Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ISL 2004 days ago
The responsibility is ours. The net downside of such a spill is so extreme that essentially any non-military action necessary to effect a successful extraction of the oil is likely to be worthwhile.
3 comments

Even military action to affect successful extraction is worthwhile.

Every thing has a cost. Everything. Its very simple calculus really. What will be the short-term, medium-term, and long-term damage in dollars and lives of allowing this ship to break apart?

What will be the equivalent of using military action - if necessary?

Either decision will cost dollars. Either decision will cost lives. We either pay up front, or we pay down the road, but we will pay. We need to determine the cheaper cost and steel ourselves to pay it.

And which countries should conduct that military action?
Given the tensions in the region, anything is risky. Perhaps the only ones who could pull it off are the Swiss, but that doesn't solve the question who will pay for the effort, and who will get whatever remains when the salvaged cargo and ship is sold off.

My personal wild guess: nothing will happen, the ship will break apart, no one will dare and try to contain it for fear of getting targeted by someone's warship or drone, and only the nations who can afford it will clean up their coasts.

The Swiss? They don't even have a navy as far as I know.

Realistically the only one who could do this is the US. But the US may not want to fight the Houthi, which would probably be necessary.

The US paid the Russians to help them secure their nuclear material in the greatest masterstroke of nonproliferation of all human history, we can do a similar thing with the Houthi. Everyone wins.

If a major food supply fails in the Middle East, we might see another mass-migration like that driven by the Syrian conflict.

Whether we like it or not, everything today is global.

Why is this a US responsibility? The UK, France, India, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Russia, and China are all closer and have significant naval forces which could reach that tanker.
Because we live on the planet and others haven't yet stepped up.
So on that basis you're willing to sign up US military personnel to risk their lives, and US taxpayers to foot the bill? The Yemeni littorals are an active combat zone.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/5497/us-destroyer-atta...

Agreed. And the owners billed.
Who are the owners?