| ▲ | Iran threatens to hit Gulf states if US launches new strikes(reuters.com) |
| 41 points by mapping365 9 hours ago | 49 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | megamike 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| question: When does all this hit the fan? Been reading for months that gas will rise to astronomical prices. When?
answer: it depends heavily on China. If China were to jump into the global oil market with both feet, prices would shoot upwards. To date they have largely stayed on the sidelines.They have huge amounts of oil in storage. Their behavior so far has been the big surprise. They have been providing a pressure relief valve for the entire globe. |
| |
| ▲ | fragmede 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I wouldn't call what they're doing "staying on the sidelines". It's a very big thing they're doing to stop global oil prices from shooting up by using up their stockpile for as long as they can. As to why, it's just the... I dunno, Chinese? thing to do. Quietly fix someone else's fuckup and not seek glory. Whatever you want to attribute it to, it's an ethos and makes total sense to some, because things are gonna get fuuuuuucked if gas prices go to the moon. | | |
| ▲ | aprilthird2021 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It is to their benefit in several ways: They can use this ability to keep oil prices down to sort of back up their strategic goals. They could block a strait themselves while taking Taiwan. They could open the stores for concessions in other ways. They can also use this current Iran War to study how the US handles economic problems like oil-inflation. By having their finger on the scale they can push and pull and see how the US reacts in a war scenario. | |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | China’s economy depends on exporting to the world, as it will never have enough domestic demand to meet domestic supply. If the global economy crashes from an oil price shock, China goes down with it. | | |
| ▲ | fragmede 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Power is better than money though. China is communist in name only now, but they could extract huge concessions out of the rest of the world right now if they wanted to. | | |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | They could, but they’ll wait, they’re not ready yet. Until then, they’ll continue to electrify their economy, build out domestic energy supply, rebuild their oil inventories from Russia and Iran when able (at below market prices, dominated in yuan, avoiding dollar systems and sanctions) and prepare to take Taiwan as the US continues to weaken itself. If Taiwan toasts TSMC when that happens, well, that’s part of what China is rapidly building out their domestic chip industry. China will then have a monopoly on that chip production besides what can be produced in the US and Europe, and have achieved reunification. And who is going to stop them? Nobody, based on the evidence and current trajectories. | | |
| ▲ | DivingForGold 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | >If Taiwan toasts TSMC when that happens ... You can bet that all TSMC chip factories in Taiwan have strategic installs of explosives just for this scenario, China will get nothing, and the US has multiple TSMC chip factories now and will gladly accept Taiwan victims. | | |
| ▲ | maxglute an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Bad bet, wanking about TW blowing up their golden goose fabs is US hopium/threat - literally US Army War College insinuated US would blow up fabs to deny PRC while TW politicians/defense minister retorted under no circumstances was that acceptable nor would they evacuate semi talent to US before women and children. Not that they could under PRC blockade/quarantine. The entire notion is fundamentally stupid, TW with fabs is at least useful to PRC and sustains wealth after, or they'd be subsistence pineapple farmers. US has 0 TSMC factories that would operate for long with TW semi sole supplier, Arizonal would grind to halt until US reshores every piece of semi supply chain which even CHIPS ACT didn't pretend US was capable of. Only PRC pursuing end to end full vertical semi integration. TW goes byebye in next few years, PRC will likely be capable of making wholey indigenize 7+nm while entire western semi is fucked because they lost TW inputs. Now consider PRC land based munitions can make anything on TW go byebye in 7 minutes, reality is PRC has maximum semi leverage during war while US has semi leverage during peacetime (lawfare/export controls etc). | |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | As mentioned, they won’t need the fabs. They’re spending tens of billions of dollars to advance their own vertical chip industry. The US just pulled temporary status from hundreds of thousands of Hatians, so I wouldn’t be so confident what the future looks like for Taiwanese refugees in the US. TLDR China is going to build whatever chip technology they need to accomplish their technology and geopolitical goals. They have the resources, the will, and the time. China’s EUV Lithography Progress: Parsing Signal From Noise - https://thediplomat.com/2026/07/chinas-euv-lithography-progr... - July 2nd, 2026 China begins mass production of homegrown DUV chipmaking tools - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49076684 - July 2026 China Tells Telecom Carriers to Phase Out Foreign Chips by 2027 (2024) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48767466 - July 2026 US tells ASML it is concerned China may have top chip tool - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48602369 - June 2026 |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | cyanydeez 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | when the rich people stop talking to their LLMs and realize their hand servants have access to guns. | | |
