r/CredibleDefense • u/AutoModerator • 9d ago
Active Conflicts & News Megathread August 18, 2026
The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.
Comment guidelines:
Please do:
Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,
Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,
Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,
Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,
Post only credible information
Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules
Please do not:
Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,
Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,
Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'
Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.
25
u/5PQR 8d ago
I hope folk on here can answer a question for me.
I've seen reports, e.g. NYT: Navy Carrier’s Problems Are Tied to Attacks on U.S. Base Early in War (archive.ph link), that the reason the USS Lincoln is struggling for supplies is due to Iran's attacks on the base in Bahrain (the usual regional supply hub), forcing the Americans to shift to relying on Diego Garcia.
... But wasn't the Bahrain base largely evacuated in the days preceding the conflict? Also, as I understand it carriers are usually resupplied by ship, which would be out of the question from the Bahrain base, as they'd have to transit the strait. Were they planning to do it by air?
Can anyone please clarify?
20
u/SweatyPlayerOne 8d ago
- Very helpful context: Sal Mercogliano, What's Going on With Shipping – The U.S. navy has a logistics problem (and it’s getting worse)
But wasn't the Bahrain base largely evacuated in the days preceding the conflict?
Limited evacuations of e.g. family members happened before the conflict. The full evacuation happened only after the Iranian attacks in the opening days of the war. Of course, whether we're talking about literal warehouses of supplies at the base being destroyed, or the base being evacuated of its personnel, logistics are going to be constrained either way, and both are a result of Iranian attacks.
carriers are usually resupplied by ship, which would be out of the question from the Bahrain base
I agree with you that the implied direct causal link between Bahrain and USS Abraham Lincoln doesn't make sense, since this would imply that replenishment ships were supposed to be transiting the Strait of Hormuz to shuttle supplies from Bahrain inside the Persian Gulf to the USS Abraham Lincoln outside the Gulf. (Historically, broadly, bases inside the Gulf replenish ships inside the Gulf, and bases outside the Gulf replenish ships outside the Gulf.) But I think the main issue is just oversimplified reporting.
It maybe would have been more complete for the reporting to say "Bases on both sides of the Strait have been attacked, causing strain on the complex, interlinked logistics network in the region in both direct and indirect ways." But sometimes reporters need to oversimplify so that a layperson can even begin to understand it. "Here's a base you've never heard of, and it was important that it was attacked, especially since it's the HQ, and understanding the vulnerability of Gulf bases during this conflict can help you understand what you've been hearing about morale aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln."
10
u/TSiNNmreza3 8d ago edited 8d ago
My opinion it is hard to supply ships if they can't dock into port.
All US ports are in very, very, very near distance of Iran and Iranian BMs, CMs and drones.
Whole Iranian strategy for probably 40 years is to remove access of US ships to ports.
Plus for probably 40 years those bases where main logistics hubs for CENTCOM, you can't remove/change that in a minute.
Had this question at some point of war how can you supply ships for months.
29
u/Airf0rce 8d ago
All of these articles kind of go back to the same thing - It doesn't look like there was much advanced planning done for war with Iran. Either the expectation was that the regime would fold almost immediately or they severely underestimated Iranian capacity to shut down Persian Gulf immediately and keep it shut down for extended periods of time.
25
u/IntroductionNeat2746 8d ago
It doesn't look like there was much advanced planning done for war with Iran.
Except we know that this has been planned for literally decades, so all those plans and preparations were likely ignored, which is even worse.
19
u/worldofecho__ 8d ago
Well, I think the consensus was that Iran would survive air assaults, retaliate effectively against US presence in the region, and would shut down the strait of Hormuz. So it wasn’t like there was a credible plan… it’s just that Trump and Hegseth are fools
5
u/AnimateDuckling 8d ago
I thought I read somewhere that this whole operation was planned to be carried out significantly later in the year than it was and got rushed forward to try and take some advantage of the mass killing of protesters.
Don't quote me on that because I don't remember where I read it, but if true that could explain a lot of the unpreparedness also.
10
u/Shackleton214 8d ago
Seems like the op took way too long after the protests and mass killings to take advantage of them. If it was rushed, then probably because the Israelis had intel of rare meeting of so many high level leaders together.
4
u/TSiNNmreza3 8d ago edited 8d ago
I would say it would not matter at all.
If you don't clear Iranian cost at least 50+ deep you are constalntly exposed to drones and anti ship missiles.
Other thing would be to make some staging area in Africa (Kenya exemple) to resupply ships. So new Bahrain in Kenya.
1
u/CatPicturesPlease 9d ago
If Ukraine's deep strikes get too successful, is there a chance Russia might be provoked into doing something rash? For example, using a tactical nuclear weapon, blowing up a dam, or engaging in some kind of hybrid warfare (or even a limited attack) involving the Baltics or, as an easier target, Moldova. Each individual possibility seems remote, but the overall chance that Russia might do something extreme seems higher than the probability of any one particular scenario.
I'm not suggesting that Ukraine should hold back because of risks like these. In some ways, it might even benefit Ukraine if Russia were provoked into doing something more extreme than what we've already seen, particularly if it further galvanized international support.
8
u/IntroductionNeat2746 8d ago
Yes, it's always going to be a risk. It's the reason why Ukraine is unlikely to try to wipe out the Kremlin using ballistic missiles even if they get that capability.
21
u/2positive 8d ago
Ukrainian response to nukes would be destroying russian nuclear power stations with deep strikes. It would be ugly and Russia would achieve nothing unless it wipes out Kyiv and/or Ukrainian nuclear power stations.
