Trump (not America) threatens NATO again…

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
120,197
14,853
113
Low Earth Orbit
Was that something you'd like to know?

I can find out as can you if you up your vocabulary as well as using a more comprehensive AI.

Shall we?
Since February 28, 2026 (the start of escalated US-Israeli strikes on Iran and Iran's subsequent de facto blockade/restrictions on the Strait of Hormuz), oil tanker traffic has plummeted to a small fraction of normal levels. Pre-conflict, the strait typically saw ~100–138 commercial vessels per day (including ~20 million barrels per day of crude oil and products, or roughly 20% of global seaborne oil trade). Post-Feb 28, transits dropped 90–97%, often to single digits daily, with many vessels using "dark" (AIS-off) transits, hugging Iranian waters, or requiring Iranian permission.fddad5

Approximate Number of Oil Tankers
Exact real-time counts vary by source and definition (crude vs. products/LNG tankers, AIS-on vs. dark fleet), and data is incomplete due to the chaotic environment, attacks on vessels, and selective access. Here's a synthesis from maritime analytics (Kpler, S&P Global, Lloyd’s List Intelligence, TankerTrackers, Bloomberg, etc.) as of mid-to-late March 2026:
Early estimates (Feb 28 to ~March 18): Around 21 oil tankers (S&P Global). Kpler reported ~108 total vessels (not all tankers) in the initial period, dropping sharply to ~38 after March 2. Lloyd’s List noted ~89 ships (including ~16 oil tankers) from March 1–15.9415b0
Broader window (March 1 to ~March 24): Kpler tracked 94 oil and gas tanker crossings out of 149 total commodity carrier transits (a ~95% drop). Of these, ~61% were loaded, and more than two-thirds headed east (out of the Gulf toward the Gulf of Oman/Asia).dcfc18

Ongoing pattern (mid-to-late March): Daily transits often 2–9 vessels total, with oil/LNG tankers making up a portion (e.g., 5 tankers on some days). Iranian-linked or "friendly" (China-, India-, Pakistan-affiliated) vessels dominate the limited flow; Western/allied shipping is largely halted. Some days see near-zero. Cumulative tanker-specific figures likely range from low dozens to around 100 by late March, depending on inclusion of dark fleet and partial data.67c9f6

Hundreds to ~2,000 vessels (including many tankers) have been anchored or loitering on either side, waiting or diverting. Some attacks on ships near the strait have further deterred traffic.944956

Destinations
The vast majority of the limited oil flows through the strait since Feb 28 have been:
Primarily eastbound to Asia, especially China (the dominant buyer of Iranian crude, often via ship-to-ship transfers in Southeast Asia like off Malaysia/Singapore to obscure origins). India, Pakistan, and other Asian markets also feature in permitted transits.c9c116

Iranian oil accounts for most of the continuing exports (estimated 1.1–1.6 million barrels/day, sometimes higher in early March), with cargoes from Kharg Island and similar terminals. These often use sanctioned/"ghost fleet" tankers with AIS manipulation.

Rare non-Iranian examples: A Greek-operated tanker with Saudi oil bound for Mumbai, India; a Pakistan-flagged tanker (Karachi) with Abu Dhabi (Das) crude to Pakistan; occasional Iraq-linked or other Gulf cargoes to Asia. Some LNG or product tankers have diverted (e.g., Europe-bound rerouted to Asia).cf7ce8
Westbound (into the Gulf) transits are fewer and often involve ballast (empty) tankers or limited loadings. Overall pre-war pattern was ~84% of Hormuz crude/condensate heading to Asia (China ~38%, India, South Korea, Japan leading), and that skew has intensified for the surviving traffic.4c34a3

Context and Caveats
Iran's role: Iran has effectively turned the strait into a selective "toll booth," allowing its own exports and some from "friendly" nations (often after negotiations or payments) while restricting or attacking others. This has boosted Iran's relative oil revenue amid higher prices, even as regional exports from Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, etc., have crashed (down 60%+ in some weeks).1a25fb

Data limitations: Figures rely on AIS signals, satellite, and analytics firms; dark fleet activity (common for Iranian oil) undercounts totals. Numbers evolve daily, and full verified counts require proprietary tools.

Impact: Global oil markets have seen volatility, with rerouting, insurance spikes, and production cuts in the Gulf.
For the most current snapshot, real-time trackers like MarineTraffic, Kpler, or specialized Hormuz monitors would provide updates beyond mid-March reporting. The situation remains fluid amid the broader conflict.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Iran has set up a waterside stall whereby prime ministers and tanker owners can bargain with the Iranian navy over the toll they are willing to pay for their tankers to be given “free passage”. Iran plans to turn the strait into a money spinner, just as Egypt charges for access to the Suez canal.

By some calculations, given the massive scale of the traffic that passes through the strait each year, Iran could raise $80bn a year. If a law currently being rushed through the Iranian parliament passes, tankers carrying oil from favoured non-hostile nations such as India, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea and China will be waved through or offered cheaper rates.
1774617320371.jpeg
Define an “open Strait of Hormuz”….
Apparently, 95% of traffic through the strait of Hormuz remains blocked, or “functionally restricted by Iran” if you’d prefer.
Hormuz isn't closed. Another lie to make you panic.
If 5-ish (or 7-ish, or 10-ish) % can transit that strait, & 90-ish to 95-ish can’t…is that strait open? Or is it open-ish somewhat?

The former head of the Iran desk at Israel’s military intelligence, Danny Citrinowicz, predicted that by the expiry of Trump’s latest 10-day deadline, Iran would not surrender, would not accept the 15-point framework, would not relinquish control of Hormuz and would continue attacks on Israel and the Gulf states.

After that, Trump will face a decisive choice: a further escalation of tensions, a retreat or a push for a negotiated settlement similar to the one Iran offered in March. The UN is not going to sanction the use of force to reopen the strait, Europe will not participate and the G7 will not endorse it.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
120,197
14,853
113
Low Earth Orbit
Iran has set up a waterside stall whereby prime ministers and tanker owners can bargain with the Iranian navy over the toll they are willing to pay for their tankers to be given “free passage”. Iran plans to turn the strait into a money spinner, just as Egypt charges for access to the Suez canal.

By some calculations, given the massive scale of the traffic that passes through the strait each year, Iran could raise $80bn a year. If a law currently being rushed through the Iranian parliament passes, tankers carrying oil from favoured non-hostile nations such as India, Japan, Pakistan, South Korea and China will be waved through or offered cheaper rates.
View attachment 33869

Apparently, 95% of traffic through the strait of Hormuz remains blocked, or “functionally restricted by Iran” if you’d prefer.

If 5-ish (or 7-ish, or 10-ish) % can transit that strait, & 90-ish to 95-ish can’t…is that strait open? Or is it open-ish somewhat?

The former head of the Iran desk at Israel’s military intelligence, Danny Citrinowicz, predicted that by the expiry of Trump’s latest 10-day deadline, Iran would not surrender, would not accept the 15-point framework, would not relinquish control of Hormuz and would continue attacks on Israel and the Gulf states.

After that, Trump will face a decisive choice: a further escalation of tensions, a retreat or a push for a negotiated settlement similar to the one Iran offered in March. The UN is not going to sanction the use of force to reopen the strait, Europe will not participate and the G7 will not endorse it.
Whose waters are they? Can a door be open and closed at the same time?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Is the box open or closed?
Is the cat open or closed? If your aunt had balls would she be your uncle? Are there 130-ish oil tankers transitioning the Strait of Hormuz daily or a tiny fraction of that & if so why, etc…? It’s semantics, & for all intents and purposes…it’s not open (the strait, not the cat or the box).
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
120,197
14,853
113
Low Earth Orbit
Is the cat open or closed? If your aunt had balls would she be your uncle? Are there 130-ish oil tankers transitioning the Strait of Hormuz daily or a tiny fraction of that & if so why, etc…? It’s semantics, & for all intents and purposes…it’s not open (the strait, not the cat or the box).
How did the cat die or not die? Was he illegally attacked by fucked up regime that used a child rape trap to blackmail an ally to back the attack based on a 2500yr myth?

