ListNook

iritchie001 Apr 29, 2026 +1055

The Gilded Age is blinding.

1055

StillInevitable1511 Apr 29, 2026 +224

Honestly, the gilded age is boring. It’s the same thing. Rich guy, more money than brains, doing stupid shit.

224

hhaattrriicckk Apr 29, 2026 +1171

The blockade only affects cargo ships. So this is not really news.

1171

CurtisLeow Apr 29, 2026 +235

Iran mined the strait, correct? So it’s risky for any ship to cross the strait. Although it sounds like most of the mines are cleared.

235

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +296

Lots of ships have crossed the strait. They mined certain parts of it while other parts remain open, just depends who pays to go through it.

296

Charlie_Mouse Apr 29, 2026 -26

One issue is that even modern mines can drift. Where they’re set ain’t necessarily where they are today and safe passages ain’t exactly far away.

-26

TheGreatGenghisJon Apr 29, 2026 +52

They're anchored. They can drift, but not far. Otherwise you'd end up with mines all over the shoreline.

52

Charlie_Mouse Apr 30, 2026 -7

We’ll see. What’s meant to happen and what does happen aren’t always the same thing. >Otherwise you'd end up with mines all over the shoreline. Which is literally what still happens every two or three years with WWII sea mines washing up on U.K. beaches. It happened a hell of a lot more frequently in the years immediately postwar despite extensive demining operations.

-7

BWWFC Apr 29, 2026 +1

buy your ticket, take your chances... life, same as always.

1

hhaattrriicckk Apr 29, 2026 +169

Cargo ships need to take the highway, boats like this can take sideroads. That's the analogy I'll be using. The way cargo ships dwarf these superyacht's is sort of mind blowing.

169

ringaroundtherosiez Apr 29, 2026 +72

Also even superyachts are designed to have minimal draft where cargo ships are not. Supers have drafts around 14 to 16 feet where tankers can have upwards of 60 feet fully laden

72

LegendRazgriz Apr 29, 2026 +65

Supertankers are an entirely different breed of monster vessel. They dwarf even the largest battleships; the gargantuan _Yamato_ only had a draft of 34½ft on an 862ft long hull overall, and that thing was armed to the teeth with huge cannons housed in meters of armor. That's half the size of a modern supertanker

65

MixtureSpecial8951 Apr 29, 2026 +36

The Nimitz & Ford classes are the largest warships ever built and their draught is 37-42’. The largest cruise ship in the world, Icon of the Seas, is even larger. 248,663 GT, 1,196’ long and her draught is 30’. The supers and container ships are absolutely massive. Roughly the same GT as the Icon but having deeper droughts, some approaching 100’.

36

xIllustrious_Passion Apr 29, 2026 +21

Silly question, but I’m not super big into sailing, is a ships draft how deep in the water it is from the surface?

21

Wyrmnax Apr 29, 2026 +18

Draft is - basically - how far below water the lowest point of the ship is. It is affected by and affects a whole lot of things in the ship design. Lower draft ships can sail thorugh shallower waterways. Because, you know, less ship undewater.

18

Working_Pianist_9904 Apr 29, 2026 +9

Yeah, I’d like to know that too

9

SmokinMythics Apr 29, 2026 +37

I also wanted to know. So I googled it. And yes: “The draft (or draught) of a ship is the vertical distance between the waterline and the bottom of the hull (keel), representing the minimum depth of water needed for the vessel to float.”

37

Working_Pianist_9904 Apr 29, 2026 +4

Ahh thank you. I did think that when it said they can go different routes from the tankers

4

funkiestj Apr 29, 2026 +7

Ready the wave motion gun!

7

alotmorealots Apr 29, 2026 +5

> gargantuan Yamato Rude. Also, she's not a hotel!

5

Whetherwax Apr 29, 2026 +1

> meters of armor It had 1-2 feet of armor, not meters. Wherever you got your info, try somewhere else next time.

1

hitsujiTMO Apr 29, 2026 +17

There's a specific 3k wide channel that cargo ships need to pass through as it's the only area that is deep enough for the cargo ships. A much smaller vessel, like a yacht, doesn't need as deep water to traverse the strait so it can avoid the section that has been mined/blockaded.

17

Fresh_Boysenberry576 Apr 29, 2026 +12

They didn't mine all of it. They left space for ships to cross where they can easily reach with missiles to shoot those who they don't want to pass

12

Old_Wallaby_7461 Apr 29, 2026 +6

An oligarch can simply pay the crew enough to make it worthwhile

6

HumansNeedNotApply1 Apr 29, 2026 +5

There's a safe route and the toll is only for cargo ships.

