Show HN: Is Hormuz open yet?

(ishormuzopenyet.com)

461 points | by anonfunction 1 day ago

42 comments

  • gloosx 1 day ago
    Hello OP, I think using an ai agent to fetch the JSON is a bit of an overkill

    Here is a node.js script for you which will fetch the data and save it to the file:

      import fs from 'fs'
      import puppeteer from 'puppeteer-extra'
      import StealthPlugin from 'puppeteer-extra-plugin-stealth'
      puppeteer.use(StealthPlugin())
    
      const browser = await puppeteer.launch();
      const page = await browser.newPage();
    
      async function fetchCoords(x, y, z = 8, station = 0) {
        await  page.goto(`https://www.marinetraffic.com/getData/get_data_json_4/z:${z}/X:${x}/Y:${y}/station:${station}`);
    
        const jsonRaw = await page.evaluate(() => document.body.innerText);
    
        const json = JSON.parse(jsonRaw)
    
        return json
      }
    
      const data8353 = await fetchCoords(83, 53)
    
      const data8453 = await fetchCoords(84, 53)
    
      const data8354 = await fetchCoords(83, 54)
    
      const data8454 = await fetchCoords(84, 54)
    
      const fullData = { ...data8353, ...data8453, ...data8354, ...data8454 }
    
      fs.writeFileSync('data.json', JSON.stringify(fullData, null, 2))
    
      console.log('done!')
    
      process.exit(0)
    
    
    Just like this, no need to spend a cent on expensive APIs or tokens
    • anonfunction 19 hours ago
      Take your upvote, love the old school hn spirit.

      Reminds me of when I was speaking at a conference back in the mid 2010's with a presentation titled "Join the dark side of APIs" or something akin to that, where I showed many of the newly popularized "single page apps (SPAs)" relied on undocumented and public APIs, often without any authorization. Immediately followed by a talk by a business type guy on API copyright or something or other.

    • TomasBM 19 hours ago
      If I had to pick one thing I like about software devs as a group, it's this: you find a problem, you solve it, you share the solution.
    • ericmcer 17 hours ago
      What is the AI agent doing in this interaction? This is a public API exposed to any browser...
      • gloosx 17 hours ago
        Well, not to every every browser, there is some cloudflare bs preventing simple curling and you actually need a stealth-mode puppeteer to go around it.
  • Jeremy1026 1 day ago
    The data being ~4 days delayed does kind of make this less useful. It is a nice concept and cool to see the historical data though. Just think the domain and the large "NO" doesn't really fit with the lack of current data.
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Totally agree, I put some text and tried to make it clear. My first intention was to find some live ship tracking API and see how many ships cross the strait, but they were all hundreds of dollars a month, and behind enterprise contact forms.
      • baq 1 day ago
        You need to send an analyst there with binoculars, a box of cigars and $15k in cash to get realtime trustworthy data
        • golem14 1 day ago
          Do these ships not use transponders? E.g., in the US you can use a SDR dongle and a RPI to read local updates. The straight isn't very wide.

          Seems cheaper than the cigars and cash.

          • dewey 1 day ago
            Transponders get turned off all the time, especially if you don't want to be targeted.
            • golem14 1 day ago
              Are they though, in the straight ? I'm not sure it's such a great move, TBH:

              Given that the baddies clearly can locate ships and see that there's no transponder, and come to the conclusion they need. "Hmm, it turned off transponders and is now moving toward the straight. It's a tanker, and not one of ours, or Russia's or China's. Let's bomb it!"

              Also, pragmatically, you could look at the transponders suddenly not showing up anymore as a sign of attempt of passage, especially if they show up later on the other side.

              But yes, that would no longer be very realtime.

              • dewey 1 day ago
                Transponders are a voluntary system, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_fleet
              • zorked 1 day ago
                The fleet serving Iran and Russia does not use transponders. It's a large fleet. Ships without transponders are just a fact of life in shipping.
                • golem14 13 hours ago
                  Sure, but for the purpose of this discussion, those ships don't matter. What matters is what the ships NOT belonging to Iran's friends do.
                  • baq 2 hours ago
                    Technically all ships crossing the strait matter as their cargos end up being bought, sanctioned or not, Iran-friendly or not; they wouldn't have crossed otherwise. If we're talking about avoiding a global recession and worst case famine in some parts of the world, the oil and gas must start moving regardless of who is the shipowner.
        • jojobas 1 day ago
          The strait is wider than horizon distance from reasonable heights. Also that's how you don't hear back from the analyst in many different ways.
        • numpad0 1 day ago
          or just a cubesat on a polar orbit with a Nikon Z9 inside
      • Jeremy1026 1 day ago
        I've done some small scale ship tracking in the past, and yeah, anything beyond finding a specific ship while it is near the shore is stupid expensive.
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      What do you think of adding prediction market data to the indication? So basically there's this:

      https://polymarket.com/event/strait-of-hormuz-traffic-return...

      My approach would be if that jumps up to 75%+ it would change to YES. And if we get into May they have one for then too:

      https://polymarket.com/event/strait-of-hormuz-traffic-return...

      You can actually see in the last 24 hours it jumped up with the ceasefire and Iran saying they would open it and fell back with reports it's been shut down again easlier today.

      Edit: I added this, I can see a few downvotes, happy to discuss here or in the github repo if anyone has strong feelings on it!

      • killingtime74 1 day ago
        i didnt downvote you but why wouldn't i just go to Polymarket directly for this
        • anonfunction 1 day ago
          I mean you obviously could, the url is a little harder to remember and it doesn't have crossing data. This was just a small fun project I did, so you're free to do whatever you like. The reason I thought of using polymarket data is I didn't have live ship tracking data which is what I originally intended to use.
          • killingtime74 1 day ago
            I don't mean to say your project is not good, quite the opposite. You successfully got the real vessel crossing data and the prediction data is sort of derived or not really based on reality but on the crowd.
  • foresterre 1 day ago
    According to the Financial Times (1), the straight is "open" but Iran is extorting fees for passing ships.

    > "Iran will demand that shipping companies pay tolls in cryptocurrency for oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, as it seeks to retain control over passage through the key waterway during the two-week ceasefire."

    If they really will start doing so for all shipping, that would be odd since the straight itself is in Oman's territorial waters. Even so, the UNCLOS convention (2) requires free transit:

    > Article 44 > Duties of States bordering straits > > States bordering straits shall not hamper transit passage and shall give appropriate publicity to any danger to navigation or overflight within or over the strait of which they have knowledge. There shall be no suspension of transit passage.

