You are asserting some stuff I am not really making an issue of. 6 of the top 10 sellers to China are not operating anywhere close to what they were in 2025 with them right now. One might quibble and assert that maybe Russia is in fact increasing their shipments/day to China, but I don't think it really matters on that point, a surge to 2.7million barrels/day still isn't replacing what they were getting elsewhere, and is likely unsustainable:

China #oil imports from Russia hits record in Jan 2.70 mmb/d, down a bit in Feb to 2.61 mmb/d.

China customs data:

Feb 2.61 mmb/d
Jan 2.70
Dec 2.21
Nov 2.04
Oct 2.15
Sep 2.03
Aug 1.88
Jul 2.06
Jun 2.04
May 1.98
Apr 1.97

Thx @business#oott pic.twitter.com/4yTZNSwlTH

— Dan Tsubouchi (@Energy_Tidbits) March 21, 2026

China is THE other economy in the world that really matters (the Euro's can piss right off as far as I'm concerned) from a trade perspective and they are being significantly crippled right now as a political-economic consequence of the war/trade disruption, that is my simple point.

I think a lot of the media portrays the limited current Iranian shipments to China as somehow much more significant than they are, it's the confluence of all of it that is hitting them. They are significant to the Iranians of course, but China had a fairly well distributed source/supply chain of oil in 2025. Right now, it's a mess.

I think you're narrowly focusing on China. I don't see how they're being any more disrupted than we are. if everyone is getting weakened then what's the net gain?

sts7049 said:

---

I think you're narrowly focusing on China. I don't see how they're being any more disrupted than we are. if everyone is getting weakened then what's the net gain?

---

I think you are trying to convince me to make a post that focuses on something you want to focus on. Feel free to make your own point.

sts7049 said:

---

I think you're narrowly focusing on China. I don't see how they're being any more disrupted than we are. if everyone is getting weakened then what's the net gain?

---

Say what ? We are the world's #1 producer @ 13.87 mb/d beating #2 Russia by 3.7 mb/d. While China only produces 4.34 mb/d. The math says you are confused.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-worlds-biggest-producers-of-crude-oil/

hph6203 said:

---

Politicians lie. News at 11.

---

If you treat everything trump says is a lie, then its actually pretty easy to predict what he's going to do.

Clown Smith is one of biggest liars out there:

The polls tell us that this is the most unpopular war, going in, in American history. The President claims (and at least possibly believes) that it is 100% supported.

It’s impossible to overstate how insane this all is.

— Dave Smith (@ComicDaveSmith) March 20, 2026

Yet he's the "go to" for the fake America First crowd on all things Middle East!

Keyno said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

We entered the war because we wanted to do it, but timing was in question. We entered now because Israel was going to bomb Iran and earlier is better than later.

FIFY.

---

Yes Israel dragged us in

---

No. ADD generation that can't see past their immediate circumstances believe that.

---

Uh, no its not "generation blame" time. It's Israel blame time.

---

do you kids have any hard evidence BiBi forced Trumps hand? Other than mass innuendo?

It was time to deal with Iran. Trump took the opportunity. Why need to continue to wait?

It helps with the Russia problem and the China problem.

I should not be driving through a small village in Chile and the Alibaba Mercados. Bezos should be slinging his wares, not the Chinamen.

But enough with the Israel controls the United States. That has NEVER been the case. They are both a strategic ally and a country both in need of and deserving of our protection and friendship.

After Obama's disastrous 2009 apology tour, all our "allies" simply saw us as a blank check and the United States of Soy.

F that. Go Trump.

FobTies said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

You don't understand what you're taking about at all.

---

I posted videos of Trump telling us he saved us from "Nuclear Holocaust", THREE other times prior. This will be the fourth time.

The obvious point is that maybe we should be skeptical about our gov crying wolf about imminent nuke threats and WMDs. Its really not too much different than libs taking bait every time on climate change alarmism, for decades.

BTW, how very ironic it is you are accusing others of not seeing beyond their immediate circumstances.

---

I miss the days where we posted videos of Biden and HeelsUp just using a singular word for effective foreign policy… "Don't".

Curse Trump for following through on his threats.

Ag with kids said:

---

infinity ag said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

AGHouston11 said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

War with Iran was always going to happen because of their fanatical obsession with harming others and their relentless pursuit of military capability to execute on that mission.

It was just a matter of when.

Politically, this will further sink Trump and the R's in the upcoming midterms because of the economic impacts.

