Trump halts Armageddon for 10 days to negotiate what he calls a workable Iran's 10-point plan.

“Have you looked at Iran’s plan? It reads like a Tehran wish list from before the war, calling for a global recognition of Iran’s right to enrich uranium, the removal of all American forces from the region and a lifting of economic sanctions. And it calls for the payment of reparations to Iran for damage caused in the war,” said Richard Fontaine, the chief executive of the Center for a New American Security, a Washington think tank.

“Iran remains in the control of the Strait, which was not the case before the war,” said Fontaine. “I find it hard to believe that the United States and the world could accept a situation in which Iran remains in control of a key energy checkpoint indefinitely. That would be a materially worse outcome than existed before the war.”

The IRGC is locked and loaded waiting for Trump's and Netanyahu's next treacherous move.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ArishMell · 70-79, M

Both sides make demands of the other, that they must know will not be acceptable. The concept of reparations is of course not new, and possibly the only demand there of potential international merit.

However, I have a Question of Law about this talk of Iran controlling the Strait of Hormuz.

I examined my atlas - its Arabia pages holding a book-mark for ready reference - to see just who is where, and to measure distances.

The Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, separated by the Strait of Hormuz, is an international waterway. Pesumably the boundaries of its coastal countries run down the centre of it, at most.

They are Iran alone to the East, but Oman, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait to the West.

The Strait is under 30 miles wide at narrowest (not much more than the Straits of Dover, which is among the world's busiest for ships). It separates Iran from the Ra's Musandam peninsula, a tiny Omani exclave neighbouring the UAE.

The Persian Gulf is generally well over 120 miles wide.

Ships going to Iranian ports obviously have to enter Iranian waters close to them; but I wondered, what of passing along the two Gulfs and through the Strait close to their Western coasts? (This assumes sufficient navigable water as the entire Gulf is <200m deep, and Ra's Musandam is continued by a few small islands.)

Can Iran control the West side of the Gulf and Strait in any legal sense?

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@ArishMell Well first off the strait is only 20 miles across so you can target ships with even standard artillery guns that is how short the distance is.

And according to a UN resolution any country that allows their territory to be used to launch a war of aggression is equally culpable and fair game so the Gulf states are the equivalent of say the other Axis countries like Hungary, Romania and the Baltics in WW2.

What the aggressor wants is irrelevant. And what about the coastal waters of the USA? 6, 7 thousand miles away? The US has no business meddling in the region.

ArishMell · 70-79, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow I agree. All this would not have happened if the US Government had not decided to wade in as an aggressor.

Not content with that, we now see it, in the shape of James Vance, trying to interfere in Hungary's internal politics.

sree251 · 41-45, M

@ArishMell

Can Iran control the West side of the Gulf and Strait in any legal sense?

If you draw a centerline between Iran and UAE at the Strait of Hormuz, both the navigational lanes - each is 2 miles wide - for ships coming thru and going out the Strait are on the Iranian side which is deep enough. The UAE side is not deep enough for safe passage; especially for the huge tankers, commercial vessels and cruise ships. Marine traffic is a lot more ponderous than vehicular movement. Ships can drift apart from effect of water currents.