ListNook

Gentle_Snail Apr 2, 2026 +242

Oman wants it open though

242

ScubaAlek Apr 2, 2026 +82

They must be programmers. IF true AND false == false

82

EnchantedSalvia Apr 2, 2026 +29

XOR that shit.

29

Affectionate_Oven_77 Apr 2, 2026 +35

If Iran and Oman both want it open, you want it closed?

35

JD3982 Apr 2, 2026 +18

It would provide the most chaos.

18

spootypuff Apr 2, 2026 +2

XNOR that shit.

2

reluctant_deity Apr 3, 2026 +3

If Iran and Oman both want it closed, it's open?

3

DB-CooperOnTheBeach Apr 2, 2026 +4

if I had money to award you right now I would. Thanks for the Thursday morning laughs

4

Farnsworthson Apr 2, 2026 +1

If shit is making you XOR, try Preparation Hormuz.

1

rookie-mistake Apr 2, 2026 +3

yeah its an AND gate not an OR one well, more of an AND strait, really

3

Dark_World_Blues Apr 2, 2026 +1

With Iran's regime: IRGC's true == world's true. IRGC's false == world's false

1

SilveryDeath Apr 2, 2026 +42

> Araghchi framed the Strait of Hormuz - through which about 20 percent of global oil and gas flows in peacetime - as a sovereign matter for Iran and Oman after the war. He insisted the waterway remains selectively open. > “Only for the ships of those who are at war with us, this strait is closed,” he said. > He added that vessels from India, Pakistan, Türkiye and China have continued transit, while others have stayed away due to security risks and rising insurance costs. It seems more he is saying Oman is the only one with any say besides Iran themselves and that anyone else's opinion doesn't matter.

42

jjpamsterdam Apr 2, 2026 +36

This is an interesting idea. Imagine Spain and Morocco decided that the Gibraltar Straits were now a sovereign matter and started charging admission fees. Or Malaysia and Indonesia start charging for the use of the Melaka Straits.

36

KriosXVII Apr 2, 2026 +39

I'd imagine Spain and Morocco might do something like this, if the US and Israel decided to start bombing them.

39

foghillgal Apr 2, 2026 +1

Gilbraltar is narrow but not very long. So, easier to retake I guess. But in modern times, it\`s a moot point as drones and the like make immediate area control less effective than before.

1

NatureBoyJ1 Apr 2, 2026 -5

Would Spain declare war on the US for forty years, too?

-5

Commercial-Balance-7 Apr 2, 2026 +3

If the US and UK overthrew the democratically elected government of Spain for a British oil company? And installed a brutal dictatorship and trained their secret police in torture and political repression methods? Sure. Now where has that happen before?

3

KriosXVII Apr 2, 2026 +21

If the US bombed their middle schools, yeah?

21

TheLeapIsALie Apr 2, 2026 +2

That was after the 40 years. Totally inexcusable, but just to be clear on timeline.

2

KriosXVII Apr 2, 2026 +12

Okay well then, scroll back a few years past that and check why Iran's regime started saying "death to the US" for 40 years... Do you think they just woke up in Teheran in 1979 and decided that they hated a country halfway around the world, for no reason?

12

TheLeapIsALie Apr 2, 2026 +1

Oh for sure. They have plenty of reason to hate the British, and then the American push for the Shah that came after- and the brutal regime he held. I’m just saying let’s line up the timeline of why they hate us and be specific.

1

abenevolentmouse Apr 2, 2026

Bro you’re using critical thinking, that type of shit don’t belong in the states

0

KriosXVII Apr 2, 2026 +8

That's my secret, I'm not in the states

8

JD3982 Apr 2, 2026 +16

I think that could happen if a foreign superpower repeatedly bombed the c*** out of Morrocco, and murdered the country's leader and three steps of inherited power.

16

yxhuvud Apr 2, 2026 +2

There are historical examples of this, like the sound toll in the Baltic sea. I believe it would be against the law of the seas, but the relevancy of that when it isn't ratified by Iran is dubious.

2

nuadarstark Apr 2, 2026 +4

Well I think that's kinda illegal as far as international law goes.

