• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Monitoring the situation in Iran

Iran's policy regarding the strait (that they will sink any unapproved civilian vessel) amounts to a declaration of war against most of the world. They seem to have correctly assessed that most of the world will choose to continue to hide behind America's skirts rather than do anything about it.
 
Iran's policy regarding the strait (that they will sink any unapproved civilian vessel) amounts to a declaration of war against most of the world. They seem to have correctly assessed that most of the world will choose to continue to hide behind America's skirts rather than do anything about it.
It really comes off as straight up terrorism to attack civilian vessels that pose no threat to their country. It'd be a different story if they were military vessels from another nation, not ships owned by international corporations.
 
It really comes off as straight up terrorism to attack civilian vessels that pose no threat to their country. It'd be a different story if they were military vessels from another nation, not ships owned by international corporations.
Iran can just claim they were narco terrorist boats. You can blow up dozens of these and it's perfectly legal.
 
There's worse wars you could have, Iran war didn't happen by accident and let's be clear, Iran's intentions towards Israel, Washington complaining about Iran's priorities (nuclear arms), now the other stuff is whatever, shots at Iran's neighbors, war junkies appreciate the aircraft carriers, of course the tactics (not to be celebrated but respected) Trump still has a better chance at coming out of this a winner than Bush with Iraq or Obama with Afghan.

Remember that Iran was actively undermining post-invasion Iraq from the get go.

The awareness of the extent of Iranian, specifically Quds Force, involvement grew significantly later, leading to a shift in U.S. strategy to "kill or capture" Iranian operatives by 2007.

In 2004 the U.S. didn't so much "not know" as it failed to prioritize the threat. Intelligence was heavily focused on finding WMDs and fighting the Sunni insurgency. That left reports of Iranian meddling as a secondary concern. The lack of human intelligence on the ground meant the US struggled to track the flow of fighters across the border, while many policymakers still viewed Iranian-backed Shiite groups as tactical allies against the Sunnis.

Why did the US think the Shiite groups were allies? Well because they were being oppressed by the Sunni Ba'athists during Saddam's regime. The Sunnis were the backbone of his power and assumed they were loyal to the old regime. Part of the de-ba'athification of Iraq. So the Iraqi Shiites were "naturally" the faction the US wanted to work with politically as well. US policymakers overestimated the desire of Iraqi Shiites to align with the US and misunderstood that their primary goal was to prevent a return of Sunni domination, not to foster American democracy. This led to a massive strategic blind spot where the U.S. essentially "sleepwalked" into a power vacuum that Tehran was much better prepared to fill.

In this war the human intelligence on the ground is clearly much better than it was in 2003.

Youre not even trying.

I accept your surrender.
 
Last edited:
Iran's policy regarding the strait (that they will sink any unapproved civilian vessel) amounts to a declaration of war against most of the world. They seem to have correctly assessed that most of the world will choose to continue to hide behind America's skirts rather than do anything about it.
To be fair to most of the world, it's clear who has actually military capability and who doesn't these days. I doubt any of the Gulf states are happy they can't export their oil and I doubt the of the oil importing nations in Asia are happy they can't import the oil they need. But there's nobody who can do anything about it right now besides the US and Israel
 
Iran's policy regarding the strait (that they will sink any unapproved civilian vessel) amounts to a declaration of war against most of the world. They seem to have correctly assessed that most of the world will choose to continue to hide behind America's skirts rather than do anything about it.
At this point USA should take over the strait and Kharg island. Bomb whatever is there and then send special forces.
 
Khamenei singled out the US attack on a school, saying it "holds a special status in this reckoning"

He says Iran is "fully prepared for unity and warm, cordial mutual relations with all its neighbors"

All of that while lobbying drones in civilian, Infrastructure and economic areas on his "neighbors" and cluster ammunition on Israel.
 
I'm ignorant when it comes to shipping logistics, so forgive this question, but for the moment wouldn't it be cheaper to go around africa instead of sitting dead in the water for weeks/months on end? Yeah I know the trip is thousands of miles longer, and will take tons more time... but isnt that still better than not moving at all and risking your billion dollar ships getting sunk?
 
I'm ignorant when it comes to shipping logistics, so forgive this question, but for the moment wouldn't it be cheaper to go around africa instead of sitting dead in the water for weeks/months on end? Yeah I know the trip is thousands of miles longer, and will take tons more time... but isnt that still better than not moving at all and risking your billion dollar ships getting sunk?
There is no other route to the ports in the Persian Gulf (where a lot of oil goes to). Some oil can be re-routed by pipeline to the other side of Saudi Arabia to be picked up there instead, but not all of it.
 
