U.S. weighs lifting Iranian oil sanctions to keep price in check
axios.comSo we pay for oil from our “enemy” and fund them while fighting a war w them. I think they were thinking of doing this w Russia also. Basically paying to kill our troops while spending lots of money to send our troops there in the first place.
Well... we allow other people to pay for oil from our enemy. Then they don't need to buy oil from the same places we buy oil from, so the price goes down.
That doesn't make it any less weird that we're letting up pressure with one hand and bombing them with the other. But we aren't also sending them money... as if that made a difference.
It certainly appears like the short term impacts of this war have been:
- martyrdom of the previous ayatollah
- increase in energy price globally
- increased ability for the west's adversaries to sell their oil at higher prices through reducing sanctions
Next Iran will start bombing its own facilities in order to keep the oil price high and inflict pain on the invaders.
It's not exactly "US" so much as it is Trump and Bessent if you read the article. The obvious conclusion is that Trump will do anything to stay popular and avoid a Blue Wave at midterms. Other presidents, who at least tried to gin up public support for their wars, could ask the public to bravely make sacrifices. Trump can't do that. He painted himself into a corner.
In most countries there has to be a vote in parliament to begin a war.
This has the benefit that politicians have their name on the record and cannot weasel out of it if things go bad. Besides there is something unseemly of asking people to give their life for war that nobody wants.
> It's not exactly "US" so much as it is Trump and Bessent if you read the article.
That's true, but from an international policy perspective they are part of the US.
Damn this tells me that the shortage is much worst then I thought. Time to short oil stocks?