4

Cool_Peace Apr 2, 2026 +3

Just as legal as iran and Oman doing it. I'd point out that both scenarios go against a UN agreement both signed though.

3

Coldbee Apr 2, 2026 +14

International law died decades ago when superpowers figured out they could just not give a f*** about them when it suited them

14

btstfn Apr 2, 2026 +9

That was always the case. International law isn't any more dead now than it was decades ago. The sad fact is that through all of human history we never **really** progressed past might makes right.

9

Temper03 Apr 2, 2026 +1

Is that not already what NATO member Turkey does? I remember they declared the straits closed to combatants during the Ukraine war

1

nuadarstark Apr 2, 2026 +3

Well that I think is kinda different and it didn't disallow anyone from crossing the Bosporus, not even all combatants, just the ones that aren't formally "at home" in the Black Sea.

3

SilveryDeath Apr 2, 2026 +5

There is precedent they can cite since Egypt and Panama make money off of transit fees via the Suez and Panama Canals. Doubt anyone will be happy, but they weren't charging anything before the US and Israel starting bombing them.

5

jovin49 Apr 2, 2026 +34

Canals require upkeep and maintenance, so fees to use them are more justifiable.

34

milespoints Apr 2, 2026 +22

Canals are man made infrastructure though. Sure if you want someone to use your tunnel that you dug into a mountain on your own private property then you can charge people for it.

22

Nukes-For-Nimbys Apr 2, 2026 +4

Canals have always been different. The relevant simlar examples are the Turkish Straights and the Danish straights.

4

Glass-Cabinet-249 Apr 3, 2026 +1

Britain slides into the chat from Gibraltar.

1

jjpamsterdam Apr 3, 2026 +1

Gibraltar's territorial waters do not touch Morocco's. While in practice the UK might have the capability to disrupt shipping via Gibraltar, it lacks the standing that this (insane) line of argument of Iran presupposes.

1

Glass-Cabinet-249 Apr 3, 2026 +1

I'm not so certain the UK would care about that technicality, it would sail a carrier group through the strait and park in The Rock before moving on to demonstrate freedom of manoeuvre.

1

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 -2

[deleted]

-2

Cool_Peace Apr 2, 2026 +2

Except that it absolutely is territorial waters controlled by spain and Morocco. Canada can make bank once the northwest passage is more open.

2

NicolasCageFan492 Apr 2, 2026 +67

Don’t bring Oman into this, you’ll get them bombed!

67

Negative-Start9414 Apr 2, 2026 +15

Oh man..🤧

15

EpilepticPuberty Apr 2, 2026 +1

It's already happened.

1

jaymemaurice Apr 2, 2026 +1

Oman is like the Canada of the Middle East. A truly awesome country.

1

Creatret Apr 2, 2026 +5

If you read into Canada's history with native population and environmental actions, it'll get an extra awesomeness.

5

Electronic-Radio-383 Apr 2, 2026 -1

Canada is a mistranslation when Brits wanted to know the name of the country and the natives thought they wanted to talk to the Chief right? Canada is the Chief.

-1

rookie-mistake Apr 2, 2026 +7

Kanata meant village afaik, not chief. That's what we're taught in school, at least

7

jaymemaurice Apr 2, 2026 +1

I thought it was one of those heritage moment commercials we were all programmed with. Alongside the "Don't you put it in your mouth" and the house hippo. Americans don't have this programming.

1

JBNothingWrong Apr 2, 2026 +3

Takes two to tango

3

stimulatedbymaple Apr 2, 2026 +2

Then Thunderdome must commence

2

IAmLegallyRetarded_ Apr 2, 2026 +2

Oman does not either export or import stuff through that Strait. I don't think they give a shit.

2

Efficient_Resist_287 Apr 2, 2026 +8

Oman will not refuse the cash which is about to fall into their pockets.

8

CaptainCanuck93 Apr 2, 2026 +3

Sure, but I suspect Oman is 1000% happy with the scenario where they split a 2 million/ship toll with Iran That's a pot of about $100 billion for them to split, every year, forever For reference, Oman's current annual GDP is about $100 billion per year. So perhaps a +50% increase in GDP for nothing other than annoying the west

3

mossmaal Apr 3, 2026 +1

> That's a pot of about $100 billion for them to split, every year, forever It’s also creating an incentive of billions annually for other countries to want to destabilise your country and bring about regime change to remove the fees. It’s rarely a smart idea for small nations like Oman to create incentives like that.