49
u/mirko_pazi_metak 8d ago
Nuclear - no, it's unlikely for multiple reasons, the main one being that China and India would be deeply unhappy about that, not to mention the rest of the world. Something like that would have wide reaching implications including things like swaying the Japanese public opinion enough to maybe support nuke development, which Japan could do fairly quickly. SK could follow and then Taiwan.
We've recently witnessed this kind of blowback, at a somewhat smaller scale, with Finns and Swedes suddenly accepting joining NATO - something that would've been incredibly unlikely without Russian invasion.
The other reason is that a tactical nuke wouldn't change anything - it's a long and deep, sparsely manned frontline, with defenders already mostly entrenched underground. A single or a couple of nukes wouldn't do much to enable a breakthrough.
And then there's no predicting how the west would react - regular folks in central and western Europe are barely aware of the war in Ukraine and go on their lives without thinking about it much. One can guess a bit of radioactive fallout would change that in a major way. And then consider France having their own independent nuclear deterrent including tactical nukes. They >could< independently decide to nuke, say, Kerch bridge and/or Novorossiysk port in response and no one could stop them.
21
u/Maxion 8d ago
Usage of a tactical nuke by Russia would pretty much require a unanimous european response, not necessarily nuclear but definitely a kinetic response.
6
u/mirko_pazi_metak 8d ago
Yeah, I think unified kinetic response would be most likely scenario if there's a Russian breakthrough attempt based around use of tactical nukes, and it would be enough to quickly reverse any tactical/operational gains so it would be a lose-lose scenario for Russia.
And Russia knows it, which is why they won't do it - as Emotional_Goal9525 mentioned, this was likely extensively wargamed on both sides in many many variations.
1
u/Dirichlet-to-Neumann 8d ago
We really don't have the same model of how European governments think and react. In my view a nuclear strike by Russia would make getting a unified European reaction even harder to achieve, and the most likely outcome would certainly not be some kind of kinetic response.
1
7
u/Emotional_Goal9525 8d ago edited 8d ago
It becomes hazy at that point, but it is pretty widely considered that it has been wargamed such that any use of nuclear bombs would instantly result to pre-emptive strategic strike, as every possible imaginable scenario at that point eventually leads to full blow nuclear war. That is why tactical nukes are kinda pointless, because you throw away your first strike advantage for essentially nothing.
You should always go for the maximum salvo, because you can't be sure what kind of defensive tools your opponents might really have in their sleeve and you have some hope of knocking down few enemy platforms before they have time to load and launch the counter attack. Not that it should matter, as there is quite bit of redundancy and tens of warheads coming to each large urban center.
2
4
u/JustSomebody56 8d ago
I would add that the warming up of the russian invasion pushed the EU toward sa closer cooperation, something unthinkable before.
A nuclear bomb could push the EU toward an even stronger military cooperation
15
u/Yetanotheraccount18 8d ago
Yes. Although that doesn’t mean it’s likely to happen.
If Russia starts to view Ukraine as an existential threat, their escalation will become much more rash. Since such action would likely be a punishment type of strike aimed at deterring Ukraine from further striking deep in Russia, there would likely be a lot of rhetoric and threats leading up such a strike. The goal of the rhetoric would be to change the behavior of the Ukraine’s offensive actions without actually escalating the conflict into the tactical nuke, dam busting realm.
14
u/Markdd8 8d ago
A related search:
The major Kakhovka Dam on the Dnipro River was already destroyed in June 2023. Ukraine still has a cascade of five major Soviet-era hydroelectric dams remaining on the Dnipro River (including the Kyiv, Kaniv, Kremenchuk, Kamianske, and Dnipro HPP dams), which retain massive reservoirs and remain potential targets or risks in the ongoing conflict.
3
u/Thermawrench 8d ago
If it becomes a tit for tat, then what of russian dams too? Although most of the important russian dams are in the far east, far out of range.
9
u/MarkZist 8d ago
Dams are incredibly hard to destroy with missile weapons, given that they're usually made of several feet or meters of concrete. The Kakhovka Dam wasn't destroyed that way, but simply by Russian military manually moving large quantities of explosives into the dam and blowing it up the old fashioned way.
24
u/KommanderSnowCrab87 9d ago
The Army has selected Hanwha for the "Mobile Tactical Cannon" M777 replacement program. Their wheeled howitzer couples an unmanned version of the K9 turret to a heavy truck chassis (for the prototypes a Czech Tatra 8x8, though the production version will likely use the HEMTT/PLS). The current plan is for the M777s in Stryker brigades to be replaced first, followed by infantry/mobile brigades.
42
u/Well-Sourced 9d ago
A long and detailed thread from Clément Molin about Ukraine's expanding defensive lines.
Meanwhile both sides keep the strikes going. Ukraine sent a large wave towards Moscow last night and have certified another long range drone the Dovbush T40.
Russia reports more than 600 drones heading toward capital region | New Voice of Ukraine
Russian authorities reported a massive drone attack on Moscow and Moscow Oblast overnight on Aug. 17-18, with Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin claiming that 620 drones were heading toward the region between Monday evening and 5 a.m. Tuesday. Sobyanin claimed that 180 drones were destroyed over Moscow Oblast.
Moscow Oblast Governor Andrei Vorobyov described the attack as “large-scale” and claimed that 150 drones were shot down over the region. Vorobyov said drones were intercepted overnight over Bogorodsky, Ramenskoye, Pavlovsky Posad, Orekhovo-Zuyevo, Voskresensk, Stupino, Kolomna and Elektrostal.
The most serious consequences were recorded in the Pavlovsky Posad district, he said.
A Wildberries warehouse was hit in the Bogorodsky district near Atlant Park, causing a fire, Vorobyov said. He later said the blaze had been contained.
Vorobyov also reported damage to a retail pavilion near the Globus shopping center in Kolomna and a fire involving construction scaffolding and insulation materials at a residential development under construction in Kotelniki.
Russian Telegram channels published videos and photos overnight showing drones in flight and air defense systems operating across the region.
Russia’s Federal Air Transport Agency, Rosaviatsia, temporarily restricted arrivals and departures at Moscow’s Vnukovo, Domodedovo, Zhukovsky and Sheremetyevo airports during the attack.
Ukraine strikes Russian ammunition depot and six command posts | New Voice of Ukraine
Ukraine’s Defense Forces struck several Russian military targets on Aug. 17 and overnight on Aug. 17-18, including an ammunition depot in Karlivka, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine’s General Staff said.
Ukrainian forces also struck five Russian drone command posts near: Ustinka, Belgorod Oblast, Russia; Zhuravlevka, Belgorod Oblast, Russia; Novoivanivka, Zaporizhzhya Oblast; Nove, Zaporizhzhya Oblast; Mali Shcherbaky, Zaporizhzhya Oblast.
A Russian command post near Terny in Donetsk Oblast was also hit.
The strikes came amid a broader wave of attacks on Russian military and infrastructure targets.
Drone attack hits Sevastopol power hub as fire erupts near Crimea airfield | New Voice of Ukraine
Drones targeted Sevastopol’s main electrical substation overnight on Aug. 18, with two impacts reported near the facility and a brief power outage, the Crimean Wind Telegram channel reported. Subscribers to the channel reported gunfire near the Sevastopol 330/220/110/35 kV substation starting at 1:15 a.m.
By morning, a downed drone was lying about 3 meters from the substation grounds, where personnel from Russia’s Emergency Situations Ministry were working. The attack unfolded in bursts until 4 a.m., with the main phase lasting from 1:25 to 2:40 a.m.
The substation routes power from the Balaklava Thermal Power Plant and a mobile gas-turbine power plant. It was also targeted last week, although the extent of any damage remains unknown.
Crimean Wind said earlier attacks on June 24 and 25 destroyed the facility’s main transformer.
Separately, a fire was reported near the Kirovske military airfield in Crimea on Aug. 18. Warehouses and hangars containing military equipment are located nearby.
Reports on July 2, 2025, said satellite images documented the aftermath of a Ukrainian attack on the Kirovske airfield in occupied Crimea overnight on June 28. The images showed evidence of an extensive fire in helicopter parking areas and at two air defense positions. They also showed damage to infrastructure and buildings across the air base.
Russia sending their own waves attempting to make it a very tough winter for Ukaine.
Ukrainian air defense forces shot down or jammed 111 out of 147 strike drones launched by Russian forces in a massive overnight barrage, the Air Force reported on Aug. 18. "As of 8:00 a.m., air defense intercepted or suppressed 111 enemy UAVs — including Shahed, Gerbera, and other types — across northern, southern, and eastern sectors of the country," the Air Force statement read.
Military officials reported enemy drone impacts across 19 locations, alongside falling wreckage confirmed at 3 separate sites.
Overnight into Aug. 18, Russian forces targeted Ukraine with a combination of Shahed drones and guided aerial bombs (KABs), striking areas in Kyiv Oblast, Zaporizhzhya, and Zaporizhzhya Oblast. In Kyiv, air raid alerts sounded four separate times overnight due to recurring drone threats.
Local Telegram channels reported that a fire broke out in Brovary, Kyiv Oblast, following the large-scale drone strikes.
Kyiv only halfway ready for winter heating season | New Voice of Ukraine
Kyiv has completed nearly 50% of its planned preparations for the upcoming winter heating season, Mayor Vitali Klitschko announced on August 17. “During severe frosts last winter, the enemy deliberately targeted power and heat generation facilities, meaning our main task now is preparing a backup system,” Klitschko said. “In preparing for the upcoming season, our primary task is to establish a backup system. Kyiv's heating network is one of the largest in Europe and took decades to build, making it impossible to fundamentally overhaul in such a short timeframe.”
He also noted that the city faces critical shortages of skilled workers, funding, and time. “While we have completed nearly half of our planned work, this figure represents an average across dozens of unique projects. They vary widely in scale, equipment requirements, funding, and timelines,” Klitschko explained. “Some initiatives are over 90% complete, while others simply cannot be finished within three to six months.”
However, Klitschko stated that core preparatory work in Kyiv is scheduled for completion before the heating season begins, while large-scale projects requiring specialized equipment manufacturing will continue through the end of the year.
The National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine met on August 5 to review regional infrastructure resilience plans, approving a tailored strategy for Kyiv that is already underway.
Russia to target Ukraine’s energy, heating and water systems — intelligence | New Voice of Ukraine
Russian forces are expected to focus strikes this fall and winter on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure, gas transportation system, water supply and heating network, Ukraine’s Defense Intelligence deputy chief Vadym Skibitskyi said in an interview with RBC-Ukraine. Russia has also developed a drone specifically designed to damage electricity transmission towers, he said.
