It would set a precedent for other straits like Gibraltar and the Danish strait.
23
EquivalentOne2411 day ago
+8
Bab Al Mandeb and Malacca strait too
8
Tucancancan1 day ago
+10
Do it lol, block all the Russian ships from going in and out of lake NATO
10
TopNefariousness99431 day ago
People don't understand that they will pay that money, not European union not that company that transit Hormuz, they will pay at the end , everything will be more expensive, i love how they sustain what Iran does who is an ilegal thing and at the same time they complain about fuel price and gas prices.
0
[deleted]2 days ago
+26
[deleted]
26
TonyTheTerrible2 days ago
+22
They're gonna fund the f*** out of Hezbollah with those tolls
22
Simple_Map_18521 day ago
+8
Hezbollah will run out of living soldiers if they do.
8
Benur211 day ago
Don't they recruit more from local people?
0
_x_oOo_x_2 days ago
+14
Europe will rather pay the toll, and speed up the transition to renewables. There's no chance we'll get involved militarily, especially now it's been demonstrated even the US military is ineffective in forcing Iran to open the strait
14
neverast1 day ago
+7
I'd even assume the toll would be much cheapers than even short conflict
7
_x_oOo_x_1 day ago
+2
The toll is free. Strait closed ➛ higher oil&gas prices
Strait open ➛ lower prices + toll
2
weirdkittenNC1 day ago
+7
The price is the death of freedom of navigation as a principle of maritime law. That’s a substantial cost. The current US administration seems incapable of understanding anything more complex or longer term than a single transaction however.
7
neverast1 day ago
+4
Well more like military intervention> no toll but cost of intervention vs open strait + toll.
I mean USA and Israel should be ones paying toll on all ships as reparations for f****** up so massively
4
Diurnalnugget1 day ago
+2
That is not how free works. The price of oil will always be raised because of accounting for the toll, just because they come down from the strait being closed does not mean the toll doesn’t raise the price past what it could be otherwise.
2
NoDiamond34451 day ago
+1
This is the problem with what trump has done. It forces the issue now. And it's a big issue. Now we might have to go to war. And I hate that prospect but this cannot ride.
1
F4ntasticPants2 days ago
> Does this mean Europe will try to open the straight with military force?
Eventually they will have to. Nobody's going to pay these prices forever.
0
asdhjasdhlkjashdhgf1 day ago
+4
when trading thru the strait becomes an extortion scheme by toll, in particular if the collector is root of terror, would mean interventions preventing this get a real price tag too, like a budget to enforce it will not come to pass.
It would not lead to the question 'if', but 'who' joins applying methods of their choice to prevent it.
4
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
+3
Switching to renewables is cheaper and more of a lasting solution than going to war in the Middle East.
If the USA had invested all the trillions of dollars burned in its MENA wars (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iran...) into sustainable infrastructure projects, they would be vastly better off today.
Unfortunately, the warmongers who lead America do not care about making America great - only about stealing everything in reach.
The EU does not need to emulate America's self-destructive behavior.
3
AK_Panda1 day ago
-1
Tbf, if they are tolling the ships but are letting them through, then the oil prices will be coming down anyway.
-1
Zlimness1 day ago
+1
Not likely. But probably with diplomatic pressure.
Russia might want to join in on this as well. Unless they think everybody should do the same and get tolled up the ass by half of Northern Europe on their way to St. Petersburg.
1
Ultra_Metal1 day ago
No, Europe will write a strongly worded letter to Iran and then demonize the US for trying to open the strait by force (which is the only way it will be opened).
0
larve11 day ago
+2
Demonize? The US closed the strait with force. Europe might have to act in one way or another, but to rightfully blame the US for their *massive* and extremely poorly planned failure of a war is not to demonize the US.
It’s not even like the regime in Iran is liked in Europe. It’s that there clearly wasn’t a comprehensive plan or clear goal, and there wasn’t *any* efforts made to involve allies before any action was taken.
The fact that that some people can’t understand why US’ allies are mad is beyond me. The US literally created a huge economic crisis without warning and absolutely fucked everybody over.
It’s not about the regime, cause they f****** suck. It’s the no plan, f****** us all over and being an enormously hostile d*** at the same time. Remember Greenland?.. and you *still* think we’re “demonizing” the US, like they hadn’t bombed us to shit if we’d done half of what the US has done just this year.
