Hacker News Reader

Comment by JumpCrisscross | Hacker News Reader

> confused as to why no where in the article do they mention the intent of attacking the ships

This appears to be a maritime news service. Why rockets are flying isn’t practically relevant. You’ll see similar parsimoniousness in aviation reporting around war zones (and humanitarian reports around natural disasters).

There is almost always a market for concise commercial communications.

> target ships that have Israeli links or heading to Israeli ports

Ships in international waters have been targeted for not responding to hails. There is also no evidence anyone is coordinating the various militias that have fire control.

View on HN

> This appears to be a maritime news service. Why rockets are flying isn’t practically relevant.

Once a rocket goes up who cares where it comes down, that's not my department, says Werner von Braun

"In German oder English I know how to count down, und I'm learning Chinese," says Werner von Braun.

> that's not my department, says Werner von Braun

You’re seriously comparing sailors and shipping insurers to a Nazi weapons specialist?

Looking the other way is looking the other way. Everybody does that with what they're entrusted with, or doesn't.

And when a software build fails because of some very minor thing everything depends on, and someone quips "for want of a nail..." would you then say they "compared shitlib version 0.53 with a physical nail made out of iron for a horse shoe"? What's more, things that are the exact same are the only things that cannot be compared. You can compared an apple to an orange, or another apple, but not itself. It amazes me how often people in the internet draw this card.

> Looking the other way is looking the other way

No, it’s maintaining focus. Is every article that talks about the war in Gaza looking the other way on every other ongoing atrocity?

> You can compared an apple to an orange, or another apple, but not itself

You can compare anything to anything. That doesn’t make the comparison useful, nor does it keep it from speaking about its speaker as well.

No, why would it be. But a hypothetical citizen of a nation supporting Israel in their current undertaking not caring that a terrorist attack was committed with the stated intent of creating pressure to stop an on-going genocide, as if it has nothing to do with them, is looking the other way. An article leaving out that context is too. Given that what actually happened was "a flash and no injuries" -- so, nothing -- it seems outright weird to not include that.

> it seems outright weird to not include that

If I’m sailing a ship, I want the information that lets me do my job. Not shoehorned political agendas. Given a choice between publications, I’ll choose the concise one.

No, I am talking about the former director of NASA.

And it was not in regards to the sailors but in regards of your attitude shown in your comment.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com