5 ms·

It seems like it would be highly demoralizing to US soldiers that they are prosecuted for betting on the outcomes of the battles they are risking their lives fo

It seems like it would be highly demoralizing to US soldiers that they are prosecuted for betting on the outcomes of the battles they are risking their lives for but those insider trading commanding them aren't.

herewulf 6mo ago
Imagine doing an easy tour in your air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office and then getting blown to bits by a ballistic missile because no one bothered to tell you about the war that was being initiated which would cause such missiles in retaliation. Yeah, that's demoralizing too.
- SparkyMcUnicorn 6mo ago
  They should have kept an eye on the prediction markets.
- int32_64 6mo ago
  There will be derivative contracts of prediction markets to predict if an insider is indicted for betting on a specific prediction. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if an insider in the prosecutor's office bet on that contract. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if a special prosecutor will prosecute the other prosecutor. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if an insider in the special prosecutor's office bet on the other contract. (additional derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god).
  - rcbdev 6mo ago
    > derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god We already bet on the weather.
    - Freak_NL 6mo ago
      Which is totally up the gods — or a hairdryer: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/23/hairdryer-or-lighter-french-police-look-at-claim-of-sensor-tampering-to-win-weather-bets https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/23/hairdryer-or-l...
  - pyrale 6mo ago
    > additional derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god We already know that Jesus will come back in an election year
- bawolff 6mo ago
  I mean, surely everyone in the middle east knew a war was on the horizon. Obviously not the exact plan or day, but it wasn't a secret that usa was gearing up for a war.
  - watwut 6mo ago
    The war was surprised and host of people said so - goverments, expats living ij region, locals. And were pisssed
    - bawolff 6mo ago
      I imagine they were pissed. I dont think anyone likes being in the middle of a war. Nonetheless in the weeks leading up it was clear USA was moving massive amounts of naval assets into the region. It was on the news 24/7. I'm sure everyone in the military would have been able to read the tea leaves that something was going down soonish, even if they didn't know precisely what or when.
- bijowo1676 6mo ago
  start charging congresspeople with insider trading first, before you charge any regular soldier if rules dont apply universally, then screw these rules altogether
- breppp 6mo ago
  If you are in Kuwait you will find yourself under rockets whether you knew in advance or not I think the worse aspect is if the news of an attack being leaked to the defender and you are being blown to bits as their ballistic missiles are not decimated in their preemptive strike.
  - watwut 6mo ago
    They referred to soldiers that were killed by the start of the war. They thought the situation is normal, war was started without them knowing, got killed. Not knowing in advance was an important factor
    - breppp 6mo ago
      Soldiers can't catch a flight back home when war starts (or about to), and by the time the Iranians were able to attack back after the initial shock, all US soldiers knew there's a war going on That's why I am having great difficulty following that argument
- throwaway2037 6mo ago
  I would offer a small correction to your point: Instead of "ballistic missile", I would substitute "Shahed-type drones". It is much easier to detect (and shoot down) a ballistic missile than a Shahed-type drone.
  - ywvcbk 6mo ago
    I don't think this is true at all? A ballistic missile is way harder and more expensive to shutdown (they are flying at Mach 5-10 while you can outrun that type of drone with a mid tier car on the freeway) Shahed is very primitive in general and not hard to shot down but because its extremely cheap it can be used to overwhelm any type of air defenses. Wasting $4 million to destroy a $50k drone doesn't scale at all.
    - throwaway2037 6mo ago
      The OP wrote: > Imagine doing an easy tour in your air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office and then getting blown to bits by a ballistic missile because no one bothered to tell you about the war that was being initiated which would cause such missiles in retaliation. The purpose of my response wasn't about cost effectiveness; rather, it was about the lethality of a ballistic missile vs Shahed-type drone. A ballistic missile is easily detected by a network of outer space satellites owned and operated by the US Space Force. Whether or not you can defend against it is a different question. There is sufficient time from the detected of ballistic missile launch to move to a hardened underground bunker. All US bases in the Middle East will have these. Soldiers will regularly train for incoming ballistic missile attacks and when/how to move to underground bunkers. As a result, it is very unlikely that soldiers in an "air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office" would be killed by an incoming ballistic missile. On the other hand, a Shahed-type drone (similar to a cruise missile) is much harder to detect because they fly very low and difficult to catch on rader until close to base. As a result, soldiers on base will have much less time to move to underground bunkers.
