rsemmes
Active Member
Wait, the US was sharing satellite imagery with Ukraine and Russia is... sharing satellite imagery with Iran?
It is amazing how these Special Combat Operations work...
Middle East Defence & Security
- Thread starter MaenZ
- Start date
It is amazing how these Special Combat Operations work...
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
It’s 167.9 now at the same pump (this means one dollar and 67.9 cents per litre of gasoline). In other words, it is now 53% more expensive to drive here than it was before the war (and far from the top, I am sure). We normally import about 50,000 barrels of oil per day from the Saudi Arabia (and about 450,000 more from elsewhere, mostly the US). We export about 4,500,000 barrels every day.
In the meantime:
Iran, in turn:
And Trump still has no clue what to do about Hormuz. Sounds like “we legit prepared for every scenario!”
^ Still begging for help, which he longer needed yesterday:
So much winning and everything is obliterated and gone. Victory is just behind the corner, of course. They just now have to occupy the Kharg and maybe another island or two and that would be the cat’s meow. But also, can’t leave Iran being able to threaten/control Hormuz, though they have no clue what that means and what has to be done, but Mr President is not afraid of Iran becoming another Vietnam, but is just about finished and going to leave, but not yet, but just about:
10D chess. Stupidity is rather astonishing here.
Hoover
Member
Trump is a senile, stupid idiot. He doesn´t understand why his "allies" don´t want to get involved in that shitshow. (sorry for the harsh words)
NATO is a defence treaty. If US will be attacked (like 2001) the members will come. But not if the US is the attacker.
And nobody of is kindergarten is tough enough to tell im that.
NATO is a defence treaty. If US will be attacked (like 2001) the members will come. But not if the US is the attacker.
And nobody of is kindergarten is tough enough to tell im that.
I have even more creative words for Trump, and even more for the „people“ who voted for a 2nd time. Now the gas fields in GCC are getting attacked by Iran… Germany is screwed for the 3rd time in a row.
I would also not be surprised if the US was not informed of the attack on energy infrastructure. Israel is plunging the whole world into an economic crisis. I will never understand why this tiny state is so pampered.
I would also not be surprised if the US was not informed of the attack on energy infrastructure. Israel is plunging the whole world into an economic crisis. I will never understand why this tiny state is so pampered.
Last edited:
case in point. On a side note, China is probably the most useless „superpower“ as far as geopolitics are concerned. I wish the USSR was there that could have kept this clown show in check.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
USSR, FFS if that clown show lasted much longer, the geriatric leaders would have started WW3. As for China, they are the new economic superpowr and will stay that away unless they decide to piss away trillions in the sandbox like the USA has.
What benefit would China have if the world economy shatters? Also I don‘t understand why the EU is not taking the threat of high energy prices seriously.
I think this is quite unlikely. Quite the opposite, the presence of two super powers often led both sides to be more careful around the other. That having been said, I think the bigger piece was that the USSR kept selling resources to the west even during many crisis points. Right now "the west" has sanctioned Russia, making those resources not as available, and now the US has engaged in the Middle East, drastically disrupting that supply. It's actually pretty shocking how much relations between Russia and Europe have soured, to the point where Putin recently suggested that Russia may voluntarily stop selling resources to Europe, before even the '27 ban comes in.
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Just to note, it is still the same (now) geriatric leaders that were pickled in that environment and that are leading us into the mess we are in today. Which is a big part of the problem. Ironically, there will be a new set of soon to be geriatric leaders that are pickled in present realities that will lead us into the next one. Need a couple of generations worth of die-off without the mess to turn things around and get some fresh faces and perspectives in. Some, of course, would argue that it will never happen regardless of the faces - that is, power competition, etc. In my opinion, probability of the worldwide conflict was lower back in the day when USSR existed than it is today simply due to the existing deterrence beyond mostly useless nukes. Interest of others were considered, which prevented the reckless actions by either party and those actions that did take place imposed significant costs on the said parties.
A mighty cool intercept in Israel:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Obviously no benefit but an economic C-F may happen anyways given the massive sovereign debt of many nations and other factors (climate change, increasing possibility of some new pandemic virus). China would still have its manufacturing capability and access to Asian markets and Russian oil. As the CCP control over the population is absolute, a reduction in wages to keep industries competitive in cash starved markets isn't a stretch...albeit I have minimal knowledge, perhaps Ananda will comment.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
A missed opportunity for Canada wrt NG exports to Europe thanks to junior and his many minions in Quebec and the NDP fools running BC.
