4 ms·

idk this move, along with firing missiles even to non-combatant countries, is going to fuk-up iran... I mean, even before the $2M toll, if you're kuwait/UAE/sa

idk this move, along with firing missiles even to non-combatant countries, is going to fuk-up iran... I mean, even before the $2M toll, if you're kuwait/UAE/saudi/etc, what choice do you have? form a coalition against iran now.. with that $2M toll, iran just learnt it can just toll the ships... so what choice do all those strait-using countries have? pay $2M or more, even after US leaves? nope... they'll form a coalition against iran it's highly unfortunate that trump started the war, but iran's way of things are just making more enemies -- it'll pay with regime change within few months

klipt 6mo ago
> now.. with that $2M toll, iran just learnt it can just toll the ships... But the strait has two sides and Iran only controls one side. The UAE/Oman on the other side could equally threaten to attack Iranian ships unless Iran pays them a toll.
- sysguest 6mo ago
  well I guess that makes Iran really fked up... the strait-using countries are surely going to "make a lesson out of" iran exactly for that reason
  - zinodaur 6mo ago
    I think what we should have learned from this is that it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders... the gulf states are much more exposed to this than the US is, and much less powerful. They are also not neutral - they have been paying in to the US protection racket, and are discovering that their payments haven't bought much.
    - sysguest 6mo ago
      > it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders it's not just gulf states -- look at who are the customers of those gulf states are. the whole asia, europe, and america -- the whole world is their customer. Even if it's "extremely hard", those countries have no choice but "make a lesson out of" iran -- just like what we did with pirates why would those "customers of gulf" just leave iran? after US leaves, will iran regime suddenly become nice and stop forcing that $2M-per-voyage bill? no, and even if iran regime promises "I'll never bill those ships", how could you trust on that promise? the only way to ensure free-ship-passing would be obliterating Iran as an example, even if US backs away. > They are also not neutral - they have been paying in to the US protection racket hmm so were they "helping" US bomb iran? "being neutral" means it didn't participate on attacking iran, not whether it paid or not.
      - samus 6mo ago
        Most nations who are affected don't have a blue-water navy or similar means to pose a serious threat to Iran. They have to either back the USA or deal with the toll and the uncertainty that comes with it.
      - zinodaur 6mo ago
        If Canada and Mexico started letting Iran launch bombing sorties against US cities from within their borders, would the US consider them neutral? 2 Million a ship seems like a pretty cheap price to pay for the damage the us and Israel have inflicted on Iran - they cannot be made to pay it though, so I suppose the rest of us will have to (through marginally higher oil prices in the long term - much less than the spectacularly high oil prices the US war will cause in the short term)
        klipt 6mo ago
        > price to pay for the damage the us and Israel have inflicted on Iran Well if we're talking reparations, shouldn't Iran pay for the damage Hezbollah inflicted on Israel with Iranian supplied weapons for decades?
        PickledHotdog 6mo ago
        It would be miniscule compared to the damage Israel inflicted on Lebanon for decades
        zinodaur 6mo ago
        Since 1985, Hezbollah has killed approximately 600 Israelis (if you count IDF soldiers during the occupation of Beirut). Israel has killed 5x that number of civilians in the last two weeks, if you count Lebanon as well as Iran. If you count soldiers...
      - jltsiren 6mo ago
        The value of the oil / natural gas production in the Gulf states is not infinite. Nobody except the US has the force projection capacity to fight a major war against Iran. If they are not interested in fighting that war, the rest of the world will find that the cheapest and least disruptive option is to cut consumption. To assume that nobody is shipping oil and natural gas from the Gulf, until a new status quo emerges in the region.
- citrin_ru 6mo ago
  According to this map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg shipping lines are in Oman's territorial waters. Iran controls the whole area by creating a risk that a ship can be attacked. And if Oman would try to impose payments it would break the UN convention on the Law of the Sea.
andriy_koval 6mo ago
> they'll form a coalition against iran and do what?
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  > and do what? Bomb shit. The Saudi and UAE militaries aren't anything to sneeze at. (The area cross the Strait from the UAE is majority Arab [1].) I think it's generally good strategy to not provoke new belligerents against oneself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicities_in_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicities_in_Iran
  - andriy_koval 6mo ago
    Saudi and UAE has less air power than US+Israel, whatever could be bombed already bombed. But Saudi and UAE are ruled by rich regimes who benefit from oil revenue, and very vulnarable to Iran strikes, they more likely will pay those $2m.
    - JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
      > Saudi and UAE has less air power than US+Israel Less plus some is still more. > whatever could be bombed already bombed This is plainly untrue. We're still bombing things. Missiles are still being fired. Power plants and refineries continue to run. > Saudi and UAE are ruled by rich regimes who benefit from oil revenue, and very vulnarable to Iran strikes, they more likely will pay those $2m That functionally cedes Emirati and Saudi sovereignty to Iran. Today it's $2mm. Tomorrow it's anything else Tehran requires.
      - andriy_koval 6mo ago
        > That functionally cedes Emirati and Saudi sovereignty to Iran. Today it's $2mm. Tomorrow it's anything else Tehran requires. the point is besides full scale invasion which Saudi and UAE won't do, there is no reliable way to remove threat of Iran striking oil infra, they just don't have way to deal with the problem.

