It's different than those countries. Iran started an energy war in response by sabotaging and bombing oil and gas refineries around the ME as well as blocking the straight of Hormuz. Europe will suffer as well.

The 'world' still thinks this will be over soon, it won't unless Trump backs down and he's already prepared for 4-5 weeks or as long as it takes. No clue what 'it' is. Also still still believing Trump can actually 'insure' oil tankers.


https://www.cnbc.com/2026/03/03/crude-oil-prices-today-iran-war.html

Oil prices ease after Trump says U.S. will insure tankers transiting Strait of Hormuz

Trump said the U.S. Development Finance Corporation will “provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees” for the financial security of all maritime trade through the Gulf.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” the president said in a social media post.

That's pure fantasy, is the US going to sweep for mines to escort each tanker... Is the American tax payer going to pay for each sunk / damaged tanker?

'U.S abandoned Saudi': Iran strikes Aramco’s Ras Tanura refinery | Thick black smoke rises in skies

A dramatic escalation in the Middle East conflict as Iran launches a drone strike targeting Saudi Aramco’s Ras Tanura oil refinery one of the world’s most critical energy hubs. Visuals show thick black smoke billowing into the sky and flames erupting from the facility after impact.

It is indeed puzzling that people defend the US

Pentagon tells Congress no sign that Iran was going to attack US first, sources say

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/pentagon-tells-congress-no-sign-that-iran-was-going-attack-us-first-sources-say-2026-03-02/

Trump administration officials acknowledged in closed-door briefings with congressional staff on Sunday that there was no intelligence suggesting Iran planned to attack U.S. forces first, two people familiar with the matter said.

Trump has argued, without presenting evidence, that Iran was on track to soon secure the ability to strike the United States with a ballistic missile.

His missile claim was not backed by U.S. intelligence reports, and appeared to be exaggerated, sources familiar with the reports have told Reuters.



The only thing to fear is fear itself. Trump is lashing out in the dark. That's what happens when you keep vilifying others, you become the victim of your own propaganda.

Genuine question, anybody can answer, and I won't argue back.  Would the world be better or worse if Iran developed nukes?  Sincere question and should be easy to answer.  

And as said before, I get the anti US sentiment, I have it to a large degree as well.  

It would of course be less safe. And to be clear I am also not shedding any tears for the psychopaths in the Iranian elite that are are now diseased. But that Iran were actually about to get nukes is just not true. They have enriched uranium to an extent that suggests that they might, but are still lacking core capabilities necessary to build such weapons. The enrichment is likely to put pressure on the US, who, as we all hopefully remember, decided to throw away a nuclear agreement that served its purpose.

What is the end goal of this war exactly? The attacks are not targeting the enrichment infrastructure exclusively. Does the war even weaken the Iranian regime? I don’t think so.

US, EU and IAEA all thought/reported they were most certainly making progress towards weapon grade U-235.  Granted many thought Iraq had WOMD...  so, hell.  Don't know what to think.  

End goal, no idea.  Based on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc...  I'm not exactly thrilled.  Not sure there are any good answers on this one, just my 2 cents.

Thanks for the response, much appreciated.

Edit

I try to look on the bright side.  Iran is likely having major setbacks on weapons development and Trump's approval rating (and GoP in general) is failing.  Will we get super lucky and Iran will be setback while also having a shift in US politics this November?  I sure as **** hope both happen.  

Short term yes. If Iran had actually developed nukes like North Korea, we wouldn't be in this mess right now.

Long term, of course not, nukes are a liability and even if Iran wouldn't use them, they can always fall in worse hands. Plus having nukes apparently makes countries think they can do whatever they want, US, Russia, Israel in particular. Iran would feel more emboldened as well.

However none of what Trump is doing is making the world more safe, only making more countries determined to pursue nuclear weapons as a deterrent. 

And it certainly makes sense for Trump to try and do that but it remains to be seen what impact it will have and how Trump's insurance will work. If its expensive, it won't move the dial. If its cheap, it encourages more Iranians attacks on shipping as if they get even a handful it causes major costs for the US. And if Trump then renegade on promises to payout, everything is right back where it started.

Reports are saying traffic in the Strait of Hormuz is still falling so still looks like shipping companies aren't willing to take the risk.

I woke up this morning to news that some 20 year old kid died in Iran's counterattack. People are praising him as a "hero" just for signing up for the military. He's not a hero. At best he's a victim of a military recuiter's lies.

^ this.

Why do so many want to see the US as the bad guys?
Like common... 

If "scientists" that visit them, look over their enrichment and say its over 60%, one year.
Only to be denied future access to oversight, and then satellites can pick up traces of particles over 83%.... 
That does not sound like "weeks away from nukes for years and years".
Why are they even trying if they are told not too?

If the US, doesn't act, its words (and threats) become meaningless.
It erodes their "soft power". Sometimes all the US has to do is say "try us", and people/countries think twice about their actions.
You can't be saying for 20years or so, "don't do this, we wont allow it, there will be consequences".... only to watch them keep doing so (trying at it).
Get close to success, and then not act.  

And what is the alternative? I asked this before.
Do people actually want Iran to have nukes? What other option did the americans really have?