Biden to grovel before Khashoggi's murderer/the Butcher of Yemen in exchange for lower gas prices.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Accolades to you - wow - just wow. You were somehow able to take even this and rationalize it to the extent that I get why Biden did this now. You have a great skill of defending Biden through and through. I commend you. I know I've said it before - but I mean it very seriously: You should be Biden's Press Secretary. You really know how to defend him and rationalize what he does no matter what, and you do it so well that (I think) most reasonable people feel compelled to agree with you. It is a great skill. You could've taken the easy way out and just criticized Biden like all the rest of us have, but instead you've written a long, well-reasoned, logical post that really makes what Biden did sound reasonable and the best option.

Thank you!

[Schiff for Senate]

Disgusting. Biden promised us that he would distance the United States from Saudi Arabia, a known sponsor of terrorism and abuse of human rights. The fact that he had to bend to their will because of oil suggest that the United States doesn’t make enough of it’s own energy. The United States needs to be massively investing into green technologies that will help save our future from the inevitable climate catastrophe, not bowing to the will to give oil a continuous run.

Well Santander also made a good point that should be obvious but which a lot of us (myself included, to be sure) have forgotten - we can start investing in and transitioning to green energy today, but it won't yield energy immediately, which is what's needed to lower prices at the gas pump. For our most immediate energy needs, we unfortunately do still need to rely on fossil fuels. We're talking about prices at the gas tank. Right now, we need a tangible solution, which means foreign oil, unfortunately, since the alternatives would take very long. It's an ugly truth, and we absolutely should be doing more to transition to green so we can soon enough drop fossil fuels and eventually move entirely to green energy. But GMac (and Santander) made very solid points. We need energy ASAP. Right now, it will need to be fossil fuels. We can't get green energy into use immediately like we liberals want and thankfully, we can't immediately do more drilling, like right-wingers want. Neither will immediately lower gas prices or immediately occur - both will take some time. So we need foreign oil. It would have to be from Venezuela, Iran or Saudi Arabia. All of them are horrible places with terrorists and human rights abuses/violations, but we still need to get oil from one of them, and fast. We already tried Venezuela. GMac's point is that this leaves just Iran and Saudi Arabia, and while both of them are utterly deplorable, it is a much safer option to take it from Saudi Arabia than from Iran.

So I guess he's right, right now Biden really has no choice but to take the oil from Saudi Arabia. It's the only way to reduce gas prices immediately. We can't both attack Biden for high gas prices and attack him when he comes up with the best solution, even if that solution is very bad in many respects. But I DO want Biden to use this opportunity to make a hard pitch for renewable energy and start investing in it now. For now, we need to use fossil fuel energy either way, but the sooner we begin the transition, the sooner we can actually start relying on green energy. So THAT's where the criticism of Biden should really be, not his taking oil from Saudi Arabia - as GMac outlined, there was really no better alternative right now.

[Santander]

Accolades to you - wow - just wow. You were somehow able to take even this and rationalize it to the extent that I get why Biden did this now. You have a great skill of defending Biden through and through. I commend you. I know I've said it before - but I mean it very seriously: You should be Biden's Press Secretary. You really know how to defend him and rationalize what he does no matter what, and you do it so well that (I think) most reasonable people feel compelled to agree with you. It is a great skill. You could've taken the easy way out and just criticized Biden like all the rest of us have, but instead you've written a long, well-reasoned, logical post that really makes what Biden did sound reasonable and the best option.

No, he does not deserve credit for contorting himself into a pretzel to kiss Biden's ass defend Biden no matter what, as if Biden will give him a job if he keeps at it. He claims that somehow Saudi Arabia is far better than Iran and suggests they aren't on Russia's side (Lavrov was literally in Riyadh today). The difference between Saudi Arabia and Iran is the former values money ahead of Islamic fundamentalism, while the latter values Islamic fundamentalism ahead of money. You wouldn't even need American oil execs in Tehran - there are existing brokers and intermediaries to do that. Actually, you wouldn't even need to bring a single drop of oil into the US from Iran to alleviate the current situation.

Please tell me how "letting Putin win" is worse than letting MBS win. If that's how we're defining the stakes, Putin has already won.