2
Broken_Reality2 days ago
+15
Iran's control of the strait wasn't a problem till Trump and Israel attacked Iran. Prior to that they just let anyone use it. Sure it is a problem now that Iran has uncorked the genie and now they know they can pressure the world anytime they want to very effectively. They wouldn't have had concrete evidence of that without Trump and Israel.
So we all know who is to blame. Trump and Israel.
15
MajorMess1 day ago
-11
War wouldn’t have been a problem if they agreed to not build a nuclear bomb
-11
Broken_Reality1 day ago
+3
Oh who was it that cancelled the Iran Nuclear Deal that Obama made? That's right it was Trump during his first presidency. He also put sanctions on Iran so Iran had no incentive to NOT make a nuke anymore not that they did make a nuke they just enriched some uranium.
None of this would be happening if Trump didn't hate Obama so much. But Trump is a racist POS.
3
MajorMess1 day ago
+1
Do yourself a favor and google the criticisms of this deal. It really was bad. At least you should know about the sunset clauses that expired most of the restrictions after several years (15 years the longest one, so 2030), while about 50-100B $ of assets were available to Iran upfront, a major reason for middle eastern conflicts (Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Yemen - over a million people died in those wars!!!) because Iran was basically done financially at the point of the deal.
Iran DID violate the agreements after trumps exit in 2019. Other partners, china russia EU still upheld the agreement, so they were obligated to do so!
It also tells you about their intention to actually build the bomb
1
famine-1 day ago
+1
They did under the JCPOA agreement Obama made and didn't start enriching uranium again until the mango mussolini unilaterally pulled out of the deal.
>Rouhani, Theresa May, Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel, and European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini said the agreement was working well and that no one country could break it, reconfirming support for the deal. Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov confirmed that Iran was in compliance.
>
>In 2018, IAEA inspectors spent an aggregate of 3,000 calendar [person-]days in Iran, installing seals and collecting surveillance camera photos, measurement data, and documents for further analysis. In March 2018, IAEA Director Yukiya Amano said that the organization had verified that Iran was implementing its nuclear-related commitments.
1
MajorMess1 day ago
-1
Do yourself a favor and google the criticisms of this deal. It really was bad. At least you should know about the sunset clauses that expired most of the restrictions after several years (15 years the longest one, so 2030), while about 50-100B $ of assets were available to Iran upfront, a major reason for middle eastern conflicts from that time, because Iran was basically done financially at the point of the deal.
Edit: also, Iran DID violate the agreements after trumps exit in 2019. Other partners, china russia EU still upheld the agreement, so they were obligated to do so!
It also tells you about their intention to actually build the bomb
-1
above8k1 day ago
you got proof Iran were building nukes?
0
MajorMess1 day ago
+5
> The report by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency said that as of June 13, Iran had 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium enriched up to 60%, an increase of 32.3 kilograms (71.2 pounds) since the IAEA’s last report in May.
Source:
https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-weapons-grade-uranium-c3ae6a8aae96d54355df73842916a324
There is debate over wether Iran was close to finishing the bomb or not, but not that they were building the bomb at all.
During the last peace negotiations Iran refused a deal with trump specifically because they insisted on having nuclear enrichment rights, but rejected trumps offer to support civil nuclear reactors under their supervision. The failure of those negotiations ultimately let to the current war.
https://web.archive.org/web/20260215195721/https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/03/us/politics/iran-nuclear-deal-proposal.html
5
above8k1 day ago
-3
so the answer is NO proof.
-3
MajorMess1 day ago
+4
Huh? The IAEA literally says they have 440kg uranium?! The iaea is the international corpus created to watch over this issue! Why do you think they enrich it? They gonna stop at 89% and be all like “haha just kidding. lulz” ??!
4
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+2
Is uranium = atomic bomb?
2
MajorMess1 day ago
Are you playing dumb?
Explain to me what the extremist regime would want to do with 90% enriched uranium.
0
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
What does Israel, Pakistan, France, India, China, Russia, Japan and US do with enriched uranium.
Some do nukes. Some do power.
All these nations have enriched uranium.
1
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+42
How about US foreign policy? Isn’t that a slippery slope?
