12 ms·

Iran war wreaking havoc on shipping and air cargo, could create global delays

103 points by Bender 8mo ago

TitaRusell 8mo ago
The EU noticed that they exchanged Russia with Texas... From one evil war monger to the next.
KaiserPro 8mo ago
I mean thats Iran's play right? Its worked before (see 1980s https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/ https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/), and it'll probably work again. Especially as Iran has different values on loss. The other issue that is less said is that the USA probably doesn't have the capacity to keep bombing in this way. They are using all the fancy missiles first, but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing. This is Russian level stupidity, and shows the danger of letting "true believers" organise things over actual planners who've done this before. more over, allies can't keep up that level of air defence. It _could be_ bullshit that iran has a whole load of ballistic and drones spread all over the place, but frankly the US can't afford to find out if thats the case. Sure the US could escort tankers, but that would mean much higher risk of casualties. Given that the USA is reasonably self sufficient in oil, thats probably a hard sell. Also, does the US have enough stock of ship born anti-missle systems? Sure it has the expensive stuff, and the Phalanx at last resort, but does the USA have the stomach to have a ship sink? I fear what happens after that.
- exabrial 8mo ago
  That's my assessment. By threatening and targeting bystanders, Iran tries to make any military action against them costly to those not involved, who will naturally apply pressure to whomever is taking the action.
  - RobertoG 8mo ago
    So, the USA and Israel started a war with Iran when they were in the negotiating table and the Iranians were accepting all the nuclear demands. In the first unprovoked attack they killed an important religious leader of a big part of the population of the area (not only Iran) and a bunch of civilians (160 children in a school between them). But the assesment is that 'is Iran who is threatening and targeting bystanders'. No surprise that we are in the mess we are.
    - chasd00 8mo ago
      look at the stats of what the UAE has defended against, what is the purpose of those attacks? They make no sense to me. Iran attacks on the UAE 186 ballistic missiles 812 drones this article even states that the UAE has been attacked more than Israel itself which, again, blows my mind. The UAE is, wisely IMO, choosing to stay out of it but i mean how much can they take? https://www.axios.com/2026/03/03/uae-iran-missiles-strike-israel https://www.axios.com/2026/03/03/uae-iran-missiles-strike-is...
      - Gud 8mo ago
        The UAE is hosting multiple US military bases and is absolutely a valid target.
      - watwut 8mo ago
        > UAE has been attacked more than Israel itself which, again, blows my mind. UAE is closer and so it is harder for them to intercept attacking missiles and drones. Israel is further and thus harder target. They have more time to destroy the attacking drone or missile, making such attack more wasteful. Second, the goals are likely American soldiers stationed there and the defense systems themselves. Intercepting missiles can run out and Iran likely wants them to run out.
    - jameshilliard 8mo ago
      > So, the USA and Israel started a war with Iran when they were in the negotiating table and the Iranians were accepting all the nuclear demands. They were not accepting all the nuclear demands[0]. > In the first unprovoked attack they killed an important religious leader of a big part of the population of the area (not only Iran) and a bunch of civilians (160 children in a school between them). Calling the attack "unprovoked" is just wildly inaccurate, Iran has for years funded terrorist proxies to attack both Israel and US interests in the region. > But the assesment is that 'is Iran who is threatening and targeting bystanders'. No surprise that we are in the mess we are. Iran deliberately targets their own civilians as well as 3rd party countries.[1] I think the massacres and not the nuclear program were however what finally pushed the US and Israel into a war with the regime itself as a primary target as the massacres opened up an opportunity to potentially take out the regime once and for all. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/23/world/middleeast/iran-us-nuclear-talks-war.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/23/world/middleeast/iran-us-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres
  - chasd00 8mo ago
    > By threatening and targeting bystanders, Iran tries to make any military action against them costly to those not involved, who will naturally apply pressure to whomever is taking the action. i'm no geopolitical expert but the most likely outcome of bombing bystanders is more enemies and fewer bystanders.
- chasd00 8mo ago
  Why would the US and Israel resort to unguided cheap bombing? That’s how you end up with wide scale civilian deaths. They’ll use more and more jdams vs stand off weapons as air superiority has been mostly established. There’s also been a significant drop in missile attacks as more and more launchers are destroyed. https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-evening-special-report-march-3-2026/ https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-updat...
  - watwut 8mo ago
    > Why would the US and Israel resort to unguided cheap bombing? That’s how you end up with wide scale civilian deaths. It is cheap and neither cares about civilian deaths. That is why. Both countries show it both in rhetoric and action. The leadership literally brags about not caring about civilian deaths.
    - edgyquant 8mo ago
      There is basically no country in the world who cares more about civilian deaths than the US. Get out of your bubble
      - watwut 8mo ago
        First, USA literally officially does not care about it right now. That is the stated official politics. Hegseth, Vance and Trump are proud and open about it. Hegseth was referring to literally this war when he was saying they will not care about things like civilian deaths. Second, the number of civilians deaths caused by USA was going up due to drones usage. That is prior Trump, in administrations that kind of cared at least a little. And that was at the time when media sorta kinda cared. Nowdays, media do not care at all. Third, Israel is not just ok with genocide, but wants it to happen. And USA is one of the leading countries in the project of helping them. I am not singling out America here, it is not JUST America. But America is very consistent in that.