1

LowEmergencyCaptain Apr 2, 2026 +1

Same with USA

1

King_Roberts_Bastard Apr 2, 2026 +27

Oman catching strays

27

Usermena Apr 2, 2026 +2

Oman is good at being cool.

2

ecko9975 Apr 2, 2026 +24

Trump wants the price of oil to be high. So when he starts selling the world “his” Venezuelan oil, he’ll be racking in the cash.

24

IntelArtiGen Apr 2, 2026 +37

> “Only for the ships of those who are at war with us, this strait is closed,” he said. He thinks 90% of countries are at war with Iran? He's attacking ships going from gulf countries to Asia, but it's Israel and the US bombing them. Because they don't seem to be able or willing to target the US/Israel they instead target ships transporting fuel to Sri Lanka, Philippines, Thailand, Japan etc. Because somehow if asian people suffer enough from this, the US will stop bombing them? They're even making americans richer because they export oil and gas. I'll think that both may want the war to continue at the expense of many other countries.

37

melkipersr Apr 2, 2026 +22

They’re making *some* Americans richer.

22

Heavy_Secret_203 Apr 2, 2026 +16

That's called taking hostages. Technically, they aren't at war, but that isn't for the hostage to decide.

16

milespoints Apr 2, 2026 +16

American here. Not richer. Not that if the war made Americans richer it would make it ok. Still bad

16

AutoRot Apr 2, 2026 +8

It’s a big club and you ain’t in it.

8

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +12

They target Israel every day... but Israel isn't in the Gulf so this just doesn't apply to shipping. All ports across the gulf are enemies, because they are US allies. So the only "friendly" ships are those going from an Iranian port to a neutral port. I assume IR reserve the right to make any exceptions they want. That said... Tehrans's statement is false. *Everyone* gets to decide whether or not civilian ships can cross the straight... or navigate the gulf in general. IR don't have any special geographic or thechnological advantage here. All they have is a unique willingness to fire on civilian ships. If anyone else develops such a willingness... they also get to decide too. It's not *that* hard to harass civ navigation. Samoa could show up and have a go.... if they really wanted to.

12

Intrepid_Egg_7722 Apr 2, 2026 +20

>IR don't have any special geographic or thechnological advantage here. All they have is a unique willingness to fire on civilian ships. This is what annoys me most about the dumbass Listnook echo chamber of glazing Iran for its supposed brilliant 4d chess move of closing the strait by threatening to bomb any ships going through it. The US Navy could shut down most of global shipping for awhile (basically until they ran out of fuel) by choking off the Suez Canal, the Panama Canal, the Island Chains, etc through repeatedly bombing ships that try to use those waterways. Then the US could demand massive payments to stop doing that, same as what Iran is doing in Hormuz. But that wouldn't be some kind of strategically brilliant move by the US...it would just be state terrorism. Just like what Iran is doing is just state terrorism. Oman, the UAE, or Saudi Arabia could just as easily decide tomorrow that it will also drone strike anyone moving through the Strait from their territories unless people pay them a toll. F***, the US could do that too from its aircraft carriers. Iran hasn't settled on some unique capability; they're just cunts. Iran is the one violating international law by choking off transits through the strait. When kids start starving in at-risk parts of the world because fertilizer shipments are held up, that won't be a natural outcome of Iran being attacked that the IRGC had no choice but to do...that will be an intentional decision by the Iranian regime. The US attacking Iran doesn't absolve the Iranian regime of responsibility for their actions.

20

Efficient_Basis_2139 Apr 2, 2026 +6

You can't really say this on Listnook, who not two days ago decided to defend Iran's four decades of using child soldiers because "Trump bad"

6

diwakark86 Apr 2, 2026 +2

Iran was not choking the strait before the US started bombing them. They are holding the people who depend on shipping through strait hostage as leverage for negotiation. You are railing against strawmen of people 'glazing' Iran. Nobody did that, they were just pointing out the obvious point of leverage the regime would predictably use and calling the US morons for not having a plan to counter that leverage.