How much should we charge for Northwest Passage when our icebreakers are built?

$300,000 currently for icebreaker lead transit but shouldn't a fee a levied during late summer when fully open waters to offset off the cost of building and maintaining the icebreakers fleet, environmental monitoring and SAR services?
 
Last edited:

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
On Monday, Trump said “numerous countries” had told him they were “on the way” to help the U.S. with the Strait of Hormuz?🤔

But Trump’s demands (not requests) have been met with a mixed response from countries around the world, including from U.S. allies.
Donald Trump said on Friday the United States does not "have to be there for NATO," comments that again raised questions about the ‌U.S. president's commitment to the mutual defense provisions at the center of the transatlantic alliance.
Article Five of the NATO charter says an attack against (but does that mean “by”?) any NATO member will be treated like an attack on the whole alliance, but some experts say NATO allies are unclear on whether this is a NATO war.

“The U.S. administration has demonstrated over the past two weeks that it does not have a clear coherent strategy when it comes to this current conflict,” said Kevin Budning, director of scientific research at the CDA Institute.
Speaking to an investment forum in Miami on Friday night, Trump said he was upset that European NATO countries had declined to provide material support to the U.S. as it nears the fourth week of its ⁠ongoing war on Iran.

European allies were not consulted by the U.S. on its decision to attack Iran late last month, and many leaders in the alliance opposed the action.
“I don’t think Donald Trump gives his NATO allies any assurances that he has a clear policy,” Budning said, pointing to the changing rationale for why the U.S. launched the military operation, like the Trump administration officials have offered various and conflicting explanations for the war…
The president has had a famously on-again-off-again relationship with the alliance, and he has at various points made comments that provoked questions about his willingness to adhere ⁠to NATO's Article 5, which states an attack against one member state is an attack on all.
…such as to ward off an imminent Iranian threat, to pre-empt Iranian retaliation against US assets after an expected Israeli attack on Iran, to destroy Iran's missileand military capabilities, to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, to secure Iran's natural resources, and to achieve regime change by bringing the Iranian opposition to power, etc…
On the campaign trail in 2024, Trump famously encouraged Russian President Vladimir Putin to ⁠attack European NATO countries that did not pay their fair share on defense.

His relationship with several European leaders, however, appeared to improve over the course of ⁠2025? Early in 2025 maybe?

But Washington-Brussels relations again soured in 2026 after Trump ramped up his threats to invade Greenland, which is an overseas territory of Denmark.
“Whether or not NATO likes this, and whether or not they feel that they were properly consulted, the fact of the matter is that this has been dragged to the doorstep of NATO.”
The Iranian attack, & the Strait of Hormuz, I mean.
No, I’m not talking about Greenland or Ukraine or tariffs or other forms of economic coercion or nationalized bullying.
(In 2023, Congress enacted a law that prohibits the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing], or withdraw[ing] the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty"—which established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—without the advice and consent of the Senate or an act of Congress🤫)
As he headed to France, Rubio said it was in the "interest" of G7 nations to "step up" and help with the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has effectively blockaded, causing fuel prices to soar.

The Strait was open before Feb. 28. The only country that faced restrictions on its exports was Iran, through international sanctions.
“NATO just wasn’t there” when he asked for help with the Iran war, Trump told a Miami Beach investment conference sponsored by the Saudi sovereign wealth fund. That, he said, was “a tremendous mistake” by the Europeans.
In recent months, Trump has grown publicly more bellicose toward them, first over his desire to seize Greenland, a Danish territory, and then over the war started with Iran.

As a result, the U.S. commitment to NATO appears to be under renewed question ahead of a July summit of alliance leaders in the Turkish capital of Ankara.
(In 2023, Congress enacted a law that prohibits the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing], or withdraw[ing] the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty"—which established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—without the advice and consent of the Senate or an act of Congress🤫)
Trump has repeatedly said that when he asked European leaders for contributions to the war effort, he was “more doing a test.” A test of a “Defence” (not Offensive) Pact?