42
Legitimate-Tip-21492 days ago
+21
Absolutely, and the US made this problem, but it does impact everyone so now sane people need to solve it.
21
shurikensamurai2 days ago
So let me get this straight… US foreign policy causes issues which the rest of the world has to band together to solve? How about we shun the US and their warmongering allies?
0
twitterfluechtling2 days ago
+16
If a bully takes a dump on your doorstep, and he's stronger than you, as unfair as it is, you'll probably have to deal with it and not just leave it there.
(In international politics there is no police or higher authority you can appeal to to get the bully to clean up.)
16
shurikensamurai2 days ago
-14
Disagree.
-14
balooaroos1 day ago
+7
If stepping in shit and tracking it into your house everyday is "winning" to you then more power to ya. We're not here to kink shame.
7
shurikensamurai1 day ago
If letting people take continuous shit on your doorstep turning you on please tell me your address so I can help you get off.
0
twitterfluechtling1 day ago
+1
So you are a state with your own military stronger than anyone else, making it impractical to stop you? Wow. I didn't know.
1
shurikensamurai1 day ago
No I am giving an answer to their stupid analogy. Iran has done whatever it can to exert their military might ( as small as it can be compared to the US) to their proverbial shitting on the doorstep.
He’s mad that they shouldn’t do that. What a shit analogy that is.
0
Diurnalnugget1 day ago
+3
Disagree with what? The factual idea that the US is very hard to shake off due to being an extreme economic and military force? Shunning Russia alone put Europe into a bind trying to add the US on top of that will really cause problems. Then what should they ice out china too due to their egregious human rights violations and poor international conduct? (they use military to bully smaller nations over fishing rights)
All the biggest powers of the world are dicks. But you still gotta eat something if you want to live.
3
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
And I disagree with that notion. It’s this specific kind of making peace with the “lesser of two evils” type bullshit is why we are here in the first place.
1
Diurnalnugget1 day ago
+1
Okay so you do a lot of disagreeing but you’re not offering a choice of another realistic approach to dealing with all the powerful bad nations. Europe alone isn’t going to cut it against china and the US when they can’t even get all their own ducks in a line and are only just now starting to not rely on the US to protect them.
1
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
Realistic according to whom? You?
The bullies become bullies because people do not stand up against them. Europe continues to bend to the will of big actors. Trump continues to threaten to get out of NATO.
Be non aligned to either power the US Israel military industrial complex and the Russo-China nexus.
1
Theemuts2 days ago
+9
Well, for one, solutions should be rooted in reality.
9
shurikensamurai2 days ago
Well the world is guilty of lack of imagination. That’s true.
0
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
+4
So, our first step to solving this economic crisis should be... to shun our number one trading partner.
Some of us have to live in the world that *is*, not the one we wish for.
De-coupling from America is already happening, but the Hormuz crisis has to be solved more immediately.
4
shurikensamurai1 day ago
Yeah and that’s where I disagree. We ignore the elephant in the room because we are worried that the dog diarrhoea’d on the carpet. Let me clean that dogshit up.
No one is mentioning the mounds of elephant shit that has dried over the last few years.
0
Legitimate-Tip-21492 days ago
+10
Yes, why are you acting surprised by this, did you miss the last 80 years of world history? The US fucks things up, that's what they do, unfortunately the things they f*** up are on the planet we all live on so we then have to deal with it.
10
shurikensamurai2 days ago
It’s not. My frustration is with people and governments who continue to accept US supremacy.
0
Legitimate-Tip-21492 days ago
-2
Upside, that seems to be changing now.
-2
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+3
That’s a bit of an upside yes.
3
Legitimate-Tip-21492 days ago
-3
Did you agree and then downvote that? XD
-3
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+1
I didn’t downvote you at all.
1
Legitimate-Tip-21492 days ago
-5
Fair enough! Both happened at basically the same time so I kinda assumed it was you and thought that was funny if so.
-5
CompetitiveOwl891 day ago
I’m sure the world would be a much better place with Russia or China calling the shots /s
0
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
I think the world certainly doesn’t need anyone “calling the shots”. Not China. Not Russia. And certainly not the US.
1
spiral88881 day ago
+1
What kind of "shunning" you're after here?
Yes, the US and Israel caused the strait to be closed during the bombing. But now the bombing has stopped. We can't treat Iran as someone who doesn't have any agency themselves. They do and if they block the strait to the countries that had nothing to do with the bombing, then they are the ones that should face "shunning". If not, then why not? How would shunning the US solve the problem of no oil flowing out of the Gulf?
1
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
So your take is, I can come into your house. Take a shit on the carpet. Piss on your plants. You are mad and making a noise.
But because I have now exited the house, you should shut up?
1
ImpossibleAd66281 day ago
+2
More like a trough filled with diarrhea
2
EquivalentOne2412 days ago
+6
So, because of US attack on Iran, the rest of the world should suffer at the hands of the Iranian terrorist regime?
6
shurikensamurai2 days ago
-11
The world suffers because of the US terrorist actions. Iran has not hurt anyone.
-11
EquivalentOne2412 days ago
+20
Oh yes, IRGC, Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis and Iraqi Shia militias are noble charitable institutions that spread love and prosperity in the region.
20
shurikensamurai2 days ago
-4
All classified by US which refuses to use the same barometer to measure own and Israeli aggression
-4
EquivalentOne2411 day ago
+8
>All classified by US which refuses to use the same barometer to measure own and Israeli aggression
Also, the EU and most countries in the world.
8
shurikensamurai1 day ago
-3
Yeah I think that’s the point of this post. Thanks for competing the circle shitforbrains.
-3
Diurnalnugget1 day ago
+5
I mean you can just read news reports these are terrorist groups that intentionally kill citizens and spread terror, hamas kidnapped citizens and killed them, irgc killed protesters, houthis have attacked tons of civilians. Iraq direct funding of undeniable terrorist groups is very real. You can argue the US are also being terrorists using the same margins but arguing Iran has never hurt anyone is lunacy when they’ve shot and oppressed their own people.
5
shurikensamurai1 day ago
I am saying I refuse to follow a double standard here. If you call Iran terrorists for doing all of the above the US Israel nexus has done that and worse.
So cornering Iran for doing that is a hypocritical take which I will never support.
0
CryHavocAU1 day ago
+7
More than one thing can be true. Israel can be the perpetrator of horrible war crimes and Iran can be a supporter of terrorism.
7
shurikensamurai1 day ago
-2
I agree. This is why I am not happy with one sided labelling of Iran.
-2
SneakyBadAss2 days ago
+9
Are you taking the piss or did you just opened internet for the first time in your life
9
shurikensamurai2 days ago
-4
Nope. I refuse to classify Iran as terrorist if US and its allies are responsible for more civilian deaths in the contemporary history.
-4
EatAssAndFartFast2 days ago
+10
Ukrainian power generators tell a different story
10
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+4
I do not support the Russian invasion of Ukraine either. But Iran supplying weapons to Russia ain’t the same scale as the amount of destabilisation that US has done for a long time. And getting away with it.
4
CryHavocAU2 days ago
+7
Seriously… are you writing that with a straight face?
7
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+2
Yep.
2
Sens1r2 days ago
+3
Is this supposed to be some stupid gotcha? Kallas has nothing to do with US foreign policy.
3
to_glory_we_steer2 days ago
US foreign policy is a reflection of the internal misconceptions, foreign influence and institutional erosion within the US.
Don't expect the external to be resolved until America with it's robber barons, corruption, extremist interest groups and malign external partners is resolved.
0
shurikensamurai2 days ago
+3
US is perhaps the most corrupt country in the world
3
Diurnalnugget1 day ago
+3
Okay that’s just untrue. Vietnam, South Africa, Venezuela, Somalia, technically El Salvador, and others are way more corrupt. The US just has way bigger guns and technically a lot of what’s happened is internally legal since it comes from the president and congress doesn’t really complain, politicians also aren’t liable to be assassinated if they do complain.
3
shurikensamurai1 day ago
+1
I don’t know of a single country that can have the president and their sons indulge in open market manipulation and threats and enriching themselves but still pretend to be a country.
Wait I do recall Saddam Hussein and his Sons doing something similar ….
1
BasicMatter73392 days ago
+11
Too bad we can't change geography.
