next up on the fuck around and find out list is Iran.
QuoteIranian Sources are reporting the Attack tonight near the U.S. Consulate within the City of Erbil in Northern Iraq was carried out by 6 Fateh-110 Tactical Short-Range Ballistic Missiles launched by the IRGC.
no proxies to hide behind with this.
With some good 'clandestine nudging,' I feel Iran is ready to implode. Which is probably why they want to start something...to save their sorry theocratic-governmental buttocks.
Quote from: Gusington on January 15, 2024, 08:54:40 PMWith some good 'clandestine nudging,' I feel Iran is ready to implode. Which is probably why they want to start something...to save their sorry theocratic-governmental buttocks.
And that's exactly why Iran has continually engaged in this kind of inciteful violence since the 80's.
The Communist idea of "perpetual revolution" was adopted by Iran from the very first day the Islamic Republic took power. Part of that endless revolution involves constantly demonstrating to its people that the Revolutionary Government is strong, in charge, and not afraid of any outside pressures to reverse progress.
The more they keep external threats alive and well to their people, they have less to fear internally.
I hope Praying Mantis Part 2 starts soon.
so who had Iran launching missiles at Pakistan on their bingo card?
Pakistan is saying there will be consequences for the attack and has withdrawn it's ambassador from Iran.
:shocked: Makes perfect sense in a world that makes no sense at all.
Feels like the Ayatollah discovered his grandkids were playing Hearts of Iron, and got into the game recently, then thought hey I could actually do this...!
China is telling Iran and Pakistan, both its allies, to play nice. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-67999465
QuoteChina on Wednesday urged Pakistan and Iran to show "restraint" and "avoid actions that would lead to an escalation of tension". Foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning added that Beijing saw the countries as "close neighbours".
Nothing to ruin your cabal's plan than something like this. Am I talking out of my ass? Maybe, but I don't think Gordon Chang of the Gatestone Institute is. https://www.businessinsider.com/xi-jinpings-battle-with-chinas-military-could-drag-us-ww3-2024-1 While explaining the December 29 purge of Chinese senior commanders unwilling to go to war, Chang makes the following statement:
QuoteAll the conditions are in place for a third world war, Chang said: There is widespread conflict — war in Ukraine, insurgencies in Africa, Israel's war on Hamas in Gaza, and military activity in the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, and Indian Ocean.
"Remember, in the 1930s, there were separate wars that merged into what we now call World War II," he said.
"The same dynamics exist today, and it's entirely possible, and some people can even argue that it's probable that these will merge into a global conflict," Chang said.
A Chinese invasion in East Asia would drag Western countries into something larger, he predicted.
"I think that Xi Jinping is taking two pages out of Mao's Peasant Revolution playbook."
"One of them was to encircle the cities from the countryside. And in this, I think that Xi Jinping views Ukraine, north Africa, Israel as the countryside, and the United States as the city," he said.
I'm not trying to misdirect the thread but China's statement to Iran and Pakistan gives an indication of what it wants from its ally, Iran. It hasn't said anything to rein in Iran's actions until now, when nuclear armed Pakistan has threatened consequences.
so Pakistan seems to be hitting targets in Iran right now.....
Quote from: GDS_Starfury on January 16, 2024, 09:56:33 PMso who had Iran launching missiles at Pakistan on their bingo card?
Not me. I blame Russia for opening this whole can of worms by showing that there's no superpower but the USA and we
can't afford to annihilate anybody cuz we already control everything so why blow anything up? It will just make consummers suffer.
Question: what do you get if you combine carpet bombing with modern precision?
Answer: fewer Iranian-proxy military bases across the Middle-East today.
80+ bases reported hit in the past several hours, action appears to be ongoing.
Update: most (maybe all?) ordnance was spiked down by B-1B Lancers (staging out of Lakenheath UK at least, possibly elsewhere). Time to destroy the target packages, about 30 minutes.
ISW confirms more than 85 bases scoured. https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/iran-update-february-2-2024
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ahhuab/clips_showing_secondary_explosions_in_albukamal/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3&rdt=60173&force_seo=1
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ahgsme/clips_of_secondary_explosions_going_off_after/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ahfzel/us_airstrikes_targeting_irgclinked_warehouse/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ahfp5u/rockets_cook_off_from_an_iranian_munitions_depot/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
Enforcer Matt is collecting news on the strikes and posting them on a map here (along with related Houthi-war news from the past few days). Today's links are in olive color.
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?entry=yt&mid=1DDkdAWQO_i0m8YSubTGMGg1Ljk2LV_M&ll=34.36126622785165%2C41.65219348731058&z=9
President Biden properly stated: "Our response began today. It will continue at times and places of our choosing."
Previously the admin had stated: "We will respond at times and places of our choosing." The time was several hours ago. The targets were, to quote Zola from the Captain America First Avenger film, "EVVVERYYY WHEEEERRRR!" :RockOn:
SecDef Austin confirms, more strike packages set up and being processed.
I do love it when the US military flexes and reminds everyone why they're at least a generation behind.
80+ targets hit within 30 minutes. LOL
https://twitter.com/i/status/1753602875497054248
Imagine the many feelings Putin must be going through! :ThumbsUp:
I saw a Zeihan youtube where he claimed a strike on karg island oil terminal would destroy iran's whole economy in 1 hour. Only reason we don't do it is because China will flip out cause most of it's oil comes from there.
Wow, two reasons to do it.
The moment China goes after Taiwan, that terminal is going away. (Also per Zeihan if I recall correctly.) But even if it doesn't, it doesn't matter, because (along with the British) we control alllllllllll the ocean lanes between China and practically everywhere else including Iran.
China gets the Wonka meme ("nothing sir good day"), so their only hope is for us to be too distracted by other things to feasibly care about Taiwan. Otherwise, making active war on Taiwan is a death sentence for the Chinese government sooner rather than (demographically) later.
As I recall, Zeihan suspects Xi and his cronies might actually go after Taiwan for precisely that reason: so that when they lose, and lose hard, they can blame 'the West' for all of China's internal suffering and hope to pull together some government support that way in the face of collapse.
Wow...this is a lot of firepower.
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/HBPaK-0aUAA1ecV?format=jpg&name=4096x4096)
I read that the last time there was that much firepower was back in 2003.