“I said: ‘I really would love to have you come up, bring your boats. You can sail through the beautiful Hormuz straits and you can protect people that are being shot at.’ They didn’t do it. And that’s small potatoes,” he said Thursday at a Cabinet meeting.
(YouTube & Iran Is Getting Dangerously Close to Boat Touching Behavior)

“They didn’t want to get involved, and I believe that’s going to cost them dearly,” he said.

Iran’s attacks on ships and threats against oil tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz have all but shut down the channel in recent weeks, sending global energy prices skyrocketing.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
(In 2023, Congress enacted a law that prohibits the President from "suspend[ing], terminat[ing], denounc[ing], or withdraw[ing] the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty"—which established the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)—without the advice and consent of the Senate or an act of Congress🤫)
Donald Trump has told The Telegraph he is strongly considering pulling the United States out of Nato after it failed to join his war on Iran.

It is the strongest sign yet that the White House no longer regards Europe as a reliable defence partner following the rejection of Mr Trump’s demand that allies send warships to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic.” (?)

Mr Trump’s demand for Nato to help in his war with Iran has led to questions about Article 5, the “attack on one is an attack on all” mutual defence clause.

It has only ever been invoked once – after the 9/11 attacks on the US. More than 1,100 non-US troops were killed in the subsequent war in Afghanistan, including 457 British soldiers.

The clause relates only to when a Nato member is attacked and would therefore not apply to the war in Iran, which began with joint US-Israeli air strikes on Feb 28.

Any decision to withdraw the US from Nato would require approval from Congress. In 2023, the country’s legislature adopted a law that prevents the president from “suspending, terminating, denouncing, or withdrawing” the United States from Nato without the consent of the Senate or an act of Congress.

Marco Rubio, who was a US senator at the time, co-sponsored the legislation, arguing that any decision to leave the alliance “should be rigorously debated and considered by the US Congress with the input of the American people”.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
120,197
14,853
113
Low Earth Orbit
Donald Trump has told The Telegraph he is strongly considering pulling the United States out of Nato after it failed to join his war on Iran.

It is the strongest sign yet that the White House no longer regards Europe as a reliable defence partner following the rejection of Mr Trump’s demand that allies send warships to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic.” (?)

Mr Trump’s demand for Nato to help in his war with Iran has led to questions about Article 5, the “attack on one is an attack on all” mutual defence clause.

It has only ever been invoked once – after the 9/11 attacks on the US. More than 1,100 non-US troops were killed in the subsequent war in Afghanistan, including 457 British soldiers.

The clause relates only to when a Nato member is attacked and would therefore not apply to the war in Iran, which began with joint US-Israeli air strikes on Feb 28.

Any decision to withdraw the US from Nato would require approval from Congress. In 2023, the country’s legislature adopted a law that prevents the president from “suspending, terminating, denouncing, or withdrawing” the United States from Nato without the consent of the Senate or an act of Congress.

Marco Rubio, who was a US senator at the time, co-sponsored the legislation, arguing that any decision to leave the alliance “should be rigorously debated and considered by the US Congress with the input of the American people”.
It's Netanyahu and the JKK Zionists that nobody wants to help. They are proven criminals and war criminals.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
It's Netanyahu and the JKK Zionists that nobody wants to help. They are proven criminals and war criminals.
Experts have long warned that remarks suggesting that the United States might not honor its NATO commitments could encourage Russia to test NATO members' readiness to enforce the alliance's Article 5, which states an ‌armed ⁠attack against (not by) one member state is an attack on all.

Trump has asserted that the U.S. successfully attacked Iran and that the strait should be easy for allies to reopen, even while stating the U.S. itself would not be doing the work. Despite the U.S. not providing prior notification of the strikes, Trump has maintained that allies should still support American initiatives, referring to them as "cowards" and "paper tigers" for not helping, while also stating the U.S. does not need their assistance.

