Ships keep moving through Hormuz despite strike

Post by rayiner » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 1:46 PM UTC

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #167

rayiner wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But I don't think anyone was expecting that the US could do so in hormuz in this instance (at least without committing far more assets of a non-naval variety). I think that’s exactly what they thought. I think this was supposed to be a quick and dirty campaign like Venezuela. > I'm sure they could if cost was of no consequence but depending on the size of iran's drone stockpiles the interceptor costs might well ban…

> I think that (the US could keep Hormuz open) was exactly what they thought. I think this was supposed to be a quick and dirty campaign like Venezuela. It depends on who "they" is. The accounts seem to be that Mrs Trump and Hegseth and co thought like this. But everyone else (including the professional strategists let go in the DOGE purges, and the remaining ones in the room) thought that this was an incredibly stup…

Post by hypeatei » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 3:15 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #147

pohl wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn’t matter if they had. He’s doesn’t listen to anything he doesn’t want to hear. At this point one can safely assume that he was told exactly how this strategic defeat would play out, and it went in one ear and out the other.

I don’t think we can assume that. Maybe Trump ignored warnings (though if that happened I would have expected it to be leaked). But there’s also a possibility the Navy fucked up. And that’s important to consider, because that’s something that needs to be fixed.

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 4:00 PM UTC

drnick1 wrote: post #123

dingaling wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And Iran no longer has any significant naval force, it's all been wiped out. A naval force isn't required to control the Strait. Artillery, drones and missiles fired from inland can do that quite easily.

They can, to some extent, but drone stockpiles and factories can be targeted and destroyed by conventional means. It is difficult to destroy them ALL, but it is certainly a problem that can be addressed to a degree without taking over the country.

Post by einpoklum » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 4:21 PM UTC

thisislife2 wrote: post #64

einpoklum wrote: post #21

So, Trump claimed the closure and the attack "was a “foolish violation” of the ceasefire". However - that is not the case. The first and foremost item of the Iran-US MOU is the following: 1 — The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran and their allies in the current war are signing this MOU to declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon…

The terms of the recent US-Lebanon-Israel agreement guarantees a future civil war in Lebanon that will further destabilise it for the benefit of Israel. Apparently, Israel has to vacate the Lebanese territories it recently captured and occupies only when the Lebanese army manages to fully "disarm" and "demilitarise" Hezbollah (with some support from the Israel military).

Post by SideburnsOfDoom » Sun, Jun 28, 2026, 8:26 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #188

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You made the claim that they thought it was a great idea. What's your research for that? it is widely known that Mr Netanyahu has suggested this same plan to every US administration from Bush onwards (1), and was rejected by them all until now. It is widely known that the military analysts all made the obvious prediction that Iran would seize Hormuz (2) I might be a bit off the mark with "professional strategists let…

Thank you for the sources. The NYT article citing the Maggie Haberman book is reporting that Trump was warned protecting the strait would be difficult. I will have to read her book on this, because it’s unclear who was part of this “inner circle” who delivered this warning. Was it the military? Or was it the known Iran skeptics like Vance?