this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
203 points (99.5% liked)
Pop Culture
112 readers
52 users here now
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
More of a legal question than anything but if he and any other US citizens take part in this would it constitute a violation of the US embargo of Cuba and put them at risk of imprisonment?
These flotillas are by definition illegal. They are attempts to run the blockade with civilians
I don't think it is illegal, under international law, to deliver humanitarian aid. This is why the russian tanker that is supposedly being dispatched with oil is considered a delivery of aid (US will still seize it of course) and also why Mexico is currently shipping aid, primarily food (no oil or fuel), to the island.
International Law is fake, it's a theatrical farce with no power behind it. Hasan is a citizen of the US and subject to US law, which is real and can put him in jail
This is true, but its also been illegal to travel to Cuba at all in the past, which was never enforced.
The Russians should spare a war fleet to protect the aid
If only. They will probably just let the US take it and send the oil to Haifa
The US doesn't have functional rule of law anymore, but yes, this does constitute a violation of the embargo. That's the point, actually. Most non-violent resistance that deserves to be called resistance is, in fact, completely centered around breaking unjust laws and publicly enduring the consequences of that to expose the injustice.
Isn't humanitarian aid exempt from such an embargo? This is why the Sumud Flotilla was legal, under international law (obviously won't stop the ICEraeli regime will seize the vessels anyway every time)
The question was from the US citizen perspective so it's still practically illegal.
In the case of this embargo, humanitarian aid is not illegal, but needs to be authorized by the respective US federal government authority. Which they are not gonna do in this case obviously.
With embargos in general, it depends on the case - unilateral sanctions by the US are particularly bad at causing civilian deaths due to being specifically aimed at worsening living conditions under the pretense of facilitating regime change. This is why the sanctions against Iraq killed about as many people as the invasion under Bush jr. The same kind of massive excess mortality could never been shown for multilateral UN sanctions, which are much, much more limited in scope. Basically, the US (and to some degree the EU) treats sanctions as a means of geopolitical social murder, whereas the rest of the world doesn't.
That is a fair question, one that I am not equiped to answer.