4 ms·

NATO just today as reported by Bloomberg said that if the Strait isn't open by July that it will take or consider taking action. [1] Your view of the situation

by ericmay 5mo ago

NATO just today as reported by Bloomberg said that if the Strait isn't open by July that it will take or consider taking action. [1] Your view of the situation doesn't match reality. Separately, we still have like 11 aircraft carriers and our entire military still in tact. Nothing has changed with respect to our power. If you think otherwise, you are simply wrong. There's no other way to put it. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-19/nato-is-starting-to-consider-hormuz-deployment-to-protect-ships?embedded-checkout=true https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-19/nato-is-s... Sorry for the paywall, I don't have a subscription but saw the headline on Bloomberg TV. There are other sources but I wanted to be consistent and link where I saw the news.

epistasis 5mo ago
Oh, 8 weeks, and they'll think about doing something? Huh, yeah, I'm sure that strong statement will have a big impact. > Separately, we still have like 11 aircraft carriers and our entire military still in tact. Nothing has changed with respect to our power. If you think otherwise, you are simply wrong. There's no other way to put it. Naval power has shifted massively over the past four years due to massive technology change, and the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from its former ally, Ukraine. You are simply wrong and outdate in your thinking, and not understanding the current reality. Which is why you accuse others of the same thing, it's classic projection.
- ericmay 5mo ago
  > Oh, 8 weeks, and they'll think about doing something? Huh, yeah, I'm sure that strong statement will have a big impact. It shows that you're wrong about the diplomatic situation. 8 weeks isn't that long of a timeframe. It takes weeks just to move some assets in place. You don't have a good understanding of how long it takes to do these kinds of things. > Naval power has shifted massively over the past four years due to massive technology change, and the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from its Factually incorrect. First you can't make a claim that the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from the ongoing war in Ukraine. The reason you can't make that claim, aside from the fact that well, any single change in tactics would prove you wrong, is because the US still to this day is deploying weapons and testing weapons and capabilities in Ukraine on the battlefield. > former ally, Ukraine. Also factually incorrect because Ukraine was never a US ally. Secondarily we are still supporting Ukraine and without our help in the early days of the war they would have very likely fallen under a renewed Iron Curtain. America and England were rushing missiles while the rest of Europe was sending helmets and debating whether Russia was even going to invade. > You are simply wrong and outdate in your thinking Incorrect. You're parroting catch-phrases and what others tell you and not thinking through things for yourself here.
  - epistasis 5mo ago
    > 8 weeks isn't that long of a timeframe. To respond to the closure of a key naval route that supplies 20% of world oil supply? After months of closure already, with zero response? This entire thing was started with zero warning, as far as your "diplomatic timelines" go. Asserting weird and strange judgement calls with extreme confidence, and belittling others' judgement at the same time, is a very weak argumentation style. Perhaps you could provide some evidence that a "watch out we'll talk about this in 8 weeks" is a strong sort of statement of any sort?
    - ericmay 5mo ago
      [flagged]
      - ceejayoz 5mo ago
        > Speaking of, you're also doing what you're accusing me of "months of closure with zero response" how is there zero response? As you noted, only today has it been reported that NATO is considering maybe doing something in the Strait. In a few months. "Don't be intellectually dishonest", indeed.
        ericmay 5mo ago
        How is that being intellectually dishonest? You made a claim that NATO and Gulf States are closing bases to imply that they were denying support to the US, not that I think that claim is even true anyway, but even so I simply provided literal breaking news of NATO increasing support for the US here. They may ultimately decide to do nothing because, by July this whole thing could be over. Who knows? You are right though, Europeans do like to talk a lot and usually decide to do nothing. Maybe that'll play out again here. Plus, at least I provided a source for my claim. Where are yours?
        ceejayoz 5mo ago
        > You made a claim that NATO and Gulf States are closing bases to imply that they were denying support to the US, not that I think that claim is even true anyway… Spain: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/02/world/middleeast/spain-denies-us-air-base.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/02/world/middleeast/spain-de... France: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/france-refused-israel-use-its-air-space-transfer-us-weapons-iran-war-sources-2026-03-31/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/france-refused-israel-us... Saudi Arabia: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trumps-abrupt-u-turn-plan-re-open-strait-hormuz-came-backlash-allies-rcna343845 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trumps-abrupt-u... > even so I simply provided literal breaking news of NATO increasing support You provided breaking news that they're considering it, and that it's breaking news today perfectly illustrates the "months of closure with zero response" claim you're trying to knock down.
ceejayoz 5mo ago
> consider taking action Even if they decide to do so, why would we expect them to be more successful than the US military - which outspends the entire rest of NATO - at it? > Separately, we still have like 11 aircraft carriers… Yeah, and we're straining to keep them handling the load. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2026/05/11/epic-fury-has-navy-rethinking-carrier-deployment-tempo/ https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2026/05/11/epic-fur... https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/16/us/politics/uss-ford-fire-iran-venezuela.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/16/us/politics/uss-ford-fire...
- ericmay 5mo ago
  > Even if they decide to do so, why would we expect them to be more successful than the US military - which outspends the entire rest of NATO - at it? More ships always helps - they wouldn't be doing it without the US, it would be with the US.
  - ceejayoz 5mo ago
    > More ships always helps... So the 11 aircraft carriers are not enough, one might say?
    - ericmay 5mo ago
      You're familiar with the mythical man month, right? If we park all 11 aircraft carriers outside of Iran, how will we have them deployed to support interests elsewhere?
      - ceejayoz 5mo ago
        You have correctly identified why people are asserting to you that the US looks weak over this, yes.
        ericmay 5mo ago
        This is incorrect

