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

Miscellanea: The War in Iran

acoup.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#201

Post by TitaRusell »

roryirvine wrote: post #164
orwin wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not all. I tried as much as I could not commenting on it, but the delusions of _a lot_ of hn users on the subject, even a few whose opinion I respect, were unreal. People who are not MAGA btw. And I'm not sure most of those realise how delusional they were, even now. They will probably rewire their memory to forget what they believed 3 weeks ago, compress the time they were wrong. I initially thought the 'manufa…

It was certainly notable that so many HNers seemed absolutely certain that the Kurds would come to the USA's aid, ignoring the fact that America had facilitated the one-sided ceasefire imposed on Rojava just weeks before. A few more sceptical voices brought this up, and were told repeatedly that it didn't matter because the Kurds in Syria and Turkey are very different from those in Iraq & Iran. And there's certainly…

Turkey- a key US ally- will never allow the formation of an independent Kurdish nation near their borders.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#202

Post by citrin_ru »

klipt wrote: post #186
sysguest wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

idk this move, along with firing missiles even to non-combatant countries, is going to fuk-up iran... I mean, even before the $2M toll, if you're kuwait/UAE/saudi/etc, what choice do you have? form a coalition against iran now.. with that $2M toll, iran just learnt it can just toll the ships... so what choice do all those strait-using countries have? pay $2M or more, even after US leaves? nope... they'll form a coali…

> now.. with that $2M toll, iran just learnt it can just toll the ships... But the strait has two sides and Iran only controls one side. The UAE/Oman on the other side could equally threaten to attack Iranian ships unless Iran pays them a toll.

According to this map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg shipping lines are in Oman's territorial waters. Iran controls the whole area by creating a risk that a ship can be attacked. And if Oman would try to impose payments it would break the UN convention on the Law of the Sea.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#203

Post by Herring »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #156
aa-jv wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US doesn't stop a slaughter unless it is strategically relevant to the US' special interests - and it does promote slaughters if they are strategically relevant to the US' special interest.

Is the motivation to stop a slaughter really important if that stops it?

Yeah that’s called karma, the force of your intentions. It matters a lot. You can do good things with evil in your heart, and they come out evil. Like giving a nice gift, with strings attached.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#204

Post by ruffrey »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #8

He writes that the region is not very important to the USA. It's not, but it is a strategically important area, not only in terms of its location, at the nexus of Asia, Africa and Europe, but also because of the oil there. Now the US is not dependent on Middle Eastern Oil, but Japan, China and other countries are. So controlling the region will mean a lever of power over those regions.

China is a primary adversary for the US. Oil is a major resource for both countries, supporting economics and defense.

First, observe the top 10 oil reserve countries:

1. Venezuela: ~303–304 billion barrels (mostly heavy crude) 2. Saudi Arabia: ~267 billion barrels 3. Iran: ~208–209 billion barrels 4. Canada: ~163–170 billion barrels (mostly oil sands) 5. Iraq: ~145–147 billion barrels 6. United Arab Emirates (UAE): ~111–113 billion barrels 7. Kuwait: ~101 billion barrels 8. Russia: ~80–110 billion barrels (estimates vary) 9. United States: ~40–70 billion barrels (reserves fluctuate with prices/technology) 10. Libya: ~48 billion barrels

China is the world's largest oil importer. Stats are hard, things get mislabeled due to sanctions, but somewhere between 15%-20% of China's oil is-or-was from Iran+Venezuela.

In my view, this partially explains the move in Iran, considering a 3-10 year strategic timeline.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#205

Post by 3842056935870 »

roenxi wrote: post #105
geraneum wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a purely ideological way of looking at the situation which IMO is not sufficient. As the article states, this war was not unprovoked either, regardless of whether the provocations warrant such a response. Iran is seeking its own hegemony. Now, this does not negate your point on the hegemonic approach of US in the region. I think this war can be viewed as a power struggle between a regional and global power tha…

Is anyone going to mention what these provocations are? I've yet to figure it out after 6-12 months. Pretty much everything going on seems to involve the Israelis aggressively expanding their borders or viciously attacking anyone who might oppose their expansion. I've lost count of the number of negotiators they've killed. Trump has averaged something like 1 bombing run on Iranian leadership ever 2 years. Iranian pro…

[dead]

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#206

Post by citrin_ru »

johnohara wrote: post #72

The Straight of Hormuz is open to any country willing to pay $2M per voyage. Any country except the U.S. and Israel. The most important aspect of the "toll" is that Iran prefers payment in yuan, not dollars. If Iran succeeds in nationalizing the Straight and is successful in enforcing the toll, it represents a very serious threat to the dominance of the U.S. Dollar as the world's reserve currency for trading energy.