[Schiff for Senate]

Accolades to you - wow - just wow. You were somehow able to take even this and rationalize it to the extent that I get why Biden did this now. You have a great skill of defending Biden through and through. I commend you. I know I've said it before - but I mean it very seriously: You should be Biden's Press Secretary. You really know how to defend him and rationalize what he does no matter what, and you do it so well that (I think) most reasonable people feel compelled to agree with you. It is a great skill. You could've taken the easy way out and just criticized Biden like all the rest of us have, but instead you've written a long, well-reasoned, logical post that really makes what Biden did sound reasonable and the best option.

No, he does not deserve credit for contorting himself into a pretzel to kiss Biden's ass defend Biden no matter what, as if Biden will give him a job if he keeps at it. He claims that somehow Saudi Arabia is far better than Iran and suggests they aren't on Russia's side (Lavrov was literally in Riyadh today). The difference between Saudi Arabia and Iran is the former values money ahead of Islamic fundamentalism, while the latter values Islamic fundamentalism ahead of money. You wouldn't even need American oil execs in Tehran - there are existing brokers and intermediaries to do that. Actually, you wouldn't even need to bring a single drop of oil into the US from Iran to alleviate the current situation.

Please tell me how "letting Putin win" is worse than letting MBS win. If that's how we're defining the stakes, Putin has already won.

Interesting. You might be right that Iran > Saudi Arabia. I'm no Middle East expert. However, he did bring up anti-American sentiment all over Iran following Soleimani's assassination. It might be very risky to go to Iran to get oil? Again, I don't know, and both of you guys know better than I. All I know that neither option is good at all. I just don't know which is worse. I believed GMac but what you said makes sense to me too.

[Leo]

Imagine being this much of a cuck.

Biden just fell massively in my eyes. Like I said, I want GMac to enter right now and explain how this is okay. Because I'm trying and failing to rationalize this disgusting about-face. What Biden did here is utterly disappointing, shameful and pathetic.

Well, we have to get oil from somewhere, and there's not that many countries producing oil.  We're not getting it from Russia, obviously.

eehhh...   You are wrong.  The United States was a net oil EXPORTER in 2020 and 2021.  On a net basis we don't need to get oil from elsewhere.  The problem is oil is traded on a global market.  And if oil is trading at a higher price our unpatriotic oil companies simply ship it overseas regardless of how high gas prices are for consumers.

We have to get others to pump to get prices down overseas.

Let's stop posting this BS about the US needing other people's oil or needing to loosen regulations so oil companies pump more.  That is not the problem.

All these other countries are looking at us crazy because we have enough oil to supply our needs.

Current prices are well above the $56 per barrel average that oil companies told the Dallas Fed they need to profitably drill. Larger companies said they need per barrel prices of just $49 to turn a profit.
Yet oil executives and investors don't want to add so much supply that it causes another glut that crashes prices. And shareholders want companies to return excess profits in the form of dividends and buybacks, not reinvest them in increasing production.

We have plenty of oil.  But the oil companies like the profits they are seeing now and don't care about the consumers.  This has zero to do with Biden or the Saudis or whatever made up fantasy is being pushed.

[Mr. Reactionary]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Brandon's representatives already went on bended knee to Maduro.

The sane solution would be to thaw relations with Iran, a country far less bad than Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but this is America and being stupid is what it does best.

The sanest solution would be to kill two birds with one stone and transition to renewable. But I guess that's a no-go, right, Biden?

The sanest solution would be to develop our own energy resources

Exactly what I said. Our own RENEWABLE energy resources. No more fossil fuels.

My 2001 dodge dakota doesnt run on solar and unicorn farts. No more green only policies.

No one cares.  You went into the free market and purchased a gas guzzling vehicle.  It is not the government's job to save you.  Learn some personal responsibility and stop blaming others for your problems.  That is part of being an adult.

Marie Antoinette over here be like "let them buy teslas". You gonna buy it for me? Biden is actively enacting policies to artificially restrict gas supply and artificially force gas prices up. Thats not free market. I shouldnt have to drop $60K to buy a new greeny car because u cultists are actively making things more expense on purpose while dishonestly derping about "muh frie markit lurn to adult". If this was a free market we could drill for more oil. This is all part of yalls open and admitted plan to on purpose use the government to phase out cheap transportation by intentionally making it more expensive for those of us at the bottom. Not all of us have mommies and daddies that can buy them a new car for Christmas.