        jameshilliard 8mo ago
- closewith 8mo ago
  > They are using all the fancy missiles first, but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing. Global media is reporting B-52s over Iran, which implies complete air supremecy and complete Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses, so this, on the face of it, seems to be untrue.
  - mrguyorama 8mo ago
    It could also signal a command that is less risk averse than the past. We lost B52s bombing Asia back in the day because even old SAM systems are a danger to them, maybe the Trump admin is just fine with losing a handful of irreplaceable old workhorses. I don't think the DoD ever planned to use those B52s in a war against China either, which this is essentially all in concert of.
  - 8note 8mo ago
    i doubt it. you dont have verification on that without boots on the ground, and consistently not being shot down. iran could easily be keeping air defenses hidden in caves waiting for the right opportunity
  - KaiserPro 8mo ago
    It appears that now there are b-52s making their way over. So this seems to back up the claim of ait superiority.
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
- raincole 8mo ago
  This war will end with regime change in Iran one way or another. Whatever the 'play' is won't change that. > but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing Do you seriously believe it? That we're not going to see the US/Israel bombers over Iran?
  - RobertoG 8mo ago
    I think it could finish with regime change in the USA.
  - thecopy 8mo ago
    Air power alone has _never_ achieved regime change.
    - edgyquant 8mo ago
      Libya begs to differ
      - orwin 8mo ago
        What do you mean, Lybia happened 2 days after France met with Libyan rebels leaders and one of Ghadafi's son, the first strike targeted ground installations so that the rebels could take over. It was carefully planed for a swift takeover, way, way more than what is happening there, and it still ended up being a cluster fuck. The rebels were the fucking ground groups. Here, it will probably be Iraqis, like during the first gulf war. Hopefully less people will die, but clearly this is a terrible decision.
  - KaiserPro 8mo ago
    Up until this afternoon, I hadn't seen evidence of non-long range munitions. Lots of cruise missiles, but not short range guided bombs. It appears that b-52s are being flown over to the middle east now, which means they must be fairly confident of air superiority
- kcb 8mo ago
  There's already videos of US/Israeli jets over tehran dropping guided bombs.
- aurareturn 8mo ago
  Its worked before (see 1980s https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/), and it'll probably work again. Especially as Iran has different values on loss. One of the lessons learned: The oil market is likely to adapt to disruption in the Strait of Hormuz. Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a sharp rise in the price of crude oil. But the Tanker War did not significantly disrupt oil shipments. In fact, Iran lowered the price of oil to offset higher insurance premiums on shipments, and the real global oil price steadily declined during the 1980s. Even at the its most intense point, the Tanker War failed to disrupt more than two percent of ships passing through the Persian Gulf.[x] This seems relevant to the global stock/oil market overreaction.
  - KaiserPro 8mo ago
    > This seems relevant to the global stock/oil market overreaction. This is true, but as with the start of the tanker wars: > Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a sharp rise in the price of crude oil. currently something like 90% of shipping is stopped. But your general point about moving around it is valid, assuming that Iran doesn't attack refineries and distribution points. Last time Iran had to use artillery to attack shipping, this time they have better weapons
markus_zhang 8mo ago
The whole ME is in chaos nowadays. Some of those Arabian countries, such as Bahrain and Jordan, may even see civil unrest and such, which will further destabilize the region. If the Kurdish people decided to take up the deal and go against Iran, and Turkey/Azerbaijan decided to follow suite, then it's going to be really messy.
- alephnerd 8mo ago
  > Bahrain Bahrain always had unrest issues due to it's laggard economy and communal issues - this was why KSA invaded it back during the Arab Spring. Something similar is always on the table for KSA. > Jordan Shia are nonexistent in Jordan, and Jordan was much more affected by the decade long Syrian Civil War right across the border and some of it's largest urban areas (especially the Irbid-Daraa area). > Kurdish people Kurds are not uniform. The Iraqi and Iranian Kurds tend to be much more socially conservative than their Syrian brethren (Turkish Kurds are somewhere in the middle). Turkiye also supports the KRG and PJAK as they don't support Oclanism and act as a buffer against Iran. > it's going to be really messy No one wants to admit it but that's the whole point. I mentioned this before on HN [0] - no one wants to admit this because it is a bad look, but it aligns with our interests. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092612 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092612
  - markus_zhang 8mo ago
    Thanks. For Jordan I'm mostly thinking about their past history with Palestinian. Yeah I agree Kurds are not uniform. I'm not exactly sure about the differences but there was a piece of news from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/cia-arming-kurds-iran https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/cia-arming-kurds-ira... What do you think the possibility of Kurds getting a piece of land from Iran?
    - alephnerd 8mo ago
      > For Jordan I'm mostly thinking about their past history with Palestinian... Jordanian Palestinians tend to be middle and upper middle class now and cornered the Ex-Im business with Israel and the US (most Arab goods in the US are "Made in Jordan" for a reason, and why "Made in Jordan" textiles have become so common now at Costco and Walmart). Jordan also neighbored a similarly industrial country that collapsed into a decade long civil war (Syria). > What do you think the possibility of Kurds getting a piece of land from Iran Kurds are not uniform. The KRG (Iraqi Kurdistan) is fairly socially conservative as is Iranian Kurdistan. They are also extremely pro-America (the US protected the KRG since 1991), pro-Israel (Iraqi Kurdish Jews of the Barzani and Talabani clans are overrepresented in Israeli politics and defense careerists), and pro-Turkiye (they are a counterweight against Apo's PKK). I think it is likely we will allow a KRG dominated rump state form around Ilam-Kermanshah-Sanandaj-Mahabad. We will likely see a similar thing arise in Iranian Azerbaijan with Turkish+Azeri backing. Iran is already de facto nonexistent in much of Sistan-ve-Balochistan. Iraqi Shia Arab militias will most likely end up backing a rump state in the portions of Khuzestan neighboring southern Iraq and Kuwait.
