6 ms·
Iran mulls taking control of all 7 cables passing through Strait of Hormuz
- tristanj 5mo agoBy "control" Iran doesn't mean they will operate or maintain these cables. They mean "pay up, or we'll destroy these cables when we feel like it". Modern day piracy.
- peter-m80 5mo ago[flagged]
- tristanj 5mo ago* * *
- peter-m80 5mo agoHezbollah is the consequence of Israel Invading Lebannon.
- tristanj 5mo agoSure, but Lebanon attacked Israel first (in 1948). Lebanon was the aggressor. Assigning blame to only one side is meaningless when both sides go tit-for-tat for decades. Both Israel and Lebanon are complicit in this mess.
- constantius 5mo agoSame way as the UK attacked Germany first during WWII, no? There were many reasons for the Arab League, which Lebanon was part of, to attack a country taking over Palestine.
- OutOfHere 5mo agoFor the record, Lebanon also attacked Israel first during the war in 2026.
- ranguna 5mo agoSources other than project flower?
- tristanj 5mo agoWhen I first learned that Iran-Israel used to have friendly relations for decades, I was shocked. Genuinely surprised. Here's the relevant part of the wiki [0]: After the establishment of the State of Israel in May 1948, Israel and Iran maintained close ties. Iran was the second Muslim-majority country to recognize Israel as a sovereign state after Turkey. Israel viewed Iran as a natural ally as a non-Arab power on the edge of the Arab world, in accordance with David Ben Gurion's concept of an alliance of the periphery. Israel had a permanent delegation in Tehran which served as a de facto embassy, before Ambassadors were exchanged in the late 1970s. After the Six-Day War, Iran supplied Israel with a significant portion of its oil needs and Iranian oil was shipped to European markets via the joint Israeli-Iranian Eilat-Ashkelon pipeline. Trade between the countries was brisk, with Israeli construction firms and engineers active in Iran. El Al, the Israeli national airline, operated direct flights between Tel Aviv and Tehran. Iranian-Israeli military links and projects were kept secret, but they are believed to have been wide-ranging, for example the joint military project Project Flower (1977–79), an Iranian-Israeli attempt to develop a new missile. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_relations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_relations
- digitalPhonix 5mo agoYou know that the Iran of then is almost completely unrelated to the Iran of now culturally, politically and even religiously due to... err... “foreign intervention”, right?
- tristanj 5mo agoObviously. The point I'm addressing is that Iran does not have to maintain hostile relations towards Israel. The two countries had friendly relations for decades prior. Iranians themselves also want to end hostilities with Israel. Polling of Iranians citizens show 69% of people believe the "Islamic Republic should stop calling for the destruction of Israel" [0]. The tens of billions of dollars Iran invests into fighting Israel are (in my opinion) much better spent investing into developing the Iranian people and economy. Spending billions of dollars funding proxy wars, fighting a pointless forever war against Israel, pursuing nuclear weapons, and firing drones and missiles at your neighbors is a foolish foreign policy. Iran is asking for trouble. If Iran had a different foreign policy, this current conflict would never have happened. Iran's situation was entirely avoidable. [0] https://gamaan.org/2025/11/05/12-day-war-survey-english/ https://gamaan.org/2025/11/05/12-day-war-survey-english/
- ElProlactin 5mo ago> Iran's leadership changed post-1979... You mean the de facto dictatorship that was installed by an MI6 and CIA-instigated coup in 1953 and widely unpopular because, among other things, it used secret police to brutally suppress political dissent?
- tristanj 5mo agoAnd replaced with the deeply unpopular Islamic republic? The current regime is extremely unpopular in Iran. The regime has around a 12% approval rating. Over 60% of Iranians want regime change. Ever more (69%) believe that the Islamic Republic should change its foreign policy, and stop calling for the destruction of Israel. Iran investing 2-3% of its GDP (tens of billions per year) into funding a proxy-war against a country 2,000km away, that you had friendly relations with for decades, and has no desire for conflict with you, is an utterly insane foreign policy. To demonstrate the insanity of this: this is the equivalent of the United States spending $750 billion every year a war with Costa Rica. https://theconversation.com/iran-protests-2026-our-surveys-show-iranians-agree-more-on-regime-change-than-what-might-come-next-273198 https://theconversation.com/iran-protests-2026-our-surveys-s... https://gamaan.org/2025/11/05/12-day-war-survey-english/ https://gamaan.org/2025/11/05/12-day-war-survey-english/
- ElProlactin 5mo ago[flagged]
- tristanj 5mo agoYou've invented an argument I didn't make and then attacked it. That's a classic strawman. I never mentioned a Western-backed dictatorship, the Shah, or any conditions about Israel recognition. You invented that. My argument is simple: 60%+ of Iranians want regime change. 69% want the government to stop funding foreign proxy wars. The regime has a 12% approval rating. Iranians want something else. I cited polling data showing what Iranians want themselves. You can read the links I provided. The policies of the current regime are deeply unpopular. I believe that spending 2-3% of GDP (tens of billions of dollars per year) fighting an adversary 2,000km away that you had friendly relations with for decades & has no desire for conflict with you is an utterly insane foreign policy. This money is much better spent invested into the Iranian people. Building infrastructure, investing in the Iranian people, and building the Iranian economy. I did not advocate for a Western-backed dictatorship. The false choice you're presenting (Islamic republic vs Western puppet state) isn't the one Iranians are making. Iranians are not asking for a Western-backed dictatorship. Iranians are saying "stop spending our money blowing up the Middle East and end this pointless forever war with Israel". Iranians want a different foreign policy. You also accused me of not caring about Iranians, while also defending a regime that 88% of Iranians disapprove of. That's a strange way to show you care about Iranians.
