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

Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 146 posts

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#131

Post by gpt5 »

nazgulsenpai wrote: post #85
zardo wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would Iran not want to build nukes now? It would be suicidal not to. I feel like we have enough examples to be clear on this now, would you rather your country be treated by the major powers like Libya, Ukraine, Iraq... Or like North Korea.

That's a great point. This is also going to be disastrous for the case against nuclear proliferation, not just in Iran or the middle east -- especially when the co-aggressor has an undeclared nuclear stockpile.

I mean, Iran has been working on nukes for a while, and it has led them to a disastrous place of its own.

You could easily argue that the dictatorship is in a stronger place after getting nukes, but the act of building nukes have destabilized many regimes, including Iran. Iran could have been wealthy like UAE and the Saudis, with regional influence similar to Turkey, instead of being the punching bag of US and Israel.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#132

Post by bluGill »

maleldil wrote: post #128
bluGill wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most are public so my 401k gains. Oil companies will expand in this scenario and those new employees pay taxes, both which benefit everyone in some way. I drive an EV so I gain. Though most lose more than they gain, this isn't a complete loss for anyone.

Why would an increase in oil prices translate to new jobs? The price increase has no relation to value added, only to global scarcity, so there's no need for new jobs.

The price increase, and the anticipation of the price increase, means that if you have the ability to produce oil, now would be a great time to be drilling wells. Of course, you have to consider the late time between how long it takes to drill a well and get production versus how long you think this will go on. Still, it's a reasonable investment that the oil business should be looking at right now.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#133

Post by nullocator »

DoctorOetker wrote: post #122
nullocator wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What prevents them from pooling together the funds for 2 decades of relentless cyberattacks on Iran, unless twice the same fee is payed in reverse to compensate for just the threat? I thought it was clear to everyone that this is _exactly_ what the U.S. and Israel have been doing to Iran for literally 20+ years [0] [1]. In addition to economic warfare, other types of espionage, and acts of terrorism - e.g. blowing…

> I thought it was clear to everyone that this is _exactly_ what the U.S. and Israel have been doing to Iran for literally 20+ years [0] [1]. You changed my proposition to a different one by equating US & Israeli cyber warfare, with US & Israeli & worldwide telecom sector cyber warfare. I ask why risk that step? worldwide telecom sector is highly networked (by profession obviously) and is probably already picking up…

Or they would just pay because telecom companies do not have armies.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#134

Post by DoctorOetker »

nullocator wrote: post #133
DoctorOetker wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I thought it was clear to everyone that this is _exactly_ what the U.S. and Israel have been doing to Iran for literally 20+ years [0] [1]. You changed my proposition to a different one by equating US & Israeli cyber warfare, with US & Israeli & worldwide telecom sector cyber warfare. I ask why risk that step? worldwide telecom sector is highly networked (by profession obviously) and is probably already picking up…

Or they would just pay because telecom companies do not have armies.

this makes no sense, you're saying that if some cable operator in some distant nation agrees to chip in to prevent such normalization worldwide, that Iran will come over to that nation to physically overpower the cable operator who doesn't have an army?

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#135

Post by DoctorOetker »

rrhjm53270 wrote: post #124
DoctorOetker wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (I say this with no sympathy to the Iranian government, just looking at reality.) If we look at reality we see China is very active in Africa, and so also has undersea network cables (PEACE & 2Africa). If China allows this precedent to occur, they encourage any African nation nearby such cables to pull the same tricks on them. Hence a rational player in the shoes of China wouldn't allow this to happen. China should…

Putin and Trump have already made the world chaotic enough; don't let Xi get involved too.

Everybody is involved

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#136

Post by lonely_wanderer »

spankalee wrote: post #15
lonely_wanderer wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I vacillate between two potential rationales: - there is a concerted effort to target and topple oil producers which China relies on as a form of containment of the Chinese economy. Venezuela, Iran, eventually Russia in a more direct way. The current administration is willing to accept economic pain for just about everyone because they see the transition from petroleum to green energies as the death knell for US supe…

The China point doesn't make any sense to me. High oil prices only accelerate China's transition to renewables, and rewards them for all the investment they've made so far, both in national energy production and in selling panels and EVs to the world. It hurts the US far more, especially with this admin's anti wind and solar policies.