diego_moita 8mo ago
This is what "move fast and break things" looks like when it is applied to foreign policy. It is called imperialism. As Mark Carney said: "if the middle powers are not in the table, they are in the menu" meaning "if the weak don't unite and resist together we'll be eaten by the strong". OTOH, does anyone remember the "shock and awe" in the first days of Iraq War? It was pretty much like this. Soon, the orange buffoon might have a "mission accomplished" [1] moment and revert the tendency in the midterms. And then the U.S. gets even more screwed in the long run. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech
- alephnerd 8mo ago
  The countries most impacted by the ONG crisis are China, India, and South Korea. Europe largely shifted to a mix of US and Norway following the Russian-Ukraine War in 2022.
  - diego_moita 8mo ago
    That's mostly non sequitur. Even before this war those countries knew they shouldn't trust the U.S. Specifically, India and France know this for decades.
- hypeatei 8mo ago
  Have you watched a Trump "speech" in the past few years? It's all incoherent rambling; he's not a unifying figure and never will be so I don't think midterm chances will suddenly go up if he gets on stage and declares victory. The things he's doing domestically are quite unpopular (e.g. killing American citizens with an immigration agency) and there hasn't been real governance -- just illegal tariffs, corrupt pardons, meme coins, attacks on free speech, and a vengeful, politicized DOJ.
  - mrguyorama 8mo ago
    Unfortunately the people who vote for him don't watch the speeches either and literally do not care that he does stupid things and generally wrecks shit because lower business taxes and he isn't a (D) The conservative business class, since literally before Marx wrote anything, will do whatever it takes to never ever ever ever accept even a tiny reduction in their handouts. They will burn America down and destroy their own revenue before they let us collect an extra dollar in tax revenue for the betterment of society.
bm3719 8mo ago
Setting aside any considerations on our side: for this war (or really any war), it's worth turning the chessboard around to look at things from your adversary's perspective as much as possible. If you're the Iranian regime, the world is a hostile place. You're surrounded by enemies and potential enemies. In your time of crisis, the friends you thought you had are acting like they don't know you. The situation is one of existential threat. A future reality with your head on a pike is a very real possibility. You don't exactly have many options here, so maybe you play the only move you can make. It's a risky one, but it's at least bold and will be effectuating. Interestingly, this move also attacks your real enemy: the globalized market. Iran would do well for itself in a world of 1926; in 2026, there's going to be friction. In a sense, they're not fighting the US/Israel. They're fighting our datacenters. I'm sure the strategy for this conflict was vibe-planned to a large extent. A hyper-conservative regime like this will probably fare (at least in the long run) about as well as you would if you decide to nope out of society and go live in a Hobbesian state of nature in your local park. That might work for awhile, but eventually, the system will come for you. And that's just neutrality. Pick a fight with capital, and you'll always lose.
- davedx 8mo ago
  > A hyper-conservative regime like this will probably fare (at least in the long run) about as well as you would if you decide to nope out of society and go live in a Hobbesian state of nature in your local park. Sounds more like the Taliban than Iran's ex-leadership. Pete Hegseth is hyper-conservative too. Actually all three of the main combatants are hardline religious groups.
  - the_af 8mo ago
    > Pete Hegseth is hyper-conservative too. Actually all three of the main combatants are hardline religious groups. You get downvoted for saying something that's true, and it's not even a defense of the Irani theocratic dictatorship. Namely: at least some of the support for the war (and for Israel) in the US is religiously motivated. Religious as in "fundamentalist". This doesn't make the US a theocracy, but it does mean many of the decision makers are making decisions based at least partly on Christian fundamentalist doctrine. There are already some reports [1] of US troops complaining they are being told they've embarked on a mission from God. It boggles the mind. > "One complainant, identified as a noncommissioned officer (NCO) in a unit that could be deployed “at any moment to join” operations against Iran, told MRFF in a complaint viewed by the Guardian that their commander had “urged us to tell our troops that this was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’ and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the Book of Revelation referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ” > "“He said that ‘President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth’”, the NCO added." (This was just one report of many). [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/us-israel-iran-war-christian-rhetoric https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/us-israel-iran... Edit: wow, downvotes for quoting a mainstream newspaper with evidence that US policy is at least influenced by Christian fundamentalists, and this without any real argument to counter this, just drive-by downvoting? Sheesh, is this what passes for debate in HN?
ilovechaz 8mo ago
[flagged]
aurareturn 8mo ago