We should invest in new pipelines across Saudi Arabia, lines that can handle not only Saudi production, but also the other arab state production
True it doesn't really change anything, 25% of world oil supply still being in the hands of a single country, but Saudi Arabia is alot more stable than Iran
11
Broken_Reality2 days ago
+5
It's not just oil that needs to go through the strait. It is LPG, fertiliser, helium and other essential things that are by products of the oil industry. So we need the strait open. If it stays closed for too long oil will be the least of our worries as the helium supply will run out and then no more computer chips and we use those in everything.
5
_x_oOo_x_2 days ago
+6
Iran's missiles can reach the pipelines (in fact already have), like they can reach the strait. While it's a lot riskier for them as it counts as an attack on another country, that doesn't seem to have held them back..
6
BasicMatter73391 day ago
+1
Pipelines are easier to fix than a sunken cargoship polluting the ocean.
1
Erdalion2 days ago
The same Saudi Arabia that butchers journalists and sport-washes everything? I'm pressing X to Doubt.
0
AK_Panda1 day ago
+3
If you want to source all your oil from ethical producers you ain't getting a drop lol.
3
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
You are right.
Which is why we should be investing in renewable infrastructure, rather than building up the next country we "have to" go to war with 10 years down the road.
0
BasicMatter73391 day ago
Renewables just simply can't move ships, with current technology that is. Our world is reliant on ships and sea travel.
Nuclear is too dangerous and expensive
solar is not efficient enough yet
Batteries are too heavy and not good enough to last for month long trips
Biofuels help, but they don't really fix the pollution problem. Also biofuels are expensive compared to heavy oil.
Wind works, but its too slow.
0
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
+1
Maritime transport is only responsible for 5% of fossil fuel use. We can source that from somewhere other than the Middle East.
Meanwhile, a huge amount of the transport sector can be electrified.
1
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
We should stop investing in fossil fuel infrastructure.
This is f****** madness.
We have other options in the 21st century.
F*** fossil fuel, and f*** supporting the dictators who profit from it.
0
BasicMatter73391 day ago
The world economy is still completely reliant on fossil fuels and will be reliant for at least the end of this century
We have made great progress and we will hopefully continue to do so
but fossil fuels are so integral to everything that detaching from them globally is impossible to do in a short time
0
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
The world economy is reliant on whatever we invest in.
0
BasicMatter73391 day ago
+1
Yeah sure, investments dont move things from A to B. Ships do that. Guess what, they rely on fossil fuels and they dont have a safe, c**** and fast alternative
1
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
Ships only account for 5% of fossil fuel use.
Even if you were right about there being no option but fossil fuels for ships (which, you are not correct...), maritime traffic is only a subscetor of global logistics.
We can electrify every other type of transport, and source oil from elsewhere than the ME.
0
BasicMatter73391 day ago
+1
>about there being no option but fossil fuels for ships
As of yet there are none that are as c****, safe and efficient as fossil fuels.
Wind? Too slow.
Nuclear? Too dangerous and expensive
Biofuel? Expensive as hell
Solar? Not efficient enough
Batteries? Too heavy
>We can electrify every other type of transport, and source oil from elsewhere than the ME.
Sure we could but without fossil fuels we can't.
1
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
Luckily for us, ships only account for 5% of fossil fuel use, and 80% of the world's fossil fuels don't rely on transit though the Hormuz Strait.
"Ships need oil" does not hold water as an arguement against electrification of almost everything else.
0
BasicMatter73391 day ago
+1
Electrification is not some magic cure for every problem. That electry needs to be sourced from somewhere, those minerals need to be mined somewhere, those facilities need to be built somewhere etc
Environmental damage stays the same. We here in the west just happily twiddle our thumbs thinking were now environmentally responsible when in reality all the emmissions are just outsourced into the producer countries in africa where little kids are mining cobalt at gunpoint so everyone here can get an environmentally clean shiny electric car.
Instead of electrifying everything we should instead invest in research of fuel alternatives that we can source renewably. That way we wouldnt have to uproot and overhaul the infrastructure of the entire goddamn planet.
1
Sweet_Concept22111 day ago
-1
Dude, please.
Smarten up.
Electrification is not magic.
It is science and engineering.
We HAVE invested in research for alternatives to fossil fuels.
We found the best candidates.
They are: Wind, solar, and some nuclear energy where it makes sense.
All of the logistic and environmental conerns you listed apply to fossil fuels - but with far more severe and lasting environmental harm.
