follow an export-oriented manufacturing model dominated by the supply side, countries across Eurasia may follow the U.S.’s lead and introduce trade protectionist policies, ultimately resulting in a fragmented global trade environment similar to the pre-World War II period. This would significantly increase China’s difficulty in expanding its geopolitical space. In contrast, implementing the “Two 30” major strategy would be a more feasible path.

Achieving the target of increasing domestic consumption by 30% by 2030 is both achievable and idealistic, making it a grand strategy. Drawing on the experience of European and American countries in the thirty years after World War II, these nations accelerated their transition to domestic demand-driven, service-based economies by strengthening social security, improving labor education levels, enhancing public services, and reinforcing innovation. When facing U.S. tariff bullying, many believe that the U.S., as the largest global consumer market, is in a dominant position, and other countries, as suppliers, must accept changes to the rules or risk losing out. However, this view is outdated. Historically, the evolution of economic entities and strategic decisions shows that the positions of parties A and B are not fixed. With China’s increasing income levels, changes in development concepts, demographic shifts, and technological advancements, if the decision-makers can implement reforms to strengthen social security, improve workers’ education, build public welfare, and perfect social security for migrant workers, farmers, and flexible workers, China could accelerate its transition to a domestic demand-driven economy, rather than merely positioning itself as a supplier.

Can you spot the mistake here? This quote doesn't understand the only reason Europe grew post WW2 was exactly due to its destruction. European capital had a brief moment of very high profitability because Europe had been temporarily de-industrialized.

Likewise there is absolutely zero acknowledgement that the only reason the EU can become a "domestic driven, service-based economy" is literaly because of Western imperialism. Without this benefit this is not possible.

Yet they literaly admit to idealistic plans to turning China into Europe 2.0 based "on the same experience".

This is despicable garbage.

You keep repeating this here on the megas for months as "this is what China needs to do" etc. I tried arguing against it a few times but it is a pointless endeavour to keep repeating stuff. Let the people who go to a "Marxist-socialist" site embrace the comments supporting neoliberal-keynesian off brand that come directly from the mouth of western educated economists if they want was my conclusion.

Now the Trump tariffs was the first time since then that China could have hit back decisively and force concessions out of the US. Instead they're the ones who conceded to the tariff hike.

In an alternative world the CPC wasn't clueless and didn't just follow western educated financial advisors, they would not have folded on the overcapacity issue and Trump would not have any way to force his tariff shit because China would have already told Biden/Yellen/Blinken to eat shit.

If Tucker fucking Carlson is the person who ended up saving the lives of countless Iranians, that’s an all time “extremely critical support” moment.

This is not the first time. Trump's indecisiveness is partly because with Tucker gone now both sides of the media want the war.