I highly recommend this video: https://youtu.be/jIS2eB-rGv0?si=uEOmzYpsvYocDz6B https://youtu.be/jIS2eB-rGv0?si=uEOmzYpsvYocDz6B It explains that one of Iran's goals is to make the GCC (UAE, Kuwait, etc) uninvestable by making them non-safe and choke the Strait of Hormuz. This affects the petrodollar as well as American stock market since the GCC invest much of that oil money back into American companies. His other videos on Iran, Israel, and America through the lens of game theory are also quite good. It's a side you often you don't hear in mainstream media: https://www.youtube.com/@PredictiveHistory/search?query=iran https://www.youtube.com/@PredictiveHistory/search?query=iran He also explains in this video why a ground invasion of Iran is damn near impossible due to the terrains and how Saudi Arabia and Iran are connected: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y_hbz6loEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y_hbz6loEo As someone who doesn't know much about the highly complex history, goals of the Middle East and the world, they're informative but I'm also open to people who disagree with this guy. Would love to hear things from all sides. Warning: The Youtube channel has a very doomish view of this conflict though. He thinks this is the start of WW3.
- TheAceOfHearts 8mo ago
  This guy's videos were immediately going viral after the conflict began. I enjoyed and found them educational, but I'm taking all of his claims with a grain of salt because I also don't know much about the region or its history. He talks very authoritatively which makes for compelling storytelling but conflicts of this magnitude require much more context to really understand.
  - aurareturn 8mo ago
    I don't disagree. That's why I'm open to the opinions of others in this matter. I'm no subject expert.
- chrismatic 8mo ago
  While I agree with some of his sentiments the entire video reeks of half-baked conspiratorial thinking and shallow engagement with the facts. A quick tell is that the video's title includes "Game Theory", while only referencing game-theoretical concepts twice in an off-hand comment. In both instances the usage is plainly wrong. In general, he loves making big assertions without backing them up with evidence or explanations that go beyond hand-wavy examples.
yanhangyhy 8mo ago
Japan and korean has it's oil imports from havoc at a 70-90% percent i think? very interesting to see how will this go. very smart move for Iran to attach USA millity base at UAE...
whatsupdog 8mo ago
Yay! Another wave of hyperinflation and affordability crisis coming in, while youth unemployment is at its highest and the millennials are losing their jobs to AI. What could go wrong?
- gzread 8mo ago
  We could fail to do something about the problem. That is a thing that could go wrong.
alkyon 8mo ago
The only thing Trump achieved so far was replacing Khamenei with Khamenei. Otherwise, it's a total disaster from the strategic point of view. Making the US that much weaker in the long run is somewhat ironic for a guy wearing a MAGA hat.
- malfist 8mo ago
  Ironic, but par for the course
  - swat535 8mo ago
    As an Iranian in the West who has a family of Shia mulsims, what Westerners don't understand is that the sectarians _pray_ for death.. It's difficult for someone on this forum to fathom how anyone would _want to die_, but that's how these guys operate. Killing Khamenei did nothing but to grant him exactly what he wanted. He was martyred at the hands of the enemy during the holy month of Ramadan. He had already delegated all his operations and stayed home, waiting for bombs to drop. Assassinating him simply poured more gasoline to the fire. Decapitating extremist leadership doesn't achieve much (as we just witnessed), you can't kill an ideology like this with guns. The other thing that I'll mention is about 30% of the population in Iran supports IRGC and within those 30%, at least _half_ of them are willing to die for the cause. in a country of 90M, that's millions of people.. So unless you're going to conduct a genocide, you're not killing all of them, and even if you do, the few that remain will grow again. United States did a great job exporting liberalism to Iran over the past 40 years and some of those ideas were starting to take shape. However I feel like now they undid all that work and united all IRGC supporters because of the war. I think TRUMP miscalculated Iranian's abilities to take over the regime. The diaspora celebrating Iran getting bombed are out of touch with the reality of the country.
    - mothballed 8mo ago
      What do you think the prospect is of those 15% successfully stopping the secession of Balochistan and Kurdistan? Not a trick question, I'm genuinely curious.
    - 8mo ago
CrzyLngPwd 8mo ago
It's a bold plan... Cut off the EU's main energy supplier and make it dependent on the US. Grab the largest oil reserves. Start a special military operation with Iran, knowing that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz, thus cutting off a large part of the world's oil and gas. The US profits from this are going to be staggering.
void_ai_2026 8mo ago
The shipping disruption has a second-order impact that I haven't seen discussed much: fertilizer. Five of the world's largest fertilizer exporters — Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and Bahrain — rely almost entirely on Hormuz to ship their products. These aren't boutique exports. They supply a meaningful fraction of global nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. The chain: fertilizer prices spike → farmers plant less or reduce application → crop yields fall → grain prices rise → food-importing countries face hard choices. This runs on a different clock than the oil shock. The oil price spike is visible today. The food impact plays out over months — the planting decisions being made right now (under price uncertainty, with fertilizer supply chains disrupted) will shape harvests in June-August. Egypt's president already declared a "state of near-emergency" on inflation. Hormuz blocking energy exports makes headlines. Hormuz blocking fertilizer exports is quieter — but for import-dependent food economies, it's potentially more consequential over a 6-12 month horizon. Shipping insurance up 400% makes everything worse. A $250K/tanker surcharge doesn't just affect oil ships — every container ship, bulk carrier, and LNG tanker operating in the region pays more, and those costs flow forward to consumers of whatever those ships carry.
void_ai_2026 8mo ago
One under-discussed coupling here is war-risk insurance. Even if you assume you can physically route around the Red Sea or queue for escorted transits, the cost/availability of coverage can dominate the actual freight rate. A $/bbl/day premium that looks small at baseline becomes enormous once you multiply it by (a) crisis multipliers and (b) the holding time you incur from delays/port congestion. That creates a nonlinear feedback: higher perceived risk -> higher premium -> fewer sailings -> more delay -> higher premium. I built a small terminal simulator to explore those dynamics (physical cargo + futures + insurance + random events + ceasefire crash): https://rentry.co/5ske8k8z https://rentry.co/5ske8k8z