by ericmay 5mo ago

epistasis 5mo ago

Oh, 8 weeks, and they'll think about doing something? Huh, yeah, I'm sure that strong statement will have a big impact. > Separately, we still have like 11 aircraft carriers and our entire military still in tact. Nothing has changed with respect to our power. If you think otherwise, you are simply wrong. There's no other way to put it. Naval power has shifted massively over the past four years due to massive technology change, and the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from its former ally, Ukraine. You are simply wrong and outdate in your thinking, and not understanding the current reality. Which is why you accuse others of the same thing, it's classic projection.

ericmay 5mo ago
> Oh, 8 weeks, and they'll think about doing something? Huh, yeah, I'm sure that strong statement will have a big impact. It shows that you're wrong about the diplomatic situation. 8 weeks isn't that long of a timeframe. It takes weeks just to move some assets in place. You don't have a good understanding of how long it takes to do these kinds of things. > Naval power has shifted massively over the past four years due to massive technology change, and the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from its Factually incorrect. First you can't make a claim that the US has done nothing to adapt or learn from the ongoing war in Ukraine. The reason you can't make that claim, aside from the fact that well, any single change in tactics would prove you wrong, is because the US still to this day is deploying weapons and testing weapons and capabilities in Ukraine on the battlefield. > former ally, Ukraine. Also factually incorrect because Ukraine was never a US ally. Secondarily we are still supporting Ukraine and without our help in the early days of the war they would have very likely fallen under a renewed Iron Curtain. America and England were rushing missiles while the rest of Europe was sending helmets and debating whether Russia was even going to invade. > You are simply wrong and outdate in your thinking Incorrect. You're parroting catch-phrases and what others tell you and not thinking through things for yourself here.
- epistasis 5mo ago
  > 8 weeks isn't that long of a timeframe. To respond to the closure of a key naval route that supplies 20% of world oil supply? After months of closure already, with zero response? This entire thing was started with zero warning, as far as your "diplomatic timelines" go. Asserting weird and strange judgement calls with extreme confidence, and belittling others' judgement at the same time, is a very weak argumentation style. Perhaps you could provide some evidence that a "watch out we'll talk about this in 8 weeks" is a strong sort of statement of any sort?
  - ericmay 5mo ago
    [flagged]
    - ceejayoz 5mo ago
      > Speaking of, you're also doing what you're accusing me of "months of closure with zero response" how is there zero response? As you noted, only today has it been reported that NATO is considering maybe doing something in the Strait. In a few months. "Don't be intellectually dishonest", indeed.
      - ericmay 5mo ago
        How is that being intellectually dishonest? You made a claim that NATO and Gulf States are closing bases to imply that they were denying support to the US, not that I think that claim is even true anyway, but even so I simply provided literal breaking news of NATO increasing support for the US here. They may ultimately decide to do nothing because, by July this whole thing could be over. Who knows? You are right though, Europeans do like to talk a lot and usually decide to do nothing. Maybe that'll play out again here. Plus, at least I provided a source for my claim. Where are yours?
        ceejayoz 5mo ago
        > You made a claim that NATO and Gulf States are closing bases to imply that they were denying support to the US, not that I think that claim is even true anyway… Spain: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/02/world/middleeast/spain-denies-us-air-base.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/02/world/middleeast/spain-de... France: https://www.reuters.com/world/china/france-refused-israel-use-its-air-space-transfer-us-weapons-iran-war-sources-2026-03-31/ https://www.reuters.com/world/china/france-refused-israel-us... Saudi Arabia: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trumps-abrupt-u-turn-plan-re-open-strait-hormuz-came-backlash-allies-rcna343845 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trumps-abrupt-u... > even so I simply provided literal breaking news of NATO increasing support You provided breaking news that they're considering it, and that it's breaking news today perfectly illustrates the "months of closure with zero response" claim you're trying to knock down.

ceejayoz 5mo ago

> consider taking action Even if they decide to do so, why would we expect them to be more successful than the US military - which outspends the entire rest of NATO - at it? > Separately, we still have like 11 aircraft carriers… Yeah, and we're straining to keep them handling the load. https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2026/05/11/epic-fury-has-navy-rethinking-carrier-deployment-tempo/ https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2026/05/11/epic-fur... https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/16/us/politics/uss-ford-fire-iran-venezuela.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/16/us/politics/uss-ford-fire...

ericmay 5mo ago
> Even if they decide to do so, why would we expect them to be more successful than the US military - which outspends the entire rest of NATO - at it? More ships always helps - they wouldn't be doing it without the US, it would be with the US.
- ceejayoz 5mo ago
  > More ships always helps... So the 11 aircraft carriers are not enough, one might say?
  - ericmay 5mo ago
    You're familiar with the mythical man month, right? If we park all 11 aircraft carriers outside of Iran, how will we have them deployed to support interests elsewhere?
    - ceejayoz 5mo ago
      You have correctly identified why people are asserting to you that the US looks weak over this, yes.
      - ericmay 5mo ago
        This is incorrect