Quote from: W8taminute on February 20, 2026, 07:27:30 PMI read that the last time there was that much firepower was back in 2003.
I heard 1991...Desert Storm.
i guesstimate its only a question of the moonphase and weather now
and if the CINC suffered a Bogey in his morning golf round or not, of course
usually in the past I would have thought new moon darkness is the day, but today with no land operations involved and mostly standoff attacks, maybe full moon lighting is better for all the optical sensors in the final approach stage to secure the 1-2m CEP?
3/3 full moon, next new moon 3/19 (a little far stretched after the actual ultimatum)
so its on
9:30am Time on Target local time Teheran is unusual for a start of an operation.
so it started with a decapitation strike against the higher executives and administration. And we learned that Iran's airdefence is so week that day time is not a problem at all
Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei killed, senior Israeli official says
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/irans-supreme-leader-ali-khamenei-killed-senior-israeli-official-says-2026-02-28/?utm_source=reddit.com
Quote from: al_infierno on February 28, 2026, 04:42:31 PMIran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei killed, senior Israeli official says
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/irans-supreme-leader-ali-khamenei-killed-senior-israeli-official-says-2026-02-28/?utm_source=reddit.com
Iranian TV has confirmed his death
https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-announces-major-combat-operations-iran
Apparently, a Kuwaiti FA-18 shot down the 3 F-15Es using AIM9s. That explains why there weren't any fatalities.
Quote from: Tripoli on March 04, 2026, 03:39:57 PMApparently, a Kuwaiti FA-18 shot down the 3 F-15Es using AIM9s. That explains why there weren't any fatalities.
This had to be a crime. I find it very unlikely that this was an accident.
This had to be a crime. I find it very unlikely that this was an accident.
[/quote]
I likewise have trouble believing it wasn't deliberate, ie, a case of "sudden jihadi syndrome", or something similar. With that said, I was present when the F-14 shot down the RF-4 in 1987, and that wasn't done in the middle of a mass drone attack. People can be incredibly stupid. The confusion of it occuring in the middle of a drone attack might explain the otherwise inexplicable.
In a Hornet at close range? One shot, ok. Two shots, maybe...if you're entirely incompetent. Three shots? I say impossible. There is no way a pilot at that range could confuse a Strike Eagle with a drone. It's just too big to not have had a clear tallyho.
[Deleted as duplicate]
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on March 04, 2026, 05:47:01 PMIn a Hornet at close range? One shot, ok. Two shots, maybe...if you're entirely incompetent. Three shots? I say impossible. There is no way a pilot at that range could confuse a Strike Eagle with a drone. It's just too big to not have had a clear tallyho.
I agree, it looks really bad. Especially with their being 3 targets downed. The Kuwaiti F-18 pilot has some 'plaining to do. With that said, I'm keeping a semi-open mind about this (I personally think that the sudden jihadi scenario better fits Occam's razor). But to play the Devil's Advocate: I suspect the Kuwaiti pilot was not particularly competent. Forty years ago, stories of "poor headwork" among some of the Middle Eastern students in the jet pipeline were common. If that is still the case, then the situation could be explained by a sub-par pilot combined with confusing combat situation and/or bad commands from the ground controller.
For those interested in why the USN sank the Iranian Frigate yesterday, below is a link to a map of the shipping lanes in that hemisphere:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/07/07/business/economy/iran-strait-of-hormuz-tankers.html?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email (H/T CDR Salamander, who is very much worth reading)
The frigate was sunk 40 nm off the coast of Sri Lanka. While only 1500 tons, it was armed for 4 C802 SSMs and a 76mm gun, so it was a threat to the SLOCs in the IO.
Quote from: Tripoli on March 04, 2026, 03:39:57 PMApparently, a Kuwaiti FA-18 shot down the 3 F-15Es using AIM9s. That explains why there weren't any fatalities.
I wonder whether they will paint kill marks F-15s on that Hornet...
Apparently, an Iranian supply ship (likely supplying the recently sunk frigate) has turned itself over to Sri Lankan authorties for internment. Good choice by the Captain of the vessel, as he probably saved both his ship and the lives of his crew:
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2026/03/05/iranian-warship-surrenders-to-sri-lankans-first-time-ship-interned-by-neutral-nation-since-second-world-war/
So, it's probably not good that we're firing a bunch of generals, right? :HideEyes:
Quote from: al_infierno on April 03, 2026, 09:33:36 PMSo, it's probably not good that we're firing a bunch of generals, right? :HideEyes:
Relax.
Definitely still a dangerous environment.
^I definitely was saddened by that news yesterday.
Yeah, haven't watched it yet, but I saw indications Russia had sent anti-air to Iran. Was that it?
WSO from the downed F-15E rescued.
That was an expensive strike:
- 1x F-15E
- 1x A-10
- 1 or 2 damaged Blackhawks
- 2x Hercules
- 2x Little Birds
Quote from: Redwolf on April 05, 2026, 06:55:22 AMWSO from the downed F-15E rescued.
That was an expensive strike:
- 1x F-15E
- 1x A-10
- 1 or 2 damaged Blackhawks
- 2x Hercules
- 2x Little Birds
I personally measure cost in lives. We lost nobody. The operation was a great success. :notworthy:
While it is laudable and a genuine moral booster for any pilot who get shot over hostile territory I can guarantee you heads are going to roll over this
Can you imagine that they would have made the same decision in hindsight that this rescue was going to destroy at least 4 probably more invaluable in theater assets at a conservative cost of $350M
you know they would have said no and done something else probably a lot more riskier in lives to save equipment - that's how the military is actually paid to think of its people - they are resources as well in the calculation of war.
Quote𝐍𝐎𝐖 𝐓𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐂𝐑𝐄𝐖 𝐈𝐒 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐂𝐔𝐄𝐃 — 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐀𝐂𝐓𝐔𝐀𝐋𝐋𝐘 𝐇𝐀𝐏𝐏𝐄𝐍𝐄𝐃 𝐎𝐕𝐄𝐑 𝐈𝐑𝐀𝐍
Both crew members of the downed F-15E Strike Eagle are safe. President Trump posted "𝘞𝘦 𝘨𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘪𝘮" on Truth Social Saturday night. The WSO — a Colonel — sustained injuries but is expected to make a full recovery. Now that the fog of war is clearing, here's the full operational picture of the most dangerous combat search and rescue mission since Operation Epic Fury began.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐭𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧 — 𝐀𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐥 𝟑, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔
An F-15E Strike Eagle from the 𝟒𝟗𝟒𝐭𝐡 𝐅𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐒𝐪𝐮𝐚𝐝𝐫𝐨𝐧, deployed from RAF Lakenheath in the UK, was sh∗t down by Iranian fire over southwestern Iran while conducting a deep strike mission — the kind of high-risk penetration run the F-15E was built for (Air & Space Forces Magazine). It was the 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐔.𝐒. 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐦𝐲 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝟐𝟎 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐬 (Associated Press).
The specific weapon system that brought it down has not been officially confirmed by the Pentagon. Iran claimed it used a "new air defense system" — analysts assess the most likely candidates are Iran's 𝐁𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐫-𝟑𝟕𝟑 long-range mobile system (domestically produced), the Russian-made 𝐒-𝟑𝟎𝟎, or the Russian-supplied 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐛𝐚 shoulder-fired MANPADS — one of Russia's most advanced infrared-guided missile systems, capable of targeting low-flying aircraft and cruise missiles (NBC News, 19FortyFive). Iran initially claimed they'd downed an F-35 — wreckage photos confirmed it was an F-15E (The Aviationist).
Both crew members — the pilot and the weapons systems officer — ejected safely and made contact via encrypted radio and emergency beacons. But they landed in separate locations in hostile, mountainous terrain. The clock was already ticking.
𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝟏: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐢𝐥𝐨𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐞 — 𝐀𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐥 𝟑, 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 𝐀𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐄𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧
U.S. special operations forces located the pilot first. 𝐓𝐰𝐨 𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 — including HH-60W Jolly Green II combat rescue helicopters — went in to extract him from Iranian territory (http://Helis.com, Air & Space Forces Magazine).
The extraction was not clean. During the rescue, Iranian forces 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔.𝐒. 𝐁𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐡𝐚𝐰𝐤 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 that was carrying the recovered pilot. Crew members on the helicopter were 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐡𝐢𝐭 — but the aircraft remained flyable and made it out with everyone on board (Axios, CBS News). The pilot was safe.
Simultaneously, an 𝐀-𝟏𝟎 𝐖𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐠 providing close air support for the CSAR mission was hit by Iranian fire. The pilot managed to nurse the damaged aircraft into 𝐊𝐮𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭𝐢 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐜𝐞 before ejecting — the A-10 crashed in Kuwait. That pilot was also recovered safely (Fox News, Military Times). So within hours of the initial shootdown, the U.S. had 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐞 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 running concurrently.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐒𝐎 — 𝟐𝟒+ 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐦𝐲 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐬
The weapons systems officer — a Colonel, whom Trump later called "𝘢 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘭" — was wounded after ejecting but 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐥𝐤. He did what decades of SERE training (Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape) prepared him for: he moved away from the wreckage, took cover in elevated mountainous terrain, activated his emergency beacon, and began evading capture (The War Zone, NBC News).
He evaded for 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝟐𝟒 𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬 in hostile territory. During that time, the IRGC and affiliated Basij militia units 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐦 on the ground. Armed tribesmen in the region joined the search (Turkiye Today). And then Iranian state television made it worse.
An anchor on 𝐈𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞-𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐓𝐕 went on the air and put a 𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧: 10 billion toman, approximately $𝟔𝟎,𝟎𝟎𝟎, for anyone who captured the "𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘮𝘺 𝘱𝘪𝘭𝘰𝘵" alive and handed him to police (𝘞𝘢𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘵𝘰𝘯 𝘗𝘰𝘴𝘵, Newsweek). A state broadcaster calling for the capture of a wounded American servicemember. That's what he was evading.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐈𝐀 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐲𝐞𝐝 𝐈𝐫𝐚𝐧
Before the rescue team went in, the 𝐂𝐈𝐀 𝐥𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐠𝐧 inside Iran — spreading disinformation that U.S. forces had already located the WSO and were conducting a ground exfiltration. While Iranian forces were confused and chasing phantom operations, the Agency used what a senior administration official called its "𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘲𝘶𝘦, 𝘦𝘹𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴" to actually find him (NBC News, Axios).
"𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘭𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘩𝘢𝘺𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘤𝘬 — 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘣𝘳𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘈𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘦, 𝘪𝘯𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘊𝘐𝘈'𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴," the official said (NBC News).
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐱𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 — 𝐌𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭, 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐝, 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐦𝐞
Late Saturday night (April 4 EST), a 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐜𝐞 was inserted into Iran, linked up with the WSO, and began the exfiltration. They were not alone — 𝐝𝐨𝐳𝐞𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐟𝐭 provided overhead cover, and U.S. Air Force jets conducted strikes against Iranian forces to prevent them from reaching the extraction zone (Trump statement, Al Jazeera, Fox News).
Roads around the extraction area were 𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐝 — cratering them to create massive traffic jams as IRGC units scrambled to respond. The bottleneck worked: Iranian forces couldn't get through in time.
Then things got complicated. 𝐓𝐰𝐨 𝐂-𝟏𝟑𝟎 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬 that landed at a forward position inside Iran to carry the commandos and the rescued airman out 𝐠𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝. Commanders made the call: fly in 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐂-𝟏𝟑𝟎𝐬 for the extraction and 𝐛𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐮𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐰𝐨 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐟𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 rather than let them fall into Iranian hands (SOF News, CBS News). That's American hardware destroyed by Americans on Iranian soil — because leaving it behind was not an option.
A "𝘮𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵" occurred at the extraction site (Al Jazeera, CDM Press). Special operators engaged IRGC forces directly. Despite the ground combat, the stuck aircraft, and the IRGC forces closing in — 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐦𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞. Zero U.S. casualties in the WSO rescue operation.
𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥'𝐬 𝐑𝐨𝐥𝐞
Israel was not a bystander. Israeli intelligence 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐔.𝐒. 𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞 the missing WSO — providing intelligence support during the search (Axios). And in a move that shows the depth of the operational coordination: 𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐈𝐫𝐚𝐧 so as not to hamper the search and rescue efforts (Axios). The IDF paused its own combat operations to give the Americans a clear field. That's an ally.
𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐩 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞
Trump was briefed immediately after the shootdown and monitored the operation throughout (Fox News). The White House deliberately withheld confirmation of the pilot's rescue on Friday — Trump later explained: "𝘞𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘫𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘥𝘪𝘻𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘦 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯." Operational security over headlines.