I am not saying the gambit is correct. I am purely trying to reason about what those in charge may believe.

If you know your enemy’s position strengthens with time while your position weakens with time, under a certain mentality, you attack now.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#137

Post by JeremyNT »

gpt5 wrote: post #131
nazgulsenpai wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great point. This is also going to be disastrous for the case against nuclear proliferation, not just in Iran or the middle east -- especially when the co-aggressor has an undeclared nuclear stockpile.

I mean, Iran has been working on nukes for a while, and it has led them to a disastrous place of its own. You could easily argue that the dictatorship is in a stronger place after getting nukes, but the act of building nukes have destabilized many regimes, including Iran. Iran could have been wealthy like UAE and the Saudis, with regional influence similar to Turkey, instead of being the punching bag of US and Israel…

It's reasonable to consider the counterfactual but it seems like the closest parallel here is Pakistan, which pulled off the gambit successfully.

The years leading up to and immediately following successful acquisition were tenuous and it seemed like they were destined to become a global pariah if not a failed state. And yet now, they are a regional power.

So if anything maybe Iran just missed its window. Now with the US seemingly ready to enter a forever war with no defined objectives other than nuclear deterrence it's presumably too late, but maybe a more competent regime could have pulled it off in time.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#138

Post by stogot »

JeremyNT wrote: post #137
gpt5 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Iran has been working on nukes for a while, and it has led them to a disastrous place of its own. You could easily argue that the dictatorship is in a stronger place after getting nukes, but the act of building nukes have destabilized many regimes, including Iran. Iran could have been wealthy like UAE and the Saudis, with regional influence similar to Turkey, instead of being the punching bag of US and Israel…

It's reasonable to consider the counterfactual but it seems like the closest parallel here is Pakistan, which pulled off the gambit successfully. The years leading up to and immediately following successful acquisition were tenuous and it seemed like they were destined to become a global pariah if not a failed state. And yet now, they are a regional power. So if anything maybe Iran just missed its window. Now with th…

You’re not saying much. Iran could have not pursued this strategy that has turned them into a pariah, but they did

It was an active choice not a missed window

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#139

Post by BobaFloutist »

dingaling wrote: post #125
toast0 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The strait is not and has never been Iran's sovereign territory. About half of it is, yes? Wikipedia has a nice map [1] which shows the agreed-upon maritime boundaries and there's also some disputed islands where there's no agreed up on boundaries listed. Wikipedia isn't absolutely correct, but where a body of water separates two sovereign states, the territorial waters tend to meet around the middle, with specific…

Having failed to ratify UNCLOS, Iran is entitled to claim only 3nm of territorial water. That's international law, as it stands. Iran passed its own law in 2003 claiming 12nm. They can only assert that claim through violence.

Oh. Nautical mile. Not nanometer.

Re: Iran will impose fees on subsea internet cables in Strait of Hormuz

#140

Post by ZeroGravitas »

gpt5 wrote: post #131
nazgulsenpai wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a great point. This is also going to be disastrous for the case against nuclear proliferation, not just in Iran or the middle east -- especially when the co-aggressor has an undeclared nuclear stockpile.

I mean, Iran has been working on nukes for a while, and it has led them to a disastrous place of its own. You could easily argue that the dictatorship is in a stronger place after getting nukes, but the act of building nukes have destabilized many regimes, including Iran. Iran could have been wealthy like UAE and the Saudis, with regional influence similar to Turkey, instead of being the punching bag of US and Israel…

Apparently they restarted nuclear stuff because of the US supported Iran-Iraq war, so they never got the option to choose "nukes or punching bag", rather they were forced to choose nukes because they were already a punching bag.
Post reply on HN