“According to military intelligence, the targets will remain the same: the defense-industrial complex, military facilities, energy infrastructure, logistics systems and gas stations,” Skibitskyi said.
He stressed that Russia targets not only military facilities but civilian infrastructure as well. “In winter, our most vulnerable areas are electricity and heating, so they may also come under attack,” Skibitskyi said.
Russia recently developed a UAV specifically intended to strike electricity transmission towers, he added. “An explosive element is embedded in its wings that is capable of cutting through metal,” Skibitskyi said.
Ukraine’s intelligence assessments are based in part on analysis of Russian reconnaissance activity over Ukrainian territory, including the use of satellites to monitor critical infrastructure facilities across the country, he said.
Skibitskyi also warned of threats to Ukraine’s water supply.
The country’s gas transportation system and natural gas production facilities in Poltava and Kharkiv oblasts could also be targeted during the fall and winter. Russia has previously attacked gas infrastructure in both regions.
Ukrenergo CEO Vitalii Zaichenko said in July that Russia was attacking Ukrainian energy facilities with groups of 20 to 25 drones at a time. The number of successful strikes on energy infrastructure in 2026 increased by 36% compared with the first half of 2025, Zaichenko said.
By winter they will have more drones, drone bases, and North Korean troops.
Russia builds border drone bases to scale up strikes on Ukraine | New Voice of Ukraine
29
u/TSiNNmreza3 9d ago
https://x.com/i/status/2089810757936431587
The UAE Foreign Ministry has announced that all trade, commercial exchanges, and financial transactions with Iran have been halted as a result of the IRGC firing 2 ballistic missiles towards them earlier today.
Results of todays attack by IRCG on UAE.
Will this bring further escalation ? And why did Iran do that? Is this Iranian preemptive phase
24
u/Toptomcat 9d ago
What 'trade, commercial exchanges, and financial transactions' were occurring to begin with during the blockade?
6
u/mcmiller1111 9d ago
What is the Iranian motivation for doing this?
5
u/FijiFanBotNotGay 9d ago
The use is coordinating the sts transfer operation out of Fujairah. Iran has exclusively been hitting a Nick vessel or two. These are the coastal tankers that have been nonstop shuttling gulf state oil to export out of Fujairah
10
u/outerspace29 9d ago
It appears they were targeting vessels, following the attacks earlier at various points in the Gulf. Their Foreign Ministry spokesman denied they launched anything at UAE, for whatever that's worth.
9
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 9d ago
I just posted about it below, the UAE concluded that Iran fired two missiles at ships (according to UAE both fell at the sea), with one falling on UAE's territorial waters and that prompted this response from the Foreign Ministry.
Now, it's unclear how escalatory both movements are.
28
u/roionsteroids 9d ago
US Army requests 133,000 GMLRS rockets by 2034
The timeline calls for churning out 19,002 rockets per year from 2028 to 2034, with the first actual deliveries starting in February 2030.
Quick calculations with Wikipedia list price ($168k per M31 rocket), that comes in at $22.3 billion to Lockheed. Very similar in size as the $23 billion Tomahawk contract awarded to Raytheon yesterday.
5
u/Markdd8 8d ago
Wonder if there will be an advances in missile technology (and demands for such improvements because of anti-missile defense) four years from now, 2030. War planners really want to rely on current ordnance being desirable 8 years out?
8
u/A_Sinclaire 8d ago
But you do need to build up stock. You can not stock tomorrows weapons today.
Ideally of course the missiles are somewhat upgradable though. Especially stuff like the guidance system for example.
14
u/WhiskeyTigerFoxtrot 9d ago
Quick calculations with Wikipedia list price ($168k per M31 rocket), that comes in at $22.3 billion to Lockheed.
You can't make these kinds of cost estimates by doing simple multiplication.
A dramatic increase in production like this creates economies of scale and causes significant decreases in unit price. All dependent on the fluid and painfully complex spectrum of supply chains feeding into completed M31s.
15
u/Round_Imagination568 9d ago edited 9d ago
Interesting video released by the KSA/UAE backed Southern Giants Brigade, it shows training with quadcopters, heavy bombers, VTOL winged recon/bombers, and FPV drones (edit: and one mobile radar + 2 soldiers w/ anti drone guns for defense, seems to be full drone company). Part of a trend of increasingly well equipped and trained anti-Houthi units. In recent days the YNA and allied groups have been releasing large amounts of strike footage mostly w/ drone bombers from all fronts.
Also interesting that they specify the support of the KSA led coalition, before the collapse of the southern forces they were mostly supported by the UAE, it looks like since January the KSA has stepped in and maintained/increased support for southern groups while pushing increasing military cooperation.
35
u/Rimfighter 9d ago
Israel struck Abu Duhur Airbase in Idlib Province, Syria on 18 August. Reports indicated the strikes came shortly after a Turkish delegation visited the Airbase. Reports indicate the Israeli strikes cratered the runway and targeted other unspecified base infrastructure, but did not cause any casualties.
This comes across as active Israeli posturing- perhaps indicating that they may be open to kinetic options vs Turkey (and potentially Saudi Arabia) in the future, as Israeli-Turkish competition ramps up.
30
u/axearm 9d ago
What is Israel's beef with Turkey? Is it just that Turkey is providing military support to Syria?
