Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo • Hacker News Board

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#241

Post by ceejayoz » Thu, May 14, 2026, 11:16 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #226

ceejayoz wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So: Seizing ships isn’t a blockade. Turning away ships isn’t a blockade. The UN, Cuba, and major national and international news outlets considering it one doesn’t count. Running out of oil and massive power outages doesn’t count. Trump’s threats of strikes don’t count. Apparently nothing does. The Cuban Missile Crisis doesn’t even meet your standard.

> Seizing ships isn’t a blockade. > Turning away ships isn’t a blockade. If the vessels were legally flagged, both of these are indeed actions of a blockade! You're just ignoring the fact that the ships the US seized were flying false flags and are subject to seizure regardless of the embargo. And in the case of the Ocean Mariner, the ship wasn't forcibly turned away by the coast guard. They changed course to the Dom…

> If the vessels were legally flagged, both of these are indeed actions of a blockade!

Where is “it’s not a blockade if the ships don’t have papers” set out in international law?

> Yes it was a blockade!

Funny. Kennedy tried your exact denialist tactic - they called it a quarantine.

History, of course, isn’t fooled.

> The US military deployed its forces with orders to seize Soviet ships bound for Cuba (though they turned away before any ships were actually boarded).

And you are somehow privy to the Coast Guard’s orders in the Ocean Mariner case? How do you know what would have happened if they made for Cuba?

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#242

Post by pibaker » Thu, May 14, 2026, 11:24 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #52

ricardobeat wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump instituted tariffs on any country that sells oil to Cuba, it is effectively a blockade. It’s also in fact preventing ships carrying oil to reach the island, using their military, I wonder if there is a term for that.

[flagged]

By the same logic Iran is not blockading the strait of Hormuz — just send them 25 BTC and your oil tanker too can pass.

By the same logic the mafia aren't disrupting your business when they ask for a protection fee — just pay up and the same mafia won't empty a clip into your store during business hours.

By the same logic street muggers are not actually taking your stuffs by force — just hand them your wallet and you get to keep your jacket and your life.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#243

Post by thunky » Thu, May 14, 2026, 11:29 PM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #225

thunky wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it's cut off from oil because other countries refuse to trade with Cuba Because of US pressure, yes? If the police prevent all grocery stores from selling you food and you starve, who do you blame: the police or the grocery stores?

Because of US economic pressure, yes. But that's not what a blockade is. A blockade is preventing trade through military force, physically seizing any ships that attempt to dock in the blockaded country. > If the police prevent all grocery stores from selling you food and you starve, who do you blame: the police or the grocery stores? Except that's not analogous to Cuba's situation. It's more like if the grocery stor…

> It's more like if the grocery store sells you food, the the grocery store is hit with a bigger tax bill

And you also risk pissing off the mafia boss and will suffer the consequences elsewhere. It's not a simple choice to sell or not sell with no strings attached. Its one power drunk bully and everyone else.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#244

Post by morkalork » Fri, May 15, 2026, 12:30 AM UTC

WarmWash wrote: post #240

morkalork wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rapist mentality

Maybe? Like the dictator will let their people suffer while having the power to stop it? I'm not sure I follow, but suppose it kind of fits

>you are so weak, and your opponent is strong, that the best outcome for everyone on the whole is for you to just capitulate. Surrender.

Sounds pretty rapey to me. I certainly hope you've never made similar remarks to a date before.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#245

Post by phpnode » Fri, May 15, 2026, 12:38 AM UTC

Manuel_D wrote: post #227

beepbooptheory wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the meaningful thing you are trying to get across here something like: "everyone is saying USA is doing something really bad, but in fact they are not"? Or maybe more: "ok USA might have it a little out for Cuba, but remember, everyone else hates them too, otherwise they would be trading with them"?

The meaningful thing is to understand the difference between a blockade and an embargo. When people say that the US is blockading Cuba I'm not sure if they are genuinely misinformed and think that the US Navy and Coast Guard are physically apprehending any ships trying to dock in Cuba, or if they are just ignorant about the difference between a blockade and an embargo.

You are quibbling over minor semantics. Is the US preventing most oil from reaching Cuba or not?

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#246

Post by Paradigm2020 » Fri, May 15, 2026, 1:06 AM UTC

akramachamarei wrote: post #238

iAMkenough wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d have to ask them. Also curious about US motive behind blowing up fishing boats and school children.

I think the Iranian school bombing was pretty clearly a mistake, given its proximity to an IRGC base, and (IIRC) the previous usage of that plot of land for military purposes, suggesting an issue of outdated target intelligence. That compounds with the lack of a plausible motive, and numerous demotives for hitting it deliberately. Which is not to present the action as significantly less blameworthy; it's a heinous ne…

Agreed on the school... Manslaughter not murder and some heads should still roll.

Now explain the fisherman boats...

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#247

Post by WarmWash » Fri, May 15, 2026, 1:16 AM UTC

morkalork wrote: post #244

WarmWash wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe? Like the dictator will let their people suffer while having the power to stop it? I'm not sure I follow, but suppose it kind of fits

>you are so weak, and your opponent is strong, that the best outcome for everyone on the whole is for you to just capitulate. Surrender. Sounds pretty rapey to me. I certainly hope you've never made similar remarks to a date before.

We're talking about different things here then, sorry if it confused you.

The situation I am speaking about has three parties: a weak party, an innocent/bystander party under the power of the weak party, and a strong party trying to displace the weak party.

This is like a hostage situation, or a child custody battle. Hope that clarifies it

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#248

Post by Manuel_D » Fri, May 15, 2026, 1:37 AM UTC

phpnode wrote: post #245

Manuel_D wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The meaningful thing is to understand the difference between a blockade and an embargo. When people say that the US is blockading Cuba I'm not sure if they are genuinely misinformed and think that the US Navy and Coast Guard are physically apprehending any ships trying to dock in Cuba, or if they are just ignorant about the difference between a blockade and an embargo.

You are quibbling over minor semantics. Is the US preventing most oil from reaching Cuba or not?

The fact that oil imports are being curtailed by an embargo rather than a blockade is not minor semantics. The former is when countries voluntarily cease to trade with someone. The latter is when a country deploys its military to seize vessels trying to reach the blockade target. It's also an act of war.

If people really think it's a minor semantics difference, then they should just be honest and correctly refer to the situation as an embargo, not a blockade.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#249

Post by pasquinelli » Fri, May 15, 2026, 1:43 AM UTC

kyboren wrote: post #163

pasquinelli wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if they don't let people leave to prevent total state collapse then they're starving their own people (by means of the american trade embargo); if they do let people leave, it's to tighten their stranglehold on the country.

Any way you slice it, such an exodus is never the sign of a well-managed country.

i'd love to see america "manage" the conditions america has imposed on cuba.

Re: Cuba says it has run out of fuel, blames U.S. embargo

#250

Post by Sabinus » Fri, May 15, 2026, 1:49 AM UTC

shimman wrote: post #96

ceejayoz wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What legal justification could there possibly be for imposing a tarrif on Mexico-Cuba trade that doesn't involve the US at any point? What would your reaction be if China imposed tariffs on US-Canadian border crossings and seized American ships over it?

It always boils down to the US ignoring international trade and laws in their favor. As you said there is nothing illegal about two countries trading. The idea the US should have a say is deeply undemocratic and frankly anti-human as well, but that's just the US for you. This podcast does a great job on highlighting how the media plays its role in justifying the imperialism too: https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/sha…

>there is nothing illegal about two countries trading

No, there isn't. There also isn't anything illegal about the USA threatening to tarrif it's own trade with countries that trade with Cuba. If a vessel fakes it's flag to avoid that attribution, it is then stateless, and the USA is allowed to board it.