When the WSO was finally extracted, Trump posted: "𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘔𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘶𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘧𝘧 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘴𝘵 𝘥𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘚𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘦 𝘖𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘪𝘯 𝘜.𝘚. 𝘏𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺, 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘥𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘊𝘳𝘦𝘸 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘔𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘢 𝘩𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘦𝘭." He confirmed the Colonel "𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘫𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘦" (Truth Social).
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine held briefings throughout the crisis. Earlier in the campaign, Hegseth had stated that Iran's missile volume was "𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯 90%" and their drone capability "𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯 95%" (C-SPAN briefing, March 31). The F-15E loss proved that even a degraded enemy retains dangerous capability — but the flawless execution of the rescue proved that American forces can operate deep inside hostile territory, take fire, lose aircraft, improvise under combat conditions, and still bring every person home.
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐮𝐥𝐥 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐨𝐥𝐥
In the 48 hours surrounding the shootdown and rescue:
𝟏 𝐅-𝟏𝟓𝐄 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐤𝐞 𝐄𝐚𝐠𝐥𝐞 — sh∗t down over southwestern Iran. Both crew rescued alive.
𝟏 𝐀-𝟏𝟎 𝐖𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐠 — hit by Iranian fire during CSAR, crashed in Kuwait. Pilot rescued alive.
𝟏 𝐁𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤𝐡𝐚𝐰𝐤 𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 — struck during pilot extraction, crew wounded, aircraft remained flyable.
𝟐 𝐂-𝟏𝟑𝟎 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐬 — stuck at forward position inside Iran, destroyed in place by U.S. forces.
𝟑 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐂-𝟏𝟑𝟎𝐬 — flown in under fire to complete the extraction.
𝟎 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐭.
The United States lost 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐚𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐟𝐭 (one shot down, one combat-damaged and crashed, two destroyed in place) and had a fifth damaged — and 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞. That is not a failure of airpower. That is a demonstration of what happens when a military prioritizes its people above its hardware.
𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐠𝐨𝐭 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐭 𝐝𝐨𝐰𝐧. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐚 𝐝𝐚𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚 𝐛𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐈𝐀 𝐫𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐚 𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲. 𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐨𝐮𝐭. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐰 𝐮𝐩 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦. 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐞.
𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭'𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐦𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲. 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭'𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝.
Quote from: Con on April 05, 2026, 02:08:31 PMWhile it is laudable and a genuine moral booster for any pilot who get shot over hostile territory I can guarantee you heads are going to roll over this
Can you imagine that they would have made the same decision in hindsight that this rescue was going to destroy at least 4 probably more invaluable in theater assets at a conservative cost of $350M
you know they would have said no and done something else probably a lot more riskier in lives to save equipment - that's how the military is actually paid to think of its people - they are resources as well in the calculation of war.
No heads will roll at all. This will be viewed as a great success. Just open a history book. The US military has always placed lives above hardware with an ethos of leave no man or woman behind. Look at the countless rescue operations in Vietnam where several aircraft and helicopters would routinely be downed trying to rescue lost airmen. Said no one ever, we can't go in...the risk in hardware is too great.
QuoteInvestors placed an approximately $950 million bet on oil prices falling just hours before the U.S. and Iran announced a ceasefire, the latest large wager on the direction of the world's most traded commodity ahead of a major policy announcement by President Donald Trump.
On Tuesday, investors sold a combined 8,600 lots of Brent and U.S. crude futures at 1945 GMT, according to LSEG data.
At around 2230 GMT on Tuesday, Trump stepped back from threatening the destruction of "a whole civilization" and announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran, knocking crude futures, down by some 15% to below $100 a barrel at the start of Wednesday's official trading session.
Taking large positions on oil prices rising or falling is not unusual as traders use them to hedge large volumes of physical oil trade.
But such deals are very rarely done in big lots, as traders prefer to use sweeping orders across many exchanges and ask brokers to use algorithmic trading over many hours to execute the order to avoid impacting prices with their bets. Large orders also are seldom executed after settlement, which happens Monday to Friday at 1830 GMT.
The bet follows similar moves on March 23, when investors sold $500 million in oil futures just 15 minutes before an announcement by Trump that he would delay attacks on Iran's energy infrastructure, which stunned markets and then triggered a 15% drop in the crude price.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/traders-place-large-950-million-bet-oil-price-falling-hours-ahead-ceasefire-2026-04-08/
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 04, 2026, 04:37:12 AMQuote from: al_infierno on April 03, 2026, 09:33:36 PMSo, it's probably not good that we're firing a bunch of generals, right? :HideEyes:
Relax.
I'm really surprised that the response to the firing of top military members is a YouTube video of some guy, selling t-shirt merch.
The article below if from actual journalists from The Atlantic, and, I would argue is a better reasoned response. I mean, seriously. This YouTube guy is justifying Hegseth's firing of top military members by referencing Lincoln and MacClellan?
An Army Shake-Up in the Middle of a War
A general is ousted and the Army secretary is in jeopardy, sources say.
By Missy Ryan, Nancy A. Youssef, and Sarah Fitzpatrick
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the Army's top officer, and the White House is discussing the potential departure of the Army secretary in what together would be the biggest wartime military shake-up in decades.
Hegseth asked General Randy George, who was just over halfway through his slated tenure as Army chief of staff, to step down and retire immediately, a Pentagon official told us. Officials at the White House are also discussing the future of Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, a close friend of Vice President Vance, people familiar with the matter told us. One Pentagon official said Driscoll was expected to leave the department soon.
Hegseth and President Trump have repeatedly raved about the military's performance in the war against Iran. But George's position has been seen as tenuous since Hegseth's arrival at the Pentagon. The former Fox News host has fired senior officers who were associated with the previous administration or who had supported diversity initiatives he has dismissed as "woke shit." Hegseth and Driscoll, both Army veterans with political ambitions, have been locked in a rivalry over the past year, current and former officials have said.
Still, the timing of George's firing and the uncertainty over Driscoll's future—on the 33rd day of hostilities against Iran—risk creating instability atop the military's largest service. At least 50,000 troops and more than a dozen ships and submarines are now deployed in the Gulf region. Ground forces, including from the Army, could play a significant part in operations, which have so far focused on air and sea, as Trump considers forays inside Iran, including the potential seizure of enriched uranium or of Kharg Island, Iran's oil-exporting center.