-1
Loose_Skill66412 days ago
+5
next the USA wants to tax ships entering the gulf of trump
5
SP15702 days ago
+2
Donald will soon figure out he can tax the oxygen we breathe in exchange for not nuking all of us.
2
UbiSububi81 day ago
+2
I’m a big fan of “whoever broke it bought it”
2
RealRroseSelavy2 days ago
+4
Wherever these goddamn yanks poke their greedy noses problems arise where none were before. I'm so done with this US c***!
4
balooaroos1 day ago
-2
Ah yes, the middle east, the place that had no problems before this
-2
AnusRaidingParty1 day ago
+4
Last i checked the strait was open in February? What happened? Oh thats right US actions have led us here.
4
balooaroos1 day ago
And if the comment had said "the strait was open before" nobody would be disagreeing with it, but is that what it says? No.
0
SeltsamerNordlander2 days ago
+1
It is an absolute embarrassment being both European and Estonian while this clown is representing both
1
AK_Panda1 day ago
+3
Is there some history that makes her particularly ill equipped for the job?
3
Doctor_Saved1 day ago
+1
Don't these countries have navies to remedy these type of scenario?
1
Silver_Middle_72402 days ago
-1
EU slowly waking up
-1
SneakyBadAss2 days ago
+3
Don't bunch an entire EU into this; this is Western Europe suicidal empathy. Even some Northerners are raising eyebrows at their behaviour.
3
EatAssAndFartFast2 days ago
They won't, they were always Ignorant, US was warning them about Ukraine war and Macron was saying I talked to PUTIN and he said he won't attack Ukraine. Maybe the orange guy is right and NATO is a paper tiger without the US
0
[deleted]2 days ago
-6
[deleted]
-6
blissellen2 days ago
+6
There was no problem until Israel and America attacked Iran.... just saying
6
[deleted]2 days ago
-1
[deleted]
-1
Broken_Reality2 days ago
+3
Except this war with Iran has strengthened Russia.... The oil trade embargo on Russia has been lifted / relaxed so now Russia has had a flood of income it wasn't going to get till the USA and Israel fucked everything up for everyone.
Tell me how attacking Iran has hurt Russia and made Europe and Ukraine stronger?
3
AK_Panda1 day ago
+1
Iran provided Shahed drones, but doesn't Russia produce them domestically now? I suspect Iran providing less support to Russia won't have much of an impact.
We also now see the US claiming shortages of patriot interceptors due to the sudden spike in usage and demand from this war, which will quite likely be used by Trump and Vance as an excuse to reduce supply of those to Ukraine.
Currently looks like Iran could come out of this better off geopolitically than before it started. If it can toll the strait, it might even come out better off economically. In addition, it now has battle tested it's own tactics and technology and can begin adjusting strategies accordingly.
The only way this would have panned out differently would be if a full scale invasion took place. Given thay the two primary aggressors didn't seem to have any interest in putting an invasion force on the ground, why should anyone else have chosen to do so?
1
TheRealAfinda1 day ago
+1
The harm Israel and the US are causing isn't a threat limited to the EU but world wide in regards to Economy and Security (Israel and US cannot be trusted and thus pose a real Security risk). Funny enough Russia benefits in the meantime from this.
So sanctions against US and Israel would be the first thing to do, while strengthening defense capabilities (especially Anti Air) at the same time.
It's the logical thing to do, really, given that the actions of the US and Israel are what directly caused the worsening for everybody in regards to the strait.
1
_x_oOo_x_2 days ago
+1
Russia borders several European countries. Iran is far away. Yes, they've been supporting Russia
But think about it this way, if Russia is defeated, Iran won't be a direct threat to Europe. If Iran is defeated, Russia will continue to be a threat... In this sense, Iran doesn't matter much
1
Silver_Middle_72401 day ago
+2
Iran is Russia's gateway to the Middle East, and how it controls European energy access.
2
Erdalion2 days ago
+1
Russia's been making their own version of Shahed, the Geran, for years now. That's a non-argument.
Getting dragged in another war (for no real reason, if I may add) while directly supporting one already is not a winning move.