All of that while lobbying drones in civilian, Infrastructure and economic areas on his "neighbors" and cluster ammunition on Israel.
Its all posturing and bullshit. What else to expect from a murderous Theocracy.

End of the day, this is about the regime survival and control of that strait. Both of which are points of contention right now.
 
I'm ignorant when it comes to shipping logistics, so forgive this question, but for the moment wouldn't it be cheaper to go around africa instead of sitting dead in the water for weeks/months on end? Yeah I know the trip is thousands of miles longer, and will take tons more time... but isnt that still better than not moving at all and risking your billion dollar ships getting sunk?
wlXbnj66r60B3FeB.png



This might also help for context
 
JinWoo KimWorld's Highest IQ Record | IQ 289 but uses AI to write every single tweet he posts. Each tweet is a mini essay, all those bullet lists, the exact same writing style that's used by thousands of fake X accounts.

Regardless of Ai use as English clearly isn't his first language, I don't see any issues with what he said. No lies detected at all.

This is a very cheap alternative to countering those cheap Iranian drones. It changes the narrative that countries are spending millions to counter the cheap drones is slowly fading away once these anti drones becomes widely available.



 
Last edited:
Regardless of Ai use as English clearly isn't his first language, I don't see any issues with what he said. No lies detected at all.
Where do I begin? It's all just a barrage of unrelated words that imply insane things.

-" A 3D-PRINTED interceptor is taking out drones that cost 1,000x more" - if a Shahed costs 50k that means a Sting drone would cost 50 bucks, there is a picture RIGHT THERE that puts the price at $2000.
-"A single PATRIOT MISSILE costs $3,000,000 to shoot down ONE cheap drone" - Patriots are not being shot at Shahed drones. They are for ballistic missiles, something a Sting can do nothing against
-"STING does the same job for PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR"- A Sting cannot hit a ballistic missile. Or a fighter jet. Or a cruise missile unless it gets insanely lucky.
-"If a garage-built plastic drone can do what a $3M missile does… what exactly are we spending defense budgets on?" - again, the garage built (which it is not) cannot do everything a Patriot can
-"The future of warfare isn't $100M fighter jets. It's a kid with a 3D printer and a dream." Yeah, if you want to only be able to hit things 20 km from your border
 
Where do I begin? It's all just a barrage of unrelated words that imply insane things.

-" A 3D-PRINTED interceptor is taking out drones that cost 1,000x more" - if a Shahed costs 50k that means a Sting drone would cost 50 bucks, there is a picture RIGHT THERE that puts the price at $2000.
-"A single PATRIOT MISSILE costs $3,000,000 to shoot down ONE cheap drone" - Patriots are not being shot at Shahed drones. They are for ballistic missiles, something a Sting can do nothing against
-"STING does the same job for PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR"- A Sting cannot hit a ballistic missile. Or a fighter jet. Or a cruise missile unless it gets insanely lucky.
-"If a garage-built plastic drone can do what a $3M missile does… what exactly are we spending defense budgets on?" - again, the garage built (which it is not) cannot do everything a Patriot can
-"The future of warfare isn't $100M fighter jets. It's a kid with a 3D printer and a dream." Yeah, if you want to only be able to hit things 20 km from your border

You don't know what you're talking about.

At the moment, the US is using air defence systems such as Patriot missiles, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) batteries and Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft to intercept Iranian drones and missiles targeting its military assets in the region.

What have the US and Gulf countries been using against Iranian missiles?

The US has been supporting Gulf countries in intercepting Iranian missiles with expensive defence systems, including:

  • Patriot missile systems: The Patriot Advanced Capability-2 (PAC-2) and PAC-3 are advanced surface-to-air missile defence systems built by US defence contractor Lockheed Martin that can intercept aircraft, cruise missiles and short-range ballistic missiles. Ukraine has repeatedly asked the US for more Patriot batteries, which consist of a truck-mounted launching system with eight launchers that can hold up to four missile interceptors each, ground radar, a control station and a generator. Each Patriot missile costs about $4m, and launchers are about $10m. About 90 personnel are required to operate the system. They are in short supply as Lockheed Martin delivered a record 620 PAC-3 MSE interceptors, the most Patriot missiles, in 2025. Zelenskyy said the US and its Middle Eastern partners have already burned through 800 of those, compared with the 600 delivered to Ukraine in four years.
INTERACTIVE-GCC_MILITARY_SEPT18_2025_PATRIOT_SYSTEM-1758287528
(Al Jazeera)
  • THAAD missile defence system: Also developed by Lockheed Martin, the THAAD uses a combination of radar and interceptors to counter short-, medium- and intermediate-range ballistic missiles and can operate at high altitudes. A THAAD battery consists of six truck-mounted launchers, 48 interceptors – eight for each launcher – one radar system, and a fire control and communications component and needs 95 personnel. Each battery costs about $1bn to $1.8bn to produce.
INTERACTIVE_THAAD_GAZA_ISRAEL_IRAN_MISSILE_INTERCEPTOR_FEB25, 2026-1772104791
(Al Jazeera)
  • AWACS aircraft: These aircraft form part of an early-warning radar system designed to detect missiles and long-range projectiles from up to 400km (250 miles) away.