| ▲ | krapp 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | They know that. And they know that Americans won't do a damn thing with those guns except shoot one another. |
| |
| ▲ | aaron695 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
| ▲ | relug 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| interesting why usa wants to keep escalating, muat be some strat behind it maybe to induce strategical global recession or try and slow down china or something else |
| |
| ▲ | thraway3837 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Military–industrial complex and Israel. The Iraq war lasted nearly a decade. Afghanistan 2 decades. And the US accomplished nothing. They made things worse, I don't need to go into details because that is an easy lookup. That's ultimately the purpose of this war. Israel wants us to fight Iran because "Iran was close to making a nuke", which is an excuse they have been using for nearly 30 years. Have you seen how much money AIPAC has in US politicians' pockets? Nearly every other office in congress has an Israel flag on their door. Poured $36M (Million) into Haley Stevens. A complete nincompoop and incompetent person, but she would have further supported Israel's agenda. The US is a destructive war machine beast that needs to be constantly fed. Unfortunately, we are going to see tons of US armed forces personnel and Iranians die in a needless, wasteful, illegal war. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Military–industrial complex and Israel. Or general stupidity and incompetence. Trump and his cabinet of clowns thought they could score a big win (I suppose like Russia back in 2022). Now they are stuck in shit and have no clue how to get out. If the military industrial complex was in control of the US gov. they would stop President Cheeto from antagonizing the rest of NATO and therefore reducing the competitiveness of US arms manufacturers. You are of course right about Israel Netanyahu is playing cheeto like a fiddle.. | |
| ▲ | whosdatis 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "They made things worse.." ..it almost as if you think they came there to make things better | |
| ▲ | 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | MrDrone 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think it's giving more credit than is due to assume there's a strategy. At this stage, it seems pretty clear that a number of people are using insider knowledge of these negotiations to enrich themselves. To me this is representative of a broader pattern of looting American institutions pervasive in this administration. > https://liccardo.house.gov/media/in-the-news/house-dem-sam-l... At the same time, we've purged our military leadership of anyone who said "no" to Trump's plans of antagonizing Iran. A conflict many military thinkers consider un-winnable. > https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/in-the-news/why-trumps... Iran, having spent decades preparing for this type of situation, has the clear advantage and is pressing it hard. Shy of boots on the ground (itself an incredibly bloody and possibly futile avenue) there doesn't seem to be anyway to overcome their hold on the Strait. > https://studies.aljazeera.net/en/analyses/war-no-one-can-win... There is no secret strategy. The country is led by inept people who believe might makes right, and take every opportunity to enrich themselves. People are bending over backwards to make meaning of this blatant corruption and it is one way we're enabling the destruction of America. | |
| ▲ | exabrial 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Everyone says Israel, which is at least partly true, but the other reason is Ukraine. Iran is a major partner for Russia. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, Trump certainly did this to help Ukraine. Despite doing as much as he can to minimize US support for Ukraine since he came to office… Also that implies he (or his cabinet) is capable of understanding basic cause and effect and thinking more than one step ahead and there is absolutely zero evidence that’s the case. |
| |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The only way for the US to win is to concede and acquiesce control of the Strait to Iran, but the administration has too much pride and hubris so they’ll keep bullying until stopped. It’s not a complex geopolitical game, it’s saving face. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think returning (to some extent) to the status quo is possible but only if Trump’s admin is replaced or at least neutered. Then both Iran and US can make a deal without losing face and expect than US won’t break its word the next day. |
| |
| ▲ | jdlshore 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s Trump, not the USA, and he seems to be ruled by passions rather than logic. Mostly, his goals seem to be to seek wealth and adoration by any means necessary. Now that he’s in it, there’s no way out, and particularly no way out that doesn’t make him look like an even bigger fool. So he’ll stay in it until things get so bad he has no other choice. But that won’t stop him from lying about progress and enriching himself through the resultant stock market swings. | | |