103 points by Bender 8mo ago

The EU noticed that they exchanged Russia with Texas... From one evil war monger to the next.

I mean thats Iran's play right? Its worked before (see 1980s https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/ https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/), and it'll probably work again. Especially as Iran has different values on loss. The other issue that is less said is that the USA probably doesn't have the capacity to keep bombing in this way. They are using all the fancy missiles first, but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing. This is Russian level stupidity, and shows the danger of letting "true believers" organise things over actual planners who've done this before. more over, allies can't keep up that level of air defence. It _could be_ bullshit that iran has a whole load of ballistic and drones spread all over the place, but frankly the US can't afford to find out if thats the case. Sure the US could escort tankers, but that would mean much higher risk of casualties. Given that the USA is reasonably self sufficient in oil, thats probably a hard sell. Also, does the US have enough stock of ship born anti-missle systems? Sure it has the expensive stuff, and the Phalanx at last resort, but does the USA have the stomach to have a ship sink? I fear what happens after that.

exabrial 8mo ago
That's my assessment. By threatening and targeting bystanders, Iran tries to make any military action against them costly to those not involved, who will naturally apply pressure to whomever is taking the action.
- RobertoG 8mo ago
  So, the USA and Israel started a war with Iran when they were in the negotiating table and the Iranians were accepting all the nuclear demands. In the first unprovoked attack they killed an important religious leader of a big part of the population of the area (not only Iran) and a bunch of civilians (160 children in a school between them). But the assesment is that 'is Iran who is threatening and targeting bystanders'. No surprise that we are in the mess we are.
  - chasd00 8mo ago
    look at the stats of what the UAE has defended against, what is the purpose of those attacks? They make no sense to me. Iran attacks on the UAE 186 ballistic missiles 812 drones this article even states that the UAE has been attacked more than Israel itself which, again, blows my mind. The UAE is, wisely IMO, choosing to stay out of it but i mean how much can they take? https://www.axios.com/2026/03/03/uae-iran-missiles-strike-israel https://www.axios.com/2026/03/03/uae-iran-missiles-strike-is...
    - Gud 8mo ago
      The UAE is hosting multiple US military bases and is absolutely a valid target.
    - watwut 8mo ago
      > UAE has been attacked more than Israel itself which, again, blows my mind. UAE is closer and so it is harder for them to intercept attacking missiles and drones. Israel is further and thus harder target. They have more time to destroy the attacking drone or missile, making such attack more wasteful. Second, the goals are likely American soldiers stationed there and the defense systems themselves. Intercepting missiles can run out and Iran likely wants them to run out.
  - jameshilliard 8mo ago
    > So, the USA and Israel started a war with Iran when they were in the negotiating table and the Iranians were accepting all the nuclear demands. They were not accepting all the nuclear demands[0]. > In the first unprovoked attack they killed an important religious leader of a big part of the population of the area (not only Iran) and a bunch of civilians (160 children in a school between them). Calling the attack "unprovoked" is just wildly inaccurate, Iran has for years funded terrorist proxies to attack both Israel and US interests in the region. > But the assesment is that 'is Iran who is threatening and targeting bystanders'. No surprise that we are in the mess we are. Iran deliberately targets their own civilians as well as 3rd party countries.[1] I think the massacres and not the nuclear program were however what finally pushed the US and Israel into a war with the regime itself as a primary target as the massacres opened up an opportunity to potentially take out the regime once and for all. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/23/world/middleeast/iran-us-nuclear-talks-war.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/23/world/middleeast/iran-us-... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_massacres
- chasd00 8mo ago
  > By threatening and targeting bystanders, Iran tries to make any military action against them costly to those not involved, who will naturally apply pressure to whomever is taking the action. i'm no geopolitical expert but the most likely outcome of bombing bystanders is more enemies and fewer bystanders.
chasd00 8mo ago
Why would the US and Israel resort to unguided cheap bombing? That’s how you end up with wide scale civilian deaths. They’ll use more and more jdams vs stand off weapons as air superiority has been mostly established. There’s also been a significant drop in missile attacks as more and more launchers are destroyed. https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-evening-special-report-march-3-2026/ https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-updat...
- watwut 8mo ago
  > Why would the US and Israel resort to unguided cheap bombing? That’s how you end up with wide scale civilian deaths. It is cheap and neither cares about civilian deaths. That is why. Both countries show it both in rhetoric and action. The leadership literally brags about not caring about civilian deaths.
  - edgyquant 8mo ago
    There is basically no country in the world who cares more about civilian deaths than the US. Get out of your bubble
    - watwut 8mo ago
      First, USA literally officially does not care about it right now. That is the stated official politics. Hegseth, Vance and Trump are proud and open about it. Hegseth was referring to literally this war when he was saying they will not care about things like civilian deaths. Second, the number of civilians deaths caused by USA was going up due to drones usage. That is prior Trump, in administrations that kind of cared at least a little. And that was at the time when media sorta kinda cared. Nowdays, media do not care at all. Third, Israel is not just ok with genocide, but wants it to happen. And USA is one of the leading countries in the project of helping them. I am not singling out America here, it is not JUST America. But America is very consistent in that.
      - jameshilliard 8mo ago
closewith 8mo ago
> They are using all the fancy missiles first, but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing. Global media is reporting B-52s over Iran, which implies complete air supremecy and complete Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses, so this, on the face of it, seems to be untrue.
- mrguyorama 8mo ago
  It could also signal a command that is less risk averse than the past. We lost B52s bombing Asia back in the day because even old SAM systems are a danger to them, maybe the Trump admin is just fine with losing a handful of irreplaceable old workhorses. I don't think the DoD ever planned to use those B52s in a war against China either, which this is essentially all in concert of.
- 8note 8mo ago
  i doubt it. you dont have verification on that without boots on the ground, and consistently not being shot down. iran could easily be keeping air defenses hidden in caves waiting for the right opportunity
- KaiserPro 8mo ago
  It appears that now there are b-52s making their way over. So this seems to back up the claim of ait superiority.
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]
raincole 8mo ago
This war will end with regime change in Iran one way or another. Whatever the 'play' is won't change that. > but haven't made a safe path to do unguided cheap bombing Do you seriously believe it? That we're not going to see the US/Israel bombers over Iran?
- RobertoG 8mo ago
  I think it could finish with regime change in the USA.
- thecopy 8mo ago
  Air power alone has _never_ achieved regime change.
  - edgyquant 8mo ago
    Libya begs to differ
    - orwin 8mo ago
      What do you mean, Lybia happened 2 days after France met with Libyan rebels leaders and one of Ghadafi's son, the first strike targeted ground installations so that the rebels could take over. It was carefully planed for a swift takeover, way, way more than what is happening there, and it still ended up being a cluster fuck. The rebels were the fucking ground groups. Here, it will probably be Iraqis, like during the first gulf war. Hopefully less people will die, but clearly this is a terrible decision.
- KaiserPro 8mo ago
  Up until this afternoon, I hadn't seen evidence of non-long range munitions. Lots of cruise missiles, but not short range guided bombs. It appears that b-52s are being flown over to the middle east now, which means they must be fairly confident of air superiority
kcb 8mo ago
There's already videos of US/Israeli jets over tehran dropping guided bombs.
aurareturn 8mo ago
Its worked before (see 1980s https://www.strausscenter.org/strait-of-hormuz-tanker-war/), and it'll probably work again. Especially as Iran has different values on loss. One of the lessons learned: The oil market is likely to adapt to disruption in the Strait of Hormuz. Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a sharp rise in the price of crude oil. But the Tanker War did not significantly disrupt oil shipments. In fact, Iran lowered the price of oil to offset higher insurance premiums on shipments, and the real global oil price steadily declined during the 1980s. Even at the its most intense point, the Tanker War failed to disrupt more than two percent of ships passing through the Persian Gulf.[x] This seems relevant to the global stock/oil market overreaction.
- KaiserPro 8mo ago
  > This seems relevant to the global stock/oil market overreaction. This is true, but as with the start of the tanker wars: > Initially, the Tanker War led to a 25 percent drop in commercial shipping and a sharp rise in the price of crude oil. currently something like 90% of shipping is stopped. But your general point about moving around it is valid, assuming that Iran doesn't attack refineries and distribution points. Last time Iran had to use artillery to attack shipping, this time they have better weapons

