14 comments

  • comrade1234 49 minutes ago
    Something that I found interesting was how far away the USA had to keep its navy. What's the pint of having 11 aircraft carrier groups when you can barely even use them?
    • godwinson__4-8 19 minutes ago
      They were still used heavily... you think aircraft carriers are only useful if you can get right next to your target? A huge part of American doctrine is to kill the enemy before you are ever in their view. This is also just basically intuitive. I'm not sure what is confusing you. Its like asking why isn't a bomber parked next to its target before taking off and deploying its munitions.
      • symian 12 minutes ago
        I think the essence of the question you responded to is: The U.S. has a gigantic navy and couldn’t force safe passage through Hormuz. Why is this the case? Is the U.S. wasting its money given this?
    • dv35z 30 minutes ago
      Is there a map that shows generally where they are?
  • Toluhis 1 hour ago
    So there are tolls after all and they’re going to make Iran money.
    • JumpCrisscross 1 hour ago
      We paid to get out of kerfuffle in hopes voters forget by the midterms.
      • fny 40 minutes ago
        I'd bet Iran will find a way remind voters in October.
        • bigmattystyles 31 minutes ago
          Are you kidding, Iran is loving the current US leadership.
          • paulryanrogers 15 minutes ago
            Are they? They may come out stronger than before in the long term. Yet in the short term they've lost iconic and experienced leaders, their navy, and plenty of other military assets.

            I suppose they may be grateful to have an enemy uniting their people. Though it's not like they lost control of the opposition, even if they've had to kill a few thousand at a time.

            • colechristensen 4 minutes ago
              Their stranglehold on power is in no small way influenced by having an enemy.

              America bringing destruction and failing to bring freedom from their current tyranny has doubtfully bought us many more friends in Iran.

            • cmrdporcupine 4 minutes ago
              Oil prices are up, they're getting transiting fees now, as well, and other gulf states were weakened by the conflict.

              Assume the leadership of both Iran and the US are kleptocrats who both have motivations to have oil prices high and people dependent on them and it all makes a lot more sense.

              The Iranian people, that's a different story.

      • fhub 48 minutes ago
        Paid starting it. Paid during it. Paid to end it.

        Political capital + diplomatic reputation + military reputation + strategic reputation.. and cash.

      • ramijames 50 minutes ago
        I'm torn between "this was so bad, there's no way that they can forget" and "god, there's just enough time for just enough people to forget". I hate this.
  • BashiBazouk 19 minutes ago
    Why would they not just build a pipeline from Kuwait to Oman or even UAE to the other side of Oman? If the Keystone pipeline is profitable, so would this I would think. Seems like a temporary problem or a fine line for Iran to charge fees low enough the effort would not be worth it...
    • decimalenough 14 minutes ago
      They already did:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habshan%E2%80%93Fujairah_oil_p...

      But it obviously wasn't designed to carry all the oil going through the Strait.

      • godwinson__4-8 10 minutes ago
        It should be pointed out that facilities connected to this pipeline were targeted during the conflict.
    • godwinson__4-8 12 minutes ago
      Imagine thinking this was a good idea when you cut your ribbon after all that money and effort and then a ~$500 drone flies over and with one explosion has it leaking.

      Do you think people are dumb? Obviously beneficial and easy actions that no one has taken rarely exist in the real world. You're basically suggesting the people actually there who have a better view than you are profoundly stupid.