I don't know a few I can name off the top of my head. China has 30% or so of its refineries capacity as spare the u.s for contrast has 5% spare. This could lead to increased share of refining capacity. Also manufacturing is still in china, energy prices being more or less evenly distributed as the price is based of the global price of oil... the tighter markets may Infact result in increased demand for goods or at least increased market share. Finally as the world leader in green energy there is the growing attraction of diversity.
That is all aside from the inherent peace divided that not being a party to war tends to go the way of stable predictable countries with strong economic bases. In the form of forgin investment and counties seeking stability in there market access. Worth noting that china has had there supply cut less then others as Iran is still shipping oil to china. And interesting there exports this month will exceed last month (Presumably the u,s is not decided to seize Chinese tankers in the area right now)
Also worth noting china does have alot of pull with Iran if chinas reserve starts to run low it would not be unrealistic to think Iran would let Chinese tankers load at Gulf states in exchange for some level of support
KipPotapych
Well-Known Member
Interesting developments. Earlier reports from the Israeli sources:
The Wall Street Journal later confirmed the theory, but added the that Trump knew of and approved the strike:
This is not hard to believe. The part of “we send a message” via Israeli strike (which gives us plausible deniability) and that message is open the strait or else. This is consistent with complete misunderstanding of the situation so far displayed by Trump and his administration (is there an administration position other than Trump’s? Note Rubio’s complete disappearance, for example, as well as other usually vocal representatives in front of cameras). I believe it is pretty clear to most now that Trump has no clue whatsoever and was probably taken aback by the illusion of the quick victory (likely described by Netanyahu as the most probable outcome to an old delusional egomaniac, who was drunk by the Venezuela OP and all the general ass kissing he has been accustomed to in the past year). Makes perfect sense from an Israeli perspective too because they are interested in escalation and don’t care about the global economy, the Arabs, etc. For them, this is a temporary inconvenience in order to achieve something Netanyahu desired since… well, forever (and it is natural strategic goal of Israel) and, like I had discussed last summer, this is the best and likely only opportunity they will ever get to wreck Iran as much as possible (unless the unlikely worst case scenario for everyone else materializes, where things get wrecked to the degree that constant US involvement is required - basically fall of the regime, civil war, and so on - this is best case scenario for Israel and the opportunity used to the fullest).
The other part of the WSJ report where Trump knew and approved is equally logical. In my opinion, beyond operational awareness, probability of Israel striking that particular infrastructure on their own accord, threatening retaliation to the most sensitive thing for Trump today, is roughly about zero. There is no way they would alienate Trump all on their own and prematurely end the war. Trump knew, I am sure. Why we know that price of oil is the most sensitive thing for Trump? Well, for once, all other things aside, they, as I proposed earlier, literally let Iran export more of its oil at higher prices through the strait that Iran does not let anyone else use (or else! Lol). We now know this is to be factual and not just my proposal:
So all this makes perfect sense and likely true. Later Trump’s reaction, I believe, confirms all of it:
And it is basically a (local, not yet absolute) capitulation/TACO/call it what you will. What a clusterfuck this whole thing is. Also, “Israel, out of anger for what has happened in the Middle East” is pretty rich. Imagine Israeli frustration about what happened!
Anyway, this is what happens when you walk into a war completely blind, against the better judgement of your own (extremely capable) intelligence. Moreover, you can’t simply declare a victory and walk away because you no longer control things, even lose escalation dominance at the least and control at the worst. Big tactical/operational success (which is completely expected), but a huge strategic failure (which is actually also expected all the same). A very expensive and consequential excursion. Funny enough, does anyone still remember the most recent National Security Strategy of the United States? If not, you should read it and the Middle East part in particular.