enoint 6mo ago
Or, your brigade’s master sergeant needs the invasion to hit on the 28th rather than Mar 1st.
JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
> would be highly demoralizing Those people should quit. Sour grapes isn’t an excuse for putting others’ lives at risk.
- davedx 6mo ago
  I don't think active duty special forces can just "quit", can they?
  - CSMastermind 6mo ago
    Sort of. Not saying that I think anyone should do this but just explaining for the sake of general knowledge. I'm simplifying things quite a bit, but almost all military contracts are 8-year (typically split into a 4-year active and 4-year reserve period). If you leave on your own volition during this period, you typically have to repay the cost to the government to train you. And any contract that you're on where you received a signing bonus you have to pay back. The actual mechanism for doing this is a different between officers and enlisted and they're some paperwork but functionally you can leave if you're really motivated to and for the most part people won't stop you (outside of a few conversations where people advise you against it). The type of discharge you receive depends on the circumstances but generally there's a way to still get an honorable discharge (hardship, education, family, conscientious objector). There's also the more practical quitting special forces vs leaving the military entirely. Tier 1 units only want people who want to be there and if you don't you can get transferred to some other job in the military in like a day if you really wanted to.
  - Tangurena2 6mo ago
    They get transferred to a different unit - one that is not part of "special forces". A big part of the selection process is to find the soldiers who just won't quit. One rather famous example is of a BUD/S (usually called SEAL) selectee who drowned himself. When pulled out of the pool and resuscitated, he apologized and thought he failed out of the selection process. The instructor replied something like "heck no, you passed. We can always teach you how to swim. No one can teach you to never give up". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_SEAL_selection_and_training https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_SEAL_select...
vkou 6mo ago
> It seems like it would be highly demoralizing to US soldiers that they are prosecuted for betting on the outcomes of the battles they are risking their lives for but those insider trading commanding them aren't. Why? The enlisted military has never had any issue with similar double standards in the past. George 'AWOL' Bush handily swept the military vote, as did Donald 'Bone Spurs' Trump. Likewise, veterans routinely and overwhelmingly vote for people who cut veteran support and benefits, over people who don't. If they think those people are fit to lead them, who are we to tell them they aren't?
- dinkumthinkum 6mo ago
  I actually completely agree with your last phrase. Who are you to tell them anything, particularly with such ironic condescension?
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  - harimau777 6mo ago
    In a democracy the citizens decide who leads the military not the military.
    - bendbro 6mo ago
      Please study the venn diagram below: ((military) citizens)
- bendbro 6mo ago
  Veterans generally don’t need additional support or benefits. Disability is basically a second pension at this point. SCD for veterans under 45 has risen from 16% in 2008 to 39% in 2022 [0]. If you know any young veterans, then anecdotally you will see this is true. You can (and should) get partial disability for all kinds of aches and pains that in a normal career would go ignored. [0] https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acs-58.pdf https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acs-5...
blitzar 6mo ago
I just couldn't, in good conscience, keep bombing childrens schools under such demoralising conditions. On the flip side: who if not me and my precision guided munitions, will protect America (and freedom) from the clear and present danger of 8 year old iranian girls.
- throawayonthe 6mo ago
  truly so sad how the troops must feel
  - Arkhaine_kupo 6mo ago
    "America will bomb you and 15 years later make a movie about how sad the soldiers are based on autobiographies of completely unrepentant sadists" remains true for another decade. I wonder who the american sniper of iran will be
    - blitzar 6mo ago
      In Nam they got you hooked on opium. In Iran they got you hooked on insider trading on prediction markets.
  - themafia 6mo ago
    Troops are not homogeneous. Some of them are into it.
maerF0x0 6mo ago
I get your point, but at least he wasn't betting against it and his team!
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]

herewulf 6mo ago

Imagine doing an easy tour in your air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office and then getting blown to bits by a ballistic missile because no one bothered to tell you about the war that was being initiated which would cause such missiles in retaliation. Yeah, that's demoralizing too.