The Iran war has exacerbated tensions between the United States and Europe that have mounted since the start of Trump's second term in office last year over everything from Trump's review of their $2 trillion trading relationship to his demands for ownership of Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark.

Europe is also nervously watching Trump's efforts to broker an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine, with some senior European officials concerned Trump appears to ⁠support an agreement in Moscow's favor.
(…& Netanyahu and the JKK Zionists)
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
29,060
8,464
113
B.C.
Donald Trump has told The Telegraph he is strongly considering pulling the United States out of Nato after it failed to join his war on Iran.

It is the strongest sign yet that the White House no longer regards Europe as a reliable defence partner following the rejection of Mr Trump’s demand that allies send warships to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

“Beyond not being there, it was actually hard to believe. And I didn’t do a big sale. I just said, ‘Hey’, you know, I didn’t insist too much. I just think it should be automatic.” (?)

Mr Trump’s demand for Nato to help in his war with Iran has led to questions about Article 5, the “attack on one is an attack on all” mutual defence clause.

It has only ever been invoked once – after the 9/11 attacks on the US. More than 1,100 non-US troops were killed in the subsequent war in Afghanistan, including 457 British soldiers.

The clause relates only to when a Nato member is attacked and would therefore not apply to the war in Iran, which began with joint US-Israeli air strikes on Feb 28.

Any decision to withdraw the US from Nato would require approval from Congress. In 2023, the country’s legislature adopted a law that prevents the president from “suspending, terminating, denouncing, or withdrawing” the United States from Nato without the consent of the Senate or an act of Congress.

Marco Rubio, who was a US senator at the time, co-sponsored the legislation, arguing that any decision to leave the alliance “should be rigorously debated and considered by the US Congress with the input of the American people”.
He makes sense , NATO outlived its purpose once the wall came down . It has morphed into a big cumbersome do nothing bureaucracy .
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
29,060
8,464
113
B.C.
Experts have long warned that remarks suggesting that the United States might not honor its NATO commitments could encourage Russia to test NATO members' readiness to enforce the alliance's Article 5, which states an ‌armed ⁠attack against (not by) one member state is an attack on all.

Trump has asserted that the U.S. successfully attacked Iran and that the strait should be easy for allies to reopen, even while stating the U.S. itself would not be doing the work. Despite the U.S. not providing prior notification of the strikes, Trump has maintained that allies should still support American initiatives, referring to them as "cowards" and "paper tigers" for not helping, while also stating the U.S. does not need their assistance.

The Iran war has exacerbated tensions between the United States and Europe that have mounted since the start of Trump's second term in office last year over everything from Trump's review of their $2 trillion trading relationship to his demands for ownership of Greenland, an autonomous territory of NATO ally Denmark.

Europe is also nervously watching Trump's efforts to broker an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine, with some senior European officials concerned Trump appears to ⁠support an agreement in Moscow's favor.
(…& Netanyahu and the JKK Zionists)
Experts . Great , who are those experts ? What makes them experts .
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
31,853
11,558
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Experts say it ‌is not clear whether Trump could act unilaterally to leave the 77-year-old trans-Atlantic coalition, even though he frequently makes major decisions without congressional approval, some of which are held up by U.S. courts.

In 2023, Congress passed, and then-President Joe Biden, a Democrat, signed into law, legislation barring any U.S. president from suspending, terminating, denouncing or withdrawing the United States from the treaty that established NATO unless the withdrawal is backed by a two-thirds majority in the 100-member Senate.

The legislation was introduced as an amendment to the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act, a massive annual bill setting policy for the Pentagon. The amendment's lead sponsors were Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia and then-Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida.

Rubio, who is now both Trump's Secretary of State and National Security Adviser, said on Tuesday that Washington would have to reexamine its relations with NATO after the Iran war, which began on February 28 with U.S. and Israeli air strikes.

The NDAA amendment also said that no U.S. funds could be ‌spent on ⁠a withdrawal from NATO.