2

Efficient_Basis_2139 Apr 2, 2026 +5

The part being controlled isn't in Iranian territorial waters, so technically all they are doing is piracy at a large scale

5

M1ghty2 Apr 2, 2026 -10

You do realize that the shipping channels pass through Iran’s territorial waters?

-10

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +13

So? If the laws of the sea is respected... everyone gets passage, including even warships. If not... it's a question of being able and willing to shoot ships.

13

Specialist-Garbage94 Apr 2, 2026 -3

We enforces these laws of the sea? Aquaman?

-3

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +4

Good question. As I said.. If the law is respected, then A. If not, then B. As it stands, IR's unique power over the straight depends on uts unique willingness to shoot civ ships. Not technology, geography or legal rights. It's no different to the Houthi position, except that Hormuz can't be avoided. Others may join this club at some point. It may not even be limited to narrow straights. Maybe someone will decide to close the Pacific. If you can get a drone to some ships... and withstand whatever wrath comes your way, you can deny whatever navigation you want.

4

Specialist-Garbage94 Apr 2, 2026 -2

Which they are doing this. They don’t care about the US attacks anymore but they aren’t gonna let a US ship through the strait. We fucked up. Our idiot leader decided to f*** the world’s energy prices for the next few years at least. I’m hoping impeach comes soon

-2

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +2

The next idiot may have more than just one terrorist to apease... especially if this becomes lucrative. There are a lot of people that would enjoy collecting tolls in exchange for not shooting drones at ships.

2

rookie-mistake Apr 2, 2026

its just hugo grotius on a seadoo with a gun but he's very persuasive

0

Guy_with_Numbers Apr 2, 2026 -6

> If the laws of the sea is respected... everyone gets passage, including even warships. Freedom of navigation is only for international waters, not territorial waters.

-6

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +6

Transit passage.

6

Guy_with_Numbers Apr 2, 2026 +3

Iran has not ratified UNCLOS, so transit passage wouldn't apply for them.

3

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +1

Again... so what? It's still not legal to shoot civilian ships. They could also declare an embargo, arguably legalky. They are at war, after all. That involves challenging ships, boarding, escorting etc. Listnook brain is working extra hard to put Iran in some special circumstances where rules apply differently to it. Arguably rules don't apply to anyone... but that also includes the countries IR is trying to embargo.

1

Golda_M Apr 2, 2026 +3

Transit passage.

3

Wintermute_Is_Coming Apr 2, 2026 +8

Pretty sure they've said that they consider hosting American bases and materiel to fit the definition of war. If that's the case that seems reasonable tbh.

8

ChaseballBat Apr 2, 2026 +1

They view anyone trading with America as a collaborator from what I recall from previous statements.

1

TokenBearer Apr 2, 2026 +7

Is this kind of like that Monty Python scene with the knight who loses all of his limbs?

7

Ultra_Metal Apr 2, 2026 +6

Yes, the Islamic Republic and their supporters are as delusional as the Black Knight.

6

diwakark86 Apr 2, 2026 +1

They have in fact successfully choked the strait and are using it as leverage. Their justification for it is of course bullshit, but their opponents haven't figured out a way to counter Iran's leverage

1

Boys4Ever Apr 2, 2026 +9

Who knew? Not this administration. Just hoping this nightmare ends soon although that seems like just a dream now

9

Fantastic_Piece5869 Apr 2, 2026 +11

oh, they did know. They fired everyone who said this was a problem a few months ago. It kinda flew under the news though.

11

Thurak0 Apr 2, 2026 -2

> oh, they did know. In their mind they knew better than the people they fired.

-2

skurvecchio Apr 2, 2026 +2

UAE: "I mean, I am RIGHT here. Come on!"

2

Political_breeds Apr 2, 2026

Bullshit. Impeach and remove Abbas Araghchi immediately.

0

doolpicate Apr 2, 2026

At this point the best regime change would be removing Trump in the USA.

0

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 -3

[removed]

-3

jmeel14 Apr 2, 2026 +11

Sounds like a major war crime to me.

11

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 -9

I agree, the Iranian government is guilty of many war crimes, one of them the neglect of drinking water supply for their people.