5

NekoCatSidhe Apr 29, 2026 +2

They mined the usual roads through the Strait that are harder for them to control, but left open a road closer to the Iranian coast, or so I have heard. But no one seems to know for sure if they have really mined the Strait, or if it just rumors and propaganda.

2

LumberingTroll Apr 29, 2026 +5

Hauling bags of shit isn't cargo?

5

Zanian19 Apr 29, 2026 +7

What I hear is seize all billionaires' yachts and give them to Maersk

7

RobutNotRobot Apr 29, 2026 +8

Not true at all. Iran has claimed that all sea traffic that wants to transit the strait needs to coordinate it with them. The US has said that all ships originating from Iranian ports will be stopped and seized.

8

WreckNTexan48 Apr 29, 2026 +14

So the blockades only intent to hurt consumers Get your bets in now

14

Individual-Dust-7362 Apr 29, 2026 -2

And only *Iranian* or sanctioned ships, at that. But people are regarded and uncritical idiots. They’ll just go “har har suck it Murica.”

-2

Th4N4 Apr 29, 2026 +2

"A superyacht linked to sanctioned Russian billionaire Alexey Mordashov..." Literally the first sentence of the article. So much for "sanctioned ships", isn't it ?

2

RobutNotRobot Apr 29, 2026 +3

Nothing Russian is sanctioned for the criminal-in-chief.

3

badpersian Apr 29, 2026 -5

Like the US has the balls to stop any Russian ship

-5

tb30k Apr 29, 2026 -22

Uhmm Iran is attacking any ships that cross. Putin flexing he got more juice than America which he does right now in this conflict overwhelming lol . Embarrassing

-22

codydog125 Apr 29, 2026 +11

Russia and Iran have been close. This isn’t exactly groundbreaking stuff here

11

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +261

We know. The US blockade is based on commercial ships leaving Iran. They aren't blocking ships leaving from other places and private ships. Not sure why this is news. Iran won't attack it because Putin is helping them (and we all know Putin also has sway with Trump).

261

WickettyWrecked Apr 29, 2026 +40

This specific ship is sanctioned…

40

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +23

But that's not what the blockade is over.

23

kstargate-425 Apr 29, 2026 +36

No but Trump and Hegseth have said they would board all sanctioned ships so...

36

Dexterus Apr 29, 2026 +10

Sanctioned means it's not allowed in sanctioner's ports most likely. Why would a Russian superyacht need to go to EU or US port? Sanctions are something you do to your companies not the sanctioned country's companies.

10

Takemyfishplease Apr 29, 2026 +1

Sanctioned by….

1

whowhodillybar Apr 29, 2026 +18

I don’t want to call Reuters click bait, yet here we are.

18

newzinoapp Apr 29, 2026 +20

Iran isn't blocking everything. They've been running what's basically a toll booth. Pay, and your ship gets safe passage coordinates through the unmined channels. A Russian yacht sailing through isn't surprising. Russia and Iran have been coordinating naval movements since the war started.

20

akaelmedio Apr 29, 2026 +4

You're either a worker or an owner.

4

Literally_Laura Apr 29, 2026 +6

Putin sent instructions to Trump on Signal and the instructions were followed. Prove me wrong.

6

KDR_11k Apr 29, 2026 +1

You think Trump can operate Signal?

1

Literally_Laura Apr 29, 2026 +4

Maybe his tiny hands struggle a bit, but surely they’re sufficient for tapping on the app icon and receiving orders from his master.

4

HellaTroi Apr 30, 2026 +1

How many times have they communicated? I think we should know when they do, and what was said.

1

Literally_Laura Apr 30, 2026 +3

I agree, and once upon a time these things were taken seriously, in a golden age I remember, back before golden bathrooms full of classified documents.

3

wurtin May 2, 2026 +1

signal is just a texting app. someone else get it setup and anyone can use it.

1

RobutNotRobot Apr 29, 2026 +6

Iran controls the strait, and Iran is willing to do favors for Putin. Obviously Trump wasn't going to have his pirates seize a Russian yacht.

6

Wildcelt7 Apr 29, 2026 +28

Putin could end the US-Iran conflict in ONE DAY. He could make just two phone calls to each of the leaders, because he knows just what to say...

28

IKillZombies4Cash Apr 29, 2026 +19

Putin has his own 2 day war which has sent a million of his troops to die. So let’s not act like he knows what he’s doing, I don’t think anyone does at this point.

