> impotent threat of attacking ships

You've been paying attention to what's happened over the last few weeks and you qualify that threat as impotent? That impotent threat basically brought the rest of the world to it's knees.

▲

smcnc 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Cost of insurance for ships did.

▲

computerex 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They hit like 20 ships, people died. That’s why insurance went up. Literally the US navy will not go near the strait due to the ballistic missile threat.

▲

PierceJoy 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

And why did the cost of insurance for ships rise?

▲

smcnc 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Uncertainty.

▲

computerex 8 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, of mines and fiery death.

▲

smcnc 8 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	samrus 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I try not to say things like this on here, but readong all your comments in this thread, it really feels like your not arguing in good faith
	▲	computerex 8 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Your opinion on the matter is meaningless when in reality the strait is effectively closed for anyone that doesn’t have an agreement with IRGC. Not interested in arguing semantics.
	▲	toraway 7 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		They've attacked ships multiple times since the conflict began, why are you discussing this like it's some fantasy hypothetical? Some examples: Tracking the wave of ship attacks that has choked off Strait of Hormuz https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80j4rln8zmo ‘There’s no safe place here’: Kuwaiti tanker hit by Iranian drone attack in Dubai port https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/31/kuwaiti-tanker...