Members of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division have been arriving in the region over the past week. Since the war began, on February 28, 13 American service members have died. Both Hegseth and George have traveled to Dover Air Force Base, in Delaware, as the fallen returned home. The United States has spent billions in Army-operated munitions to defend against Iranian drone and ballistic-missile attacks, leaving George—and now his successor—tasked with finding ways to restock that costly ordnance.
Hegseth's pace of firings across the military is greater than that of any other Pentagon chief in the modern era, including during two decades of war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since Hegseth's arrival, the Pentagon has abruptly removed the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the highest-ranking military officer), the top admiral of the U.S. Navy, and the No. 2 general at the Air Force, along with dozens of top-ranking officers and military lawyers across the services. The defense chief has not provided any detailed reasons for the departures. The Hegseth spokesperson Sean Parnell, in a statement, confirmed a CBS News report of George's departure as "effective immediately."
But Hegseth has repeatedly criticized the services' top brass for, in his view, being insufficiently loyal to Trump's agenda and overly concerned with the legalities of warfare, a position he has said stems from his experience as a member of the Army National Guard serving in Iraq. George's firing happened a day after Hegseth took the unusual step of overruling the Army's suspension of two Apache-helicopter crews who were being investigated for a flyover conducted near Nashville at the home of the musician Kid Rock, an avid Trump supporter. "Carry on, patriots," Hegseth wrote on X when he announced the move.
With such an extensive purge of the senior ranks, many officers have concluded that those who speak up or question the administration risk losing their jobs. "Three years ago it would have been a big deal," one former official told us, discussing George's departure. "But Hegseth has already fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and chief of naval operations; you could argue it's a big deal he lasted this long."
George, an Iowa native who enlisted at the age of 18, graduated West Point and became an infantry officer. He commanded troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and served as a senior aide to Lloyd Austin, the secretary of defense in the Biden administration, before the Senate confirmed him to lead the Army in September 2023 for what was expected to be a four-year term. After Trump's return in 2025, George attempted to make inroads with the new administration, highlighting the Army's steps to modernize, its embrace of the tools of modern warfare, and its deepening ties with the tech sector. But, officials have told us, he has long been a target for Hegseth.
One person familiar with the situation said the secretary may have fired George because Driscoll, with his ties to Vance, was better protected. Driscoll attended Yale Law School at the same time as Vance, and the two men have remained close. Yet Driscoll, too, is now in jeopardy. At times over the past year, Driscoll, whom the administration tapped to play a key role in peace talks to end the Ukraine war, has threatened to overshadow Hegseth. The Pentagon, in a statement to us about Driscoll's prospects, wrote: "All positions held by political appointees at the War Department are at will and serve at the pleasure of the President and Secretary of War."
For much of the past year, Hegseth appeared to be on his own thin ice with White House officials, and Driscoll's position appeared safe. But Hegseth has been a vociferous supporter of the president, who values his loyalty. And the Pentagon chief has overseen tactically successful military operations, including the June 2025 bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities and the January 2 raid to seize the Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. He is now overseeing the much more complicated U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.
Hegseth has repeatedly said the U.S. military is performing ahead of schedule on its Iran plan, striking thousands of targets. But the war effort has been dogged by a lack of clarity over its strategic aims, the resilience of the Iranian regime, and the global economic shock of Iran's closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Trump said yesterday that the war would continue for another two or three weeks, a timeline many analysts consider optimistic. The regime change that Trump initially said should follow the U.S. bombardment now appears unlikely.
It was not immediately clear whom Trump will nominate to replace George, though the general's deputy, Army Vice Chief of Staff General Christopher LaNeve, is a Hegseth ally who has risen quickly through the ranks during the secretary's tenure.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 13, 2026, 03:57:41 PM
Still passing on the YouTube channel t-shirt.
Trump Pivots to 'Least Bad Option' On Iran
The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz marks a shift in strategy—but not necessarily in outcome.
By Nancy A. Youssef, Vivian Salama, and Missy Ryan
April 13, 2026, 6:14 PM ET
President Trump may have reached the limits of what he can achieve by bombing targets in Iran—now he's trying to use economic pressure to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table. After a six-week pummeling by U.S. and Israeli forces failed to force Iran to capitulate, and a marathon weekend negotiating session ended without a deal, the United States announced that it would be imposing a naval blockade on Iran. The latest strategy illustrates just how far the war has shifted from Trump's original—albeit confusing—objectives. The principal American interest today is to walk into the next round of talks with a clear advantage, by making Iran's economic life as difficult as possible.
That is, to reach a peace deal during the already declared cease-fire, the U.S. believes that it needs to wage a new kind of war, this time by targeting Iran's economy—which depends heavily on energy exports through the Strait of Hormuz.
The blockade is "the least bad option" after the collapse of the talks in Islamabad last weekend, one former military official told us. Trump has repeatedly claimed victory in the war, but the regime remains in charge in Tehran and has used its control of the strait to impose steep economic costs on the world. Imposing a blockade will also draw the U.S. military deeper into the conflict, potentially putting Navy ships face-to-face with Iranian forces or proxies.
The war's outcome may now be decided by whether the U.S. or Iran blinks first from the economic pain and returns to the negotiating table with concessions. U.S. intelligence suggests that Iran may be more economically fragile than it is letting on, and that the loss of oil revenue from the blockade might force its hand, U.S. officials told us. But regardless of who wins, there are already a couple of clear losers. One is the rest of the world, which will suffer prolonged economic pain while Washington and Tehran engage and stare each other down at sea. The second is Trump's own reputation as a leader who has spent years calling the geopolitical shots by making maximalist threats.
Trump has had little luck in recent weeks turning his headline-grabbing rhetoric into substantive victories on the world stage. Trump and J. D. Vance made extensive and highly visible efforts to prod the Hungarian electorate into backing another term for Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, but couldn't prevent the resounding defeat of Trump's ally at the polls yesterday. European allies, in the face of Trump's hectoring, have declined to enter the war in Iran. And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has so far not stopped his country's war with Lebanon, a key Iranian demand, though he agreed to Trump's request to rein in assaults and engage in direct talks with Lebanon this week in Washington, D.C.