But leadership requires you to do the right thing for the right reason at the right time. It's hard for me to argue this wasn't the time to kick it off, with the Iranian leaders all assembled together, Israel primed and ready to go, and neighboring militants in a low cycle position of weakness.

There will be unexpected setbacks for sure, and we'll just have to see where this goes. I hope like hell Trump doesn't TACO (chicken out) on this one. Stay the course and get the job done, regardless of the short term political consequences.

---

Where does stay the course stop?

---

It stops with eliminating their ability to harm others. Regime change would be a bonus but not absolute requirement.

It might require follow up action in coming years if the Iranians don't come around to economic and political incentives to live peacefully with regional neighbors, including Israel.

You simply can't let them get a nuclear bomb or build tens of thousands of missiles that they can rain down on the neighborhood. This conflict is confirming that they are crazy with how they've targeted non-combatants.

Have to finish the job and disarm them completely.

---

But then how are we okay with Pakistan having a nuclear bomb and periodically threatening the world (mainly India) with it? Why won't we take out their nukes? We don't even have to bomb them, Trump can merely ask for it and they will fall to their knees and beg us for some money.

We are not being very principled here.

---

We're NOT ****ing "okay with Pakistan having a nuclear bomb and periodically threatening the world (mainly India) with it"

HowEVER...weak administrations before this allowed it to happen...

---

Some clever Pakis helped with the original bombs so it makes sense they would be ones to make on on their own.

I think Pakistan was sort of allowed because the Hindi wanted a bomb and also had the wits and resources to do it.

Like a mini Rus v Anglo nuclear MAD.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Keyno said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

Keyno said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

We entered the war because we wanted to do it, but timing was in question. We entered now because Israel was going to bomb Iran and earlier is better than later.

FIFY.

---

Yes Israel dragged us in

---

No. ADD generation that can't see past their immediate circumstances believe that.

---

Uh, no its not "generation blame" time. It's Israel blame time.

---

do you kids have any hard evidence BiBi forced Trumps hand? Other than mass innuendo?

It was time to deal with Iran. Trump took the opportunity. Why need to continue to wait?

It helps with the Russia problem and the China problem.

I should not be driving through a small village in Chile and the Alibaba Mercados. Bezos should be slinging his wares, not the Chinamen.

But enough with the Israel controls the United States. That has NEVER been the case. They are both a strategic ally and a country both in need of and deserving of our protection and friendship.

After Obama's disastrous 2009 apology tour, all our "allies" simply saw us as a blank check and the United States of Soy.

F that. Go Trump.

---

Quote from Rubio

"The second question I've been asked is: Why now? Well, there's two reasons why now. The first is it was abundantly clear that if Iran came under attack by anyone, the United States or Israel or anyone, they were going to respond and respond against the United States."

nortex97 said:

---

sts7049 said:

---

I think you're narrowly focusing on China. I don't see how they're being any more disrupted than we are. if everyone is getting weakened then what's the net gain?

---

I think you are trying to convince me to make a post that focuses on something you want to focus on. Feel free to make your own point.

---

you seem to be arguing that China is being significantly disrupted. i'm saying they aren't. but ok.

I don't understand why anyone would possibly focus on Charlie Kirk's advice on not getting involved in Iran as some sort of authoritative stance. I liked Charlie. I respected and admired him. But Charlie Kirk was a private citizen. He had no access to any intelligence, any capabilities briefings, or any real knowledge of what Iran's military or nuclear capabilities were.

Charlie was a great thinker, a great speaker, and a great agent for getting young people to think. But lets not pretend like he was a foreign policy expert with access to the same levels of information regarding Iran's nuclear program or military plans. His thoughts on whether or not we should be involved with war in Iran are not some sort of gospel.

Queso1 said:

---

Take heed peasants. Not only should you pay for forever war through taxes, inflation and the loss of your children, you should also stay home. Don't go out. Order your food from grubhub.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/03/20/people-urged-to-work-from-home-in-global-oil-crisis/

---

The Brit's have quite possible some of the laziest coddled workforce the world has ever known.

Most stay home anyways. You can claim agoraphobia and receive permanent disability, which is Oct equal or more than having an actual job.

We are nearly there here. When we get done with Iran, hold on to your welfare britches.

maverick2076 said:

---

I don't understand why anyone would possibly focus on Charlie Kirk's advice on not getting involved in Iran as some sort of authoritative stance.

---

Its more the complete denial of this fact, and attack on anyone who brings it up on F16. Thats really the point that shows how totally irrational people are being. Which is a very relevant topic when discussing the MAGA shift from "no foreign regime change war" to "now is the time to finally liberate the Iranians, and save Israel".