| ▲ | krapp 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | The American right has wanted war in Iran for decades, it was added to the "Axis of Evil" for that reason. Plenty of Americans support war with Iran in concept at least. It's true that Trump is deranged and this war is driven partly by ego and partly by the Christian dominionist Department of War's slavish obedience to Israel and fetish for holy war. But let's be real - gross negligence and incompetence aside war with Iran was always going to happen, somehow, under some pretext. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The American right has wanted war in Iran Yeah but at least the brighter ones there like Bolton would have preferred to start a war they knew they could win at least by defining some clear objectives. The issue is not so much the war (from their perspective) but that US has no clue and at this point what it’s trying to do there. Compared to Trump Bush was basically Napoleon in how we handled Iran and Afghanistan (at least they knew perfectly well what they wanted to achieve during the conventional part of the war and how to achieve those objectives. Fumbling the aftermath of a war he “wins” is not something Trump will have a chance to do since he’ll never get there) | |
| ▲ | 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | aprilthird2021 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > But let's be real - gross negligence and incompetence aside war with Iran was always going to happen, somehow, under some pretext. And they prepared for it for a long time. And that preparation has paid off for them. We seem to not have prepared for it in the same way. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Well no. Iran is not in a great state and is not doing that well. They are just willing to sacrifice and suffer through several magnitudes more than US ever could. | |
| ▲ | krapp 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I suppose when you live under the constant threat of American imperialism, and when the US has already ginned up a revolution in your country, you have to be prepared. And I suppose when you're the world's last superpower you start believing your own hype and assume you're invincible. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | superze 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because politicians rape kids and because the world has been hijackers by Nazi Israel. | |
| ▲ | DANmode 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Solar-and-nuclear based energy sovereignty, is the most charitable interpretation I’ve developed. |
|
|
| ▲ | mrtesthah 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Do it, please. The world can't afford to keep burning oil. |
| |
| ▲ | AuthAuth 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The country making the most pollution is unaffected by this. | | | |
| ▲ | HDBaseT 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | We can't afford to not keep burning oil. | | |
| ▲ | arbitrary_name 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | yes we can. it will hurt but it will be cheaper than the consequences of continuing. | |
| ▲ | AngryData 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | We could if didn't keep pissing our money away and built an entire fleet of nuclear reactors. | |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | We can. It’ll be hard, but sometimes you gotta buck up and do hard things instead of being lazy. We won’t do it unless we’re forced to, business as usual is simply too cozy for decision makers, politically, in capital markets, and at multinationals making decisions. Wealthy and powerful people want to remain wealthy and powerful, a tale as old as time. 2-3C means potentially >2-4 billion excess deaths over the next ~50 years from climate change. As long as global oil supply chains are low volatility and low risk, we continue on that path. Ukraine has disabled 30-40% of Russia’s refinery capacity almost entirely with drones, for example. TLDR it is not bad for the global oil supply chain to experience pain, it’s the primary factor in accelerating electrification and decarbonization. https://actuaries.org.uk/media/ni4erlna/planetary-solvency.p... (page 32 risk impact matrix) https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Ukraines-... | | |
| ▲ | OneDeuxTriSeiGo 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's not really the argument they are making I believe. The issue is if you suddenly cut back oil countries pivot to bringing coal back because it's the fastest to scale up. Some places may scale up natural gas but unless a regional already has a lot of LNG infrastructure in place, a sudden drop in oil means bringing back coal. And coal is of course far worse than oil. Gradual sustained economic pressure will push a move to cleaner alternatives but a sudden shock leaves countries with exactly one option: bring back coal so the lights and heat/AC stay on. | | |
| ▲ | mrtesthah 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >The issue is if you suddenly cut back oil countries pivot to bringing coal back because it's the fastest to scale up. That may have been true a couple of decades ago, but as of 2023[1] it was significantly cheaper to build new solar than to continue operating existing coal plants. And building new coal plants takes 5 years. 1. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2023/01/30/building-new-solar-pr... | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp an hour ago | parent [-] | | It’s not that useful if you don’t have enough storage. And in more northern latitude you’ll still need to turn those plants back on since just won’t at all for at least a couple of months in winter. |
| |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Asia is cancelling LNG plans for renewables, and many markets have seen EV sales explode. Coal plants are more expensive than new renewables and batteries, existing generators may run longer, but aren’t going to be built in any material amount. China, Europe, and the US can build ~25-30M EVs per year with existing manufacturing capacity, as of this comment. That is 1/4th of global annual light vehicle sales. We can deploy ~1TW of solar PV globally annually. The world reached 3TW of total solar PV generating capacity this year. China's energy from coal has declined below 50% this year. Energy storage production continues to ramp right behind renewables. These are straightforward systems problems, there are no blockers or technical limitations. TLDR Strongly agree existing coal generators might generate more and longer than they otherwise would, but clean tech trajectory will only get pulled more vertical from further oil energy supply shocks. China's EV Boom Is Quietly Undermining Oil's Biggest Chokepoint - https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Chinas-EV-Boom-Is... - August 4th, 2026 China’s LNG and coal demand slows as renewable energy surges - https://www.rinnovabili.net/policy-and-affairs/environmental... - August 3rd, 2026 Renewables To Squeeze Oil And Gas Imports In New Electric Age For Asia - https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianpalmer/2026/06/23/renewables... - June 23rd, 2026 From Australia to Vietnam, the Iran war is fuelling demand for EVs - https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2026/4/27/from-australia-t... - April 27th, 2026 EV demand is getting a boost from the Iran war — just as auto giants pivot back to combustion engines - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/02/evs-autos-energy-oil-iran-wa... - April 2nd, 2026 | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Solar doesn’t really work in Europe during winter outside pf the southern countries so you still need alternative sources. | |
| ▲ | shaewest 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I feel as if you missed their point. Their point from my understanding is, coal might be more expensive than new renewables/batteries, but it's significantly quicker to get up and running so if you have a choice between quick coal and nothing, coal will be chosen. | | |
| ▲ | triceratops 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > coal might be more expensive than new renewables/batteries, but it's significantly quicker to get up and running How so? I can have a crew out installing panels tomorrow. | | | |
| ▲ | toomuchtodo 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I am not missing the point. You can deploy hundreds of megawatts of solar and batteries providing firm generation in 12-18 months. You cannot build a coal generator that quickly (usually takes 2-5 years). If you can turn on or up an existing coal generator, yes, faster. If you must build it from scratch, no, slower. Solar and batteries are not only the cheapest form of new generation, they are also the fastest to deploy. Citations: Economics of coal versus renewables in Southeast Asia’s energy crisis - https://zerocarbon-analytics.org/energy/coal-vs-renewables-a... - April 8th, 2026 Key points: * Since the war in Iran began in February 2026, a surge in oil and gas prices has triggered gas-to-coal switching in Southeast Asia, pushing Asia’s coal benchmark nearly 20% above the pre-war price levels and highlighting the links between the coal, gas and oil markets. * Gas-to-coal switching also pushed coal prices up after the 2022 gas crisis, when Asia’s coal benchmark surged to a record USD 443 per tonne in September 2023. * Renewables sit apart from the price volatility of coal, oil and gas, as they do not require ongoing fuel inputs. In 2024, solar was already cheaper than coal in 7 of the 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), according to LCOE data. * The current gas crisis is already causing a decline in LNG demand across ASEAN countries. New ZCA analysis shows that were ASEAN to replace its planned 45 GW gas expansion with coal, costs would rise; in contrast, we found the Association could save USD 4 billion if gas expansion plans were instead replaced with solar and storage solutions by 2030. * Even in countries with large coal reserves and coal subsidies, including China, renewables are already meeting a significant share of new electricity demand. Coal Power Is Replaced by Renewables, Batteries, and Modern Electronics - https://www.renewable-ei.org/en/activities/column/REupdate/2... - September 18th, 2025 | | |
| ▲ | HDBaseT 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | You can deploy solar and batteries rapidly, Australia is doing it. Australia has the highest number of solar panels per capita in the world. Batteries are following suit with government subsidies. Yet, Australia has some of the highest energy prices in the world, its not a fool proof solution. My comment wasn't even really about coal, it was about oil (and fuel). I'm talking about transport (even public transport) but planes & massive tankers are the big consumers. The original point is simply we cannot just stop ships. When ships stopped due to the routes being blocked, we pushed ever closer to a recession and people starved and died because they were denied critical produces, equipment, food and medicines all over the world. Not to mention cost of living. This is what I mean by we "cannot afford" to not use oil. We cannot afford for the routes to be shut, we cannot ban boats, cars, planes without major economic downturn. | | |
| ▲ | wasfgwp an hour ago | parent [-] | | Australia is pretty unique since it’s extremely suitable for solar. Countries in more northern latitudes, especially in Europe (where you need alternative sources in winter regardless of how much solar you (realistically) build) are in a slightly different situation. Also aren’t wholesale prices in Australia very cheap or often negative? If that’s the case then the issue very high prices isn’t really on the production side but due to taxes/distribution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
