Trump is completely crazy.
this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2026
233 points (98.7% liked)
World News
55380 readers
4583 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Remember when we had a 25th Amendment? Good times.
You got jack shit. So much of it in fact you guys keep throwing it at everyone around you
Consequences?
How are you so stupid you end up coming out being the bad guy against IRAN 🤦🏻
The USA has always been THE bad guy, it just used to have better marketing and propaganda.
Siding with Israel doesn't help 🤣
The ceasefire announcement was market manipulation. Everything this administration does is rooted in making themselves and their friends richer.
Uh oh.
Also, I found some interesting trackers:
https://www.hormuztracker.com/
https://www.shiptraffic.net/2001/04/hormuz-strait-ship-traffic.html
No ships going through yet. And one had a very interesting nugget of info on insurance:
Insurance withdrawal makes transit commercially unviable independent of physical conditions. Even if the security situation improves tomorrow, insurers take weeks to reinstate coverage. Ships cannot sail without P&I cover — ports won't accept them, banks won't finance cargo, charterers won't book them. Three weeks in, no insurer has shown willingness to reinstate. This is why the disruption will persist well beyond any resolution.
This is bullshit. There is a combination of excess and premium that any insurer would accept.
Or the USA could provide/pay the insurance. Trump wants the strait open, he can backstop the insurance.
And didn't Iran also mine the strait?
Apparently Iran has a map of safe routes that they give out to ships paying their transit fee.
add on top of that:
- time for Iran to administrate passage
- time for each boat to enter/exit under security
- reduced production rates due to full tanks or damaged infrastructure
- time for countries to raise sovereign capital (selling bonds, gold and currency reserves) to meet price increases
estimates are a reduction of 15-25% of global supply and 3-5 years to recover IF the straight is opened immediately and stays open. You can't print oil ppl. The price per barrel will need to be high enough to squash 15-25% of global demand. We could see $300-350+ per barrel.
We need to see oil prices high enough to squash 95-100% of global demand.
Humans can adapt. We have renewable energy. We've had 6 years since covid to build a more resilient, sustainable infrastructure. We didn't. The world went right back to burning fossil fuels, and then some, and have only accelerated since.
Maybe we need another global supply chain breakdown to force us to make up for lost time. Cause we needed to stop burning fossil fuels a decade ago.
I bet we'll start seeing a lot more electric cars on the road. Too bad so many manufacturers shut down their production!
Great find, thanks for sharing.
No wonder the Trump administration didn't want to release the ceasefire conditions.
The U.S. and Iran also appear at loggerheads over how traffic through the Strait of Hormuz should be managed.
Wow, CNBC, ya don't say
I mean yeah blatantly not even a question.
More reporting on this. Whole article is short and worth a read, but:
https://www.axios.com/2026/04/08/lebanon-attacks-israel-iran-ceasfire
The U.S. official said the White House is not currently concerned that the situation in Lebanon would cause the ceasefire with Iran to collapse.
Hezbollah said it had a right to respond to Israeli's attack.
Three parts of Iran’s 10-point ceasefire proposal have been violated, Ghalibaf said. The violations are Israel’s continued attacks on Lebanon, the entry of a drone into Iranian airspace, and the denial of the Islamic Republic’s right to enrich uranium, he said.
As far as I'm aware, the ceasefire was to negotiate the terms to end the war, which was what the 10-point plan was a part of - nobody has agreed to anything yet beyond a cessation of hostilities pending the reopening of the straight. This is difficult to follow, because Iran's own reporting has been incredibly inconsistent about the contents of that plan and what they are saying the ceasefire actually entails, and to complicate it further the US/Israel have said barely anything about the negotiations or terms of the ceasefire (including as far as I am aware listing any terms beyond "reopening of the straight".)
I can't find any reports of the US or Israel attacking Iran directly during this ceasefire, though - the only mention in the article of a direct slight against Iran is that a drone may have violated Iranian airspace - so... there's that? It sounds like the US still hasn't started blowing Iran up again, which is... god...
IDK. To my armchair-geopoliticing-ass, this feels like Iran attempting to force the idea that the US/Israel agreed to their 10-point plan as terms of the ceasefire - something which seems extremely unlikely given that the terms (depending on the source) include "allowing Iranian nuclear enrichment" which seems like something that would be negotiated at a much later part of the process. Which is weird because they already have the whole "Israel still blowing up lebanon" thing to justify this.
can’t find any reports of the US or Israel attacking Iran directly during this ceasefire,
I think it was Isreal stops attavking Lebanon
Yeah, sorry if that was unclear - I was just saying I don't think they've attacked Iran directly during the ceasefire, Israel attacking lebanon is separate to that point.
edit: I have no idea why this is contentious?
Because it's the same war. Iran officially recognizes Israel's war of aggression across the region as the same that it is currently fighting, and part of the explicit ceasefire agreement (no one corrected you but the 10 points ceasefire WAS this one and why Iran agreed to the ceasefire they twice denied without these stipulations) was for Israel to stop invading and expanding their territory into Lebanon.
Israel violated this agreement, and as Israel and the US are essentially one entity from the view point of anyone not in Israel or the US, the US thus violated the ceasefire.
Iran was not begging for a ceasefire, Trump was. Iran has stated repeatedly it is ready to escalate or continue on as long as necessary until its demands are met. There is no non-nuclear action the US can take to end this war without meeting Iran's demands; and pakistan has already issued threats of nuclear retaliation should nukes be used by Israel or the US, so that's off the table.
I'm not sure why it wouldn't be the same war - I was remarking that the US and Israel appear to have stopped directly striking Iran, nothing beyond that. In no way am I saying that attacking lebanon isn't a part of the same war, or wasn't a violation of the ceasefire.
the 10 points ceasefire WAS this one
Where are you seeing this? I have found nowhere besides some reports (like this one) purporting to quote Iranian state media that claims all sides agreed to those terms - but even trump's announcement presented the '10-point plan' as the basis for future negotiations, not the terms of the ceasefire, which agrees with this statement from Iran:
So I am very curious where you heard that this was the case.
I don’t think anybody is actually talking to anybody at this point. They’re playing telephone with the media.
Pretty much. It would be nice to know if negotiations had even begun before they fell apart, though I guess I don't think it would particularly change anything.
Yeah, the reporting on all of this has been terrible. Iran released an inconsistent (different demands on the English terms) list of demands to end the war, but everyone is acting like the US accepted the list by agreeing to a temporary ceasefire.
At this point, I have to become an accelerationist. The only way MAGA Americans (about 25% of voters) will wake up is if they are negatively personally affected in serious ways, and the only way to do that is serious war issues.
The 25% will likely never wake up. It's the 13% or so who enable the 25% who can actually be "flipped"
If the guy in the header photo didn't at some point say "Suck it, Trebek", I'll be very disappointed.