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

Iran War Cost Tracker

iran-cost-ticker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 486 posts

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#241

Post by tick_tock_tick »

adriand wrote: post #47
lefstathiou wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carriers aren't meant to hang out at port at home. The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years.

> The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years. But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing. The idea that the war isn’t costing money for personnel because those people would be doing something anyway makes no sense. They could be doing something else. In fact, they could be doing something that increases the wealth and wellbeing of the world, rather than destroy…

> But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing.

With Iran's support of the Houthi I think you'll find they are exactly the same thing.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#242

Post by password54321 »

Jtsummers wrote: post #230
tzahifadida wrote: post #224

What would have happened if the US dis not get involved in WWII. We would probably not be here... Not everything is short sighted bean counters. Having major cities explode by nuclear devices in the US will surely cost more.

Iran has been weeks away from a nuke for decades. What evidence is there that they were any closer this time, or that this war was necessary to delay or block their progress?

The war is for Israel, sorry I should say Greater Israel.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#243

Post by [deleted] »

hereme888 wrote: post #203
nprz wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really believe killing 175 children[0] will bring peace and prosperity to the Iranian people? [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/01/world/middleeast/girls-sc...

That news piece was officially dismissed after investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM. I would bring to your awareness that you're using an emotional argument with no substance, and it discounts the decades of complex history in the region.

[deleted]

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#244

Post by bawolff »

PieTime wrote: post #208
bawolff wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But rather than protect global sea lanes, the US is bombing Iran. That’s not the same thing. Arguably the primary threat to modern sea lanes is Iran. Right now Iran is harrasing traffic. Previously the Houthis, generally considered an Iranian proxy, were harrasing traffic. Its all kind of the same war, this is just the end game.

The end game is when the US backed dictatorships collapse, this is the end of American power, not the beginning.

That seems pretty unlikely at the moment.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#245

Post by lukas099 »

hereme888 wrote: post #200
danny_codes wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah that’s the likely outcome given our track record /s

Venezuela is undergoing tremendous freedom and hope. My fellow Venezuelans and I are super grateful for the well-planned, surgical mission of the US. They can have all the oil they want and help restore our industries in exchange for their financial benefit and partnership, which is the most recent track record.

I think that interventions in the region of interest, the middle east, are more relevant data points than Venezuela.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#246

Post by roysting »

throwaw12 wrote: post #87

This doesn't include generational damage in sentiment: * Europe is in trouble because they can't get gas from Russia, Qatar stopped supplying gas * Japan is in trouble because Middle East supplies its 75% of oil, which is blocked now * Ukraine is in dilemma, because US giving every support to Israel, but not to Ukraine * Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain is asking questions, if US can't defend us and is moving all defensiv…

That’s just the tip of the iceberg. People here seem to also have no perspective, since it is not in the wheelhouse of most tech people, on the fact that this is all a part of a 40 year strategy (as Netanyahu himself has openly stated) that some refer to as the “the Clean Break Strategy” or the “7 countries in 5 years memo”[1]. It clearly took longer than 5 years, but they definitely tried and even the likes of Hillary “we came, we saw, he died” Clinton was a party of that.

People always squabble over blue team vs red team, never realizing that the whole game is just a ruse to provide a sense of democratic control to placate the public, and also give the apparatchiks if the regime a sense of autonomy, when in fact they’re just all pulling at the same continuity of agenda like beasts of burden, being whipped and rode by a very small group that hold their reins.

[1] https://x.com/wikileaks/status/1819709215352438921?lang=en

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#247

Post by nradov »

Retric wrote: post #44
lefstathiou wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carriers aren't meant to hang out at port at home. The US has protected global sea lanes for 80 years.

We have surplus carriers specifically to allow them to average a large percentage of their time at home unlike container ships who spend the vast majority of their time in service. Many systems that are both bespoke and complex means lots and lots of maintenance issues. Sure the Navy can Airlift in parts etc, but that’s obviously very expensive and less obviously more dangerous.

We don't have a surplus of carriers. We have a shortage, at least relative to their current tasking. They're overstretched and behind on maintenance. This is unsustainable so the civilian leadership will have to either cut back on missions or build more.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#248

Post by tick_tock_tick »

tw04 wrote: post #54
1234letshaveatw wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

History really doesn’t say otherwise. Tensions were mostly cooling after the Obama nuclear deal. Now the message we’ve told the world is: If you don’t want to eventually be at risk of the US attacking you, you better be nuclear armed.

Of course they cooled Iran kept enriching uranium and the rest of the world agreed to ignore it.

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#249

Post by mkoubaa »

jklinger410 wrote: post #155
throwaw12 wrote: post #87

This doesn't include generational damage in sentiment: * Europe is in trouble because they can't get gas from Russia, Qatar stopped supplying gas * Japan is in trouble because Middle East supplies its 75% of oil, which is blocked now * Ukraine is in dilemma, because US giving every support to Israel, but not to Ukraine * Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain is asking questions, if US can't defend us and is moving all defensiv…

I think citizens in those countries recognize that allowing a repressive regime to exist simply for cheap oil costs is not necessarily a good solution, either.

[flagged]

Re: Iran War Cost Tracker

#250

Post by richardfeynman »

aeve890 wrote: post #237
hereme888 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That news piece was officially dismissed after investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM. I would bring to your awareness that you're using an emotional argument with no substance, and it discounts the decades of complex history in the region.

>investigation by the IDF and CENTCOM this has to be bait, right?

Perhaps the original comment, putting forth debunked IRGC propaganda, and presenting it as definitely true, was bait.
Post reply on HN