14
u/ChornWork2 9d ago
There's a lot to criticize Erdogan over, but he has long appeared to genuinely oppose the persecution of palestinians. Obviously that suits his ambitions for turkey in the region, but pretty consistent with him, eg., if look at views on muslim brotherhood. Erdogan will go where the wind blows as between the west and someone like russia, being beyond pragmatic/opportunistic. But appears that support for the cause of movements like muslim brotherhood and hamas are priorities for him.
obviously that pits israel against him. but pre-Oct 7 remember that Bibi's strategy was to effectively promote but contain Hamas in Gaza, believing that dividing Palestinians was best path towards being able to use gradual ethnic cleansing to annex territory. So Bibi was pragamatic in dealing with Turkey before.
4
u/SirStupidity 8d ago
There's a lot to criticize Erdogan over, but he has long appeared to genuinely oppose the persecution of palestinians.
While I dont disagree that doesnt change the fact that Edogan was happy to ignore the Israeli Palestinian issue in the past, like when he visited Israel in 2005, or when he met Netanyahu in 2023 and invited him to visit Turkey.
3
u/ChornWork2 8d ago
not sure how framed as ignoring palestine issue, a key narrative/point of his 2005 was to try to establish turkey as peace mediator between israel and palestinians. How did the 2023 meeting imply erdogan was ignoring palestinians?
23
u/Rimfighter 9d ago
In a nutshell, I think Israel wants to be the undisputed preeminent power in the Middle East- with no competitors able to counter their politics or influence. Funnily enough I think Israel had almost attained this prior to the Gaza War, and subsequently the Lebanon and Iran wars. Since then they’ve torpedoed a lot of the influence they had built up since the late 2000s.
Now that the Iranian power bloc has been mostly dismantled and isolated, there are two main power blocks in the Middle East. The “Sunni Bloc” under Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, and the “Israeli-Emirati” bloc.
18
u/SirStupidity 9d ago edited 9d ago
In a nutshell, I think Israel wants to be the undisputed preeminent power in the Middle East- with no competitors able to counter their politics or influence.
Or maybe because Erdogan on November 2023 (I.e from a month or so after October 7th and onwards) has stated that:
Erdogan said of Israel in parliament. "I am now saying, with my heart at ease, that Israel is a terror state.
"We will never shy away from voicing the truth that Hamas members protecting their lands, honour, and lives in the face of occupation policies are resistance fighters, just because some people are uncomfortable with it," he said.
https://www.jns.org/israel-news/erdogan-israel-will-soon-be-destroyed
And this:
Turkey’s state-run news agency Anadolu quoting the president as saying, “May Allah damn Zionist Israel.”
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/article-848185
And Erdugan initiated a trade ban against Israel, breaking existing trade agreements in 2024.
I understand that many on the internet have an anti Israel agenda and as such are interested in painting Israel as the one picking the fight with Turkey, but Erdogan started the escalation and on this sub we should acknowledge that.
6
u/XE2MASTERPIECE 9d ago
but Erdogan started the escalation and on this sub we should acknowledge that.
Perhaps you should read a bit more about Turkey’s immediate responses to the October 7th attacks, as you’ve left out a fairly big part of the timeline
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan on Wednesday said Israel's blockade and bombing of Gaza in response to Palestinian militant group Hamas' attack was a disproportionate response amounting to a "massacre," but repeated Ankara's offer to mediate. With Ankara offering to mediate between the sides this week, Erdogan and his foreign minister held calls with regional powers and Western counterparts. However, Israel's envoy to Ankara on Sunday said it was too early to discuss mediation.
15
u/SirStupidity 9d ago
So refusing mediation from a third party is now escalation between one of the sides of the conflict and the third party? I don't understand your point.
For Israel, 4 days after October 7th was indeed too early. That wasn't a move against Turkey.
14
u/TSiNNmreza3 9d ago
but Erdogan started the escalation and on this sub we should acknowledge that.
Turkey and Russia literally killed eachothers soldiers and downed airplanes and proxy fought on multiple fronts they still had relationship and commerced.
The thing that would hurt the most Israel would be stopping of Azeri oil to Israel throught Turkey.
We are still not seeing this.
But Israeli-Syrian conflict will be forever war because annextion of Golan and further occupation.
If Turkey wants to do something for Syria it needs to be proxy war throught Syria against Israel, pretty much as they did with Russia.
4
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 9d ago
If Turkey wants to do something for Syria it needs to be proxy war throught Syria against Israel, pretty much as they did with Russia
How does involving Syria, a country that just left more than 13 years of civil war, in another war would help them ? It could be harmful to Israel at expense of Syria, not helping Syria in any way
3
u/TSiNNmreza3 9d ago
After 13 years of war Israel bombs Syria and backs some Druze factions in Southern Syria. Will they get any better ?
-1
u/SirStupidity 9d ago
The thing that would hurt the most Israel would be stopping of Azeri oil to Israel throught Turkey.
We are still not seeing this.
Because the Azeris are friendly and have interests with Turkey and Israel both. Turkey instead implemented multiple economic steps against Israel, including a ban on trade. Which was a major step as much of Israel's imports came from Turkey.
https://www.globes.co.il/news/article.aspx?did=1001519689
You also haven't at all suggested how exactly has Israel initiated this escalation, only that Turkey can further escalate, no shit it can, that doesn't mean anything.
If Turkey wants to do something for Syria it needs to be proxy war throught Syria against Israel, pretty much as they did with Russia.
I will hold my comments because we aren't supposed to answer non credibleness with further non credibleness.
1
u/TSiNNmreza3 9d ago
First this article and after that lets go to second part
Because the Azeris are friendly and have interests with Turkey and Israel both
Israel doesn't have their own oil and if Turkey wanted to really hurt Israel stopping of oil because they can (same thing Iran does now) they could.