    It would be unprecedented and unlawful, but I guess previous actions of Israel, the US and Iran have shown our world is beyond adhering to laws and agreements now.

    (1) https://www.ft.com/content/02aefac4-ea62-48db-9326-c0da373b1... (2) United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea: https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unc...

    • femiagbabiaka 1 day ago
      Oman and Iran are splitting the fees RE: the statements by Iran.
      • AnimalMuppet 1 day ago
        But collected by Iran, not by Oman. Which is weird, if it's really Oman's territorial waters.
      • FrustratedMonky 1 day ago
        And Trump.

        Didn't Trump float the Idea of a joint venture with Iran on the Fees?

        Amazing, that once you could make money on a toll, Trump was "there is profit in peace? lets get this peace thing going"

        • bawana 23 hours ago
          Maybe we can get israel to pay some of our billion dollars a day military costs. Adelson gave stump 750 million for campaign. There must be a lot of wallets in the us that will open for israel. Maybe a synagogue tax?
        • hattmall 1 day ago
          Trump and the US effectively control the commerce because they are the only source of insurance. Even with payments and promises from Iran, no ship is sailing without insurance coverage. There is no one insuring the ships other than the US program Trump created.
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      It's super hard to tell what's actually happening. Because I've seen other reports that Iran state media halted traffic earlier today, as reported by Washington Post[1]:

      > With Trump and Iran each claiming victory, but still far apart on key issues, traffic in the Strait of Hormuz remained at a standstill Wednesday.

      1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/04/08/trump-iran-w...

      • femiagbabiaka 1 day ago
        That's because Israel killed hundreds of civilians in Lebanon today.
        • spiderfarmer 1 day ago
          It's only hard to tell if you rely on the US billionaire controlled media.
          • quantummagic 1 day ago
            It's been very hard to watch how many people who, a few years ago, believed everything the media said about say the pandemic, now claim you can't trust them at all. Time makes "conspiracy theorists" out of all of us -- it can be hard to see just how much the media lies and distorts, until they start talking about something you care about.
            • AlecSchueler 22 hours ago
              > how many people who, a few years ago, believed everything the media said about say the pandemic

              Are you sure they're the same people and do you have examples of misinformation these people believed 6 years ago?

              • quantummagic 11 hours ago
                If you NOW believe that the media is corrupt and full of lies, but also believe that 6 years ago they were 100% truthful, you're being intellectually stunted. If you believed all the media lies during Covid, but NOW you see that the media is lying about the Middle East, you should have the intellectual honesty to at least earnestly consider if you were duped back then. Because that's much more likely than the entire media going from truthful to deceitful in that same period.
                • AlecSchueler 6 hours ago
                  So "No" then?
                  • quantummagic 6 hours ago
                    Oh don't be so obtuse. We're not going to get into a big long debate about the particulars -- it's been done a million times, you can search the details if you actually care. But you're only asking in an attempt to deflect the topic away from the reality staring you right in your face, if you had the courage to admit it.
    • foxglacier 1 day ago
      Iran hasn't ratified it and is not a party to that agreement. You can't really fault a country for not complying with an extraterritorial law made by and for other countries.
      • spwa4 22 hours ago
        If you are really of that opinion, does that include not accepting warcrimes committed by the US or Iran? Or Israel (and many other nations, including all arab countries, at least half of Africa, and more)

        You see, they have not ratified or withdrawn from the Rome treaty, which is the only UN treaty that talks about war crimes.

        What I'm saying, if countries just get to opt out of treaties, where that affects a great deal of other countries (like here, in Iran's case), and that just lets them off the hook, then you can just close up the UN and start WW3 right now. Because that just became unavoidable.

        (historically people use "war crimes" for Geneva convention violations too, but those can only be presented to the UNSC, and with China and Iran blocking everything, nothing will ever be accepted there. So if those are warcrimes, that's a purely theoretical thing only)

        • AlecSchueler 22 hours ago
          > does that include not accepting

          Their point wasn't about accepting it or not, it was about Iran not being bound by the terms of a treaty they've never ratified. And of course that applies to any state and any treaty.

          War crime is something of a different case also because it's a term which exists separately in the popular lexicon and isn't used solely to mean "not in keeping with the terms of the UNSC."

          Your comment also seems to be an example of whataboutery. It might be worth considering what prompted that.

          • spwa4 21 hours ago
            Not at all. Freedom of navigation, the specific principle Iran violates, is one of the core parts of the post-WW2 "security architecture". Which is a difficult way of saying, it's the big reason we don't have WW3. And now you say, we'll just let Iran "opt out" and firing at other people's ships is just fine now ...

            This means getting goods from other countries without paying tax to half the countries in between is no longer possible. It means no more business for any gulf country without paying Iran. It means no more business between EU and Asia without paying Spain and Morocco. It means ... Half the world's wars have been fought over that and the "way out" has been: as long as you use the seas, you get to do that, for free.

            You see the problem, I hope?

            Yes I get it, we all hate Trump, and this is "showing Trump" (not really, of all countries, the US is one of the least affected by this. This is especially horrible for Europe, especially specific European countries, most of Asia, most of South America and Russia)

            Back to wars it is, I guess. This will rapidly deteriorate to the point where a great many countries are effectively unable to trade internationally.

            • AlecSchueler 16 hours ago
              > now you say, we'll just let Iran "opt out" and firing at other people's ships is just fine now

              Could you point to where I said this?

              • spwa4 14 hours ago
                It's in the top comment of this thread. Which is the side of the argument you're defending.
            • watwut 17 hours ago
              I mean, speaking of that ... USA "opted out" when it destroyed ships in pacific and killed survivors.

              That international custom is breaking and the power openly and proudly breaking it does not get to pearl clutch when someone else does it too.

              Whether Iran looses or wins, the nice cooperative days are kind of gone.

              • spwa4 14 hours ago
                Does it really need to be said that military ships are fair game?
                • toraway 7 hours ago
                  Are (alleged) drug smugglers not engaged in any kind of active combat "military ships"?
                  • spwa4 1 hour ago
                    Yes. You're technically right, of course, in theory only by the government whose flag they bear. And that flag is not the US flag. All I can say, it is not a matter of serious disagreement that Venezuela's government was running a drug cartel. That is perhaps not why Trump cares, but it is true. So either that was going to happen or it was just going to continue ...
        • foxglacier 14 hours ago
          Absolutely. If your country didn't sign up to the law of war crimes, you don't have to follow it. That's how sovereignty works. It doesn't mean they're not bad for doing bad things but it does mean you can't defer to the law to judge them as the parent did.

