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

US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

lloydslist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 316 posts

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#221

Post by JeremyNT »

brentm wrote: post #20

He may still wriggle out of it but it is increasingly looking like Trump has stepped into something that he won't be able to reverse his way out of easily, a one way decision.

It seems like a huge self own but he benefits from an extremely loyal fan base and a militaristic culture that loves rallying around the flag.

Does he even care if his actions hurt the country or global stability at all, so long as his supporters remain unwavering? It seems like he doesn't, so here we are.

There is no plausible stimulus that he might actually care to respond to.

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#222

Post by udkl »

NickC25 wrote: post #138
sschueller wrote: post #5

These tankers aren't easily replaceable are they? As in it takes significant time to build them. Even if Trump's claims that the war will end shortly were true. Oil prices are guaranteed not coming down if many more of these ships are sunk.

Also, the amount of oil spilling into such a small area can't be good for the environment, can't be good for local marine life (if there is any), etc....

From twitter: the cost of cleaning up the oil spill is much larger than the damage repair on the ship which drives up insurance rates

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#223

Post by 1-more »

wheelerwj wrote: post #176
spwa4 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's hope next year we laugh about this with the question with "And why did he have any expectation it was going to work?".

No man, thats not going to fly. No one ever got anything done by just hoping. Get started now.

Started doing what? Distributing Maoist literature and rifles, or donating to Act Blue, or something in the middle?

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#224

Post by dizlexic »

solarpunk wrote: post #199
dizlexic wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless china is importing sanctioned oil from.... Iran, Russa, and Venezuela at discounted rates. I think this has been the crux of many allegations against China. They don't operate fairly in global markets.

Just for my own understanding, you're not insinuating the US is currently playing fair with regards to starting the war that caused all this?

Just for my own understanding, you're not insinuating China isn't violating international sanctions to purchase oil at a discount?

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#225

Post by 1-more »

jmward01 wrote: post #133
wing-_-nuts wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very much a 'you break it, you buy it' situation. The US should be running destroyer screens for convoys a la WW2 today , yet AFAIK the US fleet is sitting hundreds of miles out of the Persian Gulf, within bombing range, outside of easy strike range.

Yes. I think the biggest issues though are: - We likely don't have the assets to move the amount traffic that needs to get through - We probably can't protect them perfectly (we don't have maritime supremacy) so ships will still take damage and that will stop the convoys pretty quickly I suspect the escort ships would be fine though. They can defend themselves. So if we did start them, they wouldn't continue for long…

> I suspect the escort ships would be fine though. They can defend themselves.

From underwater drones? Does that technology exist?

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#226

Post by hereme888 »

add-sub-mul-div wrote: post #100
comeonbro wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is hilarious cope. The US benefits far far relatively more when the global economy is running smoothly than when able to sell oil higher, like some shithole petrostate. Appropriate I suppose.

You're replying to someone who gets their political analysis from Twitter. Hilarious is the best case.

I understand you clearly hate Trump, but I'll take his statements over yours any day.

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#227

Post by cyberax »

bigyabai wrote: post #198
cyberax wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be outside of Iran capabilities? They are the ones who provided Russia with Shahed drones.

It's not impossible. Iran has connections with China, who is great at designing and manufacturing UUVs. That said, a UUV fleet would have downsides for Iran. It's expensive, dependent on imports and an overmatch for swarm-style attacks. Attack boats are a closer fit for the "cheap/attritable" tactics we see used with Shaheds.

I think you're overestimating the complexity of small unmanned subs. Drug traffickers are building _manned_ subs now in South American jungles.

You just need a body (plastic tube), batteries, motors, and a computer. Maybe with a "range extender" gas engine. Everything can be COTS, and Iran certainly can manufacture occasional custom components.

After all, it can manufacture centrifuges for uranium enrichment.

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#228

Post by keybored »

moi2388 wrote: post #182
CapricornNoble wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Telegram is full of gigantic rallies all hours of the day and night supporting the Iranian government. Even street interviews with young women (no hijab!) claiming they were formerly protesters but aren't going to tolerate foreigners bombing their country. Do you have some solid sources on the ground to the contrary?

All the Iranians I personally know. About 15 families.

Presumably you are not in Iran. Where people are getting bombed and feel the consequences of “finally [getting] rid of the Iranian regime”.

Some circles might have only pro-Trump Americans. Others might only have anti-Trump Americans. And yet your experience is all-knowing? With 15 families? Outside of Iran (presumably).

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#229

Post by epistasis »

muddi900 wrote: post #179
epistasis wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? That's a pretty far out there statement that needs substantial support to be taken seriousl. By all accounts Israeli leadership also tried to rope Biden and Obama into attacking Iran, but they were stronger presidents that paid more attention to US interests rather than being easily tricked.

US pulling out of the JCPOA was the biggest travesty of the 21st century. No nation state will ever feel safe without a nuke now. But Israel wanted to destroy Iran as competition. And they got it.

Agreed. And I'd say pulling out of the TPP is an equivalently big mistake, and will honestly have far worse consequences for the US but in far different ways. Letting China be the leader of the Pacific by pulling out, in combination with the terrible hostility to all countries there now, especially to South Korea, massively weakens the US economically and military. We just handed everything over, no fight, no fuss, no benefit to the US. Ugh.

Re: US- and Greek-owned tankers ablaze after Iran claims 'underwater drone' strike

#230

Post by realo »

ultratalk wrote: post #217
realo wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really not sure you can compare solar and wind energy from the 1970s to the highly efficient modern solar and wind solutions of today. Really.

I suppose that the specifics of what I said were mistaken, but the general sentiment remains the same. It doesn't seem like this conflict will last as long as the embargo, and when one of the largest investors into new technologies has firmly refused to acknowledge the necessities of renewables, progress and adoption will certainly slow down.

"... when one of the largest investor into new technologies ..."

No. Sorry but China has not firmly refused to acknowledge the necessity of renewables. Quite the contrary, actually.

Post reply on HN