      • Herring 2 minutes ago
        Yeah I was thinking look at what happened to the Nord Stream pipelines near Denmark, taking Russian gas to Europe. Someone took them out (definitely not Ukraine nope never), and Russia was so salty. War is unpredictable, which is why all previous US presidents with brains avoided this.
      • colechristensen 6 minutes ago
        Oil pipelines are underground. The small proportions of above-ground sections were indeed targeted in this recent conflict but in war-prone areas so is the rest of your oil infrastructure including ships at sea and the ground based facilities can be fortified and defended.
  • walrus01 1 hour ago
    Are we all tired of so much winning yet?
  • ggm 1 hour ago
    The low bar path out for Iran is not to charge US ships insurance. The people most likely to complain would not complain if America has an exception.
    • yousif_123123 42 minutes ago
      It affects global prices and sets a precedent against rules on international waters and freedom of navigation.
    • JumpCrisscross 1 hour ago
      Does anything America imports through the Strait travel on U.S.-flagged vessels?
      • s1artibartfast 12 minutes ago
        The US import very little from Hormuz on any ship. Most buy ers are in asia or europe.
    • decimalenough 13 minutes ago
      There is zero commercial shopping through the Strait with US flags, everybody uses flags of convenience.
    • Zigurd 1 hour ago
      If the only recourse is to spend tens of billions on another bombing campaign, or even more on a land war, why would Iran be looking for a path out of anything?
      • knollimar 1 hour ago
        Americans are fueled by spite, though.
        • RobRivera 1 hour ago
          I see
        • SpicyLemonZest 40 minutes ago
          Spite against whom? Like most Americans, I have a number of grave concerns about the Iranian regime and the terrible things they've done. But on a personal level, Donald Trump has done a lot more to make me feel spiteful than either Masoud Pezeshkian or Mojtaba Khamenei have. I think everyone involved is well aware of this fact and it's going to continue to severely constrain Trump's options.
          • bijowo1676 25 minutes ago
            Americans have zero concerns about Iran, they care more about inflation and gas prices, it is evident in all surveys.

            the only people who have grave concerns over Iran are the ones who have monetary incentive to do so, or ethnical tribalism reason

            • SpicyLemonZest 17 minutes ago
              It sounds like you agree with me that Americans do not feel that fighting theocracy in Iran is a particularly high priority, and that people who care about it care more about domestic issues. So I'm not sure why you've chosen to express that in such a confrontational tone. Perhaps I've misunderstood something.
    • unmole 12 minutes ago
      > US ships

      What US ships?

    • epistasis 51 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • Zigurd 1 hour ago
    To the victor belong the insurance policy commissions
  • jmyeet 15 minutes ago
    If this was obvious to some random guy like me at least two months ago [1][2] without access intelligence community information and military assessments then this should surprise absolutely no one in the administration. I said then and have vindicated (IMHO): this will go down as the largest strategic blunder in US history. It's also going to reshape the region away from US influence because of the hollowness of US security guarantees. The GCC are going to have to deal with Iran as a fellow oil-producing nation. A big loser here is the UAE and I'm not sure that Dubai ever recovers.

    Before all of this, Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz was a theory that was never tested. Traffic passed freely. But a war was forced upon them by the US and Israel so if any of these countries (or anyone else for that matter) is unhappy at the outcome, you know where to point the finger.

    One irony in all this is that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea would guarantee free transit passage through territorial waters like the Strait of Hormuz. Iran isn't a signatory. The ironic part is that the United States isn't either.

    [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47944212

    [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47937691

  • lokar 27 minutes ago
    Look at the doc (from Iran), the things covered by the “insurance” have only ever happened (in the straight) due to Iran.
    • ajross 24 minutes ago
      Well, gosh! You're right, that's just not fair! We should make sure the relevant authority figures pass judgement or something to make them stop.

      Folks, this is what happens when you lose a war. You have to pay the bad guys to win the war in a more comfortable way for you.

      Iran knows this is a protection racket. They don't care. What're we gonna do about it? Bomb them again?

      • lokar 22 minutes ago
        lol. I’m not pro-Iran or pro-maga. I was going to make a mafia reference but wanted to stay neutral
  • fuzzfactor 59 minutes ago
    Al Capone couldn't have come up with a more "attractive" insurance plan himself.
  • zaptheimpaler 36 minutes ago
    LMAO they're learning how to do legally defensible racketeering the way US insurance companies do, very smart.
  • jimbob45 46 minutes ago
    Were straits not doing insurance at all before? Would have thought that all straits were charging for it after the Ever Given disaster. The strategy can’t permanently be “wait for the EU or US to fix it in a week as worldwide markets crash”.
    • gtirloni 21 minutes ago
      The Ever Given was stuck in the Suez Canal.

