Conversation thread

They were threatening worldwide trade and every time we try and ignore them they continue state-sponsored terrorism that directly affects the United States along with trying to creat NUKES to bomb their enemies, is being one of them. Trying to prevent that is our utmost priority, so no, we’re not leaving Iran alone.

If we used our own flaming oil we wouldn't be dependent on the trade going through there – if America First hadn't been ditched by Biden, there would be no problem for us with the "Trade disruptions"

Our oil reserves only last us 1-3 decades at best, and that’s at their current rate. We use that because we need it. Trade through that area is pivotal to the world at large, even if we isolated, our allies suffering is our suffering.

Our oil "reserves" – but not the un-drilled oil in the Alaska Wildlife Refuge, which is worth billions, not the massive amounts of oil yet to be drilled in Texas – but Alaska, Alaska is one of the most oil-rich areas on the planet. I didn't mean we should rely only on our oil reserves, I meant we should drill MORE oil!

And if we do so, we devastate everyone living in the area, including both the environment round it and the people already living there. Overall, if the oil spills, we may need to spend billions cleaning it up in the process, not to mention the issues we’d have actually rescuing the people affected. Don’t believe in climate change? Smog is still a problem, along with the pollutants it puts in our air. Not to mention, the oil companies already have thousands of leases being completely unused due to the fact that they don’t WANT lower prices, they’ll sacrifice the lower…  Read more oil prices for their own profit, and as such, the issue of drilling lies solely with them in the first place. Also, if we drill in Alaska, the permafrost is the cost. Ever heard of what happens with permafrost, or what’s underneath? We’ve discovered over 100 diseases in a single ice core from that, and there’s enough methane underneath to give the earth a good ten years of emissions as it melts, boosting the problem so much further than usual. The geological problems get even further in, causing sinkholes, landslides, extreme droughts, and state-wide displacement of most animals, often humans could be on the list. So, in short, REALLY bad idea to suck the oil out of Alaska, that’s how we cause disease, drought, severe emissions, and destroy entire ecosystems.

Did you read my message like… at all? Humans are drastically affected too, there’s diseases, by the thousands, that we haven’t discovered underneath the permafrost, and when that stuff melts, we get to meet them in full force. Over 90% of Alaska is covered in it, and when we drill there, that stuff disappears a lot faster, endangering the cities and towns of almost all of Alaska. It’s not just the animals, it’s the people, the towns, and eventually large amounts of Alaskan land becoming destitute.

I did, but it was so boring my brain probably instantly deleted the bulk of it, explaining our current situation. Perhaps to break up the monotony you could season your emotional unloads with a dash of logic and maybe a hint of truth – then, I'm certain, my brain, which actually has an above average capacity for memory, would retain much more of it. It's sad how little control we have over such things :(

Apparently you don't know this (chuckle) but bacteria die within 24 hours on most surfaces and can't survive long OR grow in freezing temperatures ... that's how…  Read more freezers work – they impede the growth of bacteria by cooling it to a very low temperature. It would be highly improbable (to say the VERY LEAST) that diseases could survive for thousands of years (that's probably why permafrost has never killed anyone before).