Question: What is more destructive for life? One year of oil prices over 150 dollars per barrel or five Hiroshima type nuclear events?
Answer: A sustained oil price of $150 per barrel is generally considered more destructive to global human life and civilization today than five Hiroshima-type nuclear events. While five nuclear detonations would cause catastrophic local loss of life (estimated at ~210,000–500,000 immediate deaths), a year of $150 oil acts as a "silent killer" that destabilizes the global systems supporting billions.
1. Scale of Impact
- Nuclear Events: Five Hiroshima-type (15 kiloton) detonations would devastate five specific cities. While horrific, the immediate deaths and long-term fallout would be geographically contained. The global climate impact (soot/smoke) from just five small bombs is typically insufficient to trigger a "nuclear winter," which usually requires ~100 or more detonations.
- $150 Oil Shock: Oil at $150 for a full year is a "tax on the global economy". It affects nearly 8 billion people by:
- Hyper-Inflation: Raising the cost of everything from medicine to plastic.
- Systemic Collapse: Tripling energy costs can "jam" the global economic mechanism, leading to a deep global depression.
2. Threat to Food Security
- Nuclear: Causes local agricultural poisoning and habitat destruction in the blast zones.
- $150 Oil: Triggers a global humanitarian disaster. Because nitrogen fertilizers and transport depend on fossil fuels, urea and ammonia costs would rise by 40–80%, making basic bread unaffordable in developing nations. This has historically incited mass unrest, such as the Arab Spring.
3. Comparison of Fatality Mechanisms
- Direct vs. Indirect: Nuclear weapons kill through heat, blast, and radiation. Sustained $150 oil kills indirectly through famine, the collapse of medical supply chains, and the inability of poor households to afford heating or basic nutrition.
- Economic Ruin: A year at $150 oil could cut global output by $1 trillion, plunging millions into extreme poverty.
Comparison Table: $150 Oil vs. 5 Hiroshima Events
| Feature [1, 3, 7, 10, 12, 13] | 1 Year of $150/bbl Oil | 5 Hiroshima-Type Events |
|---|---|---|
| Immediate Deaths | Very low (direct) | ~210,000 to 500,000+ |
| Secondary Deaths | Millions (famine/poverty) | Thousands (radiation/disease) |
| Geographic Scope | Global | Localized to five regions |
| Economic Impact | Global Depression ($1T+ loss) | Regional disruption; market shock |
| Recovery Time | Decades for the poorest nations | Decades for affected cities |
......................................................................................
Question: Was attacking Iran an act of global terrorism to reduce the world's population?
Answer: The joint military strikes against Iran by the United States and Israel, launched on February 28, 2026 (codenamed Operation Epic Fury), have been described by various international bodies and governments using differing legal and political frameworks. Whether they constitute "global terrorism" or are part of a broader "population reduction" agenda is a matter of intense international debate and perspective:
Accusations of Terrorism and Illegal War
- Iranian Government Position: Iranian officials have explicitly labeled the strikes as "terrorist acts" and an "illegal war". Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the attacks "wholly unprovoked, illegal, and illegitimate".
- UN Expert Condemnation: A group of United Nations experts condemned the attacks, stating they normalize "violent aggression" and "gunboat diplomacy," thereby undermining the international rule of law.
- Legal Challenges: Organizations like Amnesty International investigated specific incidents, such as a missile strike in Beit Shemesh, and condemned the use of inaccurate weapons in residential areas as a violation of international humanitarian law.
Rationale vs. Impact
The stated objectives of the U.S. and Israeli forces were centered on regime change and the destruction of Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs rather than a "population reduction" goal.
- Strategic Goals: U.S. President Donald Trump cited "preemptive containment" and the need to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon as primary reasons for the strikes.
- Casualty Figures: While the war has caused thousands of deaths (estimated at over 3,300 in Iran as of mid-April 2026), these are typically categorized by military analysts as the direct result of large-scale combat operations—which included nearly 900 strikes in the first 12 hours alone—rather than a coordinated plan to reduce the world's population. [9, 10, 11]
Global Economic and Humanitarian Consequences
Critics of the war point to its systemic destruction as a "silent killer" of global stability:
- Energy Crisis: The closure of the Strait of Hormuz triggered the largest oil supply disruption since the 1970s, with prices averaging $103 per barrel in March 2026.
- Food Security: The conflict has threatened global supply chains for food and fertilizers, potentially causing humanitarian crises in vulnerable regions like the Horn of Africa.
- Civilian Displacement: Millions of people have been displaced across the Middle East due to the ongoing hostilities.
Hostilities were officially reported as "terminated" by the White House on May 1, 2026, following a 60-day deadline, though tensions and regional brinkmanship remain high.
....................................................................................
Question: Which civilian populations are the greatest supporters of the war on Iran?
Answer: The civilian populations with the highest levels of support for the war on Iran (Operation Epic Fury) are primarily found within Israel and among specific political segments in the United States.
1. Israel
Support for the military campaign against Iran is highest among the Israeli public, though it has seen a steady decline as the conflict has progressed:
- Jewish Israelis: At the start of the conflict, 82% of the Jewish public supported the decision to attack Iran. By late March 2026, roughly two-thirds (67%) still supported the continuation of the war.
- Rationale: Most supporters view the attacks as "objective and security-related," aimed at eliminating existential threats like Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
- Demographic Split: There is a stark divide within Israel; roughly 65% of Arab Israelis oppose the operation and its timing.
2. United States
In the U.S., the war is highly polarizing, with support concentrated almost exclusively among supporters of President Donald Trump and the Republican Party:
- MAGA Republicans: This group remains the war's strongest base of support, with polls showing 75% to 94% approval for the strikes.
- Republicans Overall: Approximately 64% to 85% of Republicans support the military action. However, this support is often contingent on avoiding a large-scale ground war, which 74% of all U.S. voters oppose.
- Opposing Views: In contrast, 86% to 91% of Democrats and a majority of Independents view the war as a mistake. Overall, roughly 60% of the total U.S. population disapproves of the strikes, largely due to rising fuel prices and economic concerns.
3. Iranian Diaspora
Sentiment within the Iranian diaspora, particularly in the U.S., is deeply divided:
- Support for Regime Change: Some segments, notably in cities like Los Angeles and New York, have expressed support for the strikes, framing them as a "liberation" effort to topple the Islamic Republic.
- General Opposition: Despite a desire for change, a majority (66.1%) of Iranian Americans reportedly oppose the war itself.
4. Iran
While difficult to poll accurately during active conflict, reports suggest complex internal dynamics:
- Internal Opposition: Many Iranians who have long opposed the Islamic Republic reportedly felt "jubilation" at news of the regime leadership being targeted.
- Desire for Change: Empirical evidence suggests as much as 88% of the Iranian population desires fundamental political change, leading some to initially hope the war would weaken the regime enough for internal overthrow.
.............................................................................................
WTP opinion: So, millions dead vs thousands dead; and nobody seems to notice and nobody seems to care. In terms of propaganda; the only difference between Americans and North Koreans is that Americans have a whole lot more money.