Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

gcaptain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 500 posts

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#431

Post by TMWNN »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #429
TMWNN wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You’re both fucked. This is like asking if a massive asteroid hit the other side of the Earth, the people on the other side are not “much, much poorer.” That’s plainly idiotic. In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. >It was also a massive and unprecedented drawdown. People first and foremost measure their lives relative to their recent past. Not how folks halfway around the world are doing. I said what I…

> was addressing those who in 2017 and today immediately respond to any talk of the US raising tariffs, or reducing its military commitments abroad, with how the US will suffer the most economically (often with invokings of the "petrodollar" nonsense) Sure. I agree with you here. But that’s not how your original comment reads. It contests that we’d get poorer in a Smoot-Hawley scenario, not that we’d be relatively ri…

That's being disingenuous. In my first comment I link to two sources that both show that the US GDP would go down, not up, in a world without international trade. If you can't use context to understand that I was and am saying that the US would be hurt less than all other countries (and thus would be more prosperous *relative to the rest of the world*, as opposed to being poorer relative to the rest of the world), that's your onus, not mine.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#432

Post by johnnyworker »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #387
johnnyworker wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is displaying a national group elsewhere not destroying it as a national group ? That's why I say genocide. And at best you could say they don't care if the Palestinians live or die as long as they go away, by bombs, starvation or fleeing, and then can take the land. https://twitter.com/GLZRadio/status/1741347524693127398 > "If we act strategically correctly, there will be immigration and we will live in the Gaza…

> How is displaying a national group elsewhere not destroying it as a national group? Plenty of nations have migrated over history. Every inhabitant of the Middle East is part transplant and/or invader.

Yes, and? People die naturally, they always eventually do. Does that make murder a nop?

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#433

Post by m4rtink »

badpun wrote: post #419
m4rtink wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, the Czech Republic used to get most of its natural gas from Russia as well, even very recently - mainly due to how the old eastern block pipeline network was laid out. But it has since the switched to regasiffied LNG & rented a couple LNG terminals for it. Other European countries did the same successfully. Why Hungary can't do that as well ? Seems more like some direct blackmail against Orban and his people to…

I believe that Hungary is doing that as well (a quick googling reveals a bunch of projects under development and construction). However, untying themselves from Russia might take a couple of years at least.

I was frankly surprised how quickly & well it went it went for the Czech Republic & other countries. But indeed its not as easy for every country, for various reasons (that might or might not include corruption :P).

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#434

Post by johnnyworker »

bawolff wrote: post #365
johnnyworker wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> What is that "pro-Israel" side? I just mean random people on the internet siding with the state of israel. > One of the five acts constituting genocide as defined by the UN Genocide Convention is "imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group". Yes i agree that is part of the definition. While i find a lot of the statements you mentioned concerning, for it to be genocide i would think they would have to…

I'm sorry, but that's like looking for direct orders by Hitler before you can be really sure there's a problem.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#435

Post by ceejayoz »

maxglute wrote: post #426
ceejayoz wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The big revelation is Houthis has demonstrated US Transportation Command / US military's sealift ability is being challenged by small time Iranian proxy, so good luck on an IndoPac campaign against PRC. This is a very odd takeaway from this incident.

This is pretty common takeaway from martime analysts. 90% of US transport command missions are run by commercial operators. Maersk contracted DoD vessels refused to transit red sea pre Prosperity Guardian when they already had USN escorts is pretty big red flag on US ability to rely on civilian shipping (and air) for protracted conflict. And right now a lot of rear logistics has been outsourced to civilian sector, fr…

> Maersk contracted DoD vessels refused to transit red sea pre Prosperity Guardian when they already had USN escorts is pretty big red flag on US ability to rely on civilian shipping (and air) for protracted conflict.

A protracted conflict would involve significantly more pressure from the US government to comply. There's nothing so critical right now they need to make a big fuss with Maersk. If we go to war with someone like China, shipping's not going to get to opt out of transits of the Red Sea. That's what stuff like the Defense Production Act are for.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#436

Post by johnnyworker »

bawolff wrote: post #351
figassis wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Genocide is already defined by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. There is a big difference between saying genocide is wrong, and saying that anyone dying during a war is wrong. Of course every death is a tragedy, but my expectation is that israel (like any country) follows international law. I don't expect them to be absolute pacifists.

Replace "dying" by "murdered". Einstein called killing under the cloak of war murder anyway, and that wasn't even talking about bombing one of the most densely populated areas with over 1M minors in it. If you need more arguments to stand up, you will never stand up. The White Rose also talked about cloaking cowardice under the cloak of wisdom. It's not a tragedy, it's a crime, it has perpetrators and supporters who are mighty insolent and hoping to get away with it.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#437

Post by johnnyworker »

edanm wrote: post #392
johnnyworker wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Mexico had invaded the US and killed a thousand citizens, it would be completely legitimate to ask how the US would make sure this didn't happen again. > I wouldn't call them Nazis, that's going too far - but some of them are almost as bad, and a few have the rhetoric of Nazis, no question. I would also call Hamas or other religious fanatics who murder "Nazis" in that sense. It's a very sloppy, but also delibera…

> Not by committing an even bigger atrocity. Because if 1000 Israelis warrant murdering 10000 Palestinians [...] Let me be very clear, killing 1000 Israelis doesn't "warrant" killing a single Palestinian. Revenge killing is not moral, period. If Hamas were to surrender, there'd be no legitimate reason to kill anyone, neither civilian nor militant. The valid reason to wage war is to prevent someone from killing you. I…

[flagged]

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#438

Post by rayiner »

tptacek wrote: post #322
tptacek wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, this is literally the oldest, best established casus belli in the American system.

(for what it's worth, this was a rare opportunity to namedrop the Barbary Pirates, not so much a political statement)

I would’ve done the same.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#439

Post by sbierwagen »

mikewarot wrote: post #190
sbierwagen wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be a refreshing throwback to actually declare war, something the US hasn't done since 1942.

Would you then have us nuke Yemen? That couldn't possibly backfire. It's not like any promenant families are from there, right?[1] Wouldn't it be easier to just drop Israel like a hot potato? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bin_Laden_family

Game-theoretically the US wouldn't want to drop support for Israel in response to attacks on shipping-- that would just result more in attacks on shipping by any country in the world that wants to force the US to do something. If the US wanted to drop Israel, they would only do so after a years-long bombing campaign that terrorized and depopulated Yemen, to make it clear that the US cannot be blackmailed into dropping allies.

And yes, obviously, the US would do this entirely with conventional weapons. They've got eighty years of experience in crushing the third world under their boot with regular TNT bombs, after all, with no need for nukes.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#440

Post by pophenat »

petesergeant wrote: post #107
pophenat wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that the Saudi do not participate also because they do not want to be seen as Israel supporters.

> the Saudis do not participate In fact: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi-led_intervention_in_the_...

The parent comment is about the current operation in the Red Sea, which the Saudi do not participate in.

The relevant link is:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_involvement_in_the_Is...

Post reply on HN