Most of North Africa would probably be shared by the British and the French, Afghanistan seems to be shared by most of the "Global North" at this point, and so on. I definitely wouldn't say that the US doesn't have any responsibility here.
Just remember the Taliban started as a US sponsored group that fought the Soviet invasion.
But it's far cheaper than the cheapest brand of bottled water, which apparently comes in at about $1.4 per liter, a little under double the price of the most expensive oil we've ever had.
The normal price say $60-80 per barrel these days, is 0.4$, or about 1/4th to 1/3rd of the price of bottled water.
The commercially available panels with the highest specific power are about 700 W/kg (with an estimated upper bound of 1.2 W/kg) [1], in comparison to gasoline which is 12.5kWh/kg. Solar exposure can be about 5-6 hours of full sun equivalent per day. So the breakeven point would be about two to three days of charging!
2) most countries import oil
1 + 2 = ???
Answer: most countries need dollars, because they need to import oil. If oil was not sold in dollars, the demand for dollars would be much lower.
Therefore, the US needs to control oil producers. If one producer gets out of line and decides to sell oil in another currency, the US will attack them.
War is a racket and so is the industry that feeds on the perceived threat of one. The humongous US military budget ends up (at least a substantial of it) in private pockets somehow. The US is of course not the only country playing that racket, but it certainly is the undisputed biggest player. Speaking truth to principles and morals is simply out of the question for anyone involved, with that amount of capital changing hands.
It's Realpolitik. If we refused to work with anyone who didn't mirror Western values, do you think that would be possible? I mean, do we just refuse to even engage most of Africa, the Middle East and Asia? That doesn't seem realistic.
Realism is the mark of adulthood.
From then on we can have a good discussion. But the above is using realism as an excuse instead of fully assuming it and taking it to its conclusion.
Adulthood means that you need to prioritize your goals, choose your battles, and set the stage for the progress you want to make.
Simply refusing to deal with anyone that doesn't adhere to your ethical values is what my teenage daughter does, quite literally.
The comment above wasn't about prioritizing the best targets to pursue your ethical goals. It's about ignoring them but pretending they still matter. They don't matter. If we care about ethics at all we wouldn't orchestrate coups instead of forgoing a bit of oil revenue.
The country is run by psychopath cutting journalists to pieces at foreign embassies. I mean we're talking about the same level of primitive evil as some African dictators that ended with pretty harsh sentences at International Court of Justice.
And Trump basically pardoned the guy in the media from what I recall. I am curious if Biden's administration will change the US approach to him/SA or they keep quiet for enjoying their military bases there.
Concrete steps that would financially hurt those holding power, ie sanctions for their foreign accounts/investments means at least something.
Also, because you didn't ask him the question, you don't know that he would agree with the SA "wrong".
My comment that the general wasn't even asked this question, was a bit of a different point, it unfortunately distracts from my main point.