all 6 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 4 points 32 minutes ago

not a huge fan of the precedent this sets ngl

  • source
  • [–] [S] 3 points 55 minutes ago (4 children)

    The unsettling part isn’t that tankers are lingering over cables. It’s that nobody can easily distinguish a ship having a very boring afternoon from one preparing to disconnect entire countries. Apparently the global Internet now depends on whether a tanker captain feels like dropping anchor.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 43 minutes ago (3 children)

    I imagine there would be divers and explosive charges being placed for these types of operations, but anchors are still a very real risk

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 39 minutes ago (2 children)

    An anchor is a cheap way and gives everyone a wonderfully convenient excuse: »Oops, maritime accident.« The cable ends up broken either way, and proving intent becomes almost as difficult as repairing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 2 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 5 points 4 hours ago

    Several tanker ships linked to Iran have been loitering over subsea Internet cables in the Gulf of Oman near the Strait of Hormuz—a possible indication that the Iranian government is preparing to attack such undersea infrastructure in response to any renewed US and Israeli strikes.

    The movements of three sanctioned tankers and an Iranian fishing boat have been tracked near major undersea cables by the maritime intelligence firm Windward in October, according to the Financial Times. Six active cables currently cross through the contested Strait of Hormuz, linking the Middle East to Europe, Africa and Asia, with two more cables having segments under construction in the region.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 hours ago

    Smart move, at this point every major power probably has charges on internet cables

  • source