      Narrowest width:

      - Strait of Hormuz (33 km)

      - Bab-el-Mandeb (26 km)

      - Strait of Gibraltar (13 km)

      - Strait of Malacca (2.8 km)

      - Bosphorus (700 m)

      - Suez Canal (205 m) <- Ever Given

      - Panama Canal (55 m)

  • gafferongames 26 minutes ago
    ART OF THE DEAL
  • ameon 1 hour ago
    [dead]
  • 2OEH8eoCRo0 1 hour ago
    Incredible that Iran is victorious (so far).

    War is one way of forcing political will on another. The US military executed nearly flawlessly yet US leadership doesn't want to pay the cost of defeating Iran by force.

    Why even have this military if anything that affects the market makes the US cower in fear?

    • gpm 55 minutes ago
      > The US military executed nearly flawlessly

      Did they? They

      - Started the war off by (to all appearances accidentally) bombing a girls elementary school

      - Had an aircraft carrier spontaneously catch fire via laundry - forcing it to go for repairs mid war

      - Lost a bunch of very expensive aircraft, and some (though not very many per airframe) soldiers with them

      - Proved that the F-35s stealth capabilities aren't quite what they were hyped up to be by having one hit by a guided missile

      And on the strategic objectives front (where, to be fair, they were given impossible tasks)

      - Killed the person they were hoping to install as the new head of state

      - Didn't manage to destroy Iran's missile launch capability

      - Didn't manage to secure the straight of hormuz

      - Didn't manage to defend their own bases against missile attacks, instead fleeing to hotels

      • everyone 27 minutes ago
        Also..

        * USA (or Israel really) started this war on their own terms at a time of their choosing. But they werent prepared at all.

        * Incredibly valuable things like THAAD radars (like $1B per unit) were taken out by $1000 drones.. We've all seen the war in Ukraine, we all know Iran makes Shahed drones. US seemed to be completely unprepared for this.

        * US was using $1M pac 3 patriot missiles to shoot down $1000 drones, utterly failing the shot exchange problem. Also US has run down its stockpiles of many missiles to 50% or less. It will take 3 or 4 years to return many items to acceptable levels, and wont be able sell any either, leaving customers seeking alternatives.

        * Clear miscoordination and lack of clarity between US and allies. Like no-one really knew what was happening or why, leading to stuff like the ghost of Kuwait.

        Classic trump regieme action. No-one competent in the room. Just impulsively doing random shit each day with no strategy or understanding.

        • paulryanrogers 8 minutes ago
          > Classic trump regieme action. No-one competent in the room. Just impulsively doing random shit each day with no strategy or understanding.

          It has echoes of LBJ and later Nixon trying to control a massive conflict from thousands of miles a way, based mostly on vibes.

    • jcranmer 18 minutes ago
      > The US military executed nearly flawlessly

      The US military exhibited numerous flaws. To cover numerous flaws not yet covered by other replies:

      * Required the deployment of assets beyond their useful operational capability (which caused the aircraft carrier to catch fire).

      * Demonstrated that their targeting list is not only based on outdated information, but failed to update that information when informed it was outdated (which led to the bombing of the elementary school).

      * Failed to anticipate literally the one military contingency everyone expected Iran to do--close the strait. Hell, even after it was clear that was happened and everyone was screaming "what are you going to do about it?" the answer was, shockingly "absolutely nothing."

      * Failed to adequately secure supply lines to ensure that military units in the area have sufficient food. This is literally logistics 101 stuff.

      * Defined operational success criteria not based on results achieved but on effort spent--in other words, how many bombs you launched rather than whether or not the targets you wanted destroyed were destroyed.

      * Definitely several C2 issues we're not entirely privy to, given the midair collision that cost a tanker, and the loss of an AWACS unit.

