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

Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 678 posts

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#621

Post by Gibbon1 »

soperj wrote: post #220
pphysch wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can Israel have a nuclear weapon? It is also an insanely violent ethno-theocratic regime.

You can ask the same question of the US. They're the only ones to have actually used them (and they try to justify it still). For all those who are about to reply saying it was justified because it saved American lives, why didn't you use it Afghanistan or Iraq?

US lost 2500 soldiers in Afghanistan between 2001 and when Trump betrayed his country to appease Putin.

Okinawa alone cost 12,000 US soldiers. With 100,000 to 150,000 civilian deaths.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#622

Post by mikem170 »

ericmay wrote: post #537
mikem170 wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Iran probably wasn't following the JCPOA Source?

They deny access to “military sites” where nuclear research is done. I mean it’s not like they’re stupid or something.

I don't know how you got to "Iran probably wasn't following the treaty", when their adhereance to the JCPOA was certified by the U.S. (twice by the Trump administration [0][1]), until Trump wanted to renogiate, withdrawing and re-imposing sanctions in 2018. Everything I found says that the Iranians followed the treaty until they withdrew in 2021.

You mentioned military sites... I wondered if the IAEA ever requested access to military sites? They were entitled to do so, under the JCPOA. I couldn't find anything in a quick search I just did.

In your response above, you seem to imply that the Iranians may have already sneaked nuclear matarial to military sites. But the The IAEA found no evidence of that, at least as of 2025, well after the treaty, as per this summary report:

> Iran held enriched uranium at all three main nuclear sites: Natanz, Fordow, and Esfahan. There are no indications that Iran moved stocks outside of these three sites [2]

Once again, do you have sources for what you are saying, that the Iranians weren't following the treaty while it was in effect, or that there were military sites where they were hiding nuclear research? I'm not finding any.

Or is this just an opinion, or a guess? I would say that one must be careful, those who profit in some way from war always exaggerate the enemy.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/iran-nuclear-d...

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/us/politics/trump-iran-nu...

[2] https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-v...

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#623

Post by ericd »

consumer451 wrote: post #426
ericd wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, I don't think they're doing it because they want all the money, I think they truly believe that this is existentially threatening, and are trying to regulate their open source competition away because they think that's the way to be safe. That they can be trusted with the power, but if it's out and about, that's unsafe - they like to compare it to nukes, and they want nuclear non-proliferation.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. This is the most "I get both sides" issue in my mind these days. I am still not sure where I fall, or if there is even a correct position with which to agree. It really seems like there are no good options. On the one hand, if all knowledge work ended up in two dude's hands, that is really bad. On the other hand, if every surviving child victim of war (US, RU, IL, CN, whatever) has ac…

Yeah, it's really tough, there's so much potential good, and so much potential bad. My intuition says that decentralized will probably be better, the other way seems to concentrate power while also not really keeping it out of the hands of anyone. It doesn't seem likely that the US firms will be able to convince the Chinese to agree to an international regulatory framework for this stuff. Opinion polls there have the populace being quite optimistic about the benefits of this stuff, and I think the cat's too far out of the bag to really put it back in, anyway.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#624

Post by ericmay »

etchalon wrote: post #606
ericmay wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You introduced a whataboutalism. I pointed out whataboutalisms are ridiculous when it comes to dead children. Sure, but you should be talking Iran killing people since they killed many more and did so on purpose instead of on accident. You keep using the term incompetence because you have an axe to grind. Actions matter but intentions get a say too. > You introduced a whataboutalism. Well I'm certainly not going to…

At no point have I said Iran is a good country doing good things. I have no control of, or say, in how Iran operates. I am a US Citizen who votes in the US and who is concerned with the actions my government takes on my behalf. If Iran shouldn't "need an agreement" not to build nuclear weapons, what exactly is our current aggression seeking to accomplish? How does it end? How do we know its over? When there is no lon…

> At no point have I said Iran is a good country doing good things.

I didn't say you did. I'm just focused on their wrongdoings and I'm not interested in some accident that the US was involved in. We accidentally blew something up? Dang that sucks. Let's talk about how awful Iran is instead and focus on that because that's what matters.

> I have no control of, or say, in how Iran operates.

What does that matter? You also have no control or say of how Israel operates. Therefore you can't criticize them or be concerned with their actions? You also have no say in Ukraine or Russia.

> If Iran shouldn't "need an agreement" not to build nuclear weapons, what exactly is our current aggression seeking to accomplish?