SparkyMcUnicorn 6mo ago
They should have kept an eye on the prediction markets.
int32_64 6mo ago
There will be derivative contracts of prediction markets to predict if an insider is indicted for betting on a specific prediction. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if an insider in the prosecutor's office bet on that contract. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if a special prosecutor will prosecute the other prosecutor. And those prediction markets will have derivative markets to predict if an insider in the special prosecutor's office bet on the other contract. (additional derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god).
- rcbdev 6mo ago
  > derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god We already bet on the weather.
  - Freak_NL 6mo ago
    Which is totally up the gods — or a hairdryer: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/23/hairdryer-or-lighter-french-police-look-at-claim-of-sensor-tampering-to-win-weather-bets https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/23/hairdryer-or-l...
- pyrale 6mo ago
  > additional derivative markets will exist up to the divine wrath of god We already know that Jesus will come back in an election year
bawolff 6mo ago
I mean, surely everyone in the middle east knew a war was on the horizon. Obviously not the exact plan or day, but it wasn't a secret that usa was gearing up for a war.
- watwut 6mo ago
  The war was surprised and host of people said so - goverments, expats living ij region, locals. And were pisssed
  - bawolff 6mo ago
    I imagine they were pissed. I dont think anyone likes being in the middle of a war. Nonetheless in the weeks leading up it was clear USA was moving massive amounts of naval assets into the region. It was on the news 24/7. I'm sure everyone in the military would have been able to read the tea leaves that something was going down soonish, even if they didn't know precisely what or when.
bijowo1676 6mo ago
start charging congresspeople with insider trading first, before you charge any regular soldier if rules dont apply universally, then screw these rules altogether
breppp 6mo ago
If you are in Kuwait you will find yourself under rockets whether you knew in advance or not I think the worse aspect is if the news of an attack being leaked to the defender and you are being blown to bits as their ballistic missiles are not decimated in their preemptive strike.
- watwut 6mo ago
  They referred to soldiers that were killed by the start of the war. They thought the situation is normal, war was started without them knowing, got killed. Not knowing in advance was an important factor
  - breppp 6mo ago
    Soldiers can't catch a flight back home when war starts (or about to), and by the time the Iranians were able to attack back after the initial shock, all US soldiers knew there's a war going on That's why I am having great difficulty following that argument
throwaway2037 6mo ago
I would offer a small correction to your point: Instead of "ballistic missile", I would substitute "Shahed-type drones". It is much easier to detect (and shoot down) a ballistic missile than a Shahed-type drone.
- ywvcbk 6mo ago
  I don't think this is true at all? A ballistic missile is way harder and more expensive to shutdown (they are flying at Mach 5-10 while you can outrun that type of drone with a mid tier car on the freeway) Shahed is very primitive in general and not hard to shot down but because its extremely cheap it can be used to overwhelm any type of air defenses. Wasting $4 million to destroy a $50k drone doesn't scale at all.
  - throwaway2037 6mo ago
    The OP wrote: > Imagine doing an easy tour in your air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office and then getting blown to bits by a ballistic missile because no one bothered to tell you about the war that was being initiated which would cause such missiles in retaliation. The purpose of my response wasn't about cost effectiveness; rather, it was about the lethality of a ballistic missile vs Shahed-type drone. A ballistic missile is easily detected by a network of outer space satellites owned and operated by the US Space Force. Whether or not you can defend against it is a different question. There is sufficient time from the detected of ballistic missile launch to move to a hardened underground bunker. All US bases in the Middle East will have these. Soldiers will regularly train for incoming ballistic missile attacks and when/how to move to underground bunkers. As a result, it is very unlikely that soldiers in an "air conditioned Kuwaiti logistics office" would be killed by an incoming ballistic missile. On the other hand, a Shahed-type drone (similar to a cruise missile) is much harder to detect because they fly very low and difficult to catch on rader until close to base. As a result, soldiers on base will have much less time to move to underground bunkers.

enoint 6mo ago

Or, your brigade’s master sergeant needs the invasion to hit on the 28th rather than Mar 1st.