- mieses 5mo ago[flagged]
- johnbarron 5mo agoGet your history right: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pVJ1Ci3MXs4 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pVJ1Ci3MXs4
- _DeadFred_ 5mo ago[flagged]
- cosmotic 5mo agoWrite a good article explaining why and maybe someone will post it to hackernews so we can discuss it as on-topic.
- lisp2240 5mo agoOr you could look up the dictionary definition of piracy and save everyone the trouble of explaining it to you like you’re a child
- johnbarron 5mo ago>> Modern day piracy. "Israel seizes Gaza aid ships in international waters" - https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-begins-intercepting-gaza-aid-ships-far-shores-army-radio-says-2026-04-29/ https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-begins-inte...
- karmakurtisaani 5mo agoIt still shocks me that there are people out there who think of this as watching sports: when my team does it, it's ok. When they do it, it's clear-cut wrong.
- cyanydeez 5mo agoso, whats americas hamhanded war called?
- Henchman21 5mo ago"The Distraction of the Moment"
- bot403 5mo agoOperation epic fail
- blevinstein 5mo ago"What do you mean by seizing the whole earth; because I do it with a petty ship, I am called a robber, while you who does it with a great fleet are styled emperor." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_and_Emperors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirates_and_Emperors
- rsynnott 5mo agoYes. It's all the rage these days: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/6/trump-says-us-could-charge-for-strait-of-hormuz-passage-amid-iran-war https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/4/6/trump-says-us-could-...
- _DeadFred_ 5mo ago[flagged]
- spwa4 5mo agoYes what they want to do is to tax other countries for using what is currently international waters and tax free, because they are militarily able to do so. That creates the problem that if Iran is allowed to do this, other countries will do this too (Indonesia will tax the Malacca strait). If that happens, a lot of countries will give very serious thought to attacking each other, not just in the middle east, and may decide they don't have a choice.
- tristanj 5mo agonit: The strait of Hormuz is not considered international waters. It's split between Iranian and Omani territorial waters. The strait itself is classified as a "transit passage" under Articles 37–44 of UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which guarantees ships the right of continuous and expeditious transit.
- dingaling 5mo agoIran has not ratified UNCLOS, and Oman has ratified it but then negated the implied right of transit passage in domestic law - they only recognise innocent passage. So the Strait has no clear legal status. In theory since Iran didn't ratify UNCLOS they can only claim 3nm of territorial water, but they claim 12nm anyhow. The USA insists on the right of transit passage, but itself isn't even a signatory to UNCLOS so that's hypocritical and has no basis. It's a mess that nobody wants to touch, so it's pretty much up for grabs by the most militant player.
- tristanj 5mo agoVery interesting, I wasn't aware of the full legal mess occurring at the strait. I found this detailed article [0], written by a law student, which discusses the Hormuz strait situation in the context of the past century of maritime law. [0] https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-strait-of-hormuz-and-the-limits-of-maritime-law https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/the-strait-of-hormuz-an...
- 5mo ago
- grebc 5mo agoThat website makes my eyes hurt.
- anakaine 5mo agoSeems like an excellent way to have your country routed around, and to have connections to your country cut by adversaries.
- guidopallemans 5mo agoAre there better sources to this than WioNews?
- planteur 5mo agohttps://www.iranintl.com/en/202605091805 https://www.iranintl.com/en/202605091805
- silexia 5mo agoVon Clausewitz thought it was a fool's errand to try to have a bloodless war. Who is Von Clausewitz? One of the most famous military strategists of all time who lived two centuries ago and spent his entire life at war. He pointed to many examples from his time of foolish populations and leaders who thought they could get away with "humane" versions of war, then were smashed by those who held no such compunctions. Americans and the west need to set aside the Disney and Netflix propaganda we are drowned in and recognize that when we fight, we need to go all in including troops on the ground.