Glad you are at least honest about Kirks stance, even though you are writing him off as disconnected and not an expert. The dude was frequently in the oval office, and rubbing shoulders with intel officials urging them not to war with Iran. We see Trump shills like Ben Ferguson claiming "military experts didnt know Iran would draw others into conflict" in the region. Trump himself claiming it was unexpected. Charlie Kirk literally predicted exactly that would happen....its in the clip I posted, that gives everyone here an aneurism.

What we are told is that you were hearing what actually Charlie said was not what he said by people that didn't listen to him.

Don't try to twist my post into somehow endorsing your own. I'm not agreeing with you or disagreeing with you about what Charlie Kirk said about the Iran war. I don't care what Charlie Kirk said about Iran war.

Honestly, anyone's year-old comment about whether we should get involved in Iran is equally worthless. Geopolitically and militarily, a lot can change in a year. Stop trying to pretend like Kirk's comments made a year ago have any strategic validity.

And just because Charlie Kirk hung out in the Oval Office doesn't make him a foreign policy expert. Kid Rock and Kanye West also spent time with Trump in the White House, and I don't give a **** about their opinions on Iran either.

maverick2076 said:

---

I don't understand why anyone would possibly focus on Charlie Kirk's advice on not getting involved in Iran as some sort of authoritative stance. I liked Charlie. I respected and admired him. But Charlie Kirk was a private citizen. He had no access to any intelligence, any capabilities briefings, or any real knowledge of what Iran's military or nuclear capabilities were.

Charlie was a great thinker, a great speaker, and a great agent for getting young people to think. But lets not pretend like he was a foreign policy expert with access to the same levels of information regarding Iran's nuclear program or military plans. His thoughts on whether or not we should be involved with war in Iran are not some sort of gospel.

---

Well apparently Charlie predicted what Iran would do months before all the while Trump just keeps saying nobody thought that Iran would start attacking everyone around them. That and other things that were said would happen.

But it seems currently that Trump is preferring getting his information from Lindsey Graham fed to him via B B. Because what he's saying nobody knew would happen seems many others told him otherwise.

maverick2076 said:

---

Don't try to twist my post into somehow endorsing your own. I'm not agreeing with you or disagreeing with you about what Charlie Kirk said about the Iran war. I don't care what Charlie Kirk said about Iran war.

Honestly, anyone's year-old comment about whether we should get involved in Iran is equally worthless. Geopolitically and militarily, a lot can change in a year. Stop trying to pretend like Kirk's comments made a year ago have any strategic validity.

And just because Charlie Kirk hung out in the Oval Office doesn't make him a foreign policy expert. Kid Rock and Kanye West also spent time with Trump in the White House, and I don't give a **** about their opinions on Iran either.

---

Exactly.

Why people care what a talking head/"influencer" says, and let's not pretend he was anything more than that. Politician? No. Titan of industry? Also no.

As such, like you, what he said about anything means as much as what Kanye says, seeing as how Kanye also went to the Oval Office to hang out with Trump.

You nailed it.

Ag87H2O said:

---

I dont' think Trump went into this hungry to take action. But he saw that Iran has been a real threat to this country to varying degrees now for almost fifty years, they refused to negotiate in good faith, they flat out said we will not give up our nuclear ambitions and you can't stop us, and he likely knew that Israel was going to hit them again.

He did what good leaders do. He assessed the situation, weighed the variables, saw the unique opportunity to solve the Iranian/middle east problem, adjusted his plan, and did what he believes was in the best interest of America and took action.

Time will tell, but I think he did the right thing. Is there risk? Absolutely. But it is a once in a century opportunity to change the entire balance of power in the region, take out one of if not the worst enemy on the international stage, and tilt the balance of power in favor of America.

It's sad that many posters here are so warped by their dislike for Trump that they are actually pulling for us to lose.

---

I think Trump is asking for the $200 billion and sending troops to that region because he knows it'll take more than air superiority to change anything. It may take doing what W did with Iraq, but with Iraq so fresh in everyone's minds, the mistakes made then wouldn't be made this time.

Time will tell, but I can't see why anyone who voted for Trump would have a problem with this. It's needed. It's been needed for almost half a f*king century. It's time for a new Iran and, with it, an entirely new ME.

Okay, rant over. Carry on.

Preach.