[Santander]

eehhh...   You are wrong.  The United States was a net oil EXPORTER in 2020 and 2021.  On a net basis we don't need to get oil from elsewhere.  The problem is oil is traded on a global market.  And if oil is trading at a higher price our unpatriotic oil companies simply ship it overseas regardless of how high gas prices are for consumers.

We have to get others to pump to get prices down overseas.

Let's stop posting this BS about the US needing other people's oil or needing to loosen regulations so oil companies pump more.  That is not the problem.

All these other countries are looking at us crazy because we have enough oil to supply our needs.

It's more complicated than that. The global energy market helps balance supply and demand between countries and regions. For example, some regions (Europe/Latin America) higher relative demand for middle distillates than the US, so it makes sense for the US, which has enormous refining capacity, to export middle distillates to those regions, while Europe exports light distillates to the US. Canada is a huge supplier of crude to American refineries, but has very limited refining capacity itself, so it makes sense for the US to buy cheap crude from Canada and sell back a portion of the much higher-value refined petroleum products. (not to mention bitumen from the tar sands can't even move in a pipeline by itself, so needs imported oil to move it along in the pipe)

The energy market is one of the areas where global trade is most crucial, and having an overly-simplistic nationalist view does not solve any problems.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Accolades to you - wow - just wow. You were somehow able to take even this and rationalize it to the extent that I get why Biden did this now. You have a great skill of defending Biden through and through. I commend you. I know I've said it before - but I mean it very seriously: You should be Biden's Press Secretary. You really know how to defend him and rationalize what he does no matter what, and you do it so well that (I think) most reasonable people feel compelled to agree with you. It is a great skill. You could've taken the easy way out and just criticized Biden like all the rest of us have, but instead you've written a long, well-reasoned, logical post that really makes what Biden did sound reasonable and the best option.

No, he does not deserve credit for contorting himself into a pretzel to kiss Biden's ass defend Biden no matter what, as if Biden will give him a job if he keeps at it. He claims that somehow Saudi Arabia is far better than Iran and suggests they aren't on Russia's side (Lavrov was literally in Riyadh today). The difference between Saudi Arabia and Iran is the former values money ahead of Islamic fundamentalism, while the latter values Islamic fundamentalism ahead of money. You wouldn't even need American oil execs in Tehran - there are existing brokers and intermediaries to do that. Actually, you wouldn't even need to bring a single drop of oil into the US from Iran to alleviate the current situation.

Please tell me how "letting Putin win" is worse than letting MBS win. If that's how we're defining the stakes, Putin has already won.

Interesting. You might be right that Iran > Saudi Arabia. I'm no Middle East expert. However, he did bring up anti-American sentiment all over Iran following Soleimani's assassination. It might be very risky to go to Iran to get oil? Again, I don't know, and both of you guys know better than I. All I know that neither option is good at all. I just don't know which is worse. I believed GMac but what you said makes sense to me too.

Iran is definitely not a better ugly friend than Saudi Arabia.

First of all, Iran f---ing hates our guts and will never be our friend.  Saudi Arabia may murder journalists but at least they don't chant "Death To America" during their Friday prayer service every week.

Second of all, Iran has us over the barrel already because Trump dismantled the JCPOA.  Iran is now making a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel, and we're in an incredibly weak negotiating position because we already reneged on the deal once.  We're already having to play really nice with them to avoid a potential Israel-Iran nuclear exchange.  Having to beg them for oil as well will really undermine our position.

Thirdly, Iran is absolutely one of Russia's key allies.  Thanks to western sanctions, Iran does most of its trade with Russia.  Iran buys most of its weapons from Russia.  Iran and Russia are on the same side in every middle eastern conflict Iran is involved in.  Russia also shares intelligence with Iran.  None of this is true of Saudi Arabia.  Santander casually implied that both Saudi Arabia and Iran are equally friendly with Russia because "Lavrov was in Riyadh" but of course this is just a lie.  Saudi Arabia has been a military partner of the United States ever since the Gulf War and we have American bases there.

