The United States Must Not Be Part of Israel's Unlawful War on Iran
- Thread starter oil&gas
- Start date
Oil is a fungible commodity. Price of oil imported by Ontario from
the U.S. and the Middle East will be impacted by removal of oil
supply to Asia. Expect Brent and WTI oil prices to explode.
Sure, but the question is whose economy gets fucked first, and who gets fucked the most, arguably it's China and other Asian countries
and Iran itself and the gulf emirates (Kuwait/Qatar/UAE). Russia and Saudi might actually benefit if the price explodes.
If Biden conducted such a strike against Iran, no doubt you would have labelled him as a "war monger" as you have done in the past against The Democrats. Many Reps in Congress from both sides of the aisle do think that it was illegal to strike Iran, especially as someone like Tulsi Gabbard testified before Congress that Iran had no nuclear capabilities. She like so many cult followers then tried to walk it all back when Trump disputed her testimony even though he had no evidence of it. Trump was manipulated by Netanyahu especially as word was out prior to Israel's attack on Iran that Iran and The USA were close to a deal!!
Which has nothing to do with my point.
Congress gave the Presidency the power to do this. It was bipartisan. And never rescinded.
And judging from things, you can bet, just like with Ukraine, the Lindsay Grahams would have praised him. After all, he did fully support 10's of billions in arms and ammo to Israel. This is just the next step. The USA has wanted this since 1979.
Russia has been selling a lot of its sanctioned oil to Saudi and
others who didn't need the oil to meet demand but profit from
resellig it to Europe at premium price.
It is possible curtailed supply to China would be compensated
partially by Russia channeling its sanctioned oil to them at premium
price of course.
To be sure China's economy will be hit but I doubt they will suffer
as much as Europe.
I see that escalation of this conflict between Iran and Israel
could take the polarisation between the west and the east
to the extreme. It is possible in the not too distant future
Russia and Iran would cut off energy supply to the west
entirely to export oil and gas to BRICS members exclusively.
Last edited:
If Europe opts to prolong the Ukraine war through sanctions
of Russian oil exports and if Iran's strategy of oil blockage
enables Russia to turn the table by redirecting exports of oil
to Europe through middleman buyers to China it will be
Europe that will get fucked the most.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Europe's Risky War On Russia's 'Shadow Fleet'
The EU wants to target illicit oil tankers, a move that could expand the Ukraine war and drag the US in further
ANATOL LIEVEN
JUN 16, 2025
The European Union’s latest moves (as part of its 17th package of sanctions against Russia declared in May) to target much more intensively Russia’s so-called “shadow fleet” of oil tankers and other vessels illustrate the danger that, as long as the Ukraine war continues, so will the risk of an incident that will draw NATO and the EU into a direct military clash with Russia.
The EU sanctions involve bans on access to the ports, national waters and maritime economic zones of EU states. Ships that enter these waters risk seizure and confiscation. It does not appear that Washington was consulted about this decision, despite the obvious risks to the U.S.
As part of this strategy, on May 15, an Estonian patrol boat attempted to stop and inspect a tanker in the Gulf of Finland. Russia sent up a fighter jet that flew over the Estonian vessel (allegedly briefly trespassing into Estonian waters), and the Estonians backed off — this time. In January, the German navy seized a Panamanian-flagged tanker, the Eventin, in the Baltic after its engines failed and it drifted into German territorial waters.
Sweden has now announced that starting on July 1 its navy will stop, inspect and potentially seize all suspect vessels transiting its exclusive economic zone, and is deploying the Swedish air force to back up this threat. Since the combined maritime economic zones of Sweden and the three Baltic states cover the whole of the central Baltic Sea, this amounts to a virtual threat to cut off all Russian trade exiting Russia via the Baltic — which would indeed be a very serious economic blow to Moscow.
It would also threaten to cut off Russia’s exclave of Kaliningrad, which is surrounded by Poland, from access to Russia by sea.
This is the kind of action that has traditionally led to war. The Swedish assumption seems to be that the Russian navy and air force in the Baltic are now so weak — and so surrounded by NATO territory — that there is nothing Moscow can do about this. However, it is very unlikely that the Swedes would take this step unless they also believe that in the event of a clash, Washington will come to Sweden’s defense — even though the EU and Swedish decisions were made without U.S. approval and are not strictly covered by NATO’s Article 5 commitment.
