Live data from Hacker News

Iran starts Bitcoin-backed ship insurance for Hormuz strait

bloomberg.com

511–520 of 737 posts

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

#511

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…

> 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 The first and second event are undeniably different than the third in at least one crucial respect, the third was never even claimed to be unintentional by anyone involved - while the first two were repeatedly claimed to be unintentional by e…

> After spending four weeks on it in an advanced ethics class, I feel the Hiroshima bomb was probably reasonably justified but that the Nagasaki bomb was not.

In the full context I'm kind of surprised there was any kind of split twixt the two given the full context that both H & N were on a very long target list being systematically worked through and both were destined to be destroyed and effectively levelled regardless of whether untrialled prototype nuclear weapons were tested on those cities or not.

As were 72 other cities (including Tokyo) prior to either H or N being touched.

ie. In the full ethical context the deeper question is really about programs of total war / total destruction rather than the edge case of using two targets as test sites for novel weapons.

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

#512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not wrong, except that USA is/was not always literally "keeping waters open" for everyone. The Cuba blockade, which is another form of war and has dire consequences for the population, has been going on for decades: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_...

This is factually incorrect. Blockade is not a synonym of embargo. Blockade is generally an act of war, and embargo is not. Dealing with Cuba is certainly a huge PITA for the majority of trading actors because of potential blacklisting in the US, but waters around Cuba are as open as they can be, and you can check marine traffic to make sure that ships arrive to Cuban ports. Even from the US itself (cause there are e…

Our Blessed Homeland :: Their Barbarous Wastes

Our Glorious Leader :: Their Wicked Despot

Our Great Religion :: Their Primitive Superstition

Our Noble Populace :: Their Backward Savages

Our Heroic Adventurers :: Their Brutish Invaders

Our Legal Embargo :: Their Illegal Blockade

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

#513
post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

.

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

#514
post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Ir…

You can’t just label all of Israel’s enemies “terrorists”. The history of the Zionist colony is well know at this point. I’m a US citizen and fully aligned with Iran against Israel and the US presence in the Middle East.

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

#515

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 The first and second event are undeniably different than the third in at least one crucial respect, the third was never even claimed to be unintentional by anyone involved - while the first two were repeatedly claimed to be unintentional by e…

> After spending four weeks on it in an advanced ethics class, I feel the Hiroshima bomb was probably reasonably justified but that the Nagasaki bomb was not. In the full context I'm kind of surprised there was any kind of split twixt the two given the full context that both H & N were on a very long target list being systematically worked through and both were destined to be destroyed and effectively levelled regard…

I didn't want to digress too much on that sidebar but the split on Nagasaki was mostly centered around the number of days between Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I think nearly everyone would have agreed the second bomb was probably justified had it been dropped later. Many felt that given more time the Japanese side might have changed their minds without the second bomb.

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

#516
post #504
post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 ag…

There is still lots of evidence that Iran started enriching uranium towards weapons grade over the past decade. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-64810145 Largely a legacy of Trump's sanctions failing to get a nuclear deal the first term and back firing. You'd have to be naive to think they don't want a bomb in the first place before that though. Saddam played the same game where they pretended they just wan…

The best way to thread the needle I can see was that maintaining highly enriched uranium was a deterrance/bargaining strategy. Doesn't break the fatwa but sends a message. Obviously it wasn't successful, they should have either built a bomb or not bothered, in hindsight.

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

#517

Even if Iran would charge $2 million per ship (like it has done) it would be manageable cost for for shipping companies and would generate same amount of income as Iran's domestic oil production. When the US violates the law of the sea in the South America, why not. Everybody complains but understands.

Few things:

1) no one owns the strait, Iran has never owned it, its international waters.

2) Who says they keep it at $2 million? Due to the location they could say anything and people would pay it, that would have a massive impact in worlds economy. And any plans to bypass the strait would get heavy attention from Iran and their friends - because no one wants to lose their cash cow.

3) if Iran is allowed to do that, everyone starts to do that - you think oil is expansive now? Good luck when every country with similar bottlenecks nearby starts their tolls. Again, these are international waters.

As for the US breaking law of the sea in South America, I assume you mean blowing up boats? Has anyone proven that they have been civilians and that they have lied about the targets?

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

#518
post #513
post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

.

What's your point? Innocent passage never applied to artificial canals. You seem to be unclear on the basics of maritime law.

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

#519
post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yeah, and "don't launch wars of aggression or bomb girls' schools on a whim" has been a principle for about the same amount of time.

Iran has been pretty clear that they'll open the strait if the USA lifts the blockade. How can we complain about fair passage while maintaining a blockade ourselves?

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

#520
post #498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 we…

> The primary US strategic war goal was to slow down Iran's nuclear weapons program.

Let’s be realistic, this was probably about Israeli domestic politics first and US domestic politics second, and maybe thirdly as a favor to the Saudis. It’s crooks running all three countries for their own purposes and issuing BS PR cover stories.

Post reply on HN