1
spookendeklopgeesten1 day ago
-2
This is Trumps problem. FU
-2
EatAssAndFartFast2 days ago
-1
EU will impose a bunch of useless sanctions on Iran as retaliation cause they don't have the balls to defend their rights
-1
Over-Giraffe99051 day ago
At this point Iran deserves the toll revenue to rebuild their country after a unprovoked attack, and the proposed fee off roughly 1 dollar per barrel is far from unreasonable.
0
Felonphantom2 days ago
-11
Everytime Kaja opens her mouth she says something stupid. Iran can control the strait because that is it's territorial waters. They can apply the toll. This is another classis case of Western powers bullying the little guy. As for this bimbo, she should just stop talking.
-11
Filias91 day ago
+9
This absolute BS. Your "little guy" is bullying whole Middle East for decades. Just because Trump is bad, doesn't mean that Iran is good guy.
But yeah, let's close all the straits and sunk all the ships who don't pay the toll. From Gibraltar to Malacca.
9
martindines2 days ago
+19
Iran’s territory doesn’t extend the entire width of the strait. They claim about half, the other half belongs to Oman.
Perhaps you should stop talking
19
Felonphantom2 days ago
+1
Yes it belongs to Oman and that is why Iran is saying it is with Oman they will decide.
1
Sens1r2 days ago
+6
So first of all there's different territories on each side of the strait, this is not the Bosphorus. Do you see the same thing happening at Dover or Gibraltar?
6
RealRroseSelavy2 days ago
+4
uninformed and offensive is a great combi of a beautiful mind
4
Annunakh1 day ago
Well, how about USA stop invading sovereign countries? I'm glad Iran fighting back and doing it right, it's been 50 years of unchallenged bullying from states, Vietnam lessons had to be repeated.
0
Typingdude32 days ago
-6
EU slowly realizing the terrorist regime in Iran that uses kid soldiers really doesn’t care about Europe. Maybe she will even realize Hamas, Houthis and Hezbollah don’t spread democracy and world peace. Maybe she will even think about sending a strongly worded letter to Iran about opening the strait. Nah that‘s too far, baby steps.
-6
TheHumanGnomeProject2 days ago
-18
It ain't no goddamn problem. It just means you pay the toll. Should've checked the US 20 years ago.
-18
balooaroos2 days ago
+12
It very much is a problem to threaten death on sailors if they don't pay a "toll" to pass through waters that are in no way your territory. Look at a map. We're not talking about passing *through* Iran. This isn't like the Panama canal, they're attacking anything their missiles can reach, ships off the coast of other countries. It's literally piracy.
12
Loose_Skill66412 days ago
if you haven't yet realised piracy has been back for at least 10-20 years now and it's going to get worse, the USA doesn't have a navy to police the oceans anymore it's not 1950
0
balooaroos2 days ago
+6
I'm aware piracy is a thing. (Look at me. I'm the captain now.)
I'm just also aware it's a *bad* thing. The comment trying to paint it as good and fine is wrong and ignorant.
6
TheHumanGnomeProject2 days ago
-5
It isn't. The waterway is only like 40 km wide. The US' territorial waters extend a couple hundred MILES off their coast. So for Iran to say "you being at MAX 40 kms off our water, you have to register and pay a toll" is WAY less of an imposition than, say, the US bombing an all girl primary school killing nearly 200. BUT, they've offered to regulate the Strait WITH Oman. And the Strait splits them...they control it. It's their territory. So if they toll it together... Would you say the same if ships wanted access to the Strait of Juan de Fuca and the US and Canada jointly said "bros, pay us!"?
-5
balooaroos2 days ago
+5
You're making an imaginary situation to argue about. Oman and UAE aren't doing this, Iran is alone while *attacking* UAE and Oman. So the US/Canada analogy you make is false. The real analogy would be Canada attacking US ships in the Juan de Fuca Strait. Acting like they own the whole thing and threatening death unless the US pays protection money to not be shot at while sailing along their own coast.
5
TheHumanGnomeProject2 days ago
-3
Iran is sharing the Strait with Oman. That was in their own proposal. And they're being fired upon! That's what precipitated the whole situation. It's like the US firing upon Canada and them going well since y'all need this f****** Strait, pay us to fix all this havoc you created.
-3
Crushed-Giant2 days ago
-5
Does anyone know if she was at some point a CIA agent?
-5
Menethea2 days ago
-8
Stunning and bold is everybody in Europe‘s problem
145 Comments