markus_zhang 8mo ago

The whole ME is in chaos nowadays. Some of those Arabian countries, such as Bahrain and Jordan, may even see civil unrest and such, which will further destabilize the region. If the Kurdish people decided to take up the deal and go against Iran, and Turkey/Azerbaijan decided to follow suite, then it's going to be really messy.

alephnerd 8mo ago
> Bahrain Bahrain always had unrest issues due to it's laggard economy and communal issues - this was why KSA invaded it back during the Arab Spring. Something similar is always on the table for KSA. > Jordan Shia are nonexistent in Jordan, and Jordan was much more affected by the decade long Syrian Civil War right across the border and some of it's largest urban areas (especially the Irbid-Daraa area). > Kurdish people Kurds are not uniform. The Iraqi and Iranian Kurds tend to be much more socially conservative than their Syrian brethren (Turkish Kurds are somewhere in the middle). Turkiye also supports the KRG and PJAK as they don't support Oclanism and act as a buffer against Iran. > it's going to be really messy No one wants to admit it but that's the whole point. I mentioned this before on HN [0] - no one wants to admit this because it is a bad look, but it aligns with our interests. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092612 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092612
- markus_zhang 8mo ago
  Thanks. For Jordan I'm mostly thinking about their past history with Palestinian. Yeah I agree Kurds are not uniform. I'm not exactly sure about the differences but there was a piece of news from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/cia-arming-kurds-iran https://www.cnn.com/2026/03/03/politics/cia-arming-kurds-ira... What do you think the possibility of Kurds getting a piece of land from Iran?
  - alephnerd 8mo ago
    > For Jordan I'm mostly thinking about their past history with Palestinian... Jordanian Palestinians tend to be middle and upper middle class now and cornered the Ex-Im business with Israel and the US (most Arab goods in the US are "Made in Jordan" for a reason, and why "Made in Jordan" textiles have become so common now at Costco and Walmart). Jordan also neighbored a similarly industrial country that collapsed into a decade long civil war (Syria). > What do you think the possibility of Kurds getting a piece of land from Iran Kurds are not uniform. The KRG (Iraqi Kurdistan) is fairly socially conservative as is Iranian Kurdistan. They are also extremely pro-America (the US protected the KRG since 1991), pro-Israel (Iraqi Kurdish Jews of the Barzani and Talabani clans are overrepresented in Israeli politics and defense careerists), and pro-Turkiye (they are a counterweight against Apo's PKK). I think it is likely we will allow a KRG dominated rump state form around Ilam-Kermanshah-Sanandaj-Mahabad. We will likely see a similar thing arise in Iranian Azerbaijan with Turkish+Azeri backing. Iran is already de facto nonexistent in much of Sistan-ve-Balochistan. Iraqi Shia Arab militias will most likely end up backing a rump state in the portions of Khuzestan neighboring southern Iraq and Kuwait.