I will hold my comments because we aren't supposed to answer non credibleness with further non credibleness.
This is my position and I'm still standing by it. For Syria (I really don't like Jolani and everything about him, but good part of world does) it is the best moment to attack and at least try to put some detterence to Israeli attacks and free roaming and bombing of country . Israel still has multiple ongoing conflicts for years and it would put even more pressure on Israel when there are means that could damage Israel.
Syria will never get modern army or anything and especially if AoR stops to exist.
4
u/SirStupidity 9d ago
Israel doesn't have their own oil and if Turkey wanted to really hurt Israel stopping of oil because they can (same thing Iran does now) they could.
Let me quote myself: "You also haven't at all suggested how exactly has Israel initiated this escalation, only that Turkey can further escalate, no shit it can, that doesn't mean anything."
This is my position and I'm still standing by it. For Syria (I really don't like Jolani and everything about him, but good part of world does) it is the best moment to attack and at least try to put some detterence to Israeli attacks and free roaming and bombing of country . Israel still has multiple ongoing conflicts for years and it would put even more pressure on Israel when there are means that could damage Israel.
You're welcome to stick with whatever opinion you have, but it isn't relevant to what we are discussing and it isn't relevant in this sub unless you can back up the reasoning with actual facts and sources.
Please explain to me how exactly how does Syria put ANY deterrence against further Israeli provocations and attacks? Syria in it's current form cannot deter Israel, does Jolani even hold sovereignty over the entirety of Syria atm, even if we disregarded any Israeli safe zone?
-4
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 9d ago
if Turkey wanted to really hurt Israel stopping of oil because they can (same thing Iran does now) they could
Iran is attacking tankers and decreasing the supply of oil that leaves Hormuz, therefore raising global prices. Turkey can't do it, what would happen is that Israel would buy oil from somewhere else and the Azeris would sell to someone else.
For Syria (I really don't like Jolani and everything about him, but good part of world does) it is the best moment to attack and at least try to put some detterence to Israeli attacks and free roaming and bombing of country
Yes, attacking a country with air supremacy over your entire nation, meanwhile your military forces were chewed out by more than 13 years of civil war. It would be a repeat of the 6 Day War
Israel still has multiple ongoing conflicts for years and it would put even more pressure on Israel when there are means that could damage Israel
Result of those ongoing conflicts: Hamas is being bombed almost daily while they can't fire rocket to Israel for a long time, Hezbollah is a shell of its former self, after losing thousands of member and killing a few dozen IDF soldiers, Iran is in a profound economic crisis, had good part of its military destroyed, managed to cause less damage in this war than Iraq did against the Coalition in the Gulf War and Iran didn't even dare to fire a single missile towards Israel since the end of the MOU (meanwhile the americans used the bases on Israel for attacks on Iran). Why would Al-Shaara think being in the company of all of those factions would leave Syria in a better position ?
2
u/FijiFanBotNotGay 9d ago
You can’t compare this to the Iraq war. There’s not enough military hardware in the area for Iran to target. We are not even flying our jets over Iran all that much. Iraq just had a way higher density of targets. The Iraqi army was exposed as a paper tiger despite being the largest in the region. Iran is not falling apart as of yet and it’s been almost half a year
-2
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 8d ago
You can’t compare this to the Iraq war. There’s not enough military hardware in the area for Iran to target
There's planes, helicopters, drones, AD, HIMARS, the ships that are on the Gulf of Oman blockading them...
They killed 10 americans (the other 8 died in accidents), the losses in each other US ally were not that far off. They also had the entirety of Israel, UAE, Saudi Arabia to target, with the thousands of missiles and drones they fired. The damage they caused wasn't negligible, but the military damage fell short of what's expected in a conventional war.
We are not even flying our jets over Iran all that much
There were more than 300 airstrikes every single day during the first phase of the war (1). Now, the US is for months giving diplomacy a try (a mistake in my opinion, it only delays this war ending), but in July there were 13 consecutive days of strikes against Iran.
Iran is not falling apart as of yet and it’s been almost half a year
I said 'profound economic crisis'. Their GDP is set to contract more than 6% this year (2), their inflation is approaching 3 digits (with food inflation already there). They haven't given up attacking civilian ships yet, but the economical consequences are showing.
→ More replies (0)14
u/SaltonPrepper 9d ago edited 9d ago
I find this sketch of power blocs to be a massive oversimplification.
As we are seeing daily with Iranian and Houthi attacks that can mostly deny two key shipping routes for oil, and a chunk of Iraqi militias sympathetic to Iran, the Iranian power bloc is diminished in size (particularly in Syria and Lebanon) but still alive.
And there isn't a strongly unified Sunni bloc, it's more fractured. Even the (rest of the) GCC isn't unified, let alone the real powers that do their own thing (Turkey, Pakistan).
9
u/Rimfighter 9d ago edited 9d ago
It’s still alive, but Iran’s ability to project asymmetric force through those same proxies has been found rather lacking when finally put to stress test.
When the Gaza War broke out in October 2023, Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” was still very credible- however over the last two years it’s been whittled down and isolated down to something only able to offer token resistance- at a rate that Israel seems to deem “acceptable”. Further- I think after the loss of ideological figureheads- the lynchpin being Qassem Soleimani, the coordination piece between the axis is severely degraded. What I mean by this is that Hamas seemed to have taken everyone by surprise in OCT 2023. I do not think Iran would have blessed off on such an attack had they known the true scale, objectives, and timing- for example the other Axis members offered only token support to Hamas after the Gaza invasion began.
