Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Miscellanea: The War in Iran

acoup.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 1001 posts

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#311

Post by samus »

citrin_ru wrote: post #82
lmm wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every rusty trawler is a viable launch platform for Shahed type drones And where exactly are you planning to operate that trawler out of? Or are you going to send it across the Atlantic on its own (well, with a couple of tankers accompanying it, but never mind that) and hope no-one pays attention? > operational range ~2500 km per Wikipedia I think you either added an extra zero or were looking at the hyped prototyp…

> And where exactly are you planning to operate that trawler out of? Or are you going to send it across the Atlantic on its own China operates fishing fleets all around the globe but Iran is not known for this so Iranian fishing vessel in western Atlantics will rise suspicions. An ordinary cargo vessel heading to the Central America on other hand may sail unnoticed.

How to identify a vessel as Iranian though? They can just register it in a Caribbean country and give it a less suspicious name.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#312

Post by zinodaur »

sysguest wrote: post #239
zinodaur wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what we should have learned from this is that it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders... the gulf states are much more exposed to this than the US is, and much less powerful. They are also not neutral - they have been paying in to the US protection racket, and are discovering that their payments haven't bought much.

> it's extremely hard to "make a lesson out of" Iran if you depend on moving oil past their borders it's not just gulf states -- look at who are the customers of those gulf states are. the whole asia, europe, and america -- the whole world is their customer. Even if it's "extremely hard", those countries have no choice but "make a lesson out of" iran -- just like what we did with pirates why would those "customers of…

If Canada and Mexico started letting Iran launch bombing sorties against US cities from within their borders, would the US consider them neutral?

2 Million a ship seems like a pretty cheap price to pay for the damage the us and Israel have inflicted on Iran - they cannot be made to pay it though, so I suppose the rest of us will have to (through marginally higher oil prices in the long term - much less than the spectacularly high oil prices the US war will cause in the short term)

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#313

Post by samus »

Certhas wrote: post #95
Synaesthesia wrote: post #8

He writes that the region is not very important to the USA. It's not, but it is a strategically important area, not only in terms of its location, at the nexus of Asia, Africa and Europe, but also because of the oil there. Now the US is not dependent on Middle Eastern Oil, but Japan, China and other countries are. So controlling the region will mean a lever of power over those regions.

The article states that it's not important for any reason other than oil and shipping: "The entire region has exactly two strategic concerns of note: the Suez Canal (and connected Red Sea shipping system) and the oil production in the Persian Gulf and the shipping system used to export it. So long as these two arteries remained open the region does not matter very much to the United States."

Unfortunately these two things have been the major drivers of politics of the last 80 years in the region.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#314

Post by _DeadFred_ »

MrDrDr wrote: post #305

That this was so predictable, is the hardest thing to process. A friend shared this video by Jiang Xueqin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y_hbz6loEo&t=2s I find this guys hard to take seriously, his logic is erratic and often just absent. But his prediction has been frighteningly spot on regarding Iran. Towards the end he predicts American boots on the ground - and them turning into American hostages. I found that l…

This guy is a weirdo that believes Jesuit illuminati run the world (listen to the end of his Breaking Points interview), his qualification is a BA in English, he teaches at the high school level, and holds discussions with manosphere figures like Sneako. Not sure I'd elevate what he says just because he has a good online presence and really don't understand why he would be at the time of this post in the top comment in this discussion.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#315

Post by ReptileMan »

pphysch wrote: post #307
ReptileMan wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Return them to stone age until the leadership becomes reasonable. Worth reflecting on this sentence. What is "reasonable" supposed to entail here? ETA: "Become secular" is a wild demand from theocratic regime that wants to "Kill Amalek and Build the Third Temple".

Give away the enriched uranium, become secular.

