General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsTrump change in a week of war:
— George Conway âï¸ðºð¸ (@gtconway.bsky.social) 2026-03-14T22:17:28.215Z
IronLionZion
(51,141 posts)April Fools!
Aussie105
(7,839 posts)Classic Donny Droopypants though.
paleotn
(22,125 posts)Fix it yourself, Shitler.
Mblaze
(988 posts)LilElf70
(1,537 posts)I'm not surprised by this at all. There's no one behind the wheel. Ya know, this isn't a friggin Tesla. I expect crash and burn as a legitimate result. It only makes sense.
Bluetus
(2,686 posts)It doesn't matter how many British, French or Chinese ships you put into that channel, Iran has a free shot at all of them.
Trump is talking about putting Marines on the Khark oil terminal. They could destroy the terminal. But having 1000 marines on that little island does nothing for opening ship traffic. Khark is 300 miles from the choke point of Hormuz. The only way you can guarantee safe ship passage is to put troops on the ground all along Iran's Persian Gulf / Gulf of Oman coastline, and that will probably take 25,000 troops.
I don't know how many gun placements Iran has there, but I bet it is a lot.
IronLionZion
(51,141 posts)Geography makes it easy to attack but difficult to defend.
Bluetus
(2,686 posts)They are as slow as ... supertankers. Sitting ducks.
dalton99a
(93,836 posts)Bluetus
(2,686 posts)The Patriot and other systems are for intercepting missiles that are high altitude, high speed, long-range. I bet Iran has lots of placements in the Hormuz area where they can shoot short-range rockets where a Patriot would be completely ineffective. One would think that, given the history of Hormuz, Iran probably has well-protected, underground firing positions.
dalton99a
(93,836 posts)The tunnels seem well protected
Ship owners and insurers are not too crazy about Hormuz
LudwigPastorius
(14,608 posts)Count on it.