Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

the meaningful change is that ships can move with volume through the strait again, no?

ships could register and pay the toll without having to take a stroll by iran's toll booth, so the volume of ships can go back up

 help



I'm likely misunderstanding what you're trying to say.

Can you elaborate on how, exactly, ships would be able to evade the toll booth, if they have to pay the toll in any case?

Because on the surface of it, it sounds to me like Iran is tolling the straits. Which is fine. The fee is small enough that I'm not opposed to paying it given the alternative. I understand why the world is willing to pay. Ok. I get it.

But it's hard for me to view this as a win for us. So I'm probably missing something? (Or at least, I hope I'm missing something.)


Change relative to before the war… where ships could just pass freely. So that's a loss.

Ships would have not been able to pass freely at a later point. That’s why Iran was building and buying these missiles. Folks look around and say wow they did so much damage - yea now imagine 2x-5x the number of missiles and launchers and by the way why not build a nuclear bomb to really make sure the rest of the world pays them for oil and energy.

Of course Iran wasn’t going to close the straight yet, they didn’t have the ability to inflict enough pain to deter US, Israeli, and/or Gulf State strikes to prevent them from closing it.


But everyone still pays them right? I mean that's the deal.

Why would I want to be paying them if you're, at the same time, telling me they don't have the muscle to make me pay?

Why is anyone paying Iran anything if we won? Someone's gonna need to explain that to me.


Where are you getting this idea that anyone is paying Iran? Genuinely confused about this. The only thing that has happened is that the US made Iran open the Straight up for two weeks in exchange for a pause in bombing. Nothing else has been agreed to. What source are you looking at that says anyone is paying them and that is has been agreed to?

------------

Via BBC:

-Complete cessation of the war on Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen

-Complete and permanent cessation of the war on Iran with no time limit

-Ending all conflicts in the region in their entirety

-Reopening the Strait of Hormuz

-Establishing a protocol and conditions to ensure freedom and security of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz

-Full payment of compensation for reconstruction costs to Iran (via reparations in the form of USD2 Million per ship Hormuz fee to be shared with Oman[?] for some reason? Again, I don't understand why anyone is paying anything to anyone else?)

-Full commitment to lifting sanctions on Iran

-Release of Iranian funds and frozen assets held by the United States (Also to be used as reparations to Iran. Again, why?)

-Iran fully commits to not seeking possession of any nuclear weapons (More on this below. And it's a doozy.)

-Immediate ceasefire takes effect on all fronts immediately upon approval of the above conditions

------------

OK. Now that is the english language version. The Farsi version, which is not being reported in the media, contains the following language as well: "acceptance of enrichment". (Which again, to me, seems like it would be a non-starter.) The idea being that enrichment is a dual use technology I assume?

The full version isn't being reported in English language media, but the Administration has it. When asked about what's in the plan, the White House will only confirm that "yes", it is 15 points and not just the 10 we know about. So that answer at least confirms there are additional points. Which, again, even if there weren't added points, the 10 we know about mean that everyone still pays Iran for passage through the straits.

I'm gonna be honest here, this seems totally unworkable. I'll even go further, and characterize this as Iran giving us a list of conditions for our surrender. This is not acceptable. This is materially worse than the status quo that existed 2 months ago.

Jeez. Just do nothing!

Doing nothing would have been better than this.


> Via BBC:

This isn't answering what I asked though. This is a statement of Iranian talking points but there is no agreement, the US hasn't "capitulated", nor have further talks taken place. Nobody has agreed to pay Iran anything. It doesn't matter what they say.

When you write things like this:

> Which, again, even if there weren't added points, the 10 we know about mean that everyone still pays Iran for passage through the straits.

It's like who cares what they wrote in these 10 points? They can demand the moon be made of cheese too. There will be no paying to use the Strait because like other points in these 10 demands the US and Gulf States won't agree to it.

When Iran wrote this did you like, think that they made these demands and then other countries are trying to comply with them or something? It doesn't matter what Iran writes. It only matters what the US says will happen as we see fit.

> Doing nothing would have been better than this.

Doing nothing means the following:

- Iran continues to stock pile missiles - Iran gets to a point where they have so many missiles that it becomes untenable for the US to stop them from buying and building more missiles because the destruction they would create for Gulf States and others that they hold hostage aren't worth the risk - Because Iran can't be stopped they would continue their pursuit of a nuclear weapon

Then Iran can enact whatever toll they want on the Straight and there's nothing anyone can do about it and we're right here where we are now except the US has pulled out of the region and Iran's crazy regime is making billions from Gulf States and the international community by taxing trade. That's why the US struck now instead of waiting - if we wait there's nothing we can reasonably do!

Sit down and think this through for yourself. Of course you can argue "Iran wouldn't do that" but you have to take them at their word and through their activities which indicate that is indeed what they planned on doing. Doing nothing means we have a much, much bigger problem down the line. Doing something now means we can likely prevent that bigger problem from occurring in the first place.


Maybe I should have been more clear? These are the points in the proposal that the Iranians/pakistanis sent to Trump that Trump said formed the basis for the ceasefire. Which it doesn’t. There is nothing there for us.

It doesn’t matter anymore in any case as Israel just launched a massive barrage. So there will be no ceasefire now anyway.


No worries, sorry if I wasn't clear as well. To your point, I didn't really think a ceasefire would last long anyway because neither side has any interest in changing their perspective and at the end of the day the US holds the upper hand and the folks they are "negotiating" with are, well, rather delusional.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: