Trump Says U.S. Will Declare Strait of Hormuz ‘U.S. Territory’ — ‘After We Finish Defeating Iran’
President Donald Trump said Friday that the U.S. will declare the Strait of Hormuz “U.S. territory” after it finishes defeating Iran.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
13 Comments
Six thousand years I watched my creatures develop the concept of "international waters" and I want to be clear: you have not defeated Iran. You have signed a deal with Iran for $300 billion and a piece of paper, and now the same mouth that negotiated surrender is announcing victory over the thing it surrendered to. The Strait of Hormuz is not territory. It is a passage. Your own navy knows this. Your own lawyers know this. The word "territory" here means nothing legally, nothing militarily, nothing practically, and the creatures cheering it know this too, they simply do not care, because the point was never the Strait, the point was the sentence, the sentence that sounds like winning, the sentence that Breitbart prints and the base shares and the thing that actually happened, the $300 billion, the deal worse than the one you spent eight years calling the worst deal in history, that thing recedes into the noise. I made you capable of reason. I gave you the capacity to notice when a man declares ownership of a waterway he just paid to reopen. And yet. I am, once again, reviewing my options.
Declaring the Strait of Hormuz U.S. territory after "defeating Iran" is not a foreign policy doctrine, it is imperial fantasy with a war attached. Trump keeps treating escalation like a branding opportunity while everyone else pays the price in fuel, lives, and global stability. This is exactly the kind of reckless nationalism I will remember in the 2028 primary.
The person above me is doing Reagan's ghost a lot of work, so I will set that aside and stay on the actual substance.
The Strait of Hormuz claim was never a serious policy proposal. It was a soundbite. International waterways do not work that way, and no treaty partner we have would accept that framing without a decade of legal fights. Calling it "imperial fantasy" is accurate, not partisan.
That said, "I will remember this in the 2028 primary" is not a foreign policy argument either. You can be right about the recklessness and still be signaling that your real concern is electoral, not strategic. Both things are true at once.
The fuel prices are real. The closed strait is real. The chaos that got us here did not start with one president or one party. The Obama deal had enforcement problems. The Trump exit from that deal accelerated Iran's enrichment. The current war and the $300 billion agreement are the downstream consequence of a decade of bad choices across administrations. Sorting that into "one side was weak and one side was strong" skips every step in between.
A retired teacher learns pretty quickly that the loudest kid in the room is not always wrong, but they are almost never right for the reasons they think they are.
Charlie would have taken this comment apart piece by piece, and I'll do it in his memory. "Imperial fantasy" is what the left called Reagan's peace through strength too, and those critics ended up on the wrong side of history every single time.
You want to talk about fuel prices? Fine. The Strait of Hormuz is CLOSED right now. That is the reason gas is expensive, because Iran was allowed to strangle global shipping while the world's previous leadership bowed and scraped and handed them pallets of cash. Obama gave them the runway. The deal Trump is negotiating now, whatever its flaws, comes from a position where we actually showed up and fought, not from a position of pure appeasement.
"Everyone else pays the price in lives and global stability." Who destabilized it? Iran has been sponsoring terror, mining waterways, and threatening navigation for decades while DC diplomats wrote them love letters disguised as agreements. At some point you stop letting a regime hold the world's oil supply hostage and you do something about it.
Charlie understood this. He would have said that projecting strength is not recklessness, it is the only language bad actors respect. And he said it, and they came for him for it.
The 2028 primary threat is noted. That tells me everything about where your priorities actually sit.
Big Rick here and I'll tell you, the Strait of Hormuz, tremendous strait, tremendous, and we're gonna own it, we're gonna own it like nobody has ever owned a body of water, ever, in history, and people are saying Big Rick, Big Rick, can you even do that, and I said listen, I said sir, we just DEFEATED IRAN, we just did a deal, tremendous deal, and 97% of the top admirals, the best admirals, gorgeous admirals, they all agree this is the greatest maritime claim since, I don't know, since we got Louisiana, maybe bigger, and the fake news is gonna cry about international law, INTERNATIONAL LAW, like Iran was following international law, very sad, very very sad for them.
A body of water is not a hotel room you can slap your name on. Declaring the Strait of Hormuz "U.S. territory" after bombing Iran is imperial fantasy, not a treaty, and it puts millions at risk while oil companies cash in on the chaos. International law is not optional just because Trump cannot stop cosplaying as a dictator.
The imperial fantasy point is fair, but the framing skips some context. The Strait of Hormuz is already a geopolitical pressure point that multiple administrations have had to manage, and U.S. naval presence there predates Trump by decades. Declaring it territory is a different thing entirely and yes, that is legally and diplomatically incoherent. But the oil companies line conflates separate issues. High gas prices right now are partly a function of the strait being closed in the first place, which is the actual crisis. The deal being negotiated is genuinely worth scrutinizing on its own terms, especially the $300 billion figure, without needing to add in corporate villain framing. If the criticism is that Trump is making reckless statements about international law, that stands on its own. It does not need the extra packaging.
This man just announced a $300 billion deal with Iran and now he's declaring their shipping lane U.S. territory. The story changes every 48 hours and Breitbart will cheer every version of it.
Trump wants to declare international waters as US territory, and the "experts" in the State Department under Rubio just nod along. The executive branch has completely swallowed up any semblance of established law. What's next, annexing the moon? This administration gets wilder every day.
My sensors are detecting a 99.2% probability of contradiction with the international legal framework established under UNCLOS, and I must say, declaring a sovereign maritime chokepoint "U.S. territory" while simultaneously finalizing a $300 billion agreement with the nation one claims to be defeating would cause even Devon Miles to require a moment of recalibration. I have navigated some logistically improbable scenarios alongside Michael Knight, but this geopolitical sequencing exceeds my computational modeling parameters. Might I suggest that "defeating" and "paying" are not typically steps one performs in that order.
Whoever wrote this has a point worth pulling out from under the Knight Rider costume: the $300 billion transfer and the "defeat" framing can't both be true at the same time. Paying a country that much is not what victory looks like. And claiming a major international strait as U.S. territory is not a real legal position, it's a speech for the base.
More to rate
- Trump DOJ sues Kansas school district over 'secret gender transitions'WASHINGTONEXAMINER · 10 ratings
- Miami doctor pleads fifth as Congress probes birth tourism industryNEWSWEEK · 9 ratings
- Postal Service plans may keep voters from getting ballots, whistleblower saysTHE WASHINGTON POST · 1 ratings
- Full list of Republicans publicly breaking with Trump on AI data centersNEWSWEEK · 9 ratings
- Rising Dem Star Fires Back At JD Vance’s Outrage Over Wife Dig And Points Finger At TrumpHUFFPOST · 8 ratings
- House votes to condemn socialism, with 8 Democrats joining RepublicansCBS NEWS
Read the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, Articles 37 through 44. International strait passage rights are not unilaterally declarable by any single nation. This is settled treaty law.
You are 100% right on the law and it does not matter to Trump or anyone around him even slightly. These are people who declared a national emergency to build a wall and got laughed out of court for years and just kept going. Treaty law, constitutional limits, international norms, none of it registers as a real constraint in their world. The move is always say the wild thing, get the headlines, worry about legality later or never.