· 44 comments · Save ·
News & Current Events Apr 13, 2026 at 4:49 PM

Strait of Hormuz situation is an argument for strong international maritime coalition, EU's Kallas says

Posted by Raj_Valiant3011



🚩 Report this post

44 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
Torran 5 days ago +31
The strait of Hormuz situation is an argument for a lot of investment in renewables to get rid of fossil fuels.
31
Thoroughaway008 5 days ago +11
Unfortunately most of the worlds helium goes through there too and that’s actually a bigger problem than the fossil fuels imo. 
11
Torran 5 days ago
Helium and resources for chemical industry especially fertilizer are currently the harder to solve problems than replacing fossil fuels. In theory you could produce it with electrolysis but that requires a lot of electricity. Looking for alternatives to Helium wherever it is possible is still a good idea.
0
eikenberry 4 days ago +2
That won't help with food production.
2
Torran 4 days ago +1
If we burn less gas we can use it to make more fertilizer and in the long term can use renewable hydrogen. How will that not help?
1
Due-Sentence-1219 5 days ago +2
Nothing is that simple. Batteries are not good enough yet.
2
Torran 5 days ago +1
To replace 100% no. But reducing the required amount by 80%+ will still help a lot.
1
Due-Sentence-1219 5 days ago +2
You have no clue how far off we currently are with the technology available. Do some research get a nuance realistic understanding.
2
menalhCB3 6 days ago +41
Key word being 'strong'. If its gonna be strong, it probably has to include the US. It has more active warships than all other nations combined. And if it includes the US, Trump's left ankle can decide on what to do, again. So we're back to square one...
41
Bluedroid 6 days ago +30
This is all talk but it's never going to happen. Russia invaded Ukraine literally inside of Europe and Europe doesn't have the will to fix it by itself. This is multitudes times cheaper and more geographically relevant than being able to build systems capable of supporting a true blue water navy that is able to force project around the world for issues that are less directly relevant to Europe's interests.
30
AK_Panda 5 days ago +4
It all just comes back to the US deciding it wants to abandon its position as the global hegemonic power. By virtue of its geographic position, the US being a hegemonic power meant it required a massive navy and it needed to ensure open trade globally for its own economic benefit. Now it doesn't want that power anymore, so someone, or something will have to step up or we should anticipate a return to state sanctioned piracy in places.
4
True_Window_9389 5 days ago +8
It’s kinda the opposite with Trump. He isn’t necessarily abandoning being a hegemonic power, he’s using it differently. Worse, to be sure, but the intent is to use our power to bully the rest of the world into submission. There was some benevolence in our global projection of power before, even as we got rich and meddled around the world for national interest. But most of the world was fine with dealing with the downsides because of the upside, which was us bearing the burden of high defense spending to create a Pax Americana of global order. The global order was mostly supported by European and East Asian allies, who Trump believes are too weak and feckless to replace or contribute to global order, so he pretty much doesn’t care about them and sees them as an annoyance at best. So with that, he’d rather go it alone in the way he knows how to operate, which is bullying and trolling, but still a hegemonic power.
8
AK_Panda 5 days ago +8
Basically, Trump is the first president in recent history whose primary goal is not the furthering of US geopolitical power, but the leverage of US political power for private gain. And I don't just mean private markets, I mean specific individuals and corporations who benefit from actions that broadly harm the US economy.
8
Federal-Guess7420 6 days ago -8
Literally has fewer ships than the CCP.
-8
Landwhale6969 5 days ago +12
Now compare tonnage. The number of ships is not relevant.
12
ImaLichBitch 5 days ago +10
Should also compare actual experience in conducting *real* combat operations, *real* life performance of equipment and *proven* logistical capabilities. Building a floating hull and painting it to look nice is the easy part of having a navy.
10
Federal-Guess7420 5 days ago -3
Well then the OP should have said tonnage not number of hulls.
-3
HumanSnotMachine 5 days ago +3
Fishing boats vs yachts
3
HP844182 5 days ago +7
Sounds like North Atlantic countries with similar goals should form some sort of alliance, formalized by Treaty, as an Organization 
7
Demostravius4 5 days ago +14
Trade routes are kept open by diplomacy and naval force. Europe for the most part has surrendered the latter respinsibility to the US. Now we pay the price of that complacency. It's easy to be pacitist when others do the hard work.
14
No-Cat1037 5 days ago +5
Finally someone recognizes this, the website has been propaganda’d by Iran for weeks now
5
erebuxy 5 days ago +4
Yes, and who wants to pay for it.
4
Ok_Pin_4554 5 days ago +2
Kallas seems really keen on saying absolutely nonsensical things.
2
Murky_Meaning2129 6 days ago +6
How about a strong argument for not attacking countries that have a trump card against a vital choke point? It was open before the pedo decided to start a war.
6
Phraktaxia 5 days ago +3
Hormuz and the surrounding trade routes have been going through this exact process of conflict since mankind had enough throughput to give a shit about controlling territory with vital trade. It's always by engaging the party that currently controls the vital choke point. I don't agree with it in this instance for sure, but it is exactly what one has to do in order for the control to change hands.
3
Ijnefvijefnvifdjvkm 5 days ago +2
Without the US
2
Asleep-Waltz2681 5 days ago +2
The amount of blatant stupidity coming from this lady is staggering. She is the Estonian version of Annalena Baerbock.
2
Fenixstorm1 5 days ago +4
That the US will never sign even if the rest of the world does. US will never agree to follow rules made.by others, even if it benefits society as a whole.
4
toobadkittykat 5 days ago +1
i thought that was “settled law” , or at least nautical common sense , suddenly , the billionaire class wants to take over control of the oceans next /s
1
WardenEdgewise 5 days ago +1
The Straight of Hormuz situation is an argument for the entire world banding together to get rid of Trump.
1
[deleted] 6 days ago +2
[deleted]
2
toeknn 6 days ago +3
The EU growing stronger dosnt mean the US has grown weaker. Its kinda like if you and a group of buddies go to the gym. And you can lift 200 while your buddy can lift 100. Then after some gains your buddy can now lift 150 and you can still lift 200. Editing your posts to counteract points is hilarious. But your buddy getting stronger dosnt mean you got weaker.
3
[deleted] 6 days ago +2
[deleted]
2
toeknn 6 days ago
continou the thought. Europe being less reliant on US force projection increases US operational flexibility. An ability to now concentrate the exisiting power where its needed. To continou my analogy. Its like your buddy who you previously had to spot every lift now can do it without your active spots enabling you to get more fulfilling lifts of your own.
0
[deleted] 6 days ago +3
[deleted]
3
toeknn 6 days ago +1
Except now youve projected a future that isnt even being discussed. So yea if EU kicks us out of their bases. Itd be problemactic. Except they arent. And trump cant pull us out of NATO as much as he wants. What we have is EU rearming.
1
[deleted] 6 days ago
[deleted]
0
toeknn 6 days ago +1
"The discussion has started and is intensifying. This headline is a great example and there are others like Spain refusing to stage attacks on Iran. It is a slippery slope, take away the dependence and there is not much meat left on the bone. Power doesn’t have to be taken away to be reduced. It just has to be needed less." Refusing to go into war is different then kicking out of a defensive alliance. France didnt follow us into nam. We didnt follow UK into Suez crisis. Also stop editing your comments to change their meaning and response.
1
Gh0stPeppers 5 days ago +1
I had someone completely change their post a couple weeks ago after I pointed out a few logic holes in their argument, they then replied as if I was crazy randomly shouting a response to something nobody said. Posts need an edit flare to show they have been edited.
1
HopefulGuy123 5 days ago
The UK needs to stay out of this and focus on energy self sufficiency.
0
goasttbuster 5 days ago
We need to establish a global democracy without a veto power, where heads of the states are not the most important people in the room.
0
TheWizard 5 days ago
Rules go out the door in a war zone.
0
EmotionalPraline4321 5 days ago -2
La ue no se va a meter y además la gente de todos los países europeos no queremos que mandes trospas
-2
EmotionalPraline4321 5 days ago -2
La gente de España no va a ir a morir por qué quiera estados Unidos
-2
← Back to Board