• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran

Nah, Drumpf ended US support of Ukraine as soon as he took office again. Everything that's been sent in 2025 and 2026 was earmarked during the Biden presidency.
Not fully true, afaik. The U.S. is still selling weapons to Ukraine. If he stops that as well, then Ukraine (and Europe) might get into real trouble.
And Ukraine is still able to use starlink.
 
What has Starlink got to do with Trump? It's a private ISP company.
Also, I highly doubt Iran would launch missiles into Europe for any reason. Also, Iranian missiles in range of Europe sounds more like another reason for us not to get involved in Dump's pointless war ;) .

How would we open the Strait anyway? This is 2026, wars are fought with drones now. You can take out artillery, missile launchers, submarines, and whatnot, but you can't keep people along a whole coastline from launching drones, and once launched, a drone swarm seems really hard to stop. The Ukraine war has been showing that for years.
 
Can a single person calling for militarily "opening the Strait" define what that would mean?

Because as long as A Single Ship can and will get hit it will effectively stay closed. As long as tankers need military escorts, the number of crossings will stay a fraction of what is normal or needed.
How can you guarantee that not a single Iranian or Houthi drone or missile or drone boat will get through?
 
Last edited:
John Bolton
@AmbJohnBolton
The Europeans made a critical mistake by ignoring Iran, and taking Trump’s bait by saying “Iran is not our war.” Europe is well within range of Iran’s missiles. Its economies are threatened by closure of the Strait of Hormuz. They’ve given Trump the perfect opportunity to end US support of Ukraine.
Nice response to this.


A couple of paragraphs
Here is a question worth sitting with. Why do you think that is? Is it possible, just possible, that when you treat your allies like enemies for over a year while cuddling up to their actual enemy, those allies might update their opinion of you? Is that concept too complicated? Does that require more working memory than is currently available?

You did not plan this war with your allies. You did not consult them. You did not build a coalition. You started a conflict, watched it go sideways, and then got on your knees asking for help from people you spent fourteen months calling weak, corrupt and irrelevant.
 
Given the increased belligerent tones from the USA administration and its collection of apologists they are slowly realising that no it is not just NATO/Europe/China that "needs" the oil and other products that passes through the straits but the USA as well.

They are very good at the demand side of supply and demand, not good at the supply side.
 
Given the increased belligerent tones from the USA administration and its collection of apologists they are slowly realising that no it is not just NATO/Europe/China that "needs" the oil and other products that passes through the straits but the USA as well.

They are very good at the demand side of supply and demand, not good at the supply side.
Exactly. If the US didn't need the Strait of Hormuz to be open, we would see no fuel price rises in the US.
 
The impact on the US is based on US Refineries using Gulf Oil, not Venezuelan type.
Yes, the US could do without - but only after months or years of rebuilding the supply chain.
 
I see Polymarket's biggest book by far (160m) is on USA having boots on the ground in Iran by 31 December.

Current odds have it as 99.8% likely.
 
I see Polymarket's biggest book by far (160m) is on USA having boots on the ground in Iran by 31 December.

Current odds have it as 99.8% likely.
I guess the definition of "boots on the ground" has to be determined, because special forces have reportedly already used in the rescue of the F-15 crew.

But assuming one means at least a brigade (which would still be very small) I guess that it's less certain than that. If only because there has to be a greater than 0.2% chance of Trump dying or becoming too incapacitated for even the GOP to pretend otherwise.
 
I see Polymarket's biggest book by far (160m) is on USA having boots on the ground in Iran by 31 December.

Current odds have it as 99.8% likely.
Why would one between on something like that, given that there's pretty good evidence that [edit - some not done] of the people betting are involved in the decisions? Which itself is a massive security risk that in a normal administration would have the FBI investigating.
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile, I've just heard.
The impact on the US is based on US Refineries using Gulf Oil, not Venezuelan type.
Yes, the US could do without - but only after months or years of rebuilding the supply chain.
Yes, and if we built far more renewable energy and Blbattery, Europe would be far less dependent on the Strait of Hormuz too. Although probably not for Helium.
 
John Bolton
@AmbJohnBolton
The Europeans made a critical mistake by ignoring Iran, and taking Trump’s bait by saying “Iran is not our war.” Europe is well within range of Iran’s missiles. Its economies are threatened by closure of the Strait of Hormuz. They’ve given Trump the perfect opportunity to end US support of Ukraine.


Oh noes. Europe fell into Trump's trap. Because he would never act without a reason.

Which is shown by his demands for Canada and Greenland. Neither of which are stupid and counterproductive. Especially not his given reasons for demanding Greenland be ceded to the US.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom