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

Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 737 posts

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#491

Post by BLKNSLVR »

CMay wrote: post #416
everdrive wrote: post #20

Much of the post-WW2 American-led world order was founded partially on the United States using its military to keep international waters open. It would be quite stunning Iran defeated the united states in this sense. The military might is there, but this administration clearly had no idea what they were getting themselves into and did not plan accordingly. (and does not have the will or public support to do so) The b…

We've been planning interventions in Iran for 40 years and they constantly get revised or updated. Iran is literally one of few countries known for drones, which they based on stolen drone tech from western countries. It's not realistic that we entered this conflict unaware that Iran could harass the strait cheaply. The problem is that Israel bombed their entire leadership structure and there's seemingly nobody to de…

> A lot of the benefits of intervening in Iran seem to be paying off right now

I, umm, disagree fairly wholeheartedly.

Maybe there's some long term that has changed direction slightly as a result, but right now literally everything immediate is worse than it was beforehand.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#492

Post by SubiculumCode »

tehjoker wrote: post #454
SubiculumCode wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not sure if in the long term it is our interest to allow Iran to extract rent from this trade route, which would only strengthen China. It seems to me that the hurt is spread around the world quite widely, with inordinate impacts on Iran and China, not the U.S. or Europe [1]. [1] https://www.visualcapitalist.com/charted-oil-trade-through-t...

It's not really in my interest for a cabal of pedophiles to win this one. I dispute the conflation of the interests of the capitalist class with the american people.

Wow. You know, I think Trump is dangerous to our Republic, almost certainly committing graft and fraud using the Office of the President for personal gain, probably a rapist and maybe a pedophile. I don't know. But that has nothing, I repeat, NOTHING to do with our national security and the geopolitical reality of the Russian-Iranian-Chinese-North Korean Axis and the threat that axis poses to the democratic free-world. Separate your concerns, walk and chew gum, and face the real world.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#493

Post by el_io »

chrisco255 wrote: post #229
danbruc wrote: post #197

The US should be happy about this. Maybe. Iran seeking reparations is a reasonable demand, this gives the US a way to satisfy a demand without having to pay themselves - which certainly would not be popular, to say the least - making an exit easier. There is of course the risk of setting an undesirable precedent and it is not clear what the consequences of that would be.

Iran has been funding terrorists for decades and the IRGC has murdered tens of thousands of Iranians. There are no reparations for terrorists getting their comeuppance.

> Iran has been funding terrorists for decades

So is USA.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#494

Post by antman »

dmix wrote: post #445
jchook wrote: post #431

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US fundamentally wants the oil to flow globally. Its secondary blockade of the Strait seems to be driven by optics and PR rather than strategic value.

It's a pressure campaign to get a nuclear deal. NYT reported Iran already offered to open the strait, end hostilities, and negotiate a nuclear deal later, but the US rejected that offer as they want to pressure them into giving up their uranium. Now Iran is demanding money in exchange for the uranium which is the primary roadblock.

Nobody credible said or believed Iran was making nuclear weapons. Iran had made it a fatwa against the Islamic law to develop such weapons and Obama had referenced that. They also dont believe bolivian fishermen could reach the US with stocks of drugs, they dont believe venezuela’s president was a hidden drug kingpin, and they also dont believe that Cuba is a credible threat that needs to be blockaded to the stone age.

These are power plays to signal that world dominance is not decaying but in case of Iran it has backfired and pushes China’s narrative as a pillar of stability.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#495

Post by nradov »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #483
SubiculumCode wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is incorrect. The point is to show that if Iran does this, then they will not be the only ones that can do it. The last thing that should happen is to reward Iran for rent seeking on the Strait. Others can also seek rent then, and the whole strait gets shut down..which encompassed around 90% of all Iranian oil exports, which in turn was about 90% of their economic exports.

Why is it so bad that countries want rent over the areas they control?

It's not a matter of good or bad. Innocent passage through national waters (including straits) without paying tolls has been a fundamental principle of maritime law for a long time. Allowing Iran to charge a toll for passage through the Strait of Hormuz would set a bad precedent and encourage other countries to do the same. Iran might be able to get some of the weaker countries to pay up but the USA has no incentive to agree; more likely they would just continue the blockade, and possibly impose secondary sanctions against any entities that send money to Iran.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#496

Post by ProllyInfamous »

cpncrunch wrote: post #420
daft_pink wrote: post #105

I’m not convinced that bitcoin is stable enough to use in insurance products. The currency volatility risk is too high to reasonably cover the covered losses which will need to be covered in some other currency to do things like replace boats etc.