          War crimes is a funny example to choose. It just happens that post WWII, the west has been impermeable with its expensive high-tech militaries so it could comfortably set a high moral standard for itself and then judge poorer countries by that same standard. For example, Palestinians commit war crimes all the time because they don't have the conventional military capability of fighting to the west's moral standards. I suppose in your view, they should just admit they're losers and take whatever happens to them, but people love to fight for the part of the Earth they feel they have exclusive rights to and no amount of labelling something a crime is going to get in the way of that.

          • spwa4 1 hour ago
            There is no responding to this. If war crimes are just fine and peachy, as long as it's your favorite party committing them ... well I hope you're not too attached to your children. I am to mine.
  • elSidCampeador 1 day ago
    I believe NASA / EU provide daily satellite imagery for free (which is of relatively high quality too). I wonder if there's a way to take that data, and training some kind of image recognition model that figures out "movement" or something to the same end? Would be cool to see
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Funnily enough, I did find a few satellite sources at the beginning for the map background and noticed that all the ships seemed to be scrubbed from the image. It's an interesting idea, thanks for the comment!

      The sources I used were:

      - ESRI World Imagery[1] — free satellite tiles, high-res, but ships are stripped out from the imagery

      - NASA GIBS - VIIRS[2] — near real-time daily satellite imagery from NASA, but resolution is ~375m so ships aren't visible anyway

      - Mapbox Satellite[3] — high-res and looks great, but same deal — ships are scrubbed from the composited imagery

      1. https://server.arcgisonline.com/ArcGIS/rest/services/World_I... 2. https://earthdata.nasa.gov/engage/open-data-services-softwar... 3. https://www.mapbox.com

      • letcree 1 day ago
        Ai2 has vessel detection models for Sentinel-1 and Sentinel-2 (ESA) along with Landsat 8, Landsat 9, and VIIRS Nighttime Lights (NASA/USGS/NOAA):

        - Sentinel-2 (10 m/pixel): https://github.com/allenai/rslearn_projects/blob/master/docs...

        - Landsat (15-30 m/pixel): https://github.com/allenai/rslearn_projects/blob/master/docs...

        - VIIRS Nighttime Lights: https://github.com/allenai/vessel-detection-viirs

        I think you can see these vessel detections at https://app.skylight.earth/ ("Try out a limited version as a guest") but they seem to be delayed by 48 hours.

        VIIRS is very low resolution but you can make out vessels with reasonable accuracy in the night-time images.

        VIIRS covers most locations at least once per day, but the other sensors capture a given location only once per 5-10 days (although when combined, Sentinel-1/Sentinel-2/Landsat should provide close-to-daily coverage).

      • lukewarm707 1 day ago
        modifying the data is crazy

        doesn't this sort of thing invalidate any kind of experiment because the instrument is no longer trustworthy

        • lazide 20 hours ago
          Most of them remove clouds for similar reasons - moving/temporary stuff in individual images makes the underlying data useless.
      • colechristensen 1 day ago
        It turns out during a war having real time satellite imagery of shipping would be a poor choice.
        • lukewarm707 1 day ago
          but what about other experiments, just saying, it's subjective

          you could, presumably, mess up other instruments than visual to interfere with enemy countries

          • yetihehe 1 day ago
            "Nice crop watering prediction model you have there, shame if someone modified source data and your crops would falter..."
            • lukewarm707 23 hours ago
              grim times

              and you just know governments will do supply chain style attacks.

              Crypto AG cia front company, encryption devices

              backdoor in RSA key generation by nsa

              exploding pagers

              usa installing bugs in enterprise router exports

    • tgsovlerkhgsel 1 day ago
      The ESA (Sentinel) data is somewhat delayed and has a low revisit period (AFAIK 6 days, although you might get lucky and get more due to overlap the further away from the equator you get) and low resolution. The Sentinel-1 data (SAR, synthetic aperture radar) might be somewhat useful for this as ships should be more easily identifiable on it and you don't have to worry about cloud cover, but probably still less useful than the delayed crossing data.

      Ships don't move that quickly; AIS data refreshed once every few hours would probably be more than good enough.

      • baq 1 day ago
        AIS over there is jammed and spoofed. Nobody wants to get bombed and certain Greek and Chinese owners run the strait dark with their crews apparently very happy about the danger pay.
    • 000ooo000 1 day ago
      Read somewhere once that trading firms use satellite imagery of shipping to inform trading strategy. Don't know any more about it unfortunately but it sounds interesting.
    • creatonez 1 day ago
      Public satellite imagery is heavily censored these days.
      • kzrdude 1 day ago
        Tangential, but I was wondering if it's maybe related: why doesn't google maps and google earth want to show satellite images of the ocean? It just overlays those areas with blue color.
        • creatonez 1 day ago
          Part of it is just because the ocean is difficult to photograph. The parts of coastline that do have ocean surface imagery have crazy artifacting from the sun reflection, and the color is inconsistent from constantly changing sediment and algae levels.

          By not providing imagery of the ocean surface, it also gets to display ocean floor topography data it wouldn't otherwise get to show without having to add another mode.

          I assume another reason is that it reduces the total size of the imagery, which would have been a plus on the 2001 computers that Google Earth was originally developed on.

          I believe you can get this imagery from other sources (aside from things that are government-censored), but you face the same problem Google did in how to stitch it together without it being a patchwork of different moments in time.

    • barchar 1 day ago
      I think sentinel-1 has a SAR instrument, it's very easy to see ships with that data
  • alerter 1 day ago
    I work for a consultancy that does vessel tracking as one of its main products, and yeah it's expensive! afaik they have remote teams with sensors at key points and a bunch of people using AI/software to manage things like GPS spoofing. So it's all pretty guarded proprietary stuff.

    Great bit of topical datavis here.

  • namewithhe1d 1 day ago
    OP, DM me and I'll get you a persistent key for this data. Not from MarineTraffic
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Wow thanks, there's not really any dm functionality on hn and I didn't see a clear social handle in your profile. https://github.com/montanaflynn/ has my email.
      • codethief 1 day ago
        You could get in touch with GP by googling for his company (see profile), finding his name through the company website (he's the CEO), and then googling for his LinkedIn/X accounts.