Moreover, there's an implicit agreement between America and Saudi Arabia that if Iran ever gets a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia will be protected by the American nuclear threat.  Because Iran and Saudi Arabia are mortal enemies and Iran would absolutely love to obliterate Saudi Arabia just as soon as it's finished with Israel.  That's just another reason why it's so bizarre to even consider the notion of "flipping" from Saudi Arabia to Iran as a regional partner.

[Ashley Biden's Diary]

Accolades to you - wow - just wow. You were somehow able to take even this and rationalize it to the extent that I get why Biden did this now. You have a great skill of defending Biden through and through. I commend you. I know I've said it before - but I mean it very seriously: You should be Biden's Press Secretary. You really know how to defend him and rationalize what he does no matter what, and you do it so well that (I think) most reasonable people feel compelled to agree with you. It is a great skill. You could've taken the easy way out and just criticized Biden like all the rest of us have, but instead you've written a long, well-reasoned, logical post that really makes what Biden did sound reasonable and the best option.

No, he does not deserve credit for contorting himself into a pretzel to kiss Biden's ass defend Biden no matter what, as if Biden will give him a job if he keeps at it. He claims that somehow Saudi Arabia is far better than Iran and suggests they aren't on Russia's side (Lavrov was literally in Riyadh today). The difference between Saudi Arabia and Iran is the former values money ahead of Islamic fundamentalism, while the latter values Islamic fundamentalism ahead of money. You wouldn't even need American oil execs in Tehran - there are existing brokers and intermediaries to do that. Actually, you wouldn't even need to bring a single drop of oil into the US from Iran to alleviate the current situation.

Please tell me how "letting Putin win" is worse than letting MBS win. If that's how we're defining the stakes, Putin has already won.

Interesting. You might be right that Iran > Saudi Arabia. I'm no Middle East expert. However, he did bring up anti-American sentiment all over Iran following Soleimani's assassination. It might be very risky to go to Iran to get oil? Again, I don't know, and both of you guys know better than I. All I know that neither option is good at all. I just don't know which is worse. I believed GMac but what you said makes sense to me too.

Iran is definitely not a better ugly friend than Saudi Arabia.

First of all, Iran f---ing hates our guts and will never be our friend.  Saudi Arabia may murder journalists but at least they don't chant "Death To America" during their Friday prayer service every week.

Second of all, Iran has us over the barrel already because Trump dismantled the JCPOA.  Iran is now making a nuclear weapon to destroy Israel, and we're in an incredibly weak negotiating position because we already reneged on the deal once.  We're already having to play really nice with them to avoid a potential Israel-Iran nuclear exchange.  Having to beg them for oil as well will really undermine our position.

Thirdly, Iran is absolutely one of Russia's key allies.  Thanks to western sanctions, Iran does most of its trade with Russia.  Iran buys most of its weapons from Russia.  Iran and Russia are on the same side in every middle eastern conflict Iran is involved in.  Russia also shares intelligence with Iran.  None of this is true of Saudi Arabia.  Santander casually implied that both Saudi Arabia and Iran are equally friendly with Russia because "Lavrov was in Riyadh" but of course this is just a lie.  Saudi Arabia has been a military partner of the United States ever since the Gulf War and we have American bases there.

Moreover, there's an implicit agreement between America and Saudi Arabia that if Iran ever gets a nuclear weapon, Saudi Arabia will be protected by the American nuclear threat.  Because Iran and Saudi Arabia are mortal enemies and Iran would absolutely love to obliterate Saudi Arabia just as soon as it's finished with Israel.  That's just another reason why it's so bizarre to even consider the notion of "flipping" from Saudi Arabia to Iran as a regional partner.

Imagine actually believing this.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Apple pie, baseball, and bowing down before Saudi abusers of human rights are America's favorite national pastimes.

And regime changing "authoritarian" regimes because of "terrorism", never mind that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.

[Indy Texas]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Because throwing someone in prison for protesting against a government's ruling party is an unacceptable violation of human rights that we will not stand for.

But chopping off someone's head because a guy with a big wizard beard said they were practicing witchcraft in violation of Sharia law? Totally fine.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Imagine actually believing this.

Lazy, dumb response.  Be better.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Imagine actually believing this.

Lazy, dumb response.  Be better.