> The Straight of Hormuz is open to any country willing to pay $2M per voyage. Any country except the U.S. and Israel.

The straight is not physically closed by Iran. It's closed by insurance companies which asking a very high war risk insurance premiums. Even if you pay $2M it unlikely will reduce the cost of insurance. That's why very few ships are choosing this option (and some of them are shadow fleet tankers which probably have no insurance).

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#207

Post by mrexcess »

geraneum wrote: post #66
Synaesthesia wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The purpose of the war is to destroy the Axis of Resistance, Iran, Hezbollah and its allies, the only force standing in the way of US/Israeli hegemony in the region.

That’s a purely ideological way of looking at the situation which IMO is not sufficient. As the article states, this war was not unprovoked either, regardless of whether the provocations warrant such a response. Iran is seeking its own hegemony. Now, this does not negate your point on the hegemonic approach of US in the region. I think this war can be viewed as a power struggle between a regional and global power tha…

>As the article states, this war was not unprovoked either

Using the same extraordinarily broad definition of "provocation" required here, can you name a single war in history that was unprovoked? And if not, haven't we just neutralized all meaning from the phrase "provoked war" with our overly broad definition of "provocation"?

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#208

Post by redwood »

Amazing to me how impatient people are. It was six to seven months between the 12 day war in June and the mass uprising seen in December/January which was ruthlessly crushed. It will likely be a while between the end of this war and the next mass uprising. But every uprising that happens against a massively weakened regime means there's more chance of real change. Totalitarian regimes fall in ways that are hard to predict, but gradually and then suddenly.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#209

Post by klipt »

roenxi wrote: post #137
geraneum wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is anyone going to mention what these provocations are? Sure, it’s not hard to find. These started long before Trump. You should look beyond the last few months’ news cycles. Iranian government’s issues with Israel are of ideological nature (according to the regime) and their open support (financially and militarily) of a part of Palestinian resistance and Hezbollah. Iran has been active at Israel’s borders for yea…

Would it be fair to characterise these provocations as all involving Iran providing resistance to Israel aggressively expanding their borders? Because these cases seem to have a tendency to Israel controlling more land at the end of the day. It looks like a pretty classic situation where an aggressive power builds up in a series of "defensive" expansions. > Iranian government’s issues with Israel are of ideological n…

Israel withdrew fully from Lebanon in 2000, and this was certified by the UN, yet Hezbollah kept attacking them anyway.

If Hezbollah offered Israel a choice between: peace with Hezbollah OR occupy land in Lebanon, I think Israel would rationally choose peace.

But Hezbollah has never offered this. Their stated goal is complete destruction of Israel.

So if the options are: Hezbollah shoots at you from right across the border OR you occupy a buffer zone and Hezbollah still shoots at you but from further away:

Isn't it perfectly rational to choose the buffer zone?

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#210

Post by redwood »

khhu2bnn wrote: post #26

The amazing part to me is just the perceived invincibility this small circle within the US administration has. You can find dozens of articles with a search limited to Feb 1~Feb 27, plenty of analysis warning of the risks that have now become reality, everything - the strait, no revolution, further radicalization, critically low US stockpiles, abandoning other US partners, gulf destabilization, etc. In the fantasy im…

I see a lot of people throw this "no revolution" perspective around when everyone involved has been very clear to the Iranian people: that this is the time to stay safe and inside. People rising up will take time, and will be highly unpredictable. No one said otherwise. You imply "analysts already had this all identified" yet you are putting forward a supposition here that's just wildly unrealistic.
Post reply on HN