The Iran war has exposed the fragility of the global energy system as countries remain dependent on fossil fuels. Could renewables like wind, solar, hydropower and photovoltaic shield people from the shock?
Ok, that’s a good argument, however I’m throwing a new one into the ring myself: I think the “LocationX War” naming schema should not be used.
Compare it to naming diseases after (supposed) places of origins such as the Spanish flue. In contrast, Coronavirus disease 2019 was explicitly named after the virus to avoid mixing cause and location. Which of course didn’t stop people like Trump to call it China flue anyway, but we digress …
Partially this schema is used already. I.e. “The American War for Independence” is a war initiated by the people of the soon-to-be USA against their colonial sovereign Great Britain caused by a wish for independence. So IMO same as with diseases the name should derive from the cause, not from the location. Therefore, better alternatives to “the Iran war” are:
The war in Iran
The US-Israel war
The US-Israel war in Iran
The nuclear disarmament war (if you go by official US statements *cough cough*)
Therefore, better alternatives to “the Iran war” are:
…
The US-Israel war in Iran
How about “US-Israel war with Iran”, which they already use. But in a headline you want to be short and concise. If you write “the Iran war” today, everyone knows which war you mean and who started it, there’s no need to repeat it in every headline. For the same reason they write about “renewables” instead of “renewable energies such as wind, water, biomass and solar power” and they write about “energy crisis” instead of “oil and oil-product supply crisis”. Because
How the US-Israel war in Iran oil and oil product supply crisis caused by the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran in response to the US-Israeli attacks strengthens the case for renewable energies such as wind, water and biomass which some countries in Europe already produce a lot of
Ok, that’s a good argument, however I’m throwing a new one into the ring myself: I think the “LocationX War” naming schema should not be used.
Compare it to naming diseases after (supposed) places of origins such as the Spanish flue. In contrast, Coronavirus disease 2019 was explicitly named after the virus to avoid mixing cause and location. Which of course didn’t stop people like Trump to call it China flue anyway, but we digress …
Partially this schema is used already. I.e. “The American War for Independence” is a war initiated by the people of the soon-to-be USA against their colonial sovereign Great Britain caused by a wish for independence. So IMO same as with diseases the name should derive from the cause, not from the location. Therefore, better alternatives to “the Iran war” are:
How about “US-Israel war with Iran”, which they already use. But in a headline you want to be short and concise. If you write “the Iran war” today, everyone knows which war you mean and who started it, there’s no need to repeat it in every headline. For the same reason they write about “renewables” instead of “renewable energies such as wind, water, biomass and solar power” and they write about “energy crisis” instead of “oil and oil-product supply crisis”. Because
How the US-Israel war in Iran oil and oil product supply crisis caused by the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran in response to the US-Israeli attacks strengthens the case for renewable energies such as wind, water and biomass which some countries in Europe already produce a lot of
is not a good headline.