Edit: Sometimes the only answer to the weaker side claiming that something is impossible is Vae Victis. I am sure that there are enough powerful people in Iran that wouldn't mind secular state if they are the one to lead it. It is not as if their kids are not wild partying in europe anyway.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#316

Post by pphysch »

znnajdla wrote: post #240

No one seems to discuss the worst case scenario for this war. In the best/average case the world takes an economic hit. But I can think of one really big black swan event which no one seems to even consider (except Nassim Taleb). This war could trigger regime collapses all over the Arab world and put populist leaders in charge who rise to power on the basis of Gaza genocide fury. That would be catastrophic to Israel:…

This is exactly why the Saudi leadership have been quick to debunk Western propaganda about the Saudi's itching to join the war, despite Iran's strikes on GCC territory. The domestic blowback in the GCC states would be fatal to the political system.

The GCC elites there are living well, with escape plans, but the people know they are viewed as subhuman "arabs" by the Israelis, and are in line for the Gaza Method (which is currently being deployed in the West Bank and Lebanon).

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#317

Post by lxgr »

dalyons wrote: post #294
lxgr wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wether it's wind, solar or hydro, a underappreciated property of renewable energy is the energy sovereignty they provide. If your sovereign territory happens to support them geographically. This is true for many, but not all countries. Also, without large storage capacity, you might end up being self-sufficient during sunny, windy days, but find yourself very dependent on your neighbor countries for imports on over…

Why do you have to go to absolutes? If 90% of countries can be 80+% self sufficient, that’s still an amazing thing

If you're 80% self-sufficient, you're not self-sufficient.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#318

Post by surgical_fire »

hersko wrote: post #264
surgical_fire wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and for some reason this place that has "military and civilian infrastructure" completely at the mercy of their enemies is right now exercising full control of one extremely important sea trade route, and is wreaking havoc on all gulf states allied to the US, and is successfully hitting targets on Israel. Facts have this annoying tendency of getting in the way of propaganda.

Explain how they are better off than when the war started.

Since you seemingly have trouble reading text, I'll try to condense it in some bullet points.

Unfortunately HN has no crayon functionality:

1. Regime still in power, legitimized by the defense against foreign agressors.

2. Internal unrest loses steam.

3. Effective control of the strait of Hormuz, being able to, for example, dictate who is allowed to pass through and/or demand tolls for safe passage.

4. Weakening of the US presence in the Gulf countries. In particular the destruction of radar systems. Those things are expensive.

5. Lifting of sanctions on Iranian oil, at a time where the resource is very expensive.

6. Likely will be able to pursue its nuclear ambitions undeterred.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#319

Post by mrguyorama »

Dig1t wrote: post #299
abraxas wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You elect clowns, you get a circus. The US has turned into a Wall-e society just getting off on entertainment and bored with civilized, thoughtful politicians. This is the end result of TOO MUCH prosperity for the average American. They haven't experienced true hardship in generations and we (the rest of the world) is paying the price of their hubris.

From the article: >Israel could force the United States into a war with Iran at any time. >It should go without saying that creating the conditions where the sometimes unpredictable junior partner in a security relationship can unilaterally bring the senior partner into a major conflict is an enormous strategic error, precisely because it means you end up in a war when it is in the junior partner’s interests to do so…

We had Israel friendly politicians for at least 50 years, all of which who eagerly wanted to fuck up Iran ("Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" anyone?) and we didn't because they were at least sober enough to understand that it was moronic and would obviously be some sort of strategic defeat or decades long boondoggle.

No president has ever been this fucking stupid.

Re: Miscellanea: The War in Iran

#320

Post by pepperoni_pizza »

mrexcess wrote: post #200
daemoens wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Millennium Challenge 2002 is discredited because it had motorcycle couriers that moved at light speed handling all communications and 10' speed boats launching 19' missiles.

After being restarted, the red (opposing) force general resigned due to the restarted game having what amounted to a scripted end, with little to no latitude for the red force to exercise creativity in strategy or tactics. Among the highlights, the red force were required to turn on and leave on their AA radars so that blue force HARMs could take them out, and the red force was prohibited from attempting to shoot dow…

We have not gotten quite to the "VDV tries air assault, gets wiped out" stage of Iran war yet, as far as I know.

But the US seems to be committed on repeating the Russian experience.

Post reply on HN