Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Major (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/)
-   -   Economic Impacts of Iran War (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/major/152485-economic-impacts-iran-war.html)

at6d 04-12-2026 07:53 PM

According to ChatGPT Persians are considered as White according to the US Government forms. Modern Iran does touch the Caucasus…I’ll walk myself out.

John Carr 04-12-2026 07:55 PM


Originally Posted by at6d (Post 4022709)
According to ChatGPT Persians are considered as White according to the US Government forms. Modern Iran does touch the Caucasus…I’ll walk myself out.


AI Overview"Caucasian" is generally considered an obsolete racial classification rather than an ethnicity, historically used to describe people of European, Middle Eastern, and North African descent. It is considered a social construct originating from 18th-century anthropology, though it is still used in the U.S. as a synonym for "white"
I'll be right behind you, shutting the door.

rickair7777 04-12-2026 09:16 PM


Originally Posted by at6d (Post 4022709)
According to ChatGPT Persians are considered as White according to the US Government forms. Modern Iran does touch the Caucasus…I’ll walk myself out.

They are not Arabs if that's what you're getting at. Not technically speaking, and not practically speaking. But Persians are not the only ethnicity in Iran.

"Caucasian" is an arbitrary historical classification, make of it what you will.

John Carr 04-12-2026 10:34 PM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 4022718)
They are not Arabs if that's what you're getting at. Not technically speaking, and not practically speaking. But Persians are not the only ethnicity in Iran.

Insert country here has a metric crap ton of ethnicities within it. Especially middle eastern, central asian, Stan, Stan of Stan, Stan within Stan, etc.


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 4022718)
"Caucasian" is an arbitrary historical classification, make of it what you will.

See my post above, pretty much covered that.......

You missed the satire.

ZapBrannigan 04-13-2026 07:13 AM


Originally Posted by Extenda (Post 4022697)
dude you’re a trip. Why do you feel the need to defend “your side” so aggressively? Like I want profit sharing and to not dump an increasing amount of my paycheck into a federal government black hole that I get nothing out of. That’s my relationship with whoever is leading the federal government. At best these people can keep some kind of a status quo (possibly doomed) ship moving in kind of a reasonable direction. At worst you have…well…this.

It’s like you have some weird parasocial relationship with the president. Dude he loathes you and me. We’re unionized worker bees who have the audacity to fight for our piece of the pie. Why are you carrying his water all the time? Can you critique him on a single point? Is he some kind of god to you?

I mean all this in the nicest possible way, it’s just so strange to me seeing people just so all in on one particular “side”.

THANK YOU for saying this. Post of the year. Politics aside, as unionized pilots you would think we would decry anything that negatively impacts profit sharing at best, but more likely job security and career expectations.

rickair7777 04-13-2026 07:24 AM


Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan (Post 4022822)
THANK YOU for saying this. Post of the year. Politics aside, as unionized pilots you would think we would decry anything that negatively impacts profit sharing at best, but more likely job security and career expectations.

Politically I consider not only my short-term economic benefit but also long term structural, societal, and economic ramifications, mostly for the sake of my kids.

As I've said this current adventure is a bit over the top... guaranteed short-term economic pain (loss of profit sharing for sure), with lots of risk of a variety of potential bad outcomes. The ultimate end-state is still likely to be better than the old status quo, but of course that's not 100% either.

Excargodog 04-13-2026 07:47 AM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 4022833)
Politically I consider not only my short-term economic benefit but also long term structural, societal, and economic ramifications, mostly for the sake of my kids.

As I've said this current adventure is a bit over the top... guaranteed short-term economic pain (loss of profit sharing for sure), with lots of risk, of variety of potential bad outcomes. The ultimate end-state is still likely to be better than the old status quo, but of course that's not 100% either.

Yeah. Some of the comments remind me of the schism between my peers invested in QOL when it comes to contract negotiations and those desiring max $$$ opportunities for them, almost regardless of the toll it may take on home life. IF (and it is a big IF) this current conflict can keep my kids from having to live in a world where insane apocalyptic mullahs have control of nukes and the missiles to deliver them, I’d gladly forgo a couple of years of profit sharing. But clearly others have a different priority.

Today’s prices:

alt=""https://i.postimg.cc/DZJH2Hpt/IMG-8005.jpg

AAdvocate 04-13-2026 08:56 AM


Originally Posted by ZapBrannigan (Post 4022822)
THANK YOU for saying this. Post of the year. Politics aside, as unionized pilots you would think we would decry anything that negatively impacts profit sharing at best, but more likely job security and career expectations.

You must have lost everything on BITCOIN to have such simplistic short term thinking. We just survived 4 years of record inflation and an administration that waged war on anything oil, I think we'll be fine. btw, almost every union pulled their support for Kamala Harris. Just sayin

jerryleber 04-13-2026 09:02 AM


Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 4022854)
IF (and it is a big IF) this current conflict can keep my kids from having to live in a world where insane apocalyptic mullahs have control of nukes and the missiles to deliver them

Nations with nuclear weapons
North Korea
Pakistan
India
Israel
Russia
China
United Kingdom
France
United States

Excargodog 04-13-2026 09:37 AM


Originally Posted by jerryleber (Post 4022893)
Nations with nuclear weapons
North Korea
Pakistan
India
Israel
Russia
China
United Kingdom
France
United States

Yep, and there will doubtless be more. It’s 80 year old technology at this point. But that certainly doesn’t mean rational people want EVERYONE to have nuclear weapons and intercontinental deliver capability. And I don’t recall anyone in that group spending the last 46 years chanting “Death to America.”

While mowing down relatives with antiaircraft guns for inattention at a meeting doesn’t strike me as particularly rational, even North Korea isn’t sponsoring international terrorism in multiple countries trying to spread their particular brand of irrationality. And yeah, if I thought that was going to change I’d be all about preempting them too.

But I’m still for doing what I can to keep the world a safe place for my kids, and teach them to do the same for my future grandchildren/great grandchildren/ad infinitum. It’s my culture.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:46 PM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands