• TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m gonna take a break while the bots and state department shills get their talking points worked out; so they can explain and justify how this is legal by international standards.

          • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            Then they should take the ship, and give back the oil. This isn’t about law, it’s about power and control. And it should be considered wrong by any decent, civilized person.

            • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you are being unreasonable in that argument. It’s not like they have the oil in cargo containers and can transfer it from one ship to another outside of port. The oil IS the ship.

              Sure they could dump it in the ocean? Which would be the dumbest of all options.

              Or they could seize the ships, and tow them back to port. Which looks like the options they took.

                • HuddaBudda@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  So now I have to prove my geopolitical stance on an engineering and logistics problem?

                  I can only give the facts, what people do with the politics is their own prerogative.

                  • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    The logistics are pedantic. They took the ships under civil forfeiture. Made the company pay to transport the oil to Houston. Took the oil and sold it. They could have left the oil. Arrested the captain and crew. And fined the company. They stole it for… reasons.

            • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It is about power and control. We are uaing sanctions on Iran and many officials in Iran as leverage for the nuclear deal as well as other human rights violations. And this company fucked up real bad, otherwise we would have let them do it. So much oil gets sold in Iran, blended in Malaysia, and sold to China at a reduced price for accepting the contraband oil.

        • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Another country? What are you talking about my dude? An American company bought oil from Iran (in violation of US law), and had the oil they bought seized.

            • Badass_panda@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 year ago

              It takes all of three minutes to click through to the court order here. All three companies do significant business in the US, but the money to buy the oil was US dollars, and came from Oaktree Capital which is based in Los Angeles.

              Which is (and this might be a shocker) in the USA.

              • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Iran is not the USA. The sanctions aren’t recognized. Therefore, any laws America makes does not have to be complied with.Your arguing US law. I’m arguing international. They are not the same. The United States of America does not have authority over the world, despite what you wish. Source. Even the UN says the sanctions are illegal.