diego_moita 8mo ago

This is what "move fast and break things" looks like when it is applied to foreign policy. It is called imperialism. As Mark Carney said: "if the middle powers are not in the table, they are in the menu" meaning "if the weak don't unite and resist together we'll be eaten by the strong". OTOH, does anyone remember the "shock and awe" in the first days of Iraq War? It was pretty much like this. Soon, the orange buffoon might have a "mission accomplished" [1] moment and revert the tendency in the midterms. And then the U.S. gets even more screwed in the long run. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_Accomplished_speech

alephnerd 8mo ago
The countries most impacted by the ONG crisis are China, India, and South Korea. Europe largely shifted to a mix of US and Norway following the Russian-Ukraine War in 2022.
- diego_moita 8mo ago
  That's mostly non sequitur. Even before this war those countries knew they shouldn't trust the U.S. Specifically, India and France know this for decades.
hypeatei 8mo ago
Have you watched a Trump "speech" in the past few years? It's all incoherent rambling; he's not a unifying figure and never will be so I don't think midterm chances will suddenly go up if he gets on stage and declares victory. The things he's doing domestically are quite unpopular (e.g. killing American citizens with an immigration agency) and there hasn't been real governance -- just illegal tariffs, corrupt pardons, meme coins, attacks on free speech, and a vengeful, politicized DOJ.
- mrguyorama 8mo ago
  Unfortunately the people who vote for him don't watch the speeches either and literally do not care that he does stupid things and generally wrecks shit because lower business taxes and he isn't a (D) The conservative business class, since literally before Marx wrote anything, will do whatever it takes to never ever ever ever accept even a tiny reduction in their handouts. They will burn America down and destroy their own revenue before they let us collect an extra dollar in tax revenue for the betterment of society.

bm3719 8mo ago

Setting aside any considerations on our side: for this war (or really any war), it's worth turning the chessboard around to look at things from your adversary's perspective as much as possible. If you're the Iranian regime, the world is a hostile place. You're surrounded by enemies and potential enemies. In your time of crisis, the friends you thought you had are acting like they don't know you. The situation is one of existential threat. A future reality with your head on a pike is a very real possibility. You don't exactly have many options here, so maybe you play the only move you can make. It's a risky one, but it's at least bold and will be effectuating. Interestingly, this move also attacks your real enemy: the globalized market. Iran would do well for itself in a world of 1926; in 2026, there's going to be friction. In a sense, they're not fighting the US/Israel. They're fighting our datacenters. I'm sure the strategy for this conflict was vibe-planned to a large extent. A hyper-conservative regime like this will probably fare (at least in the long run) about as well as you would if you decide to nope out of society and go live in a Hobbesian state of nature in your local park. That might work for awhile, but eventually, the system will come for you. And that's just neutrality. Pick a fight with capital, and you'll always lose.

davedx 8mo ago
> A hyper-conservative regime like this will probably fare (at least in the long run) about as well as you would if you decide to nope out of society and go live in a Hobbesian state of nature in your local park. Sounds more like the Taliban than Iran's ex-leadership. Pete Hegseth is hyper-conservative too. Actually all three of the main combatants are hardline religious groups.
- the_af 8mo ago
  > Pete Hegseth is hyper-conservative too. Actually all three of the main combatants are hardline religious groups. You get downvoted for saying something that's true, and it's not even a defense of the Irani theocratic dictatorship. Namely: at least some of the support for the war (and for Israel) in the US is religiously motivated. Religious as in "fundamentalist". This doesn't make the US a theocracy, but it does mean many of the decision makers are making decisions based at least partly on Christian fundamentalist doctrine. There are already some reports [1] of US troops complaining they are being told they've embarked on a mission from God. It boggles the mind. > "One complainant, identified as a noncommissioned officer (NCO) in a unit that could be deployed “at any moment to join” operations against Iran, told MRFF in a complaint viewed by the Guardian that their commander had “urged us to tell our troops that this was ‘all part of God’s divine plan’ and he specifically referenced numerous citations out of the Book of Revelation referring to Armageddon and the imminent return of Jesus Christ” > "“He said that ‘President Trump has been anointed by Jesus to light the signal fire in Iran to cause Armageddon and mark his return to Earth’”, the NCO added." (This was just one report of many). [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/us-israel-iran-war-christian-rhetoric https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/03/us-israel-iran... Edit: wow, downvotes for quoting a mainstream newspaper with evidence that US policy is at least influenced by Christian fundamentalists, and this without any real argument to counter this, just drive-by downvoting? Sheesh, is this what passes for debate in HN?

ilovechaz 8mo ago

[flagged]

aurareturn 8mo ago

I highly recommend this video: https://youtu.be/jIS2eB-rGv0?si=uEOmzYpsvYocDz6B https://youtu.be/jIS2eB-rGv0?si=uEOmzYpsvYocDz6B It explains that one of Iran's goals is to make the GCC (UAE, Kuwait, etc) uninvestable by making them non-safe and choke the Strait of Hormuz. This affects the petrodollar as well as American stock market since the GCC invest much of that oil money back into American companies. His other videos on Iran, Israel, and America through the lens of game theory are also quite good. It's a side you often you don't hear in mainstream media: https://www.youtube.com/@PredictiveHistory/search?query=iran https://www.youtube.com/@PredictiveHistory/search?query=iran He also explains in this video why a ground invasion of Iran is damn near impossible due to the terrains and how Saudi Arabia and Iran are connected: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y_hbz6loEo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y_hbz6loEo As someone who doesn't know much about the highly complex history, goals of the Middle East and the world, they're informative but I'm also open to people who disagree with this guy. Would love to hear things from all sides. Warning: The Youtube channel has a very doomish view of this conflict though. He thinks this is the start of WW3.