klipt 6mo ago

> now.. with that $2M toll, iran just learnt it can just toll the ships... But the strait has two sides and Iran only controls one side. The UAE/Oman on the other side could equally threaten to attack Iranian ships unless Iran pays them a toll.

sysguest 6mo ago
well I guess that makes Iran really fked up... the strait-using countries are surely going to "make a lesson out of" iran exactly for that reason
- zinodaur 6mo ago
  I think what we should have learned from this is that it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders... the gulf states are much more exposed to this than the US is, and much less powerful. They are also not neutral - they have been paying in to the US protection racket, and are discovering that their payments haven't bought much.
  - sysguest 6mo ago
    > it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders it's not just gulf states -- look at who are the customers of those gulf states are. the whole asia, europe, and america -- the whole world is their customer. Even if it's "extremely hard", those countries have no choice but "make a lesson out of" iran -- just like what we did with pirates why would those "customers of gulf" just leave iran? after US leaves, will iran regime suddenly become nice and stop forcing that $2M-per-voyage bill? no, and even if iran regime promises "I'll never bill those ships", how could you trust on that promise? the only way to ensure free-ship-passing would be obliterating Iran as an example, even if US backs away. > They are also not neutral - they have been paying in to the US protection racket hmm so were they "helping" US bomb iran? "being neutral" means it didn't participate on attacking iran, not whether it paid or not.
    - samus 6mo ago
      Most nations who are affected don't have a blue-water navy or similar means to pose a serious threat to Iran. They have to either back the USA or deal with the toll and the uncertainty that comes with it.
    - zinodaur 6mo ago
      If Canada and Mexico started letting Iran launch bombing sorties against US cities from within their borders, would the US consider them neutral? 2 Million a ship seems like a pretty cheap price to pay for the damage the us and Israel have inflicted on Iran - they cannot be made to pay it though, so I suppose the rest of us will have to (through marginally higher oil prices in the long term - much less than the spectacularly high oil prices the US war will cause in the short term)
      - klipt 6mo ago
        > price to pay for the damage the us and Israel have inflicted on Iran Well if we're talking reparations, shouldn't Iran pay for the damage Hezbollah inflicted on Israel with Iranian supplied weapons for decades?
        PickledHotdog 6mo ago
        It would be miniscule compared to the damage Israel inflicted on Lebanon for decades
        zinodaur 6mo ago
        Since 1985, Hezbollah has killed approximately 600 Israelis (if you count IDF soldiers during the occupation of Beirut). Israel has killed 5x that number of civilians in the last two weeks, if you count Lebanon as well as Iran. If you count soldiers...
    - jltsiren 6mo ago
      The value of the oil / natural gas production in the Gulf states is not infinite. Nobody except the US has the force projection capacity to fight a major war against Iran. If they are not interested in fighting that war, the rest of the world will find that the cheapest and least disruptive option is to cut consumption. To assume that nobody is shipping oil and natural gas from the Gulf, until a new status quo emerges in the region.
citrin_ru 6mo ago
According to this map https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Strait_of_hormuz_full.jpg shipping lines are in Oman's territorial waters. Iran controls the whole area by creating a risk that a ship can be attacked. And if Oman would try to impose payments it would break the UN convention on the Law of the Sea.

andriy_koval 6mo ago

> they'll form a coalition against iran and do what?

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
> and do what? Bomb shit. The Saudi and UAE militaries aren't anything to sneeze at. (The area cross the Strait from the UAE is majority Arab [1].) I think it's generally good strategy to not provoke new belligerents against oneself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicities_in_Iran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnicities_in_Iran
- andriy_koval 6mo ago
  Saudi and UAE has less air power than US+Israel, whatever could be bombed already bombed. But Saudi and UAE are ruled by rich regimes who benefit from oil revenue, and very vulnarable to Iran strikes, they more likely will pay those $2m.
  - JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
    > Saudi and UAE has less air power than US+Israel Less plus some is still more. > whatever could be bombed already bombed This is plainly untrue. We're still bombing things. Missiles are still being fired. Power plants and refineries continue to run. > Saudi and UAE are ruled by rich regimes who benefit from oil revenue, and very vulnarable to Iran strikes, they more likely will pay those $2m That functionally cedes Emirati and Saudi sovereignty to Iran. Today it's $2mm. Tomorrow it's anything else Tehran requires.
    - andriy_koval 6mo ago
      > That functionally cedes Emirati and Saudi sovereignty to Iran. Today it's $2mm. Tomorrow it's anything else Tehran requires. the point is besides full scale invasion which Saudi and UAE won't do, there is no reliable way to remove threat of Iran striking oil infra, they just don't have way to deal with the problem.