Iran wants nuclear weapons as an insurance policy against regime change efforts from noted nuclear powers the United States and Israel.  But they’re not going to use them the first chance they get. I mean, f—king Pakistan sponsors at least as much Islamist terrorism as Iran, and they actually have nukes, as does their mortal enemy next door—and it’s been, what, three decades that that’s been the case? It would suck but we could live with it.

Iran getting nukes makes it harder to topple the regime and could create a dangerous nuclear arms race in the region, but in terms of actual threats to Israel or the US or other countries, they’re not the problem. The problem is—has been—Iran’s sponsorship of terrorist and insurgent groups, especially in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian territories but also Yemen and Afghanistan, which of course goes back to the early days of the Revolutionary Guards and the Qods Force (ie., the 1980s). Again: not new.

But if we were to condemn countries for sponsoring or turning a blind eye to Islamist terrorism, we might want to take a look some of our so-called allies (and indirectly, ourselves…), like the inbred royal morons in Riyadh or the paranoid deep state in Islamabad. I don’t care if the groups they support also want to hang the al-Saud and all the other existing Islamic governments from lamp-posts; if anything, that makes their support of Salafi jihadists even more insane low IQ behavior. At least Hezbollah effectively and loyally serves the Islamic Republic’s interests, lol…

[urutzizu]

It is so ironic, "Global Pariah", I remember Biden openly bragging last year that he would only speak to the King and refuse to speak to MBS. And now it is Biden who was begging for a call with MBS (which MBS snubbed) and going to there to make amends. The way the US deals with its so-called "allies" is essentially a one sided emotionally abusive relationship, where the moment you are no longer useful or an inconvenience to them, you are immediately dropped and pushed aside, and the moment they need you again, they expect you to run back to them as if nothing happened, because everyone obviously would want to be with them. Maybe now the US learns the hard way that like in real life, that doesn't work forever, although usually people like this don't change.

Anyway, from a Human rights standpoint maybe the Biden admin deserves a little credit, because it actually put in a tiny bit of effort for a year and (slightly) reduced military cooperation and offensive weapons sales with the Saudis, until they had to change course due to gas prices. As opposed to the Europeans which manufactured faux outrage at how Trump gave a free pass after Khashoggi, but in reality never reduced Saudi relations and went to normalize MBS some time ago.

[Aurelius]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Brandon's representatives already went on bended knee to Maduro.

The sane solution would be to thaw relations with Iran, a country far less bad than Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but this is America and being stupid is what it does best.

The sanest solution would be to kill two birds with one stone and transition to renewable. But I guess that's a no-go, right, Biden?

The sanest solution would be to develop our own energy resources

Exactly what I said. Our own RENEWABLE energy resources. No more fossil fuels.

My 2001 dodge dakota doesnt run on solar and unicorn farts. No more green only policies.

There are plenty of cars that do. Just because you choose to drive a car that doesn't run on renewable energy doesn't mean there aren't any such cars. You can continue driving your Dodge Dakota. But we need to start moving towards green energy, and your owning a Dodge Dakota doesn't change that in the slightest. And how can there be 'no more green only policies' when there haven't been any green only policies to begin with?

This is one of the most hilariously, cluelessly privileged things I have read on this website. New cars are more expensive than ever. And the used car market is even more ridiculous.  Furthermore hybrid and electric cars are especially expensive, and the infrastructure for electric vehicles is an extra challenge especially if you don't own your own home with its own parking spot.  Soaring gas prices are already bad enough, but buying a brand new vehicle is even more expensive.  The median vehicle on the road is 11 years old. All the fancy new sensors and doodads that the government is now requiring on all new vehicles have shot prices through the roof.

Personal vehicles are also not the only thing affected. Diesel prices have soared even worse than gas prices, the national average is well above $5 a gallon,  And in 10 States it is above $6 a gallon. Everything we buy and use in our everyday lives is shipped to us on semi trucks that run on massive amounts of diesel fuel. Inflation is already bad enough as is, and these insane gas and diesel prices are going to make things much worse if we don't get them under control quickly.

[Schiff for Senate]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Brandon's representatives already went on bended knee to Maduro.

The sane solution would be to thaw relations with Iran, a country far less bad than Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but this is America and being stupid is what it does best.

