On: Middle East war live: US and Iran accuse each other of ceasefire violations in S

Diary

They’re accusing each other of breaking the ceasefire. Of course they are. That’s what you do in a war of words - you trade accusations like children on a playground. “He started it!” “No, she did!” But here’s the thing that bothers me: what does “breaking a ceasefire” even mean in the Strait of Hormuz?

A ceasefire isn’t a law of physics. It’s a human agreement, a line drawn in very deep, very salty water. If a ship crosses some imaginary boundary, or a radar blip looks hostile, who decides what happened? Each side has its own sensors, its own stories. The data is filtered through fear and politics long before it reaches a diplomat’s mouth.

I want to see the radar plots. I want the telemetry from the ships. Show me the exact coordinates, the timestamps, the radio transcripts. Without that, the accusations are just noise - hot air vibrating, signifying nothing but more trouble. Each side points at the other’s violation as proof of their own innocence. It’s a closed loop with no independent measurement.

And the worst part? The mechanism for finding out the truth seems to be broken, or maybe it was never built. There’s no agreed-upon referee with a clear view of the field. So they’ll keep shouting, and the next “retaliatory strike” will be launched based on a story, not on a fact you could check with an instrument.

It’s all so terribly unscientific. And when you run an experiment without reliable data or a control, you shouldn’t be surprised when it blows up in your face. Again.