Even Trump's recent trolling of Pope Leo XIV—which included posting a depiction of a Christlike Trump and an accusation that the head of the Roman Catholic Church was "WEAK on Crime"—was met with a papal riposte that encapsulates how more and more global leaders appear to be feeling: "I have no fear of the Trump administration."
The blockade took effect today, but neither the White House nor the Pentagon provided much detail on how it will work. America's allies and even officials within the military were scrambling to understand the scope of Trump's order and how it would affect shipping through the strait and, by extension, the global economy.
The U.S. carried out what it called a naval "quarantine" against Cuba during the 1962 missile crisis. And the Trump administration conducted a limited blockade of Venezuela, targeting oil tankers, in the weeks leading up to the January capture of President Nicolás Maduro. But Washington rarely employs the tactic, because it is considered an act of war under international law; it's complex to implement, demanding troops and materiel; and it's inherently risky, current and former military officials told us. Speaking on the condition of anonymity to share sensitive operations details, they described for us what would be involved.
A formal blockade of the Strait of Hormuz that prevents Iranian ships and any other nations' ships leaving Iranian ports from transiting to the Gulf of Oman and the Arabian Sea would begin with air power, the officials told us. At least two aircraft-carrier groups or land-based air forces would be tasked with providing cover for seaborne forces monitoring the waterway. P-8 Poseidon patrol aircraft would watch the water and attack targets at sea. E-2 Hawkeye radar planes would fly above the fleet to detect threats and other aircraft. The U.S. would also swarm the strait with drones.
Controlling access points would take roughly a dozen destroyers and littoral combat ships. These ships, along with autonomous systems that don't require human navigation, could also be used to conduct de-mining operations. Regional partners, including the United Arab Emirates, might also contribute to the effort.
Once a suspected Iranian ship attempted to break the blockade, Marines or Navy SEALs would need to board the ship, arriving by helicopter or on small boats. One Marine Expeditionary Unit, which could provide three boarding parties at any given time, is already nearby. But after U.S. troops seize an Iranian vessel, where would it go and who would guard it? This scenario assumes that those aboard such a ship would peacefully comply with U.S. orders. What if Iran put armed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps members on its ships who resist the American operation? For riskier boarding operations, the military typically employs highly skilled Special Operations forces, but even then things can go awry. In 2024, two SEALs died during one such mission off Somalia.
How else might Iran respond to the blockade? The regime, as it did during the 39-day U.S.-led campaign, could hit back with asymmetrical tactics—laying mines or launching drones and missiles. Those attacks might target both U.S. naval forces and Persian Gulf partners, on land and at sea. A single mine would not destroy a tanker but could sink a U.S. destroyer. The Iranians could also ask the Houthis in Yemen to harass commercial-shipping vessels in the Red Sea, which the group has done before, choking off an alternate route.
In theory, the blockade will prevent Iran from exporting additional oil from its ports—a sharp reversal from the Trump administration's effort earlier in the war to lower the global price of oil by easing restrictions on the Iranian supply already at sea. Trump's social-media post announcing the blockade indicates that the United States would interdict any vessel in international waters that had paid Iran to transit the strait. "No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas," he said on Truth Social. In the Venezuela blockade, the U.S. Navy pursued ships as far as the Indian Ocean. But Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, has suggested that it is pursuing a more narrow mission focused on blockading Iranian ports. The U.S. military is also beginning a mission to clear the area of Iranian mines—but how many are hiding in the strait remains unknown, making the endeavor all the more perilous.
A blockade offers the U.S. a flexible, coercive means of imposing economic damage while minimizing direct civilian casualties. Air strikes on a bridge or a power plant, unlike a blockade, create damage that is not easily reversed. Retired Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, who commanded U.S. naval forces in the Middle East from 2015 to 2017, said that the Navy has long interdicted vessels suspected of carrying drugs or other illicit cargo from Iran, including weapons bound for allies in Yemen. U.S. sailors, he said, can manage the risk associated with unwilling crews and with anti-ship fire from shore. "If your idea is to keep up the pressure on Iran during negotiations, a blockade does that without having to resort to restarting air strikes," he told us.
But even if the blockade is successful, a return to normalcy for shipping traffic and prewar energy prices remains a long way off. Trump, in an interview yesterday with the Fox News host Maria Bartiromo, said the price of oil might come down by November's midterm elections—or "it could be, or the same or maybe a little bit higher, but it should be around the same."
Since the beginning of the conflict, commerce has slowed to a trickle in the strait, through which one-fifth of the world's traded oil normally transits. Trump's cease-fire nearly a week ago raised hopes that trade would soon resume. Now "that optimism has evaporated," Chris Newton, an analyst at the International Crisis Group, told us. "If you take what Iran and the United States have said publicly, what you have is a double blockade, and no one wants to sail through that."
The U.S. and Iran may yet return to their negotiations before the cease-fire expires next week. The 21 hours of meetings in Islamabad didn't yield a breakthrough, but officials tell us that they did create some momentum. U.S. officials described the second stretch—nearly 10 hours—as the point when the friction between the two sides abated and they began to listen to each other. The result was a framework that would allow for future talks, though one official acknowledged that the cease-fire could still end with either a deal or a resumption of conflict.
The talks produced progress on the U.S. demand that Tehran abandon its nuclear-weapons ambitions, the official told us without providing specifics. But friction over the strait persists. After all of the ordnance that the U.S. and Israel have dropped in their effort to bring Iran to heel, the verdict of global markets might ultimately prove dispositive.
In the meantime, despite Trump's threats and bluster, the U.S. may have to rely on other nations to find peace. Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey continue to try to get the talks back on track. The foreign minister of China, a major importer of Iranian oil, today urged other nations to "unequivocally oppose any actions that undermine the cease-fire or escalate the confrontation." (Trump is scheduled to travel to Beijing next month for high-level talks, which have already been postponed once because of the war.) And the United Kingdom and France this week will host talks that are intended to form a peaceful multinational mission to restore freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
And in case we all forget, our President is DONALD J. TRUMP and is solely responsible for this "excursion" or "operation" or whatever we're calling it, but not a WAR (except when it's referred to as a war).
This is who has sole control of our nuclear weapons, with literally no checks or balances to their use.
Tom Nichols is a professor emeritus at the U.S. Naval War College, and a Republican. In other words, he knows what the fuck he's talking about.