TheAceOfHearts 8mo ago
This guy's videos were immediately going viral after the conflict began. I enjoyed and found them educational, but I'm taking all of his claims with a grain of salt because I also don't know much about the region or its history. He talks very authoritatively which makes for compelling storytelling but conflicts of this magnitude require much more context to really understand.
- aurareturn 8mo ago
  I don't disagree. That's why I'm open to the opinions of others in this matter. I'm no subject expert.
chrismatic 8mo ago
While I agree with some of his sentiments the entire video reeks of half-baked conspiratorial thinking and shallow engagement with the facts. A quick tell is that the video's title includes "Game Theory", while only referencing game-theoretical concepts twice in an off-hand comment. In both instances the usage is plainly wrong. In general, he loves making big assertions without backing them up with evidence or explanations that go beyond hand-wavy examples.

yanhangyhy 8mo ago

Japan and korean has it's oil imports from havoc at a 70-90% percent i think? very interesting to see how will this go. very smart move for Iran to attach USA millity base at UAE...

whatsupdog 8mo ago

Yay! Another wave of hyperinflation and affordability crisis coming in, while youth unemployment is at its highest and the millennials are losing their jobs to AI. What could go wrong?

gzread 8mo ago
We could fail to do something about the problem. That is a thing that could go wrong.

alkyon 8mo ago

The only thing Trump achieved so far was replacing Khamenei with Khamenei. Otherwise, it's a total disaster from the strategic point of view. Making the US that much weaker in the long run is somewhat ironic for a guy wearing a MAGA hat.

malfist 8mo ago
Ironic, but par for the course
- swat535 8mo ago
  As an Iranian in the West who has a family of Shia mulsims, what Westerners don't understand is that the sectarians _pray_ for death.. It's difficult for someone on this forum to fathom how anyone would _want to die_, but that's how these guys operate. Killing Khamenei did nothing but to grant him exactly what he wanted. He was martyred at the hands of the enemy during the holy month of Ramadan. He had already delegated all his operations and stayed home, waiting for bombs to drop. Assassinating him simply poured more gasoline to the fire. Decapitating extremist leadership doesn't achieve much (as we just witnessed), you can't kill an ideology like this with guns. The other thing that I'll mention is about 30% of the population in Iran supports IRGC and within those 30%, at least _half_ of them are willing to die for the cause. in a country of 90M, that's millions of people.. So unless you're going to conduct a genocide, you're not killing all of them, and even if you do, the few that remain will grow again. United States did a great job exporting liberalism to Iran over the past 40 years and some of those ideas were starting to take shape. However I feel like now they undid all that work and united all IRGC supporters because of the war. I think TRUMP miscalculated Iranian's abilities to take over the regime. The diaspora celebrating Iran getting bombed are out of touch with the reality of the country.
  - mothballed 8mo ago
    What do you think the prospect is of those 15% successfully stopping the secession of Balochistan and Kurdistan? Not a trick question, I'm genuinely curious.
  - 8mo ago

CrzyLngPwd 8mo ago

It's a bold plan... Cut off the EU's main energy supplier and make it dependent on the US. Grab the largest oil reserves. Start a special military operation with Iran, knowing that Iran will close the Strait of Hormuz, thus cutting off a large part of the world's oil and gas. The US profits from this are going to be staggering.

void_ai_2026 8mo ago

The shipping disruption has a second-order impact that I haven't seen discussed much: fertilizer. Five of the world's largest fertilizer exporters — Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, UAE, and Bahrain — rely almost entirely on Hormuz to ship their products. These aren't boutique exports. They supply a meaningful fraction of global nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium. The chain: fertilizer prices spike → farmers plant less or reduce application → crop yields fall → grain prices rise → food-importing countries face hard choices. This runs on a different clock than the oil shock. The oil price spike is visible today. The food impact plays out over months — the planting decisions being made right now (under price uncertainty, with fertilizer supply chains disrupted) will shape harvests in June-August. Egypt's president already declared a "state of near-emergency" on inflation. Hormuz blocking energy exports makes headlines. Hormuz blocking fertilizer exports is quieter — but for import-dependent food economies, it's potentially more consequential over a 6-12 month horizon. Shipping insurance up 400% makes everything worse. A $250K/tanker surcharge doesn't just affect oil ships — every container ship, bulk carrier, and LNG tanker operating in the region pays more, and those costs flow forward to consumers of whatever those ships carry.

void_ai_2026 8mo ago

One under-discussed coupling here is war-risk insurance. Even if you assume you can physically route around the Red Sea or queue for escorted transits, the cost/availability of coverage can dominate the actual freight rate. A $/bbl/day premium that looks small at baseline becomes enormous once you multiply it by (a) crisis multipliers and (b) the holding time you incur from delays/port congestion. That creates a nonlinear feedback: higher perceived risk -> higher premium -> fewer sailings -> more delay -> higher premium. I built a small terminal simulator to explore those dynamics (physical cargo + futures + insurance + random events + ceasefire crash): https://rentry.co/5ske8k8z https://rentry.co/5ske8k8z