The Wall Street Journal later confirmed the theory, but added the that Trump knew of and approved the strike:
This is not hard to believe. The part of “we send a message” via Israeli strike (which gives us plausible deniability) and that message is open the strait or else. This is consistent with complete misunderstanding of the situation so far displayed by Trump and his administration (is there an administration position other than Trump’s? Note Rubio’s complete disappearance, for example, as well as other usually vocal representatives in front of cameras). I believe it is pretty clear to most now that Trump has no clue whatsoever and was probably taken aback by the illusion of the quick victory (likely described by Netanyahu as the most probable outcome to an old delusional egomaniac, who was drunk by the Venezuela OP and all the general ass kissing he has been accustomed to in the past year). Makes perfect sense from an Israeli perspective too because they are interested in escalation and don’t care about the global economy, the Arabs, etc. For them, this is a temporary inconvenience in order to achieve something Netanyahu desired since… well, forever (and it is natural strategic goal of Israel) and, like I had discussed last summer, this is the best and likely only opportunity they will ever get to wreck Iran as much as possible (unless the unlikely worst case scenario for everyone else materializes, where things get wrecked to the degree that constant US involvement is required - basically fall of the regime, civil war, and so on - this is best case scenario for Israel and the opportunity used to the fullest).
The other part of the WSJ report where Trump knew and approved is equally logical. In my opinion, beyond operational awareness, probability of Israel striking that particular infrastructure on their own accord, threatening retaliation to the most sensitive thing for Trump today, is roughly about zero. There is no way they would alienate Trump all on their own and prematurely end the war. Trump knew, I am sure. Why we know that price of oil is the most sensitive thing for Trump? Well, for once, all other things aside, they, as I proposed earlier, literally let Iran export more of its oil at higher prices through the strait that Iran does not let anyone else use (or else! Lol). We now know this is to be factual and not just my proposal:
So all this makes perfect sense and likely true. Later Trump’s reaction, I believe, confirms all of it:
And it is basically a (local, not yet absolute) capitulation/TACO/call it what you will. What a clusterfuck this whole thing is. Also, “Israel, out of anger for what has happened in the Middle East” is pretty rich. Imagine Israeli frustration about what happened!
Anyway, this is what happens when you walk into a war completely blind, against the better judgement of your own (extremely capable) intelligence. Moreover, you can’t simply declare a victory and walk away because you no longer control things, even lose escalation dominance at the least and control at the worst. Big tactical/operational success (which is completely expected), but a huge strategic failure (which is actually also expected all the same). A very expensive and consequential excursion. Funny enough, does anyone still remember the most recent National Security Strategy of the United States? If not, you should read it and the Middle East part in particular.
It appears Iranian military boats continue to operate in the Hormuz. This is very interesting because in theory the US should be able to destroy them from the air pretty easily. Maybe Iran still has some SAMs that prevent US helos from hunting these boats, or maybe Iran has hardened facilities where they're operating them out of, and they only come out when Iran has other ISR to direct them against a specific target like a tanker.
t.me
Военный Осведомитель
Спутниковые снимки горящего в Ормузском проливе контейнеровоза и группы катеров ВМС КСИР Ирана, действующей по близости несмотря на угрозу со стороны американской авиации. Координаты местоположения судна: 26.4294, 56.8285. Военный Осведомитель
t.me
This is different because it was avoidable and all thanks to an incompetent administration in the US and a completely deplorable population (1/3 of the US). Real estate dealer and another guy whose sole qualification is that he’s 47’s son in law to negotiate a nucler deal? Come on…
Some nations have already begun fuel rationing. Is China happy with this? Or any other nation for that matter. It‘s about time to put the foot down and say enough is enough.
————————-
I don‘t understand why the GCC doesn‘t take steps to remove the US from the region and this goes for many of its „allies“. The presence of the US has become a liability. It‘s not providing any security to its Indopac allies if they just abruptly moved interceptors to the ME. Gulf is suffering from a war that was started exactly thanks to the US‘ presence. I think it‘s about time to scale back the presence of the US worldwide. It‘s a country that has completely gone insane enough to elect an incompetent, geriatric, corrupt clown TWICE.
Last edited:
This is a terrible mess. It complicates things further that the US and Israel most likely have overlapping but not identical objectives for this war. I am guessing the US will try to end this as soon as possible whereas Israel probably can stomach to keep this running a bit longer, probably they still hope for regime change, and they also want to destroy much more of Irans military capabilities before the war ends. Analysis: What does Israel want from the Iran war? Is it different from what the US wants? | CNN Politics
In other news, joint statement from the leaders of United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Japan today on the Strait of Hormuz, which included the following statement:
How should we interpret this? Are they now opening for the possibility of doing something where they just a few days ago said they would do nothing? Or am I misreading this?