[Feel free to make your point about the political ramifications of this conflict, but consistently poking at other posters on this board is out of bounds and will result in a timeout if you continue -- Staff]

I've seen a couple of things posted here that are ridiculous:

- America's most unpopular war in its history? I guess whoever made that statement ignored the late 60s, early 70s with a piece of land known as Vietnam

- This war is adding to our national debt? While I don't disagree, I have to wonder why there was no gnashing of teeth over our debt prior to the onset of this war.

Then there is this mocking statement about Trump saving us from nuclear devastation. While I don't claim to know the exact state of Iran's nuclear program, I'll just point out that it is a known fact that they were working toward a bomb. UN (most worthless organization ever) inspectors were frequently denied access to the nuke sites for required inspections per treaties agreed to over the years (those treaties turned out to be as useful as Chamberlain's "peace for our time" piece of paper). We know that the Iranians want "death to America". We know that the Iranians are the instrument of world-wide terrorism. Yet the idea that this war, as well as last summer's attacks, is unnecessary seems to be perfectly fine with some. I prefer not to be obliterated in a nuclear blast, nor do I wish to be a survivor of such in some post-apocalyptic nightmare world. There comes a time when one has to deal with a bully or a psycho unwilling to co-exist with others. Preferably that time comes prior to the psycho obtaining the one thing that would make dealing with them far more costly, both in terms of $$$$ and lives.

To be very clear, this isnt a post to make fun of anyone here who claimed "Charlie Kirk wasn't against the war", and are now claiming "Kirk isnt an expert, his opinion has no strategic value".

Its a simple short video to help people self reflect. Have we already forgetten what we learned from COVID about blindly "trusting the experts" and marginalizing anyone who doesnt have authority?

Repeatedly playng the Charlie Kirk quote is so lame. He's been dead for months now. When he made those comments, he had no idea the circumstances, and opportunity that would arise that would lead Trump to decide to take this action now.

Just like Trump has in the current situation, given the current circumstances he might well have changed his opinion. There is no way for anyone to know, but taking old footage and assuming how he would think now is disingenuous at best.

In the end, it doesn't matter what Charlie Kirk or anyone else thinks about it. They aren't the president and didn't have all the data to factor in and weigh the alternatives. Trump is president in the here and now. He made his decision based on the current data and what he believed was best for America. It's sad so many here can't take it for what it is and get behind it instead of hoping we lose in order to gain political advantage.

It going to claim that the Apple series Tehran is fact based but it provides a glimpse into how things may have worked out.

Iran has stated the public demand for nuclear weapons. They have stated the goals of their regime is to topple Great Satan and Little Satan.

Despite being heavily punished for taking these steps, they remain committed.

Why people just want to sit on their hands to see if they achieve their goal, many of us prefer not to see the Holy Land turned to glass and the inevitable loss of life that will come from that sort of fallout, nuclear and metaphorical.

We have technology that we can loose that minimizes and eliminates the need for boots on the ground. Sort of things that are not posted on public forums.

I absolutely believe we will have to send in some forces but likely to protect and distribute humanitarian aid as was done in Gaza. I'd much rather assist the Persian dissenters than Gaza terrorists. That point is lost on a lot of people here.

I cannot look it up now, but did Charlie Kirk support Hamas acting against Israel? I wouldn't think so but that's the narrative some want you to believe.

Regarding Lil Kim, he was told what the ramifications would be if he kept his antics up. I assume that starts with an EMP and some of those nifty bombs that ends the tyranny of a regime birthed in a snowy mountain near China.

Folks need to settle down. Trump is fixing it, fixing the world.

flown-the-coop said:

---

It going to claim that the Apple series Tehran is fact based but it provides a glimpse into how things may have worked out.

Iran has stated the public demand for nuclear weapons. They have stated the goals of their regime is to topple Great Satan and Little Satan.

Despite being heavily punished for taking these steps, they remain committed.

Why people just want to sit on their hands to see if they achieve their goal, many of us prefer not to see the Holy Land turned to glass and the inevitable loss of life that will come from that sort of fallout, nuclear and metaphorical.

We have technology that we can loose that minimizes and eliminates the need for boots on the ground. Sort of things that are not posted on public forums.

I absolutely believe we will have to send in some forces but likely to protect and distribute humanitarian aid as was done in Gaza. I'd much rather assist the Persian dissenters than Gaza terrorists. That point is lost on a lot of people here.

I cannot look it up now, but did Charlie Kirk support Hamas acting against Israel? I wouldn't think so but that's the narrative some want you to believe.