        Also: Cool project!

    • HiroProtagonist 1 day ago
      Very cool thing of you to do.
    • nodesocket 1 day ago
      Aren't ships turning off their AIS when traveling the straight? I think https://atlas.flexport.com/ could also be a good source.
  • bl4ckneon 1 day ago
    Very cool! I love one off intresting sites like this. Thanks for building it and talking a little bit about where the data comes from etc.

    On the note of Ai agent getting the data for you, could you not just build a chrome extention that intercepts/read the api response and then uploads it to whatever ingest endpoint you have? You could probably just call their api end points they use on the page as well but not sure what protections they have so might be a bit tricky. A custom chrome extention could do it though if they have protections.

    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Their APIs are protected by cloudflare, I didn't want to circumvent that. Also I dont really want to make a chrome extension or have a browster tab open, if that's what you meant? I've already made a cron style agent framework[1] so that's what I'd probably reach for since they can actually open the browser and inspect the network traffic to grab the json.

      1. https://botctl.dev/

      • Klonoar 1 day ago
        How is doing it via agent not circumventing it?
        • anonfunction 1 day ago
          I think I was just spit-balling what would be possible, rather than what I intend to do. As mentioned elsewhere I'm hoping to get an API key from one the data providers, I even reached out to the api behind marinetraffic.com, https://www.kpler.com/product/maritime/data-services to see if they would sponsor the project.

          This was just something I built on a whim, but I appreciate your comment and took it to heart!

  • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
    This is a nice overview, but please remove the PolyMarket indicator. It is an obscene prediction mechanism as it creates horrible financial incentives to a war situation. Its degenerate effects have been featured here before. [1]

    Let's not condone "measurements" that are effectively ways for people to gain money on important political decisions, affecting the lives of many people.

    (1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47397822

    • DaedalusII 1 day ago
      why dont UK start enforcing the Marine Insurance Act 1745 to combat this or the Life insurance act maybe 1775

      this law literally make it illegal to gamble on marine risk that you do not have direct economic interest in

      • colechristensen 1 day ago
        Are they? Is there a prediction market available in the UK which allows you to place these bets? They're regulated like gambling there.
        • roryirvine 20 hours ago
          Bookmakers and betting exchanges regulated in the UK have always been pretty careful about not adding unlawful markets.

          Anything that relies directly or indirectly on the death of a real person is covered outlawed by the Life Assurance Act, so you've never been able to bet on things like fatal crashes in an F1 race or the date of the start of the next monarch's reign.

          The Marine Insurance Act is a new one on me, but I've never seen anything which would obviously violate that. There's plenty of spread betting on oil, but mostly on prices and volumes, not the fate of individual cargoes.

    • voidfunc 1 day ago
      People don't matter, only outcomes
    • zeofig 1 day ago
      I agree polymarket is "bad", but it's also highly relevant and should absolutely be included in this web page.
      • afavour 1 day ago
        Why is it highly relevant? It’s a bunch of people betting on the outcome.
        • furyofantares 1 day ago
          I've spent years watching prediction markets and finding them to be, by a wide margin, the most accurate way for me to understand the world. It is not remotely close.

          It sucks that they're going mainstream, providing incentives to bad actors to profit from their power, and it sucks that they've gone so heavily for the predatory gambling market to boot.

          I really hate this duality.

          • verdverm 1 day ago
            > the most accurate way for me to understand the world

            Are you sure it's not survivorship bias or similar? I've seen multiple trend lines that are very confident only to switch to the opposite outcome at the very end.

            • pgodzin 1 day ago
              Are you sure you're not the one seeing the survivorship bias? Something that is 10% likely to happen ends up switching to the opposite outcome at the very end 1/10 times. There are thousands of prediction markets up at any given time, so there are going to be plenty of examples of unlikely events happening.

              But there is plenty of research on how well-calibrated they are. For example, https://polymarket.com/accuracy

              • verdverm 1 day ago
                Prediction markets, like many other micro-financialization trends, is unhealthy for society. I'm not going to trust research from the very company selling the product. History provides ample examples of how that works without the need to gamble on it.

                I would invite you to look into the statistics on foreclosures, bankruptcy, and gambling hotline traffic which compare jurisdictions that have allowed this stuff vs not. Those with demographic breakdowns help to show those most at risk.

      • michaelt 1 day ago
        > it's also highly relevant

        Polymarket has $5 million of wagers on "Strait of Hormuz traffic returns to normal by end of April?"

        The toll Iran charges for safe passage is $2 million per ship, and at current prices such a ship would be carrying about $200 million of oil. Oh, and we live in a world where a single billionaire will happily spend $200 million to influence politics.

        The polymarket number merely shows that nobody's paid to make it higher or lower yet.

    • nodesocket 1 day ago
      By this logic would you also consider trading OIL (USO) and Palantir a "obscene" market.
      • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
        Actually yes. I put my money in things I would like to see shape the future, which I think is what investment should be about: shaping the future.

        But disregarding this admittedly niche attitude; it's not the same thing. If you're opening bets on the ships being bombed before a certain date, you're opening incentives for people to do so. Although buying OIL or Palantir is morally questionable, it does not create such direct incentives.

        • trhway 1 day ago
          >you're opening incentives for people to do so

          how about short-selling of stocks, isn't it the same thing? I'd even argue that sinking one ship affects say 10 people of the crew who most probable will survive in the warm Gulf waters whereis sinking a company may affect many people life outcomes probably causing a number of indirect deaths. CDS of 2008 would be similar example.

          >buying OIL or Palantir is morally questionable, it does not create such direct incentives

          it creates direct incentives to suppress competitors - wind and solar energy for OIL, and whoever Palantir competitors are.

          Wrt. "Hormuz open" - does the "open" definition includes the new fee Iran would be taking for the strait traverse (something like $1/barrel, nice for Iran, how come that they had't implemented such an idea before? one can only wonder)

          • herewulf 20 hours ago
            > $1/barrel, nice for Iran, how come that they had't implemented such an idea before? one can only wonder

            Probably someone would have bombed their country of they had done that before. That and the reverse are pretty basic assumptions..

          • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
            > how about short-selling of stocks, isn't it the same thing?