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago

> would be highly demoralizing Those people should quit. Sour grapes isn’t an excuse for putting others’ lives at risk.

davedx 6mo ago
I don't think active duty special forces can just "quit", can they?
- CSMastermind 6mo ago
  Sort of. Not saying that I think anyone should do this but just explaining for the sake of general knowledge. I'm simplifying things quite a bit, but almost all military contracts are 8-year (typically split into a 4-year active and 4-year reserve period). If you leave on your own volition during this period, you typically have to repay the cost to the government to train you. And any contract that you're on where you received a signing bonus you have to pay back. The actual mechanism for doing this is a different between officers and enlisted and they're some paperwork but functionally you can leave if you're really motivated to and for the most part people won't stop you (outside of a few conversations where people advise you against it). The type of discharge you receive depends on the circumstances but generally there's a way to still get an honorable discharge (hardship, education, family, conscientious objector). There's also the more practical quitting special forces vs leaving the military entirely. Tier 1 units only want people who want to be there and if you don't you can get transferred to some other job in the military in like a day if you really wanted to.
- Tangurena2 6mo ago
  They get transferred to a different unit - one that is not part of "special forces". A big part of the selection process is to find the soldiers who just won't quit. One rather famous example is of a BUD/S (usually called SEAL) selectee who drowned himself. When pulled out of the pool and resuscitated, he apologized and thought he failed out of the selection process. The instructor replied something like "heck no, you passed. We can always teach you how to swim. No one can teach you to never give up". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_SEAL_selection_and_training https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_SEAL_select...

vkou 6mo ago

> It seems like it would be highly demoralizing to US soldiers that they are prosecuted for betting on the outcomes of the battles they are risking their lives for but those insider trading commanding them aren't. Why? The enlisted military has never had any issue with similar double standards in the past. George 'AWOL' Bush handily swept the military vote, as did Donald 'Bone Spurs' Trump. Likewise, veterans routinely and overwhelmingly vote for people who cut veteran support and benefits, over people who don't. If they think those people are fit to lead them, who are we to tell them they aren't?

dinkumthinkum 6mo ago
I actually completely agree with your last phrase. Who are you to tell them anything, particularly with such ironic condescension?
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- harimau777 6mo ago
  In a democracy the citizens decide who leads the military not the military.
  - bendbro 6mo ago
    Please study the venn diagram below: ((military) citizens)
bendbro 6mo ago
Veterans generally don’t need additional support or benefits. Disability is basically a second pension at this point. SCD for veterans under 45 has risen from 16% in 2008 to 39% in 2022 [0]. If you know any young veterans, then anecdotally you will see this is true. You can (and should) get partial disability for all kinds of aches and pains that in a normal career would go ignored. [0] https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acs-58.pdf https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2024/demo/acs-5...

blitzar 6mo ago

I just couldn't, in good conscience, keep bombing childrens schools under such demoralising conditions. On the flip side: who if not me and my precision guided munitions, will protect America (and freedom) from the clear and present danger of 8 year old iranian girls.

throawayonthe 6mo ago
truly so sad how the troops must feel
- Arkhaine_kupo 6mo ago
  "America will bomb you and 15 years later make a movie about how sad the soldiers are based on autobiographies of completely unrepentant sadists" remains true for another decade. I wonder who the american sniper of iran will be
  - blitzar 6mo ago
    In Nam they got you hooked on opium. In Iran they got you hooked on insider trading on prediction markets.
- themafia 6mo ago
  Troops are not homogeneous. Some of them are into it.

maerF0x0 6mo ago

I get your point, but at least he wasn't betting against it and his team!

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]