The sanest solution would be to kill two birds with one stone and transition to renewable. But I guess that's a no-go, right, Biden?

The sanest solution would be to develop our own energy resources

Exactly what I said. Our own RENEWABLE energy resources. No more fossil fuels.

My 2001 dodge dakota doesnt run on solar and unicorn farts. No more green only policies.

There are plenty of cars that do. Just because you choose to drive a car that doesn't run on renewable energy doesn't mean there aren't any such cars. You can continue driving your Dodge Dakota. But we need to start moving towards green energy, and your owning a Dodge Dakota doesn't change that in the slightest. And how can there be 'no more green only policies' when there haven't been any green only policies to begin with?

This is one of the most hilariously, cluelessly privileged things I have read on this website. New cars are more expensive than ever. And the used car market is even more ridiculous.  Furthermore hybrid and electric cars are especially expensive, and the infrastructure for electric vehicles is an extra challenge especially if you don't own your own home with its own parking spot.  Soaring gas prices are already bad enough, but buying a brand new vehicle is even more expensive.  The median vehicle on the road is 11 years old. All the fancy new sensors and doodads that the government is now requiring on all new vehicles have shot prices through the roof.

Maybe try reading instead of having these knee-jerk reactions. I'm aware Teslas are unaffordable for most people (including my family, in case you think I come from an upper-class, elitist, Tesla-driving family or something). I noticed that Reactionary said his car was from 2001. When did I ask him to change that? When did I say that at all? We do need to transition to renewable. I literally clarified that I have no objection to Reactionary driving his Dodge Dakota, just as long as he wasn't using that to object to moving towards renewable. I understand that most cars used today are older and require oil/gas. Didn't object to that. We can nonetheless start moving to renewable energy. And again, like I said, it's not like eco-friendly cars don't exist. I get that they're expensive and too expensive for many of us, but it's not like cars like Tesla don't exist. I did not tell Reactionary to buy a new car - that would have been very cringey and out of line. I literally said that his driving his Dodge Dakota is perfectly all right with me. Please read the whole post in the future before responding.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Yeah Averroes is right. Honestly it makes sense that extraction of raw materials would be where the most obvious brutality took place within the context of global markets. This has been true since the Bad Old Days of colonialism and chattel slavery, if not before. I don’t see a realistic way to solve this, sadly.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If you think that keeping oil flowing involves some unsavory compromises, wait until you learn about material supply chains for electric batteries. The shift to renewable energy does not solve this problem.

There are a lot of disturbing political and moral assumptions in the Dune books--Al's mixed review of the first book on this forum goes into some of them--but the fundamental "the Spice must flow" concept underlying most of their conflicts is evergreen, and was already evergreen when they were written considering the sordid history of trade and natural-resources policy before the discovery of petroleum.

Not that any of this makes the ridiculous circular "the Saudis are better than the Iranians because they're our allies, and we know this because they wouldn't be our allies if they weren't" arguments from the "this is fine" dogs of the foreign policy establishment any less reprehensible.

[Aurelius]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Brandon's representatives already went on bended knee to Maduro.

The sane solution would be to thaw relations with Iran, a country far less bad than Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but this is America and being stupid is what it does best.

The sanest solution would be to kill two birds with one stone and transition to renewable. But I guess that's a no-go, right, Biden?

The sanest solution would be to develop our own energy resources

Exactly what I said. Our own RENEWABLE energy resources. No more fossil fuels.

My 2001 dodge dakota doesnt run on solar and unicorn farts. No more green only policies.

There are plenty of cars that do. Just because you choose to drive a car that doesn't run on renewable energy doesn't mean there aren't any such cars. You can continue driving your Dodge Dakota. But we need to start moving towards green energy, and your owning a Dodge Dakota doesn't change that in the slightest. And how can there be 'no more green only policies' when there haven't been any green only policies to begin with?

This is one of the most hilariously, cluelessly privileged things I have read on this website. New cars are more expensive than ever. And the used car market is even more ridiculous.  Furthermore hybrid and electric cars are especially expensive, and the infrastructure for electric vehicles is an extra challenge especially if you don't own your own home with its own parking spot.  Soaring gas prices are already bad enough, but buying a brand new vehicle is even more expensive.  The median vehicle on the road is 11 years old. All the fancy new sensors and doodads that the government is now requiring on all new vehicles have shot prices through the roof.