In other news, joint statement from the leaders of United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Japan today on the Strait of Hormuz, which included the following statement:
Joint statement from the leaders of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Japan on the Strait of Hormuz: 19 March 2026 - GOV.UK
How should we interpret this? Are they now opening for the possibility of doing something where they just a few days ago said they would do nothing? Or am I misreading this?
rsemmes
Active Member
That statement could have been signed by the Monty Python... or Kafka.
"We condemn in the strongest terms recent attacks by Iran on unarmed commercial vessels in the Gulf, attacks on civilian infrastructure including oil and gas installations."
But condemns Iran.
"Maritime security and freedom of navigation benefit all countries. We call on all states to respect international law."
But not all states.
"Appropriate efforts"
If they are appropriate, I don't think it means anything against Israel or the US.
Does it mean that tankers from Iran, Russia and China (India?) will have to transport all that gas/oil? How are we not going to escalate that "defence" of ships, like in Vietnam?
Are we going to fight this war for Israel? I cannot see any other way to read that statement, a great message for the US, "Carry on"; but who is planning what? Who is that message for, another threat against Iran?
SolarisKenzo
Well-Known Member
You guys are overthinking it.
It's just a declaration.
Italian defence minister said this morning:
Ho letto interpretazioni totalmente errate sul documento approvato oggi da alcune nazioni europee e non, tra cui l’Italia. Nessuna missione di guerra. Nessun ingresso ad Hormuz senza un a tregua e senza un’iniziativa multilaterale estesa. Siamo consapevoli però dell’importanza per tutti di lavorare per la riapertura in sicurezza di Hormuz e riteniamo che sia giusto ed opportuno che siano le Nazioni Unite ad offrire la cornice giuridica per un’iniziativa pacifica e multilaterale per raggiungere questo obiettivo.
Translation:
I have read completely misinterpretations of the document approved today by some European and non-European nations, including Italy.
No war mission.
No entry into Hormuz without a truce and a comprehensive multilateral initiative.
We are aware, however, of the importance for everyone of working towards the safe reopening of Hormuz, and we believe it is right and appropriate for the United Nations to provide the legal framework for a peaceful and multilateral initiative to achieve this goal.
It's just a declaration.
Italian defence minister said this morning:
Ho letto interpretazioni totalmente errate sul documento approvato oggi da alcune nazioni europee e non, tra cui l’Italia. Nessuna missione di guerra. Nessun ingresso ad Hormuz senza un a tregua e senza un’iniziativa multilaterale estesa. Siamo consapevoli però dell’importanza per tutti di lavorare per la riapertura in sicurezza di Hormuz e riteniamo che sia giusto ed opportuno che siano le Nazioni Unite ad offrire la cornice giuridica per un’iniziativa pacifica e multilaterale per raggiungere questo obiettivo.
Translation:
I have read completely misinterpretations of the document approved today by some European and non-European nations, including Italy.
No war mission.
No entry into Hormuz without a truce and a comprehensive multilateral initiative.
We are aware, however, of the importance for everyone of working towards the safe reopening of Hormuz, and we believe it is right and appropriate for the United Nations to provide the legal framework for a peaceful and multilateral initiative to achieve this goal.
As I mentioned in a previous reply, forming a task force to open and escort vessels in the Straits of Hormuz isn't starting from scratch as the institutional capabilities, knowlege is available due to prior experience in the Red Sea.
But THE key issue is visibility and transparency of US / Israel's plans. Who would be willing to deploy naval vessels there when there doesn't seem to be a concrete strategy or plan and of course, the complete lack of transparency.
But THE key issue is visibility and transparency of US / Israel's plans. Who would be willing to deploy naval vessels there when there doesn't seem to be a concrete strategy or plan and of course, the complete lack of transparency.
SolarisKenzo
Well-Known Member
There will be no mission whatsoever as long as there are fightings.
So I'm not really sure what we are talking about.
So I'm not really sure what we are talking about.