            Yes. That's why it's illegal to short-sell your stocks just before you announce that your company is broke.

            There are no such regulations when betting on a bomb dropping on a boat.

        • nodesocket 1 day ago
          Shaping the future for “good” is not investing. That is ESG and if you value capital and capital appreciation ESG has been proven not to be a solid strategy. See also altruistic capitalism with such moral people as Sam Bankman-Fried, Elizabeth Holmes, Trevor Milton and Adam Neumann. Solid list of moral people shaping the future.
          • sharmajai 1 day ago
            Who said investing is _only_ for "capital and capital appreciation"? It can also be for social good.
          • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
            Wow. I am not sure how to respond to this as you seem to have a completely different mindset. You mean to say it is "proven" not to be a solid strategy as in not maximizing profit?

            Surely, you acknowledge that funding something is a rather direct way of actively supporting it. It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future. If you buy OIL to make money, you are still responsible for the additional investment made in oil, and are still shaping the future, whether you like it or not.

            • DwnVoteHoneyPot 1 day ago
              No, you're wrong. Oil producers produce oil... Consumers consume oil. In between the producers and the consumers, it doesn't matter whether or not trader A sells a barrel of oil to B, then B sells to C, and C sells it someone else. All of the A to B to C is net zero.

              All of the money comes from consumers. The money may change hands 100 times in between, but the money from consumers goes to producers.

              If you purchase any products which included petroleum in your life, whether it's a house, car (EV or not), or stretchy clothes, that is what funds the oil producers. That where the money goes into the system, including to investors as return.

            • nodesocket 1 day ago
              > It is your money and your choice of what you choose to invest it in, and thus how you choose to shape the future.

              Absolutely, but I believe you are conflating investing vs donating. The literal definition of investing is:

              > Allocating money (or capital) with the expectation of generating a return or profit over time.

              • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
                The fact that is used to make profit doesn't absolve us from any moral judgement. Buying stocks of a company improves its financial position allowing it to grow.

                Would you buy stocks of ClusterBombsInc over CureForCancerInc because it has slightly better prospects?

            • Invictus0 1 day ago
              The ticker is USO, not OIL, and it's abundantly clear that you have no idea how it works.
              • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
                I am responding to someone that used OIL presumably because it is - although incorrect - more clear as an example for those that are not into trading.
      • auntienomen 1 day ago
        The problem with prediction markets is fundamentally that they're unregulated.

        Modern equities and futures markets are highly evolved and rather carefully regulated systems. We've spent centuries learning what the failure modes are and how to guard against them. It's never perfect, it's never going to be perfect -- it's fundamentally a voting system -- but in general, we get liquidity and price discovery at a relatively low cost, while avoiding fraudulent and evil behavior like wash trading and criminal profit laundering.

        These new "prediction markets" have been put in place without any of those hard-earned protections. And surprise, they're rife with dirty trick and dirty money.

        • nodesocket 1 day ago
          Agree 100% that prediction markets are the wild-wild-west with no insider trading protections, pump and dump, and no oversight. It’s perverting the wisdom of the crowd and efficient market thesis.
          • watwut 1 day ago
            >It’s perverting the wisdom of the crowd and efficient market thesis.

            I mean, looking at futures and stocks now, I dont believe in those anymore anyway.

            • nodesocket 1 day ago
              typical HN comment when it comes to finance and the stock market. Over and over again the wisdom of the HN crowd is wrong in regards to stocks. Intel at its bottom (they are done, and doomed, listening to main stream media) perfect time to buy and load up. This has occurred over and over again in my 15 years being on HN, almost always they call a bottom.
              • watwut 1 day ago
                Have you seen what they do every time half sleeping Trump farts another truth social post?
      • mvdtnz 1 day ago
        Oil futures or any other commodity purchase that doesn't result in the buyer taking actual physical ownership of what they purchase is an obscene gambling market with perverse incentives yes correct.
        • isubkhankulov 1 day ago
          How will commodity producers (oil companies, farmers) hedge their risk / stabilize their prices without speculators and their “perverse incentives”?
          • DaedalusII 1 day ago
            [flagged]
          • broken-kebab 1 day ago
            We will gather special people, very wise, and completely honest. They'll form a committee, and we will call it Gosplan, comrade!
        • DaedalusII 1 day ago
          by this logic investing in SAFEs is obscene gambling with perverse incentives and we should shut down the venture capital industry
      • Octoth0rpe 1 day ago
        Yep
      • micromacrofoot 1 day ago
        objectively so
      • foxes 1 day ago
        Yes
      • antonvs 1 day ago
        Why would you not? Unless you literally don't care about damaging our planet and civilization in the interests of your own personal profit.
        • colechristensen 1 day ago
          At this point efficient pricing of energy is a strong motivator for environmental causes. Solar is ridiculously cheaper than fossil fuels and not subject to geopolitical risk. And once you have solar panels you've got energy for decades.

          Carbon-related environmentalism and greed now go hand in hand.

    • FrustratedMonky 1 day ago
      > "obscene"

      And yet, it is the wisdom of the crowds. The crowds being obscene.

      Aren't we all constantly hitting re-fresh for updates, and making predictions.

      The prediction markets are just consolidating that 'desire'.

      • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
        Well, it would be if everyone betting wouldn't have an influence on the outcome. That's "wisdom of the crowds". But what if the people putting money on the Strait being closed are the same that close them? Surely, that's no longer the wisdom of the crowds at play. Just perverse incentives.
        • FrustratedMonky 1 day ago
          I agree. Maybe an un-expected outcome.

          Who could have foreseen that a government/person would actually blatantly start a war, and manipulate bombing raids in order to manipulate a market, without being charged with a crime himself.

          In sports betting, it seems obvious if a player throws a game.

          In a war? Surely nobody would do this, right? Who could imagine it.

          • antonvs 1 day ago
            > Who could have foreseen

            Economists. They even have a term for this, dating back to the late 1800s: "moral hazard".

            Polymarket creates moral hazard when participants can profit from outcomes they can influence.

          • verdverm 1 day ago
            > In sports betting, it seems obvious if a player throws a game.

            On the other hand, since you can bet on individual pitches, you no longer have to throw the game, just the right pitch at the right time. A couple of players were caught, but who knows how widespread this really is...

            https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/46917665/mlb-betting-gua...

            https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/two-current-major-leagu...