19

Masrim Apr 29, 2026 +43

Why would he want it to end? His sanctions were removed by trump and he is selling his oil at extremely high prices, lol everything that has happened has benefited him greatly.

43

Classic93 Apr 29, 2026 +7

Ukraine implemented kinetic sanctions with their drones, so doesn't help Russia as much as you might think.

7

teddy5 Apr 29, 2026 -13

The war is just for Ukraine, but kinetic sanctions is such a weasel word to avoid saying they're targeting civillian infrastructure. The kind of doublespeak to soften the impact of war which would have Carlin rolling in his grave.

-13

Timbershoe Apr 29, 2026 +13

They are targeting oil refineries. The oil is being used to fund the war in Ukraine. Hence kinetic sanctions. They are legitimate targets, referring to them as ‘civilian’ targets is deliberately misleading.

13

teddy5 Apr 29, 2026 -7

This might blow your mind, but oil is used for lots of things in every society and is civilian infrastructure. It's exactly why Hormuz is a global issue at all. Just flip it on it's head rhetorically, do you think American oil production being targeted would be considered as an attack on only the military? Would everyone accept it as just a normal part of war that doesn't disrupt civilian life?

-7

Timbershoe Apr 29, 2026 +6

This may blow your mind, but Ukraine and Russia are at war. It’s been going on for 4 years and 2 months at this point. It’s been a little more than ‘disruptive’ to civilians. And you’re crying about a mild inconvenience to Russian oil production? Just stop.

6

teddy5 Apr 29, 2026 -1

I'm not at all, shit happens in war. I'm complaining about the euphemisms used to try and minimise the impact of what happens. It shields people from the realities of war and makes things more palatable to talk about without thinking about the real impacts. Specifically I was referring to this routine by George Carlin and how it would have disgusted him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o25I2fzFGoY

-1

Timbershoe Apr 29, 2026 +2

I don’t disagree with Carlin. I disagree with you. While the Russian troops are targeting civilian buildings, conducting ethnic cleansing and r*** in Ukraine, you are quiet. When Ukraine target oil refineries, you are vocal about the mild inconvenience to Russian civilians. It really upsets you that people don’t consider this might make gas slightly more expensive. Your priorities are absolutely fucked.

2

teddy5 Apr 29, 2026 +1

Lol no, I specifically opened by saying it's a [just war](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_war_theory) for Ukraine, implying I support them in it because they have a good reason to be fighting it. You can support something and still say what it is. In fact I would argue that if you can only support it by trying to pretend they aren't doing it, then you aren't really supporting it at all. This desire to ignore anything you see as bad by the side you see as good and vice versa is why Americans are so obsessed with every situation needing to break down into figuring out who the "bad guy" is. The world is more nuanced than that and it doesn't help you or anyone else to ignore things because they're uncomfortable to talk about. Using euphemisms and soft language to downplay actions because you support a country doesn't actually have any benefit. I'm simply saying oil refineries are civilian infrastructure and that kinetic sanctions is a euphemism to disguise the fact that they're targeting civilian infrastructure. I'm not making a judgement on Ukraine's actions, I'm saying we're all making ourselves dumber and more ignorant by using language which disguises reality. If you support Ukraine enacting kinetic sanctions but don't support targeting oil refineries in other wars or situations then the language has worked as intended.

1

Danny-Dynamita Apr 29, 2026 -1

I don’t care about this discussion, but you can’t disagree with him and agree with Carlin and say it just like that. It’s ridiculous. You’re blind with rage. The reasons you gave are reasons “why you hate Russia” and not reasons why what he said is untrue or different from what Carlin said. His point is very valid. Is it so hard to admit that you hate Russia’s actions so much that you would allow special measures to be taken against them? Even if they harm their civilian population. I mean, we could understand that and it would be true at least. By the way, how the hell do you know his priorities? Are you a mentalist?

-1

Ntroepy Apr 29, 2026 +8

And Trump could end it in an instant too. I’m sure he’d love to so he can start invading all the other countries on his list

8

Krewtan Apr 29, 2026 +2

Why would he? He's getting everything he wants out of it. I guess less drones from Iran but the lifted sanctions should more than make up for that.

2

Yvaelle Apr 29, 2026 +1

The US-Iran war is the best thing to happen to the Russian economy since the fall of the Soviet Union. They are free to export their oil again and oil prices are way up and probably heading to $250 in a couple months.