And despite all the hysterical language about Russia being “at war” with NATO countries, these moves by the EU and Sweden are also based on an assumption that Russia will not in fact lose its temper and react with military force. European policymakers might however want to think about a number of things: for example, what would the U.S. do if ships carrying U.S. cargo were intercepted by foreign warships? We know perfectly well that the U.S. would blow the warships concerned out of the water and declare that it had done so in defense of the sacred rule of free navigation — in which the EU also professes to believe.
EU leaders, and admirals, should also spend some time on Russian social media, and read the incessant attacks on the Putin administration by hardliners arguing precisely that Moscow has been far too soft and restrained in its response to Western provocations, and that this restraint has encouraged the West to escalate more and more. Such hardliners (especially within the security forces) are by far the greatest internal political threat that Putin faces.
It is important to note in this regard that moves to damage Russia’s “shadow fleet” have not been restricted to sanctions. In recent months there have been a string of attacks on such vessels in the Mediterranean with limpet mines and other explosive devices — developments that have been virtually ignored by Western media.
In December 2024, the Russian cargo ship Ursa Major sank off Libya after an explosion in which two crewmembers were killed. The Reuters headline reporting these attacks was rather characteristic: “Three tankers damaged by blasts in Mediterranean in the last month, causes unknown, sources say.” Unknown, really? Who do we think were the likely perpetrators? Laotian special forces? Martians? And what are European governments doing to investigate these causes?
If the Russians do sink a Swedish or Estonian warship, the Trump administration will face a terribly difficult decision on how to respond to a crisis that is not of its own choosing: intervene and risk a direct war with Russia, or stand aside and ensure a deep crisis with Europe. The U.S. administration would therefore be both wise and entirely within its rights to state publicly that it does not endorse and will not help to enforce this decision.
Washington also needs — finally — to pay attention to what the rest of the world thinks about all this. The overwhelming majority of senators who are proposing to impose 500% tariffs on any country that buys Russian energy have apparently not realized that one of the two biggest countries in this category is India — now universally regarded in Washington as a vital U.S. partner in Asia. And now America’s European allies are relying on U.S. support to seize ships providing that energy to India.
The U.S. administration would also be wise to warn European countries that if this strategy leads to maritime clashes with Russia, they will have to deal with the consequences themselves. Especially given the new risk of war with Iran, the last thing Washington needs now is a new flare-up of tension with Moscow necessitating major U.S. military deployments to Europe. And the last thing the world economy needs are moves likely to lead to a still greater surge in world energy prices.
European governments and establishments seem to have lost any ability to analyze the possible wider consequences of their actions. So — not for the first time — America will have to do their thinking for them.
Europe's risky war on Russia's 'shadow fleet'
The EU wants to target illicit oil tankers, a move that could expand the Ukraine war and drag the US in further
responsiblestatecraft.org
Then why is Speaker Johnson calling this War Power Act "Unconstitutional", especially as Trump and his Government are supposed to brief Congress within 48 hours regarding this Act of War against Iran? Just The Republicans are trying to justify Trump's use of the military in an act of war. The Democrats on the other hand are insisting that Trump violated the Constitution when he carried out the strikes on Iran's Nuclear facilities without Congress explicit authority. In other words The War power Act corroborates the Democrats side of the debate!!
Then why did they give the Presidency the power in the first place? The military obeyed the orders. Therefore they were lawful.
50% of Americans, brits and Canadians think Israel is committing genocide.
Yet still some people back Israel attacking Iran as if that will make the world safer.
Yet still some people back Israel attacking Iran as if that will make the world safer.
Was he ignoring? or just stating facts? the democrats and GOP gave the president full power. Trump is using it. Iran already in admittance of the enrichment where as Iraq didn't. Looks like NATO is also bracing for escalation.
This week I'm enjoying the record heat in NY, el risitas.Didn't know you can conduct polls at the confines of your mom's basement...
Everyone is excited about Zohran.
You'll love this poll.
This is what you want for the US and Canada, isn't it?