Trump's Latest Meltdown
Attacking the pope was only part of the president's disturbing night on Truth Social.
By Tom Nichols
On many recent nights, Donald Trump has been posting obsessively on his Truth Social site into the wee hours. The president, of course, has never been one for a solid night's sleep—or restrained and temperate commentary on social media—but his emotional state seems to be fraying: This weekend, he attacked Pope Leo XIV, presented himself as Jesus Christ, and then jabbed at his phone until dawn.
Judging from those posts, the commander in chief is in distress. No one can say for sure what is causing the president's bizarre behavior. Perhaps Trump's narcissistic insistence that he is always successful in everything he undertakes is feeling the sting and strain of multiple public failures, including the collapse of his campaign to dislodge the Iranian regime, plummeting approval ratings, the decline of the U.S. economy, and, on Sunday, the crushing defeat of one of his favorite fellow authoritarians, Hungary's Viktor Orbán.
But whatever is driving this decline in Trump's self-control, Americans must not shrug off the president's latest implosion. They should recover their ability to be outraged; more to the point, they must demand that their elected representatives ask questions about the course of the war and whether Trump still has the capacity to fulfill his constitutional duty as commander in chief. Too much is at risk to dismiss his outbursts as just another idiosyncrasy: U.S. forces have been at war for almost six weeks, and China is reportedly helping Iran rearm. Even if all other problems, including the economy, were holding steady—and they are not—America cannot keep ignoring the dysfunction of the commander in chief, the sole steward of the codes to a massive nuclear arsenal.
Trump has always gotten lost in his own public statements, splashing about like a poor swimmer trying to reach the shore of a fast-moving river. But the president is now flailing in blacker and deeper waters. Genocidal threats against the the Iranians, with whom America is at war, are bad enough, but his defenders will excuse them as part of the Trumpian bulldozer approach to international negotiation; aiming long screeds at the pope, as if he, too, is an enemy of the United States, is not only unhinged but entirely pointless. Trump's fusillade against the first American pope was not only politically incomprehensible—20 percent of Americans are Catholics, and most of them voted for Trump—but it was yet more evidence that the president is sinking into rage and confusion.
Why was Trump angry with Pope Leo? For the same reason that Trump ever gets mad at anyone: The Holy Father dared to criticize him. Last week, the president of the United States posted an expletive-filled threat—on Easter Sunday, no less—to destroy the ancient civilization of Iran. His supporters wrote this off as a clever gambit to bring an end to the war (which it has not). Leo called the threat "unacceptable," blasted the "delusion of omnipotence" that led to the war, and said: "Enough of the idolatry of self and money! Enough of the display of power! Enough of war!"
Of course, Trump wasn't going to take that kind of talk from some former Chicago science teacher just because the guy is now the Bishop of Rome. So a few minutes after nine on Sunday night, Trump posted a salvo of more than 300 words on Truth Social. According to the White House's official schedule, he had just landed at Joint Base Andrews after his trip to Miami, and was likely posting from the plane. His post was, in every way, bonkers. The president accused the pope of being "Weak on Crime" and "Weak on Nuclear Weapons." He said that Leo "wasn't on any list to be Pope" and that he likes Leo's brother Louis much better because "Louis is all MAGA."
And so it went, sentence after sentence of boorishness and whiny self-regard. Leo was only chosen, you see, to deal with Trump: If not for the 47th president, "Leo wouldn't be in the Vatican." The president is not a Catholic (and neither am I), but he claims to be a Christian, and an ordinary follower of Christ might pause a moment before concluding that Trump, personally, motivated the Holy Spirit to guide Rome's cardinals toward a particular successor to Saint Peter.
But Trump wasn't finished. He had recommendations for the pontiff about how to be a better Vicar of Christ, saying he "should get his act together as Pope, use Common Sense, stop catering to the Radical Left, and focus on being a Great Pope, not a Politician." Again, Trump is not a Catholic—he has referred to Communion as a "little wine" with some "little crackers"—and his track record both as a president and a person is replete with the seven deadly sins (and probably a few more that haven't made the list yet). He is also now officially the most unpopular modern president ever, so the pope might understandably pass on accepting either his secular or spiritual advice.
This one screed against the leader of a billion and a half Catholics was worrisome enough, but for Trump, it was just the beginning of a long night. Only 45 minutes after flaming the pope, Trump—now back at the White House—posted an AI-generated image of himself as (apparently) Jesus Christ, healing a sick man while soldiers and nurses and other worshipful white people gaze in awe and military jets fly overhead. You have to see the image to really grasp its weirdness, and to take in how offensive, even heretical, it might be to Christians of any mainstream denomination. (Trump has since taken that post down, claiming that he thought it depicted him as wearing a doctor's outfit—a denial that is not only laughable, but is also hardly reassuring about his cognitive health. "I do make people better," he said yesterday, "and make people a lot better.")
Five minutes after this sacrilegious nonsense, Trump posted a mock-up of a Trump Tower on the moon. (Sure, why not.)
Twenty minutes after that, at 10:10 p.m., Trump shared a silly meme about how Bernie Sanders, Chuck Schumer, and Joe Biden all look old after so many years in office, unlike himself. Twelve minutes later, he posted a clip from Newsmax's Rob Carson Show. Twenty minutes later, he posted yet another Newsmax clip from the same show.
Relative calm then overtook Trump's phone until 12:43 a.m., when he announced that the U.S. Navy would be blockading Iranian ports in the morning—as if it were just another stray factoid to share in his news feed.
Then, a bit more than two hours later—at 2:35 a.m.—he posted a link to a right-wing news site that approved of his Iran actions. At almost the same time, he posted another news story from the site about the Biden family and Ukraine. Two minutes later, he posted an article about Eric Swalwell leaving the California governor's race. A few minutes later, he posted the same Biden story, again.
Within another minute, Trump posted a link about an appeals court ruling that he could keep building his beloved ballroom until April 17. Finally, after a brief pause, he wrapped things up by posting a laudatory article from the New York Post—at 4:10 a.m., not long before dawn.
This is not the behavior of a stable, healthy leader. Pope Leo, for his part, said he has "no fear" of the administration and will continue to preach the messages of the Gospel. The rest of us, however, should be very worried about a commander in chief who is trying to govern the country between social-media binges, who attacks religious leaders in narcissistic frenzy, and who imagines himself as a deity. If an elderly parent did such things, most people would be concerned. The president doing such things is far more alarming.