            The focus on making money above all else, as a cultural dynamic, is degrading the human experience. It increasingly seeps into more aspects of our lives and is part of the broader Trustpocalypse.

          • tomtomtom777 1 day ago
            You don't have to imagine some giant conspiracy. Fact is, that everyone can make a bet, and there are a lot of people with knowledge and influence in the political decisions made.

            In sports, at least the outcome is only effected by the sportsmen. Here, who knows which and how many people have inside knowledge and influence that they can use that to their financial advantage?

            • FrustratedMonky 1 day ago
              Yeah. I have to agree. My view has changed in last week.

              I never imagined that markets could be so corrupted by those in power, without some other consequences somehow balancing out. Like being arrested, or removed from office.

              Forget PolyMarket. We literally have bets being made on oil futures, directly before a tweet by the president. Openly profiting on direct minute by minute manipulation. Openly corrupt.

      • heavyset_go 1 day ago
        Putting bounties on people's heads and public lynchings are the wisdom of crowds and its obscenity in action.
        • FrustratedMonky 1 day ago
          Humans need entertainment.

          Running Man was a prediction, coming true.

      • ryanschaefer 23 hours ago
        For me, I had a similar reaction to the original commenter.

        I thought about it more and realized it’s the “via Polymarket” tag on it. It reads like an advertisement. I don’t need to know the exact market the figure is from. Someone could even combine multiple ones and I still wouldn’t want to know.

  • ggm 1 day ago
    Maps can be so misleading. It looks like a dredging operation in Omani waters could alleviate this, if we'd started decades ago.

    Moving to a topographic view, it becomes clear the neck of land at "two seas view" is narrow, but tall. It would literally be moving a mountain.

    Panamax and suezmax boats are smaller than ULCC supertankers.

    Ferdinand De Lesseps time has passed. This would be ruinously expensive. Better to negotiate with rational intent.

    • acomjean 1 day ago
      It always amazed me they made ships that just fit the Panama canal. I went though the locks years ago, it was quite a trip (and how a friend got met to go on a cruise)

      https://aramcomjean.smugmug.com/Panama-Canal/i-94PDM8F/A

    • dylan604 1 day ago
      > This would be ruinously expensive.

      I bet it could have been done with the money spent on the "war"

      • ggm 1 day ago
        Yes, but in circumstances where no war is in the offing, digging a giant hole next to 50km of open water begs questions. It would be impossible to get "it's a hedge against the future" over the line.

        The same to a lesser extent applies to pipes. You could construct pipes for gas, for some of the heavier oils and crude (what I read suggests pumping crude long distance is painful, it has to be down-mixed with lighter stuff to make it sufficiently fluid) but the fertilizer? that would mean converting dry to wet and back again (nobody ships fluid weight if they can avoid it) -Or ship the inputs: ammonia, and sulphur in some liquid form, and produce the dry goods on the other side.

        But, I think pipes have a stronger case than a canal: move the things which are amenable to pipes, into pipes, and bury the pipes.

        In times past, this would have been done as a convoy. China and other nations would have stepped to the fore, conducting safe passage with their own ships on the outside edge. But we're not in a world where this kind of thing works for anyone involved. Even offering to cover insurance risk doesn't look to have motivated ship owners to pass. (in times past, the US wouldn't have put itself or it's allies in this position, hence the reference to China)

        Don't be fooled by mental images of what a convoy looks like: ships like these maintain massive separation. There's almost suction between hulls moving at this scale, if they were within 500m of each other there'd be chaos if one had to take any evasive action. In reality (I believe) even a convoy consists of a a lot of discrete, clearly demarked and targetable things, not a large mass you can "hide" in.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_traffic_separation_sch... (and a lot of links off this)

        • analog31 1 day ago
          We could have spent the money on windmills without raising any suspicions.

          On the other hand, fertilizer is fluid -- either ammonia or ureal ammonium nitrate.

          • ggm 1 day ago
            If the fertiliser production has a point in manufacture when the fluid is amenable to transport, then for sure, that would make sense.

            And you are right, if the same amount of capital and energy was invested in Solar/Wind as in Oil, we'd be in a totally different world. It's cents to dollars, considering the size of the tail AND the current investment.

            Here in Australia the problem is the royalty stream to the states. Oil and Gas windfalls when the price of equivalent supply (brent crude I believe for oil, not sure what LNG world price defines the limit) hits $100 is just amazing. The revenue stream to the states is enormous. Their motivation to transfer money into alternatives, instead of sucking on the teat, is zero. States without significant oil revenue seem to do more (SA) -States isolated from the national grid seem to do more (WA) but a site with both high insolation, and good wind, but also massive oil, gas and coal fields (Qld) does as little as possible. It's political reductionism. The crony economy is huge, Mining funds the government and the government reflects mining sector interests over all others.

  • truelson 1 day ago
    Really liked this. Made me laugh even if not intentionally funny.

    Also, given how markets and news cycles are moved with words not actions these days, I really like this site.

    There are still so many misaligned interests; this is a much tougher situation that may get some local stability for a period, but will likely return to chaos again.

    • tehjoker 1 day ago
      It’s worth remembering that the chaos is fully coming from America and Israel. The great satan indeed.
  • 4ndrewl 1 day ago
    You might want to rethink scraping marinetraffic before you get a call from their lawyers?

    https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/p/terms

    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Fair enough, I'm actually not scraping it on any automated cycle currently, I just manually copied the JSON from their site to get some ships on the map.

      There's a few live ship tracking APIs I considered but they are expensive or their free offering just straight up didn't work. I sent a few an email if they would consider sponsoring the project, no replies yet.

          - AISStream.io — https://aisstream.io — Down/not working
          - DataDocked — https://datadocked.com — Ran out of credits on a single failed request
          - VesselFinder — https://www.vesselfinder.com/realtime-ais-data — Enterprise contact form, asked if they wanted to sponsor in exchange for a link
          - MarineTraffic — https://www.marinetraffic.com, their API is like an enterprise contact form, same as above, waiting for response.
      • frm88 1 day ago
        Associated Press cites a service called Windward for their shipping data. I'm completely ignorant on the subject, but might that be of help for you? https://apnews.com/live/iran-war-israel-trump-04-08-2026#000... (second paragraph).

        Your site is very cool. Will test further.