The gulf countries were using both Patriot and Thaad to shoot down Shahed drones, not exclusively shooting down Missiles

A Patriot missile cost around 4 million each

4 million / 2000 = 2 thousand times cheaper than using a Patriot missile to shoot down a shahed drone using a Sting

Thaad Interceptors cost 12 million approximate
12 million / 2000 = 6 thousand times cheaper than using a Thaad interceptor to shoot down a shahed drone using a Stinger

https://www.armscontrolwonk.com/arc...tor-expenditures-in-the-israel-iran-conflict/


If you're talking about shooting down Cruise and ballistic missiles , you're correct that they aren't using Sting for that. But they were also using Patiot and Thaad for shooting down drones
 
Last edited:
If you're talking about shooting down Cruise and ballistic missiles , you're correct that they aren't using Sting for that. But they were also using Patiot and Thaad for shooting down drones
A THAAD shooting down a Shahed would be very impressive considering the missile has a minimum engagement altitude of 40 kilometers.
 
I'm ignorant when it comes to shipping logistics, so forgive this question, but for the moment wouldn't it be cheaper to go around africa instead of sitting dead in the water for weeks/months on end? Yeah I know the trip is thousands of miles longer, and will take tons more time... but isnt that still better than not moving at all and risking your billion dollar ships getting sunk?
You are thinking about the Suez Canal which is in Egypt. Most of this shipping is heading to Asia anyway so the route to Europe or America is not the issue.
 
Energy Secretary Chris Wright told CNBC that the U.S. Navy is not ready to begin escorting oil tankers through the Strait of Hormuz.
He said the Navy might be in a position to start escorting tankers by the end of the month. Brent oil prices touched $100 per barrel earlier Thursday.





Build the Channel in UAE
 
Last edited:
"More now from Oakland County Michigan Sheriff Michael Bouchard, who says the suspect rammed a vehicle into the synagogue, injuring and knocking unconscious one security guard.

The suspect drove his vehicle through the doors of the synagogue and then down a hallway, and his vehicle caught fire.

Another guard engaged the suspect in gunfire.

There are no other victims or injuries, and the shooter is dead, the sheriff says. He does not confirm how the suspect died."
-BBC

What a loser.
 

Indian source says Iran to allow India-flagged tankers through Hormuz as first tanker arrives


  • Iranian source denies any such agreement
  • Indian source says assurance came after foreign ministers spoke
  • India says 28 Indian-flagged vessels around Strait
  • They have 778 Indian sailors aboard
  • Suezmax tanker Shenlong, carrying Saudi crude, reaches Mumbai


Not sure what's happening here, India says they've received assurances from Iran, Iranian 'sources' deny any such comment.
 
Last edited:
Nintendo statement in


Genuine question, if this was any other country posting videos like this showing Americans/anyone else being destroyed, would it all still be LOL worthy? Or have expectations for the US Gov fallen that low that them posting war footage mixed with memes is just accepted as a US thing now?
 
Genuine question, if this was any other country posting videos like this showing Americans/anyone else being destroyed, would it all still be LOL worthy? Or have expectations for the US Gov fallen that low that them posting war footage mixed with memes is just accepted as a US thing now?
as an American I find it cringe worthy and honestly makes me feel shame. It's unbecoming of the values this country is supposed to represent and aspire to.
 
Genuine question, if this was any other country posting videos like this showing Americans/anyone else being destroyed, would it all still be LOL worthy? Or have expectations for the US Gov fallen that low that them posting war footage mixed with memes is just accepted as a US thing now?
Everybody has been memeing in current year. From China to Iran and even the UK.

Some memes are just better than others or others unironically do the opposite of what they're intended to do. China's awesome AI kaiju art making the US look bad ass for example.
 
Everybody has been memeing in current year. From China to Iran and even the UK.

Some memes are just better than others or others unironically do the opposite of what they're intended to do. China's awesome AI kaiju art making the US look bad ass for example.
Even when other countries try it on official accounts it always feels like "how do you do fellow kids" but doing it with war stuff just feels extra surreal, we're watching people being killed from afar to COD, GTA and even Nintendo Wii music. Like what?
 
Top Bottom