This isnt an insurance product though. Its “insurance”, aka extortion.

...it's the same picture.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#497

Post by EthanHeilman »

xbmcuser wrote: post #480
EthanHeilman wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bigger issue is the tankers. The US Navy isn't going to be happy patrolling the strait sure, but even if they did they wouldn't be able to protect the tankers enough for it to make sense for tankers to take the risk. The last time this happened the US opened the strait by accidentally shooting down an Iranian passenger plane after sinking a large chunk of Iranian navy. The Iranians assumed the US shoot the passen…

US downing of Iran passenger plane was as much an accident as the triple tap they did of the girls school in Iran recently or the use of nuclear bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in the past when Japan was already surrendering ie it was a terror tactic. I think americans have the false belief that US is some of kind of benevolent force acting for the good of the world and promoting freedom and democracy. Where as it is…

It was an accident, you can read the investigation. No one claims Nagasaki or Hiroshima were accidents.

> I think americans have the false belief that US is some of kind of benevolent force acting for the good of the world and promoting freedom and democracy.

A state can still make mistakes without saying it is good in everyway

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#498

Post by nradov »

jcranmer wrote: post #259
Jensson wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way were they chased away? Iran tried to sink them and didn't hit any shots, and many on Iran's side died trying. Many IRGC soldiers dying and not even scratching the paint on US vessels doesn't show US to be weak. > Hilariously the USS George HW Bush had to go the long way around Africa rather than risk transiting the Bab El Mandeb after the Houthis defeated the US Navy last year. Valuing the lives of your c…

> USA can win this war with barely any casualties What do you mean by "win"? What strategic goals can the US achieve in this war? We're at a point where merely achieving status quo ante bellum--i.e., Iran doesn't charge for passage through the Strait of Hormuz--seems to require giving concessions elsewhere. In many ways, this looks like the American version of Pearl Harbor--a stunning tactical victory that is simulta…

The primary US strategic war goal was to slow down Iran's nuclear weapons program. That was not a smart reason to launch an attack, but the attack was at least somewhat successful in achieving the goal. Much of Iran's critical equipment is now destroyed or buried, so from the US perspective that's at least a minor, temporary strategic gain. I'm not claiming that any of this was a good idea or that it will work out well in the long run but let's be clear about the real goals.

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#499

Post by xbmcuser »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #488
xbmcuser wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US downing of Iran passenger plane was as much an accident as the triple tap they did of the girls school in Iran recently or the use of nuclear bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima in the past when Japan was already surrendering ie it was a terror tactic. I think americans have the false belief that US is some of kind of benevolent force acting for the good of the world and promoting freedom and democracy. Where as it is…

People who are "already surrendering" don't need to be nuked twice.

Yes we are in agreement

Re: Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

#500

Post by CMay »

lorecore wrote: post #421
CMay wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been planning interventions in Iran for 40 years and they constantly get revised or updated. Iran is literally one of few countries known for drones, which they based on stolen drone tech from western countries. It's not realistic that we entered this conflict unaware that Iran could harass the strait cheaply. The problem is that Israel bombed their entire leadership structure and there's seemingly nobody to de…

> We can absolutely continue destroying their capacity to do things, but the terrorists do not care about their own people or the world. They will use human shields and continue seeking nuclear weapons. They do not value human life or rules. This is why they can never have a nuclear weapon. It's the US and Israel that are the "terrorists" and yet both have nuclear weapons. You literally say yourself that we can "cont…

Iran has been terrorizing the entire region, exporting radicalism and funding terrorism. Many of the wars that have occurred in the middle east were caused by Iran. If you look at the history of Israeli attacks, they have essentially been reactions to Iran-backed terrorist attacks against Israel.

Why did Saudi Arabia attack Yemen? For fun? No, they were reacting to Iran-backed terrorist groups. Why did Iraq attack Iran, for fun? No, even back then they were reacting to Iran exporting their terrorism to Iraq.

Their strategy has been to try to look innocent by avoiding direct attacks from Iran and have diplomats that pretend Iran is a nice actor on the international stage, while using their country as a stable foundation for exporting terrorism. This isn't exclusively a strategy for achieving state power, it is a religious imperative to achieve a radical vision of global Islam.

The US has worked with the Middle East for many years to settle on some kind of peace after thousands of years of conflict (which was also the case for Europe). There can never be peace as long as Iran manufactures conflict regularly.

When the US does things, there is usually a strong and valuable logic behind it, even if it is not expressed publicly. For Iran, the reasons tend to be religious. Their goals and behaviors are not the same as you would expect from a rational state actor.

Post reply on HN