1

HanzJWermhat Apr 29, 2026 +3

At the only thing the US (current admin) and Iran can agree on is: Russia is cool

3

PigFarmer1 Apr 29, 2026 +10

Trump and Iran both fear the wrath of Vladi... lol

10

BulletTacos Apr 29, 2026 +2

Will someone please explain how Iran has the straight shutdown, but now the US is blockading it and not letting Irans cargo ships through. This is so confusing.. so are there cargo ships of other countries moving through it or not? Does Iran sell passage and once you purchase passage they give you the right gps to follow to not hit mines?

2

HotBrownFun Apr 29, 2026 +1

Google how many ships crossed today, Reuters has an article. The us military finally released a tally of total ships p******. It only gave a number not which ships or what type

1

wurtin May 2, 2026 +1

The US has Iranian ports blockaded. we just don’t want iranian tankers to get out. as far as we’re concerned we want everything else to go. Iran for their part has gun boats actually around the narrow end that can shoot up and or attempt to board the tankers. reportedly iran is charging a passage fee so they can continue to rake in revenue even though they can’t get their ships out. i’m not keeping up with the day to day of how much is getting through but that’s the jist.

1

A_Nonny_Muse Apr 30, 2026 +2

Why didn't trumps navy confiscate it?

2

responsible_use_only Apr 29, 2026 +7

Epstein class gonna Epstein.

7

HettySwollocks Apr 29, 2026 +1

I mean there’s another space in Canary Wharf should the navy get bored

1

yulDD Apr 29, 2026 +1

Interesting…So, both the US and Iran let him pass.

1

HellaTroi Apr 30, 2026 +1

If the Strait is mined, how did that huge ship get through?

1

Herkfixer Apr 30, 2026 +3

Duh.. Iran told them where they are.

3

HI1681 Apr 30, 2026 +1

yo why the superyacht going to the strait of hormuz son im dead T\_T\_T\_T\_T\_T\_T

1

Sexytime_fordimes Apr 29, 2026 +1

No one here is surprised right ?!? I mean.....

1

wattspower Apr 29, 2026 -1

That boat is gorgeous.

-1

digital_cucumber Apr 29, 2026

That's one way to smuggle oil.

0

Ohuigin Apr 29, 2026 -30

Trump: “We have an impenetrable naval blockade on the Straight of Hormuz!!! No ship will pass!!” Putin: “B**** - hold my hammer and sickle. Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

-30

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +25

I mean, it's been stated for weeks it is only ships leaving Iran.

25

Ohuigin Apr 29, 2026 -24

Sure. But you and I both know there’s no reason for a Russian superyacht to navigate those waters right now for any other reason than to project who’s in charge.

-24

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +20

The US wasn't blocking them because that's not who they are blocking. Iran isn't going to shoot it since Putin is helping them. The only place it shows power is over Iran, as the US hasn't blocked any non Iranian ships.

20

Ohuigin Apr 29, 2026 -18

But it makes Trump look weak and like a fool when he boasts about the blockade. Thats all I’m saying. It’s showing who’s in charge.

-18

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +17

Again, it's been stated for weeks that the blockade is against Iranian ships. Is this coming or going to Iran? No? Then how does it make the blockade of Iranian ships look weak?

17

Ohuigin Apr 29, 2026 +3

Because the nuance of what you’re saying isn’t what he or his group of chucklefucks is saying.

3

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +9

And you are repeating it like it's the truth. What does that make you, exactly?

9

Ohuigin Apr 29, 2026

I’m not repeating anything… I’m not sure what you’re talking about. I think multiple things can be true at once. I think that yes the blockade can only apply to Iranian ships while also sending a message. I’m not sure what so difficult to grasp about that.

0

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +11

But you are implying the blockade isn't working because a ship was never part of the blockade got through. And saying the US looks weak because it made it though, implying the blockade is for everyone. So, you are just pushing the narrative that the blockade should be blocking everyone that you are implying maga is pushing. But, you apparently know it shouldn't be blocking everything, so why are you pushing fake narratives?

11

AudibleNod Apr 29, 2026 -31

Lemme guess, they pulled an 'HNLMS Abraham Crijnssen' maneuver and disguised themselves as a tropical island. I mean that's got to be the only logical reason a *Russian flagged ship* gets past a US operated dragnet. Right? Right?

-31

defroach84 Apr 29, 2026 +28

It's been said for weeks that it's against commerical ships leaving Iran. Not sure why this is news.

28

NameLips Apr 29, 2026 -1

That's the thing, you *don't know* if your ship is going to get shot at. Would *you* risk your neck for the good of the global economy? Would you call their bluff and charge through the strait? You'd probably make it. But is *probably* good enough for you?

-1

Russian superyacht crosses blockaded Strait of Hormuz

💬 Send a Message

95 Comments