Maybe try reading instead of having these knee-jerk reactions. I'm aware Teslas are unaffordable for most people (including my family, in case you think I come from an upper-class, elitist, Tesla-driving family or something). I noticed that Reactionary said his car was from 2001. When did I ask him to change that? When did I say that at all? We do need to transition to renewable. I literally clarified that I have no objection to Reactionary driving his Dodge Dakota, just as long as he wasn't using that to object to moving towards renewable. I understand that most cars used today are older and require oil/gas. Didn't object to that. We can nonetheless start moving to renewable energy. And again, like I said, it's not like eco-friendly cars don't exist. I get that they're expensive and too expensive for many of us, but it's not like cars like Tesla don't exist. I did not tell Reactionary to buy a new car - that would have been very cringey and out of line. I literally said that his driving his Dodge Dakota is perfectly all right with me. Please read the whole post in the future before responding.

I did read your whole post. The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether you say you're personally ok with him driving his truck, we are in a borderline national emergency with fuel prices right now and the idea we shouldn't do everything in our power to bring them down because ~green energy~ is absurd. We are allowed to deal with short term crises even if you think long term goals are in the opposite direction.

Side note: you've made 60 posts today (edit: and 175 in the past three days, good lord). There's no need to respond to every post you disagree with.

[Schiff for Senate]

There are a ton of other sources for cheap gas—Iran, Venezuela—and gas we are currently exporting for some reason that could be used by our people. Going to the Saudis and begging as the leading superpower and the only thing keeping them in power is more pathetic than building up our relations elsewhere.

Brandon's representatives already went on bended knee to Maduro.

The sane solution would be to thaw relations with Iran, a country far less bad than Venezuela or Saudi Arabia, but this is America and being stupid is what it does best.

The sanest solution would be to kill two birds with one stone and transition to renewable. But I guess that's a no-go, right, Biden?

The sanest solution would be to develop our own energy resources

Exactly what I said. Our own RENEWABLE energy resources. No more fossil fuels.

My 2001 dodge dakota doesnt run on solar and unicorn farts. No more green only policies.

There are plenty of cars that do. Just because you choose to drive a car that doesn't run on renewable energy doesn't mean there aren't any such cars. You can continue driving your Dodge Dakota. But we need to start moving towards green energy, and your owning a Dodge Dakota doesn't change that in the slightest. And how can there be 'no more green only policies' when there haven't been any green only policies to begin with?

This is one of the most hilariously, cluelessly privileged things I have read on this website. New cars are more expensive than ever. And the used car market is even more ridiculous.  Furthermore hybrid and electric cars are especially expensive, and the infrastructure for electric vehicles is an extra challenge especially if you don't own your own home with its own parking spot.  Soaring gas prices are already bad enough, but buying a brand new vehicle is even more expensive.  The median vehicle on the road is 11 years old. All the fancy new sensors and doodads that the government is now requiring on all new vehicles have shot prices through the roof.

Maybe try reading instead of having these knee-jerk reactions. I'm aware Teslas are unaffordable for most people (including my family, in case you think I come from an upper-class, elitist, Tesla-driving family or something). I noticed that Reactionary said his car was from 2001. When did I ask him to change that? When did I say that at all? We do need to transition to renewable. I literally clarified that I have no objection to Reactionary driving his Dodge Dakota, just as long as he wasn't using that to object to moving towards renewable. I understand that most cars used today are older and require oil/gas. Didn't object to that. We can nonetheless start moving to renewable energy. And again, like I said, it's not like eco-friendly cars don't exist. I get that they're expensive and too expensive for many of us, but it's not like cars like Tesla don't exist. I did not tell Reactionary to buy a new car - that would have been very cringey and out of line. I literally said that his driving his Dodge Dakota is perfectly all right with me. Please read the whole post in the future before responding.

I did read your whole post. The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether you say you're personally ok with him driving his truck, we are in a borderline national emergency with fuel prices right now and the idea we shouldn't do everything in our power to bring them down because ~green energy~ is absurd. We are allowed to deal with short term crises even if you think long term goals are in the opposite direction.

