606
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

They could at least give Iran back their oil. This is like when cops steal your jewelry and claim civil forfeiture.

[-] deft@ttrpg.network 11 points 1 year ago

The contraband cargo is now the subject of a civil forfeiture action in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The United States’ forfeiture complaint alleges that the oil aboard the vessel is subject to forfeiture based on U.S. terrorism and money laundering statutes.

The complaint alleges a scheme involving multiple entities affiliated with Iran’s IRGC and the IRGC-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) to covertly sell and transport Iranian oil to a customer abroad. Participants in the scheme attempted to disguise the origin of the oil using ship-to-ship transfers, false automatic identification system reporting, falsified documents and other means. The complaint further alleges that the charterer of the vessel used the U.S. financial system to facilitate the transportation of Iranian oil

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

If you tried to transport a kilo of Mexican cocaine through another country and were caught, do you really think Mexico would get its cocaine back?

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

So America owns the oceans blue?

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, but they control what happens aboard ships that fly American flags.

Do you think the ocean is some sort of lawless no man's land, where captains do as they please with crew and passengers?

Well, it isn't. The ship has a flag, and while aboard you follow the laws of that flag.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Yep. But you’re not mentioning why this happened. The Sanctions. Which are…tada- arbitrary and illegal.

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago

They are not illegal. All sovereign countries can refuse to trade with any other country or restrict the use of their own currency.

Which is all that these sanctions amount to.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I should have said unethical or extrajudicial. The United States is preventing a sovereign country from trading. Just because it is “legal” by American law doesn’t make it ethical. You can argue the legality. You may even agree with the ethics. But it is outside international law and condemned by the UN. I never argued the legality of the U.S. law. I am arguing that the sanctions are inhumane and unnecessary. So the ship should have never been seized.

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Trade embargoes do not violate international law. Otherwise, we would condemn Iran for its embargo against Israel. But Iran is free to pursue whatever trade policy it wants.

And don't confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.

Iran sanctions are meant to slow their nuclear program and thus de-escalate the region. It's possible they are now counterproductive. But it's also possible that without them, a paranoid right wing Israeli government would have openly attacked Iran by now. So it may well be the lesser evil.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Trade embargoes do not violate international law.

International laws do not exist. Source. Thus, the unilateral sanctions of the U.S. is beyond the law, and could be considered an act of war. The geopolitics of the region is not my concern. The unethical sanctions are.

And don't confuse a statement by a UN employee for a statement by the UN.

The United States will not allow a vote in the UN on sanctions. That’s why they have to do press releases. It is from the UN. The nuclear sanctions are supported by the UN, but not the economic sanctions. Which is why the tanker was seized.

[-] FlowVoid@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

International laws do not exist.

Alena Douhan, the Special Rapporteur you cited.

States have an obligation under international human rights law

Make up your mind. If they don't exist, then what she said is meaningless.

And on the subject of Ms Douhan...

The Special Rapporteurs are part of what is known as the Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council. ... Special Procedures’ experts work on a voluntary basis; they are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work. They are independent from any government or organization and serve in their individual capacity.

Looks like she was speaking for herself, not for the UN.

[-] jarfil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

States have an obligation under international human rights law

The Human Rights law, is "international", as in more than one nation recognizes it... and only 160+ of ~200 nations routinely break it with little consequence.

[-] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is pedantic and not worthy of my time. You have no interest in the truth, only in winning. So, great you won. We should sanction the world into panic and starvation until countries destabilize and launch wars that destroy humanity. Nice win!

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ca -1 points 1 year ago

It's the same bullshit with the US "pay us taxes no matter where you are" bullshit.

It's clear international overreach just like everything else.

[-] jarfil@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

All countries do that. Then all countries also want you to "pay us taxes where you live". Double taxation is a problem for many people, even between countries with tax agreements like in the EU.

[-] zephyreks@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

The US is the only developed country in the world where your tax duty is based on citizenship rather than where you live or work

this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2023
606 points (96.6% liked)

World News

38563 readers
2527 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS