• TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    50
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes. And were fined. But that’s perfunctory so that they can make more money smuggling oil. The sanctions are solely enforced by the U.S., without consent of the UN.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes.

      Your own link argues against you:

      "But the Suez Rajan case was unique at the time of the transfer because it was owned by the Los Angeles-based private equity firm Oaktree Capital Management. "

      At the time the ship was being used for moving US sanctioned oil, it was own by a US company. That supports @[email protected] 's statements.

      • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        50
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is correct and why they could prosecute this case. But they have been seizing oil since 2019. And even if all those tankers were partially owned by US companies, it still doesn’t change the fact that this amounts to piracy. Defending international injustice with legalese doesn’t absolve what this is. When China seizes our tankers because the parts were made in China, will you defend them?

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          37
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          And even if all those tankers were partially owned by US companies,

          If the tankers or company is operating in the US, then they are bound by US laws no matter where they are in the world. A company can’t benefit from the protection of the US government and laws at home only to go abroad to commit US crimes.

          • TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            36
            ·
            1 year ago

            Many countries can use that justification. Why are you defending an act that you’d condemn if it was done to America?