Regarding Lil Kim, he was told what the ramifications would be if he kept his antics up. I assume that starts with an EMP and some of those nifty bombs that ends the tyranny of a regime birthed in a snowy mountain near China.

Folks need to settle down. Trump is fixing it, fixing the world.

---

Regarding the Tehran series, a former Senior leader at CIA said it is one of the best televised descriptions of actual tradecraft ever done.

The continual posting of Charlie's outdated take is grasping at the thinnest of straws to support their position.

It also disregards anyone else's assessment of the situation.

It's "MAGA Elite CK said he was against it and now MAGA is going against the ghost of Charlie! This means Trump is wrong!".

Makes no sense, but page after page.

[You continue derailing this thread by trying to make it about other posters despite our reminder to stay away from that and keep it to the OP of political ramifications of the conflict. Take a break and don't repeat the trend when you return -- Staff]

It's ruthless enough in that regard to be believable.

I won't spoil it, but lots of twists and turns and unique angles. For people unfamiliar with regime, their layers of control they wield over their people, Mossad, CIA, IAEA inspectors… it covers it all.

You finish it and are sitting there saying… I sure don't want to get that close to bad endings.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

I've seen a couple of things posted here that are ridiculous:

- America's most unpopular war in its history? I guess whoever made that statement ignored the late 60s, early 70s with a piece of land known as Vietnam

- This war is adding to our national debt? While I don't disagree, I have to wonder why there was no gnashing of teeth over our debt prior to the onset of this war.

Then there is this mocking statement about Trump saving us from nuclear devastation. While I don't claim to know the exact state of Iran's nuclear program, I'll just point out that it is a known fact that they were working toward a bomb. UN (most worthless organization ever) inspectors were frequently denied access to the nuke sites for required inspections per treaties agreed to over the years (those treaties turned out to be as useful as Chamberlain's "peace for our time" piece of paper). We know that the Iranians want "death to America". We know that the Iranians are the instrument of world-wide terrorism. Yet the idea that this war, as well as last summer's attacks, is unnecessary seems to be perfectly fine with some. I prefer not to be obliterated in a nuclear blast, nor do I wish to be a survivor of such in some post-apocalyptic nightmare world. There comes a time when one has to deal with a bully or a psycho unwilling to co-exist with others. Preferably that time comes prior to the psycho obtaining the one thing that would make dealing with them far more costly, both in terms of $$$$ and lives.

---

our debt has been discussed here for years. what do you mean it hasn't been discussed?

our spending is so out of control we barely bat at eye at an extra 200 billion

flown-the-coop said:

---

It's ruthless enough in that regard to be believable.

I won't spoil it, but lots of twists and turns and unique angles. For people unfamiliar with regime, their layers of control they wield over their people, Mossad, CIA, IAEA inspectors… it covers it all.

You finish it and are sitting there saying… I sure don't want to get that close to bad endings.

---

Hopefully the staff doesn't schwack this post for being off message…but it's on my interminably long list of shows to watch.

flown-the-coop said:

---

The continual posting of Charlie's outdated take is grasping at the thinnest of straws to support their position.

It also disregards anyone else's assessment of the situation.

It's "MAGA Elite CK said he was against it and now MAGA is going against the ghost of Charlie! This means Trump is wrong!".

Makes no sense, but page after page.

---

Just another thought and I'll drop it. Charlie Kirk also voted for Trump to be Commander-In-Chief. He trusted and was friends with President Trump. He may or may not have personally agreed with Trump's decision - we will never know for sure. But I think it's just as likely he would have been respectful and supportive of the President given the current circumstances and their history.

FobTies said:

---

2026NCAggies said:

---

She wants us to Lose just so Trump will look bad. Only pathetic people think like that and sadly many are on this thread

---

Urging Trump to stop at air strikes and avoid Israel's regime change war, is how we win, and make Trump look good. The alternative ruins Trump's legacy and cripples us with debt. Its really that simple.

In our own backyard we've got middle aged white progressive women on school boards and in C-Suites doing the real damage to our way of life. Way more destruction than these Muslims across vast oceans could ever dream of doing themselves.

We would be better off air dropping VR headsets loaded with porn for these radical Muslims. See if that makes them forget about hating Israel, more than killing their loved ones does.

Sorry, I guess thats another "tired old talking point." Back to what yall like saying over and over on F16 "they hate us", "we cant let them get nukes", "we got to finally do it all the way this time".

---

So, them saying Death to America and killing a 1000 Americans since they took over really didn't mean anything. They were just kidding apparently...