      The strategic issues are even more myriad, but since strategy is supposed to be largely a civilian, not military, decision, it's not really the military's fault. Except I will note that a lot of civilians in this field do come from ex-military background, and there does seem to be a major recurring problem that CENTCOM is producing a lot of people with really bad strategic judgement that is partially responsible for this debacle in the first place. Really to the point that we should consider blackballing everyone from CENTCOM from ever having a military or civilian defense job of importance ever again.

    • nemomarx 1 hour ago
      The cost of defeating Iran military (in enough detail to stop them from firing rockets at ships or doing insurgency harassment etc) would probably take years, so honestly the whole operation was unrealistic from the outset without trying to install a favored successor.
      • ceejayoz 59 minutes ago
        It doesn't help that they nearly blew up the favored successor.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/19/us/politics/iran-israel-u...

        > Mr. Ahmadinejad was injured on the war’s first day by an Israeli strike at his home in Tehran that had been designed to free him from house arrest, the American officials and an associate of Mr. Ahmadinejad said. He survived the strike, they said, but after the near miss he became disillusioned with the regime change plan.

    • wolvoleo 1 hour ago
      Is this really just about the market? I imagine it's also about a ton of body bags coming back just around the midterms. Because that will happen in a ground war.
      • walrus01 1 hour ago
        There was never a buildup of even 1/50th of the ground forces that would have been required to occupy the major military sites, industrial sites and large cities (nevermind attempt to control the countryside). The buildup to the 2003 Iraq War started 12+ months in advance with thousands of vehicles, cargo containers, equipment and 150,000+ guys collecting in bases in Kuwait.
        • Terr_ 40 minutes ago
          Also worth noting that Iran is generally a bigger and richer country than Iraq, whichever timeframe you look at.

          To summarize in rough numbers:

          * 2x the population (today)

          * 3x the land area (today, but also probably back then)

          * 7x the relative wealth (compared to Iraq-2002, using US GDP across time as a shared baseline)

          I'm sure the US military has a much better statistical analysis... and I'm also sure it was ignored by the commander-in-chief.

    • cjbgkagh 23 minutes ago
      > pay the cost of defeating Iran by force.

      And how much do you think that cost would be? What are we at now? $139 to $1T in long term costs baked in so far.

    • JumpCrisscross 1 hour ago
      > War is one way of forcing political will on another

      War is politics by other means (Clausewitz).

    • JumpinJack_Cash 51 minutes ago
      > > Why even have this military if anything that affects the market makes the US cower in fear?

      First of all the chain of those cowering in fear begins with the the actors around ship transit , meaning the owners but also the seamen , they don't want to cross if there is a > 5% chance of being hit . And the seamen are actually being forced to accept such risk, they signed up for something else entirely, their risk preference would be around 0.0% because these days nobody dies at sea anymore.

      Without Hormuz the world runs out of oil and that is a much bigger problem than just stock market going down

      With the mines and drones and asymmetric warfare you'd need to conquer the entirety of Iran alley by alley and mountain by mountain to secure the strait for a risk tolerance in line with the aforementioned 5%

      This war was lost when the U.S. wasn't ready to intervene during the week of popular uprise against the regime, had the intervention happened back then , maybe it could have been possible to overthrow the Ayatollah system and reinstall the Shah (who btw was no Saint either)

      John Mearsheimer has called this right from the first day, he said that Iran 'holds all the cards' and he's been right on everything down to a T (no pun intended) [0]

      It has been an acrobatic adventure in the Middle East with lots of expenses and very little human losses to follow the 'Greater Israel' ambition of Israel and Bibi. But we must not forget that we killed their Supreme Leader and Religious Leader all wrapped in one , they will not let this slide and with the asymmetric war and warfare this Administration has exposed itself to potentially another 9/11 that would at that point force a ground war with lots of victims.

      [0]http://youtube.com/watch?v=DBOVT0UdHXg