Sorry I'm not following. They shouldn't need an agreement to behave like the rest of the signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty, yet they want an agreement special treatment, and still develop nuclear weapons in secret. Partly what our defensive operations are seeking to accomplish is to stop them from building nuclear weapons because... they're trying to build them, aren't honoring the NNPT, are murdering their own people, and murdering other people throughout the Middle East. Like why are you so confused about this? Are you unaware of these activities or something?

How about this, can you walk me through what your understanding of Iranian funded militias in Iraq, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon is? Just at a high level how do you understand those various situations?

> How does it end? How do we know it's over?

Who knows?

> When there is no longer a single person in Iran?

No that doesn't make any sense.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#625

Post by watwut »

burnt-resistor wrote: post #553

And the Saudis asked the US to strike the Houthis because they don't trust the leadership of their own officers, but the US said "no". MbS is furious with the Trump crime family as a result. (While the Saudis have tons of US equipment but it's mostly a show force because they're unable to employ it effectively.)

Maybe they should not bribe Trump in the first place. You give money to a crook to help him prior election, it is only fair for him to cheat on you.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#626

Post by inglor_cz »

fwip wrote: post #595
mrala wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also mentioned in the article that you linked: > In April 2016, during UN-brokered peace talks in Kuwait, Houthi representatives gave the United States a "sincere apology" for the "Death to America" slogan, claiming that the slogan was used for "domestic consumption as a means to attract support in the streets and create a common cause between their supporters to keep them united." > During the Red Sea crisis…

> A new Houthi slogan appeared after the group's re-designation as a terrorist organisation: "America is the mother of terrorism" set on a red background. Well, they're not wrong.

They are wrong. Muhammad's terror campaigns predate the US by more than a thousand years.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#627

Post by ericmay »

mikem170 wrote: post #622
ericmay wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They deny access to “military sites” where nuclear research is done. I mean it’s not like they’re stupid or something.

I don't know how you got to "Iran probably wasn't following the treaty", when their adhereance to the JCPOA was certified by the U.S. (twice by the Trump administration [0][1]), until Trump wanted to renogiate, withdrawing and re-imposing sanctions in 2018. Everything I found says that the Iranians followed the treaty until they withdrew in 2021. You mentioned military sites... I wondered if the IAEA ever requested a…

I'll have to dig up some sources later, if I don't then consider the point conceded I guess as a way of holding me to it.

The other problem of course if the fundamental "need" to have a JCPOA in the first place. Iran can just stop trying to build nuclear weapons and then we don't need these kinds of agreements.

They also enriched uranium: "Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency." [1]

why were they even doing that? When I read things like that it's like who even cares if they were supposedly following the JCPOA? I'm not trying to change the subject or move the goalposts, but just pointing out how it's interesting that they have all this enriched material. Why do they even have it? Someone said they were following the agreement, why do they need to have this agreement to not enrich uranium? Just don't do it?

[1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/securing-irans-enriched-u...

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#628

Post by ericmay »

m4rtink wrote: post #605
ericmay wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask you a question. Can you explain over the last 5 years any bad or unjust thing Iran has done? I'm curious what your list is.

Arming all their proxies in the region so they can indisriminately kill people ? Firing balistic missiles and drones on cities ? Atacking civilian ships & killing many sailors just doing their job ?

I know. It was a rhetorical question. I want the person I was replying to, to admit to these non-defensive activities, or admit to their not following the events closely.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#629

Post by acheron »

Ydarbleoj wrote: post #193
aliasxneo wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does that have to be the only reason? I personally think it has nothing to do with "Hacker" news, but I understand that sentiment has been in the fringe lately with HN becoming increasingly political.

Just to be clear, everything is political - whether you want to acknowledge it or not.

“political” has a meaning, and it’s not “everything”.

Words mean things.

Re: Houthis 'take control' of key island in global shipping route

#630

Post by AnimalMuppet »

strbean wrote: post #496
elicash wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no AUMF, and I believe Congress already repealed previous ones? I thought the remaining issues were a dispute related to the timing requirements in the War Powers Resolution, plus unsettled Constitutional law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Milit... The 2001 AUMF hasn't been repealed. It was used as recently as 2025 to justify attacks on Venezuelan ships.

Which is completely insane. The Venezuelan ship attacks have zero to do with what force was authorized for. The AUMF was for the use of force against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Were people on the boats in Venezuela? No. Then it's not force authorized by that AUMF.

But Trump found a smokescreen to hide behind. And Congress is too spineless to impeach him for unauthorized use of military force. And here we are.

Post reply on HN