Okay, then the problem is that you've extrapolated too much from this one post and didn't see my other posts in the thread. I conceded that the short-term problem of high gas prices must, sadly, be solved with oil, not renewable, as renewable energy isn't immediately usable/practical, and obviously, we need oil/energy ASAP. But I also said Biden should use this is an opportunity to begin also investing in green - he should use this to highlight one of many problems with fossil fuels and use this to advocate for domestically cultivated green energy. Obviously for today's energy needs, green energy is unfeasible, but we should start investing in it today so that it is a viable and feasible option tomorrow. That's basically the core of what I've said. As I said earlier in the thread as well:

Well Santander also made a good point that should be obvious but which a lot of us (myself included, to be sure) have forgotten - we can start investing in and transitioning to green energy today, but it won't yield energy immediately, which is what's needed to lower prices at the gas pump. For our most immediate energy needs, we unfortunately do still need to rely on fossil fuels. We're talking about prices at the gas tank. Right now, we need a tangible solution, which means foreign oil, unfortunately, since the alternatives would take very long. It's an ugly truth, and we absolutely should be doing more to transition to green so we can soon enough drop fossil fuels and eventually move entirely to green energy...We need energy ASAP. Right now, it will need to be fossil fuels.

[S019]

I don't like this any more than the next person, but we have to get this oil from somewhere, and despite their issues....Saudi Arabia has long been one of our trusted allies and the rising influence of Iran is another reason to cultivate our relationship with them, at least for the short term.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

I don't like this any more than the next person, but we have to get this oil from somewhere, and despite their issues....Saudi Arabia has long been one of our trusted allies and the rising influence of Iran is another reason to cultivate our relationship with them, at least for the short term.

"Trusted" to do what, exactly?

[WD]

With “allies” like Saudi Arabia, who needs enemies?

[GeneralMacArthur]

If you think that keeping oil flowing involves some unsavory compromises, wait until you learn about material supply chains for electric batteries. The shift to renewable energy does not solve this problem.

There are a lot of disturbing political and moral assumptions in the Dune books--Al's mixed review of the first book on this forum goes into some of them--but the fundamental "the Spice must flow" concept underlying most of their conflicts is evergreen, and was already evergreen when they were written considering the sordid history of trade and natural-resources policy before the discovery of petroleum.

Not that any of this makes the ridiculous circular "the Saudis are better than the Iranians because they're our allies, and we know this because they wouldn't be our allies if they weren't" arguments from the "this is fine" dogs of the foreign policy establishment any less reprehensible.

What do you want Biden to do

[Adam Griffin]

This is one of the most hilariously, cluelessly privileged things I have read on this website. New cars are more expensive than ever. And the used car market is even more ridiculous.  Furthermore hybrid and electric cars are especially expensive, and the infrastructure for electric vehicles is an extra challenge especially if you don't own your own home with its own parking spot.  Soaring gas prices are already bad enough, but buying a brand new vehicle is even more expensive.  The median vehicle on the road is 11 years old. All the fancy new sensors and doodads that the government is now requiring on all new vehicles have shot prices through the roof.

1/22 average new car price: $46,404
1/22 average used car price: $28,205
Base model Chevy Bolt (260 mile range): $32,000

This doesn't even get into the true cost of ownership: over the years, an EV owner will save thousands in combined fuel and maintenance costs compared to a combustion vehicle. It's already perfectly feasible and cost-effective to go electric if you're not looking for a higher end vehicle. For the Bolt specifically, taking into account all the major factors for the first five years of ownership (average maintenance costs, fuel costs, insurance costs, etc), buying the base model is roughly equivalent to buying a $24-25k combustion vehicle. Most people are idiots, however, and only consider the monthly sticker price rather than what they'll actually shell out over the lifetime of a car or the rare occasion they might drive 200+ miles in a single day.

None of this really matters, though: over the past year alone, the percentage of new vehicle sales that are EV went from 2% to over 6%. In a few years time, that share will likely be well north of 20%. Major manufacturers are already preparing for the 2030-2035 phase out of combustion engines. The simple fact is that oil is by far used for transportation, and even in just a few years, the amount of oil the US will need per capita is going to begin substantially dropping. What we use to power the replacement energy is a bigger concern.