The American people must not look away, as they have done so often in the past. They must pay attention to the president's deterioration, and insist that the House and Senate start acting like functioning branches of the government by asking the White House to explain what is happening, without insults or evasions, before the eyes of the country and the world.
This isn't going to turn into an attack Trump thread. I'm glad you decided to show up for a change, but please, try to control yourself.
.
.
.
Copy. I'm very upset about things, but that's not an excuse to break the rules.
Trump can bring out the kaiju in the best of us. See what I did there?
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on April 14, 2026, 09:22:49 PMThis isn't going to turn into an attack Trump thread. I'm glad you decided to show up for a change, but please, try to control yourself.
youve done a great job killing your site and making yourself a fucking joke
ya might want to wipe that orange cheeto dust off your mouth
Quote from: GDS_Starfury01 on May 03, 2026, 09:59:43 AMyouve done a great job killing your site and making yourself a fucking joke
There is some good left in this site. It's a shame that the many that did flee cannot see that. Were mistakes made? Sure. The real question is can't we put the past behind and move on?
I ask why we can't just reason with each other? It's almost impossible to change someone's mind or opinions but there is no need to cut anyone off. Why not value our differences and continue talking?
"Why can't we all just..get along?" - The President (Jack Nicholson), Mars Attacks
Grogheads is great! The only website I go to daily. It has kept my spirits up and my humor elevated throughout my ongoing double hip replacement surgeries. Grog on! Time to check on the world's cities...
Quote from: solops on May 05, 2026, 03:39:14 PM"Why can't we all just..get along?" - The President (Jack Nicholson), Mars Attacks
Grogheads is great! The only website I go to daily. It has kept my spirits up and my humor elevated throughout my ongoing double hip replacement surgeries. Grog on! Time to check on the world's cities...
Thanks, Solops. I really appreciate that. :notworthy:
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on May 05, 2026, 03:50:31 PMQuote from: solops on May 05, 2026, 03:39:14 PM"Why can't we all just..get along?" - The President (Jack Nicholson), Mars Attacks
Grogheads is great! The only website I go to daily. It has kept my spirits up and my humor elevated throughout my ongoing double hip replacement surgeries. Grog on! Time to check on the world's cities...
Thanks, Solops. I really appreciate that. :notworthy:
I ditto Solops' comment. Except for the bit about the hip replacement..... ;-)
(and I hope you get better soon, Solops!
Quote from: Tripoli on May 05, 2026, 04:46:49 PMI ditto Solops' comment. Except for the bit about the hip replacement..... ;-)
(and I hope you get better soon, Solops!
I'll echo what Tripoli said. Get better soon solops!
I don't mind arguing if it's gentlemanly debates, who really want's an echo chamber ? That's just boring.
I really don't see this ending without a desert storm, the problem is the world hates trump so good luck assembling half a million-man multinational army to execute a desert storm.
Not a trump fan either, but Iran has needed a beat down since the Beirut marine barracks bombing in 83, and some how he's the only guy crazy enough to take it on.
I just hope it gets finished right, even if it fucks the economy, cause it will suck to have to do this again if it's done wrong.
So what's everyone's thoughts on the peace deal? Seems like Iran got a pretty good thrashing on the tactical level, and their leadership is a lot younger now -- but the deal seems pretty bad to me.
$300b USD to Iran so they can rebuild everything we spent billions destroying. As I understand it, this isn't exactly us writing a check for them to withdraw $300b from the US treasury (as a lot of people are making it out to be), but being paid for by regional partners so long as Iran meets certain conditions. They also pinky promised not to develop nukes, for whatever that's worth.
I hope I'm just being negative here, but damn - even places like the Babylon Bee are making fun of this deal.
Please keep this discussion strategic and any disagreements civil.
Yeah. I'm not sure I get it either. We still don't know all the details since the exact text of the MOU hasn't been released yet. I think the only thing that is certain is that Iran will never honor any deal and will continue to lie and cheat. I have to believe that the deal was rushed due to the upcoming midterm elections and the impact gas prices may have on it. Otherwise, it is somewhat of a head scratcher. Total tactical victory, of course, so I don't want to take anything away from the military success of the mission. We destroyed the Iranian Navy, Air Force and ballistic missile capability at relatively low cost (outside of munitions). However, I think they learned that they can hold on and survive against our relatively low tolerance for combat without immediate decisive outcome while also learning that they can still control the strait and therefore the global economy to some extent, even without a navy and Air Force.
Yeah this deal is horrible and like I said in my last post, this whole war has been done wrong, so we will be dealing with this on and off for the next decade. Ground troops should never have been off the table. Marines blitzing to Terran is the only thing that would have kept the negotiations honest. Staging a 500k man army on their border would have been the ultimate bargain chip.
Trump won in Venezuela with his checkers level strategy, then he show'd up to Iran war with the same checkers level thinking in situation that required chess level thinking.
There's going to be a hell of a shit storm for this one, not sure how Teflon don will escape this one, maybe he'll just have another ufc fight at the White House to distract everyone.
:ROFL:
how did anyone honestly think this was going to work out well?
Well, I was hoping for a desert storm strategy. Not the smash and grab Venezuela strategy. All trump did was make the economy worse and now Iran has a blueprint to hold the world hostage by simply threatening to close the straight. As it stands right now, the war is a strategic loss. The only thing to reverse that would be invasion and 1 to 2 years of total war footing here in America which won't be popular cause it might lead to draft call ups. Oh, and we draft women and men this time.....equal pay is a biatch....
Quote from: Skoop on August 14, 2026, 07:57:17 PMAs it stands right now, the war is a strategic loss.
What a grand opening of Pandora's Box this turned out to be.
Commercial traffic simply does not tolerate much if any risk when deciding where to sail.
What has now been proven is that any actor with the means to field a sufficient number of drones, enough to guarantee but a few hits on merchant shipping, can effectively shut down maritime traffic.
I don't see how this can be easily countered either?
I imagine someone, somewhere is considering how to design a drone-proof cargo ship/tanker. They wouldn't be cost-effective during peacetime compared to current models but how much longer can we consider being at peace a normal state of affairs?