-9

meneerdaan Apr 2, 2026 -4

They saw your username and that was enough to get the blood boiling. Iran using cluster bombs, killing protesters by the tens of thousands, using child soldiers and just hanging everybody who even dares to lift a finger all don't fit in their narrative that Israël and the US are the most evil countries in the world.

-4

jeffreyresorts Apr 2, 2026 +7

Damn i bet you felt real big saying that. "My dad's gonna come beat your dad up" headass. Also, it truly is showing weakness to rely on threats of war crimes and atrocities. Just shows you prefer soft targets over internationally recognized armed conflict.

7

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 +3

What war crimes? They have a water shortage that’s 100% a result of the Iranian regime’s negligence. Maybe if they invested all that oil money in actually making their people’s lives better, instead of raping and murdering young girls for what they wear…

3

jeffreyresorts Apr 2, 2026 +6

Oh damn, cant even stand behind your own words. What a coward

6

Neobullseye1 Apr 2, 2026 +2

And of course, their posting history is hidden too, as per usual with Listnookors that come charging in like that. So that's another way in which they can't stand behind their own words.

2

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 +3

[removed]

3

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 +1

You don’t say. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/iran-war-news-updates-2026/card/iran-strikes-desalination-plant-in-bahrain-says-gulf-nation-mwjEnNJK1GgtebiNnUaZ

1

Key-Needleworker4633 Apr 2, 2026 +5

Well hate to break it to ya but Israel’s regime isn’t any better in fact they’re pretty awful. I guess being from Israel that would be obvious though.

5

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 +2

[deleted]

2

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 -1

They already have a water shortage. Where have you been? I’m just making fun of the fact that a politician from a country with water shortage, with no air defense, no navy, no friends and cities on fire is making demands.

-1

fhilcollins666 Apr 2, 2026 +2

Yet they have no problem hitting your oil infrastructure, that's pretty embarrassing, no?

2

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 -2

I don’t have oil infrastructure. Sorry to disappoint you, but not all Jews are rich, despite what you may have learned in your madrassa.

-2

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026

[deleted]

0

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 +4

I’m making fun of this politician who thinks anyone gives a flying f*** about his imaginary demands.

4

TradeNPlayz Apr 2, 2026 +5

While also threatening to make people suffocate of thirst. Yeah, we're used to that from Israelis.

5

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 +2

Funny you should say. https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/iran-war-news-updates-2026/card/iran-strikes-desalination-plant-in-bahrain-says-gulf-nation-mwjEnNJK1GgtebiNnUaZ

2

TradeNPlayz Apr 2, 2026 +4

Doesn't change a single thing about your threat to make people suffocate from thirst. Why not own up to it instead of dodging?

4

TheJewPear Apr 2, 2026 +2

I don’t know what suffocating of thirst is, but maybe lodge your complaint with the Iranian government that created their water crisis by years of negligence and corruption?

2

TradeNPlayz Apr 2, 2026 +2

Why should I lodge a complaint with the Iranian government while you were the one threatening to suffocate people of thirst? Why keep dodging?

2

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 -7

[removed]

-7

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 +5

[removed]

5

[deleted] Apr 2, 2026 -2

[removed]

-2

virtual_adam Apr 2, 2026 -4

At this point it’s hard to differentiate FAFO and giddiness on Listnook. People are cheering on MAGA troops deploying. Is there even a difference between the two? A third world country with thousands of newly created craters (and all the chemical exposures from all these explosives detonating in civilian areas) and no drinking water tries to take on the biggest economy in the world. It’s not FAFO that they start hurting bad?

-4

munchi333 Apr 2, 2026 +1

The rest of the world needs to find a new way to get oil out of the Persian gulf. Build more pipelines, make Iran irrelevant.

1

Ultra_Metal Apr 2, 2026 -6

The Islamic Republic will collapse soon after the Iranian people resume their revolution when Reza Pahlavi gives the signal. When that happens, the strait will open.

-6

ScoobiusMaximus Apr 2, 2026 +4

I wish I was this optimistic.

4

“Only Iran & Oman Decide” Tehran Draws Red Line Over Hormuz

💬 Send a Message

120 Comments