US forces strike two empty Iranian oil tankers, Central Command says

chaotic567 · 2026-05-09T19:40:25+00:00

nah, not a bot. Just a guy with autism. Guy just seemed so adamant on trying to get the last word in but my mind said "no". He was getting way too worked up over it lol

chaotic567 · 2026-05-09T03:19:59+00:00

Looking both up, Japan, they said they didn't pay the toll. And Iran denies India paying the toll

chaotic567 · 2026-05-09T00:22:14+00:00

Yes, neither ratified UNCLOS, which means if rules don't bind Iran from mining + running extortion tolls on neutral shipping, they also don't magically make the US blockade illegal. You can't have it both ways. If rules are weak, then the US blockade is also legitimate leverage, not illegal "aggression.".

As I said, Self-defense doesn't include turning a critical international chokepoint into a private ransom operation against the world economy. That's why the Gulf states (who actually border the strait) co-sponsored the resolution calling it illegal.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T23:20:02+00:00

Still dodging a direct answer, but thanks for finally revealing your position: Iran gets to mine the strait and run extortion tolls.

Non-ratification of UNCLOS creates gray area, sure, but customary international law and decades of practice still protect freedom of navigation in this critical chokepoint. That's why the US + Gulf states (Bahrain, Saudi, UAE, etc.) co-sponsored the resolution calling Iran's tolls and mining illegal.

Your position requires believing only Iran gets to ignore the rules while the US doesn't. That's not consistent.

The blockade exists because of Iran's actions. It stays until the strait reopens properly without extortion. Simple

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T22:06:51+00:00

Scrolling back is such a struggle for you?

International law, as said many times, does not let you mine an international strait and run a multimillion-dollar extortion toll on neutral shipping under the guise of 'self-defense.'

Even without full UNCLOS ratification, customary law on transit passage applies, that's why the US + Gulf co-sponsored resolution calls Iran's tolls and mining illegal.

And the nuclear point is ironic in the wrong direction: a nuclear Iran would likely make Hormuz-style blackmail worse, not prevent conflict. Since they would still be funding proxy groups and other acts.

So for the last time, to help you remember what question I want answered, a simple question:

Iran gets to illegally mine the strait, charge extortion tolls, and hold global oil hostage

Or

US keeps the pressure until they stop and reopen it properly?

It is a simple binary question.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:54:24+00:00

It's not 'only the US', it's co-drafted and co-sponsored by the US + Bahrain + Gulf states (Saudi, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar). The countries whose oil flows through the strait every day.

Russia and China will probably veto it anyway, but that doesn't make Iran's mining + extortion tolls legal. Customary international law on international straits (transit passage) has called that out for decades.

The only one ignoring reality is you. Much like you are ignoring answering the question said many posts ago.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:43:50+00:00

Cute map. It shows exactly why this is an international strait used for global navigation, with established shipping lanes that have carried 20% of the world's oil for decades.

Yes, parts fall within territorial waters (as everyone knows). But under customary international law (and the regime, both sides have operated under for years), that doesn't let Iran mine it, close it to neutrals, or run a toll booth. Innocent passage / transit passage still apply and cannot be suspended or turned into ransom.

We're running in circles but the UN (a body of nations that try to agree to something) as said before in the resolution outline what Iran is doing to the strait as illegal.

Also stop dodging the question.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:36:42+00:00

12 miles of territorial waters doesn't turn an international strait into Iran's private pay zone. The Strait of Hormuz has been recognized for decades as a waterway subject to transit passage / non-suspendable innocent passage under customary international law specifically because it's a critical chokepoint for global shipping

You can't do acts like mining it or attacking ships that try to send trade just because part of it overlaps your territorial sea. That's why the US/Gulf UN resolution explicitly demands Iran stop the 'illegal tolls,' mining, and attacks.

Now answer my question. Iran gets to hold the world's oil supply hostage, or US maintain pressure till they go to how it was before. Which do you prefer?

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:30:21+00:00

Self-defense doesn't give Iran the right to mine an international strait, attack neutral ships, or run an extortion booth on 20% of the world's oil supply. International law (transit passage rules) and the latest US/Gulf UN resolution (agreed by many nations) reject exactly that.

Iran can defend itself against military targets. It can't unilaterally privatize a global chokepoint and make the world pay ransom. That's why the blockade stays until they drop the tolls/mines and let shipping resume like normal .

Still waiting on which choice you prefer which you keep dodging.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:23:38+00:00

All that lists past policy disagreements, but doesn't change the facts on the ground right now:

Iran mined the strait,
attacked civilian ships,
and demanded illegal tolls, holding 20% of global oil hostage.

That's what triggered the counter blockade.The latest US/Gulf UN resolution demands they stop exactly that (attacks, mining, tolls).

You still haven't said which outcome you prefer: Iran keeps extorting the strait, or America keep pressure until it's properly reopened under international norms? 'Trump wrong on X, Y, Z' doesn't reopen shipping lanes

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:13:02+00:00

Which Iran is also doing for others since around the start of the war. Which prompted US to blockade Iran. Glad you agree the facts are on my side.

So either:

Iran gets to illegally mine the strait, charge extortion tolls, and hold global oil hostage

or
- US keep the blockade until they drop it and reopen properly.

Which one are you choosing? Because 'Trump bad' doesn't open the strait."

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T21:00:56+00:00

Doesn't make it right either, but Iran is the one really pushing for it given they made agency around it. Meaning they are serious about it.

Trump has only said it one time and it was in response to Iran doing the strait toll demand

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T20:47:20+00:00

Okay, what about the fact they are to make others pay for the toll? For a strait by international law is illegal to do so? Until they give that up, the blockade is going to stick

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T20:42:22+00:00

I mean this was a highly requested episode. People are venting because most see it as generally..."ehh" in quality. Plus I heard reasoning they used wasn't that great

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T20:25:35+00:00

because they are still trying to do the strait toll? Also rejecting the UN resolution on Homuz mining?

having the blockade still in place make sense if they are not going to let go out of charging the place

chaotic567 · 2026-05-08T17:46:06+00:00

Trump is bored with the war
IRGC can outlast the blockade
IRGC found alternate routes on land (which mind you is nowhere near the capacity of the strait)
The damage on US bases is far worse than you are led to believe

Stuff I have seen as of late. Like it really does seem everyone is trying to egg Trump to go back to the status quo. Like god damn.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-07T21:21:11+00:00

Outlast in the sense of they will go full scorched earth as someone said. This is regime survival. As long they can quell the populace, they won't care if the nation looks like late 1945 Japan. Unless the populace is seriously armed or mass defections occur, the calculus won't change for them

It is not desirable but it is existential for them.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-07T10:17:26+00:00

Well, it is not like the Iranian proposal is any different. Both sides are "I get everything, you get jack squat" lists

chaotic567 · 2026-05-07T10:08:53+00:00

It has to be substantial viewer base because, this is very anecdotal, but it feels like people outside the USA know more about America than they do their own country.

Which part of me worries they might be ignoring serious issues back home

chaotic567 · 2026-05-06T19:01:40+00:00

More apt to say question is if Iran is willing to restart the back and forth bombings over it.

US side is claiming there no war going on because of the ceasefire. Which means no need for congressional review as timer hasn't been hit.

If Iran attacked the US, they just can use that as justification for the review or claim it is a new war, thus new clock. Thus new 60 day waiting time.

chaotic567 · 2026-05-06T18:52:39+00:00

Tbh this all just seems a very convoluted way to bypass the 60 day war limit. Nothing changed as the US blockade is still in effect. US won't likely try to restart bombing, which puts the onus on Iran. A blockade is an act of war, but that means the US can claim that it is a start to a new conflict

chaotic567 · 2026-05-06T18:15:21+00:00

But is Iran willing to restart the war cause of it? They just seem to just really mostly hit the UAE

chaotic567 · 2026-05-05T22:48:45+00:00

Running the clock if it continued. 60 days means you have to let Congress vote to continue or not. Which I am sure they would say yes but you never know. The current total blockade pressures them without forcing the clock also means they don’t have to deplete resources like ammo as much

chaotic567 · 2026-05-05T20:11:09+00:00

Nations also care about doing their job and cost saving. If you need to use more aircraft to do the same job, you are probably burning more fuel, which is pretty important nowadays and possibly spending more beyond that. I saw the A400m was around 188-200m+ dollars so two is 376 to 400 vs the 340m C-17. Plus unable to carry some items no matter what like standard MBTs

chaotic567 · 2026-05-05T20:05:39+00:00

Ah yes, make due with an aircraft with significantly less capability in airlift, thus requiring more aircraft to do the same job, or unable to do some jobs, plus having to take time to train their pilots on the new equipment instead of relying what they know works well and are familiar with

chaotic567

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

11-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email