trump has indicated that the blockade will allow food into iran and is intended to force iran to make a deal, indicating he's continuing to hold to the delusion that running a government is like running a business, and he can force iran into a business deal, and he can negotiate with a psychotic terrorist death cult.

that's not what i called for and not what i support.

the uprisings in iran have been about civil rights, which do not exist in iran, but they've also been about food shortages.

i was calling for a naval siege of iran. i called it a blockade, but i was suggesting a siege of the port of bandar abbas to ensure no food can get in, with the purpose of triggering an uprising. this would have to be done in conjunction with concrete support for opposition groups on the ground.

i don't expect that merely cutting off oil revenue is going to force iran to negotiate. they're not going to negotiate. they'd rather die because they neurotically think they'll go to heaven if you kill them. they're completely fucking insane.

that said, i don't exactly oppose an oil blockade, either. i just don't think it will work.

the haphazard use of carbon in asia is devastating to the environment and needs to stop. they use oil for cooking, for electricity and for practically everything. it's 2026. this is unacceptable, at this point. these countries in the indian cultural sphere, including most of southeast asia, need to upgrade their grids. if this "blockade" creates incentives for them to do that, it's a net positive. reducing carbon emissions should be the number one priority goal when it comes to any kind of carbon fuel policy, including this. it is countries in this area that are going to suffer the brunt of climate change and need to make the most extreme adjustments. they're long overdue, for their own sake.

and, as mentioned, increases in the price of carbon in the west should help to undo some of the effects of extremely damaging subsidies to the oil industry and help make better sources of energy more competitive, as they struggle to scale. it could be the final push that carbon transition needs to tip over. i will support any policy that increases the price of oil.

but iran is not going to sign a deal without regime change, and an oil "blockade" is not going to trigger that. a complete siege type blockade that prevents bandar abbas from engaging in all trade will, if enforced long enough, succeed in toppling the state, which should be the american (and canadian) government's stated purpose, not trying to negotiate. you can't negotiate with irrational actors.