I'm surprised they didn't before. Did they? Seems like they were playing nice until Dickless Donald fucked everything up.
I do wonder if the oligarchs would even allow Donald to run again, if he tried. I think not.
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2026
31 points (94.3% liked)
politics
30689 readers
1850 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
There has been a long-established principle of the law of the sea that allows free passage through things like the Strait of Hormuz. While this principle has been around since... I think the 1800s but I'm not 100% sure, its most recent incarnation is enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
So Iran wasn't "playing nice", they were playing by the rules.
Donald Trump has repeatedly shown that he doesn't care about the rules. By going to war with Iran, he then gives them permission to also defy the rules. Iran will say: "We'll follow the rules when the US does".
N.B. Yes, it's really called "the law of the sea", maritime law is also a thing but a different thing
For what it's worth, neither Iran nor the United States have actually signed and ratified the UNCLOS and therefore are not actually members of it nor bound by its rules.
This is a very good point, have an upvote.
The maritime treaties are the ones that I assume the most countries have signed, because they rely on such old principles, but I didn't go check details on this one.
EDIT: Damn it, you made me go down a Law of the Sea rabbit hole, what with your "facts".
The US hasn't ratified UNCLOS, you're right. But it did both sign and ratify the 1958 Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, which guarantees the right of innocent passage, which is what is at issue here. Iran also signed this treaty, though never ratified.
Further, both the US and Iran signed UNCLOS, even though neither has ratified.
Further still, Oman, who is the other half of this agreement with Iran, has both signed and ratified UNCLOS.
The US also supported the definition of innocent passage in a 1989 joint statement with the USSR.
International law is mostly honor system, no?
Did the law somehow change to allow them to now charge fees? Or, were they playing nice by following a law that has no real enforcement behind it? What will we do? Sanction them?
"Playing nice" is a good way to describe it.
UNCLOS has specific enforcement mechanisms behind it. I don't know enough detail to know what they are, but yes, it's founded on an international treaty. My point was Iran wasn't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts, but because they got something in return: on UNCLOS specifically they get free passage for their own ships in others' territorial waters. More broadly, they get the stability of the post-WWII international order.
The US has turned its back on that international order by attacking Iran. Therefore the incentive for Iran to participate in that order has greatly diminished.
If all international treaties are "playing nice", then fine, they were playing nice. I prefer to see them as a mutually beneficial exchange. We're getting dangerously close to "laws are just threats" territory though, and I think that moves us away from a conversation whose definitions are useful for dialogue.
It's amazing how playing nice so they aren't attacked... goes out the window when they realize they are going to be attacked no matter what they do.
Weird. I wonder how Donnie Dumbass and his little Eichmanns will tell everyone this is the fault of Biden and Obama...
And all of the MAGA Charlie Browns will keep kicking at his football.
Can't quite see the article, but I wonder at who the shipowners are outraged.
I wonder also if Fortune magazine makes clear what the status of the strait was prior to Beelzebibi somehow persuading President Pedophile to launch a war against Iran - despite the warnings from analysts at the Pentagon.
They do have a defensive war to fund and Iran has the right to defend itself.
The only reason there's a deal is because Trump will get a cut, I bet
They should forward the bill on to Trump.
Well, they gotta pay people to rebuild somehow.