        • anonfunction 1 day ago
          That’s actually a great find, this page[1] from them I found seems to have more recent data than I’ve otherwise been able to find. I’ll reach out to them to see if they can provide some data to power my site as I don’t like the current setup of old data and prediction market odds. Thanks!

          1. https://insights.windward.ai/

  • mohavinash 22 hours ago
    That's really cool. I tried to blog about it in the early days of the war and tried to show it in realtime as well. As you discovered, it's really expensive to get ship tracking APIs. So I also did something similar, where I took the JSON from Marine Traffic and mapped it onto a Mapbox map. I did a very rudimentary-ish job — I think what you created is much more refined.
  • dzogchen 1 day ago
    If this is using OpenStreetMap data, you should add attribution.
  • xg15 18 hours ago
    I like how this already includes the Polymarket estimate. Maybe there should be another category "new accounts on Polymarket that bet some suspiciously high amounts on those specific dates"...
  • gagzilla 19 hours ago
    Very cool! Thanks for sharing.

    There is also this one- https://hormuzstraitmonitor.com/

  • frogperson 1 day ago
    https://warescalation.com/ is also a good source of info.
    • starik36 1 day ago
      It says US-Israel Bloc military deaths - 74. Iran military deaths - 10,500 It has no information what is the source of information. Seems like made up numbers.
  • fraywing 1 day ago
    Very cool, thanks for sharing!

    What's the threshold function? Do you have graduating `No --> Partially --> Mostly --> Open`?

    Also what's the update cadence?

    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      So if it's under 25% of the prior year's crossing it goes to NO, otherwise it's counted as open.

      The update cadence kinda sucks because I didn't spring for the $200 a month live ship tracking data, so I'm using https://portwatch.imf.org/pages/cb5856222a5b4105adc6ee7e880a... which lags by 4 days which isn't great for a site like this, but was fine for me on a little side project. Open to other data sources or ideas, of if anyone wants to sponsor an API key (I did reach out to a few vendors already if they would give the project api key in exchange for a link to their site).

      The original idea was to track ships and see how many crossed the strait but as mentioned above I didn't find any free sources so I went with what I did.

  • SomaticPirate 7 hours ago
    This website is down now for me
  • dogscatstrees 1 day ago
    I don't understand why ships can't just run on Oman's side of the strait, isn't there a dash-line down the middle for territorial waters integrity?
    • incompatible 1 day ago
      Because it's only a few extra kilometres, Iran could still hit them.
  • MiSeRyDeee 1 day ago
    This will be inherently inaccurate because data was based on public AIS signal, but ships are turning off their AIS to avoid detection.

    > In an attempt to evade detection, many ships appear to be deliberately switching off their tracking system - known as AIS (Automatic Identification System). https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4geg0eeyjeo

    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Great point and something I didn't consider, I should make a big disclaimer it's not meant to be fully accurate or live data. Thanks for the comment!
      • MiSeRyDeee 1 day ago
        not to discredit what you've built though, good work!
    • krisoft 1 day ago
      Everyone talks about the AIS signal being turned off in the strait as if it is an insurmountable problem.

      Ships had their AIS on before the war, and will turn it on again once they left the area. So we can just filter for ships which previously reported a location in the Persian Gulf, and now are reporting outside of it. Similarly we can count ships which were outside of the Gulf and now are inside. We don’t need the AIS to be on while they are transiting.

  • iqbalabd 1 day ago
    Is it also possible to show similar movements for ships in the Red Sea, and make the types of ships colour coded?
  • spaghetdefects 1 day ago
    It was mentioned in this thread and quickly flagged, but Israel broke the ceasefire today by attacking civilians in Lebanon so Iran closed the straight. It was open prior to the ceasefire violation.

    France's Macron actually just commented on this: https://x.com/EmmanuelMacron/status/2041990505760772551

    • globalnode 1 day ago
      israels only option is to get america involved since they cant achieve their goals by themselves. trump unwittingly got a punch in the face last time he let himself get dragged in so doubt hell go 100% in again, maybe just lip service attacks to try and appease israel while backchannel appologising profusely to iran as he does it lol

      edit: actually im likely completely wrong, what i wrote above is what i hope would be the case but sadly in reality the violence will never end and oil prices will go up and up and up. this is just a temporary blip. the fighting will continue until something more substantial happens to sort it out in favour of one side or the other.

    • xdennis 1 day ago
      > Israel broke the ceasefire

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but Israel didn't sign any ceasefire. The ceasefire was between Iran and US. Israel separately announced (not part of any deal) that it would stop attacking Iran. It honored that self-imposed limit. Israel attacked Lebanon (Iran's proxy).

      • LarsKrimi 1 day ago
        It's impossible to know right now. Some are saying Pakistan messed up by not specifying properly to both sides what would constitute a cease fire. And US (Israel's proxy) is probably a bit unreliable in how their military command and political leadership separately interpreted the agreements as well

        /S trying to highlight how stupid it sounds when you try to retrofit sense into this conflict

    • YZF 1 day ago
      [flagged]
      • spaghetdefects 1 day ago
        Israel murdered almost 200 innocent people today. They are bombing civilians.
  • dr_robert 1 day ago
    What did you use for the map ? Mapbox ??
  • ainiriand 1 day ago
    Open to whom? AFAIK some nationalities can cross freely.
  • luxuryballs 1 day ago
    So apparently the reason they don’t just go for it is due to insurance. Because Iran technically isn’t suppose to just sink a civilian vessel, but the risk is there so the ships are ordered by the owner/stakeholder not to go due to the insurance coverage. Kind of interesting, they could technically call Iran’s bluff but it would mean, they violate the insurance contract and lose coverage? I’m just reading about this so probably not the full picture.
    • roncesvalles 1 day ago
      The capability is very real. And they don't have to sink the ship, just one Shahed drone exploding on the deck and injuring/killing a sailor is deterrence enough.
      • HiroProtagonist 1 day ago
        The Shahed drone is a 'set it and forget it' device where you program a stationary target and launch it. It would not work well for moving targets, like ships.
        • FpUser 1 day ago
          Russia has been modifying Shahed drones for quite a while. May be they've shared back or Iran got creative on their own
        • worik 1 day ago
          > The Shahed drone is a 'set it and forget it' device where you program a stationary target and launch it. It would not work well for moving targets, like ships.

          The Iranians are quite handy at modifying their drones....

    • tokai 1 day ago
      No insurance has been fixed for a while now. Its as simple as shipowners not wanting to lose their boats and their future earnings potential.
      • cwillu 1 day ago
        And their crews not wanting to lose their lives.
  • anonfunction 1 day ago
    Another funny thing about this was this morning I checked if the domain isthestraitofhormuzopenyet.com was available and it was, and by the time I made the site locally, put it on vercel I went to buy the domain to point DNS to it someone had bought it! I renamed it to the current site url / repo which i think might be a little nicer to type, but crazy that we had same idea on apparently the same day. I was also just telling a friend about simultaneous invention aka multiple discover[1] a few days ago, so another case of the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon[2]!

    1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery

    2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frequency_illusion

    • soco 1 day ago
      I was also surprised to see that arewegreatyet.com is in use already...
  • ananandreas 1 day ago
    May be possible to improve the delay by reviewing ship geolocation data. Those are open to public and there is probably many apis for it
  • amusingimpala75 1 day ago
    Missed opportunity for “arewehormuzyet.com”
  • spwa4 1 day ago
    Obviously the situation has significantly improved since then, your website is given outdated information.

    https://www.vesselfinder.com/?p=OMKHS001 (click on map, zoom out). At this moment ~18 ships transiting. Not sure what the normal capacity is, and I think it's probably a bit more than this ... but it's at least mostly open.

  • insane_dreamer 1 day ago
    Very cool. I agree with some others that the YES/NO is confusing since we actually don't know due to the lag.

    And wtf is a _fishing_ ship from Panama doing in the middle of the straight?

  • seattle_spring 1 day ago
    Cool! Heads up, you're probably running afoul of some TOS by hiding the map data attributions.
    • anonfunction 1 day ago
      Ahh, thanks I'll remedy that now, wasn't intentional I'll blame Claude.
  • goodluckchuck 1 day ago
    I think there’s difference between A) whether ships are traversing the straight, and B) whether the straight is open / closed / could be traversed.

    It’s very well possible that the straight is safe, but the vessels are unnecessarily cautious.

  • stavros 1 day ago
    I'm not really very up to speed on this, can someone explain how the strait is actually closed? Are the Iranians threatening to sink any ships that pass by, or what? How come any ships don't turn their transponders off and try to make a run for it?
    • roughly 1 day ago
      > How come any ships don't turn their transponders off and try to make a run for it?

      Because the cost of failure is death and the crew aren’t going to risk it, and the other cost of failure is a couple hundred million dollars in ship and cargo and the insurance companies aren’t going to risk it either. This is like asking why your DoorDash driver wouldn’t just try to run the police blockade to get you your burrito.

    • Quothling 1 day ago
      Kattegat where I live is probably double the width of Hormuz and if you're in a small ship you can probably sail most of those 140 km. Not without risk, but you'd be relatively safe for the most part. Big ships can't though, so even though there might be 50km on each side of them they could potentially have a shipping lane which is only a few hundred meters wide.

      I can't say that I know anything about Iran, but if we were to close our straits off so you couldn't enter the north sea from the baltic sea then our navy would rapidly deploy various different mines that lay on the bottom on the shallower parts and control the shipping lanes with things like suicide drones. I imagine Iran would do something similar, only they've probably been preparing for it a lot more than we have.

    • MattDamonSpace 1 day ago
      They’ll sink ships or cause damage with low cost drones or missles

      The strait isn’t wide enough, Iran can see any ships attempting

      • stavros 1 day ago
        I see, thanks. Looks like the strait is 77 km wide, which isn't one ship's width but probably not wide enough that binoculars wouldn't see everything.
        • cwillu 1 day ago
          The navigable width where it is deep enough is significantly narrower.
          • stavros 1 day ago
            Good point, thanks.
    • luxuryballs 1 day ago
      From what I was reading Iran likely wouldn’t sink a civilian vessel but because the risk is there due to the threat they don’t do it because it would violate the contact for their maritime insurance, meaning even if you had a brave crew and orders to go, you lose all your insurance coverage against the loss if something goes wrong.
    • megous 1 day ago
      I'm sure tankers are huge and show up easily on naval radars.
    • croisillon 1 day ago
      [flagged]
  • davidguetta 1 day ago
    4 day delay kinda kills the point of the map no?
  • blobbers 1 day ago
    IRGC targeting systems have entered the chat.
  • einpoklum 1 day ago
    Iran (and various news sources) have claimed that the straights are not now, and in fact never have been, closed - provided the relevant ship was not involved/linked to the attacks on Iran, and that it coordinated with Iranian authorities.

    So, it could be that:

    * Iran is lying and that has not actually been an option.

    * A lot of the ships which would otherwise have transitioned are involved with the war somehow.

    * The relevant parties have decided not to coordinate transitions with Iran, for various reasons

    * The data displayed at the link is partial for some reason.

    • sethops1 1 day ago
      No need for baseless speculation, it's well known that no insurance company is willing to insure transit through the straight while it's an active war zone.
  • saltynews 10 hours ago
    [dead]
  • sidraarifali 1 day ago
    [dead]
  • cramsession 1 day ago
    [flagged]
    • ktallett 1 day ago
      Not the first time they couldn't keep to a ceasefire for even a day, let alone 24 hours. Exactly the same as what happened with Palestine last year as well.
      • mandeepj 1 day ago
        > Not the first time they couldn't keep to a ceasefire for even a day,

        They are obsessed with wars, murders, and chaos

        • cramsession 1 day ago
          Yes, and they're actively monitoring this site to flag and bulk downvote anything that sheds light on their crimes (like this whole thread).
      • megous 1 day ago
        Last year (March 18) Israel killed 174 children and 412 people in total in a day when violating a Jan 19 ceasefire to restart the genocide. Then proceeded to starve hundreds to death and severely compromise health of tens of thousands during the following months, while killing 1000s of aid seekers, that they forced into killing fields under starvation, like this:

        https://t.me/hamza20300/375017

        After this, they'll certainly not stop at bombing a few cities, or leveling villages today, that they can get away with because of western support.

      • xdennis 1 day ago
        Please tell me what ceasefire Israel signed? Is it in the room with us?
  • LAC-Tech 1 day ago
    It doesn't matter - Israel was able to ethnically cleanse and occupy large parts of Southern Lebanon, without undue Iranian interference. Mission accomplished for MIGA.

    The "Israel First" administration of the US will happily trade Iran's permanent control of an international waterway for the expansion of Israel.