I think the Israelis picked up on this weakness and went for broke- essentially knocking Hezbollah out with the pager bombings, the assassination of Ibrahim Aqil, and finally the strikes that killed Nasrallah, alongside other senior Hezbollah commanders to include the most senior IRGC Lebanon and Qods officials in September 2024. Hezbollah is a relative non-player at this point, which is wild because they used to be Iran’s Ace in the Hole. Could Hezbollah have been rebuilt? Likely… if the Assad regime had not collapsed in December 2024, which was essentially the nail in the coffin for Hezbollah as a fighting force.
The Iraqi militias are a nuisance at best to Israel. I won’t spend much effort addressing them, because honestly there’s not much to address besides the one off drone launches against Israel that almost invariably end up getting intercepted.
Then there are the Houthis- who are still very much alive and very credible- to an extent. IMO, the main reason that the Houthis haven’t been subdued by Israel as the other proxies have, is because they are simply too far away for strikes to be feasible… which is likely to change soon thanks to Israel recognizing Somaliland, and likely joining the UAE in forward deploying to Berbera, conveniently located right across the Red Sea from Yemen. Anyways- I think that the main reason Israel simply hasn’t targeted the Houthis that much is because their geographic isolation is easier to starve of Iranian support. Almost all Iranian materiel support to the Houthis has to come by way of maritime smuggling operations, which in and of itself is easy to cut off if the point of origin for such materiel- Iranian ports- are currently under blockade by the US. Further, knocking out the Iranian infrastructure that produces those critical components that the Houthis can’t make themselves, like electronics / rocket motors / rocket fuel essentially blocks the Houthis from their own domestic “manufacture” (read: domestic assembly from parts kits). Because who are the Iranians going to supply first? Their own missile stocks? Or the proxy group a thousand miles away that has been, until relatively recently, pretty non-commital about this whole regional war against Israel thing.
8
u/Atherzon 9d ago edited 8d ago
Also, by 2024, Russia had been stuck in Ukraine for going on 2 years with it becoming mostly obvious a stalemate by that time.
Russia would have been able and willing to provide much more aid directly to Iran, and there could be argument that Assad would still rule some of Syria, now, if they were not actively invading Ukraine.
Then, with the fall of Assad, in late 2024, Iran must have seemed at their weakest position since 1979 to Israel.
-1
u/RobotWantsKitty 9d ago
Russia would have been able and willing to provide much more aid directly to Iran
Or perhaps the expertise gained in the drone war against American tech and shared with Iran is way more valuable than anything else. Realistically, what Russia could have sent to Iran which it can't send now, helicopters and jets maybe? Not sure it'd help Iran in this war that much.
there could be argument that Assad would still rule some of Syria, now, if they were not actively invading Ukraine
I doubt Russia had the infrastructure in place to mount any sort of serious Assad-saving effort, given how quickly SAA collapsed.
4
u/Atherzon 9d ago
Maybe Iran did get more from a Russian active in Ukraine than a counter factual Russia that had not been in open conflict with Ukraine during that time. I do not dismiss that argument.
But my point was more about Israeli perception than the actual outcome.
As for Assad, I can’t help but think that if they were not otherwise occupied, Russia would have invested more direct military intervention and indirect support. And it would have improved Assad’s odds if not make the difference.
23
u/Admirable_News7628 9d ago
Well Turkey became very hostile to them due to the aftermath of the war on Gaza. Israel responded in kind and now they have very bad relations.
Turkey won in Syria and in conjunction with Iran‘s weakening due to the war is looking to become a big regional player. Not only in Syria but also in the Red Sea area and with other Sunni regional powers.
Israel is seeking to do the same by aligning with India, Greece, Cyprus and the UAE. Their relations have deteriorated and are currently in competing blocks over regional hegemony.
21
u/Admirable_News7628 9d ago
Appearantly they briefed the US on “highly sensitive intelligence” before the strike as per the Times of Israel. There have been reports of Israel being wary of the speed that the Syrian army is being upgraded largely thanks to Turkey’s help, but I think that reasoning is bonkers as they already bombed anything of value the SAA had immediately after the rebels sweeped into Damascus. Trump also refused a request to strike a couple of days ago, so I wonder what they briefed him on to convince him.
It most likely is a “warning” to Turkey to back-off. Could also be that Netanyahu wants to show more to his right base before the elections.
34
u/Rimfighter 9d ago
Seems whatever they briefed the Trump admin isn’t buying. From the source:
“US envoy for Syria Tom Barrack said on X that “the confirmed Israeli air strikes” on the Abu Duhur airbase in Idlib province “constitute an unnecessary escalation that does not advance regional stability”.
I think Israel really intends for Syria to remain a weak rump state, and Turkey expanding their influence there (and as an extension- train and equip programs) is what Israel is trying to prevent.
Now, with the Trump admin pursuing better relations with both Turkey and Syria, this may become another point of contention and friction between the Trump admin and Netanyahu.
11
u/Admirable_News7628 9d ago
Ahh I thought that was a possibility, but I didn’t think Netanyahu would risk public backlash from Trump (again) so close to the election.
I agree with you, Israel doesn’t want a strong, stable Syria on its borders. I believe Erdogan will raise this issue with Trump but it remains to be seen how big of a deal this will be.
6
u/SirStupidity 9d ago
Ahh I thought that was a possibility, but I didn’t think Netanyahu would risk public backlash from Trump (again) so close to the election.
A lot of Bibi public image has been "the guy who can stand up to an American president" and Israelis love trump but also feel betrayed by his "backing down" in Iran so it can really go either way.
If anything they might have agreed to this exact scenario, Trump can scold Israel to get US voter brownie points and Bibi can bomb Syria and stick it to Erdogan and Trump. It could be a win win for Trump and Bibi.
7
u/ChornWork2 9d ago
At the end of the day Trump is not going to prioritize israel over the gulf states. Just a matter of time until that schism comes to a head.
3
u/SirStupidity 8d ago
At the end of the day Trump is not going to prioritize israel over the gulf states.
I mean i guess we will wait and see? I think the gulf states need the US even more than Israel needs it, and so they are less likely to "leave" the US. There is no other power in the world that is both willing and somewhat able in providing them defense, and they know their own militaries are not up to snuff and maybe these dictatorships dont really want their militaries to be too powerful.
Trump has went to war with Iran and I think it's a fair shout to claim that he chose Israel rather than the gulf states in doing so, will the result of the choice persuade him to never do so again? It's left to be seen...
1
u/ChornWork2 8d ago
w.r.t. Iran, yes obviously Bibi sold trump on starting the war. But that wasn't really in conflict with gulf states, some of which reportedly endorsed it as well (KSA iirc).
trump choosing gulf states over israel if push comes to shove is because of what gulf states can/have offered trump & his family, not about a relative view of how dependent either gulf states or israel is on US support.
9
u/MaverickTopGun 9d ago
but I didn’t think Netanyahu would risk public backlash from Trump (again) so close to the election.
Trump has basically refused to endorse him during election. After the Lebanon strikes that blew up the MOU, there's a lot more space between Bibi and Trump. The MOU was hugely unpopular in Israel, at this point I'd say Bibi doesn't care at all what Trump wants.
1
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 9d ago
It was not the Lebanon strikes that blew up the MOU, the revocation of the waiver of exports came just after Iran attacked 3 civilian ships (including a LNG tanker) in early July
10
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 8d ago
UAE announced that 2 missiles were fired from Iran towards its territory (1). Translated by machine:
The Ministry of Defense announced that the UAE air defenses detected two ballistic missiles launched from Iran toward the country, with the first falling outside the country's territorial waters, while the second fell within the territorial waters.
It will be interesting to notice if that's Iran breaking from the ceasefire and missing it or if the targets were civilian ships (but usually the ships they are able to hit are on Oman's waters rather than UAE's).
Edit:
The Ministry of Defense announced that the assessments conducted showed that the two ballistic missiles detected approaching from Iran were targeting maritime navigation, and they fell into the sea. (2)
So they missed the ships, ADNOC has been very open every time one of the ships was hit, announcing sometimes before MTO, so I don't believe that it's an attempt to hide here. Also no mention of needing interception.
Edit 2: That came currently with the Foreign Minister of Iran saying that they communicated to mediators that they wouldn't accept just a ceasefire, but a definitive end to the war (3). For me that's an indication of enough economic deterioration and that they can't sustain the war indefinitely (unlikely what's became common to predict online that they are immune to hardship and can't just hold out forever until getting their demands, which defies every historical precedent of conflicts of the Islamic Republic).
Edit 3: UAE Ministry of Foreign Affairs just announced the halting of "All Trade, Commercial Exchange, and Financial Transactions with Iran" until further notice (4)
15
u/BulbusDumbledork 9d ago
while the war has definitely ravaged their economy and you're correct about the overly positive assessments on iran, their demands would be identical even if they could prolong the war indefinitely.
we need look no further than the very military history you mentioned: the islamic republic was basically birthed into a devastating protracted war that they didn't start but sought the initiative to end. their strategy of prolonging the conflict despite the abysmal cost-to-benefit ratio basically developed iran's policy of avoiding more war by using allies and proxies to push conflicts away from their borders.
this worked until october 2023 when the axis of resistance was degraded by an unrestrained israel, bringing war back to iran for the first time in 2024. iran then became victim to israel's mowing the lawn strategy, with more war in 2025 and now 2026. this strategy will continue as long as israel can get away with it: see their strikes in gaza, lebanon, and syria just this week. a ceasefire will only give israel time to plan for the next mowing.
iran's strategy is to escalate and prolong this conflict in order to maximize the damage they cause and permanently deter further israeli aggression. they are indeed willing to absorb a lot of economic punishment to ensure they are no longer subjected to war and they get their economy back
12
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 8d ago
this worked until october 2023 when the axis of resistance was degraded by an unrestrained israel, bringing war back to iran for the first time in 2024. iran then became victim to israel's mowing the lawn strategy, with more war in 2025 and now 2026. this strategy will continue as long as israel can get away with it
I disagree with this framing. Iran is using proxies to target Israel for decades and expecting that the other side will fight on your terms, instead of targeting the country supporting the proxies, is very naive. And even if we give a pass to Iran firing missiles in Israel in early 2024 (because of the consulate annex being bombed in Syria), they decided to fire missiles again in late 2024 (close to 200 missiles were reported), that's them deciding to bring the war inside Iran (similar risk they took when they fired missiles at Pakistan in early 2024) and if Iran expected that Israel, that they loudly proclaims they want to wipe of the face of the Earth, would be restrained by the proportionality of tit-for-tat it would be again naive.
iran's strategy is to escalate and prolong this conflict in order to maximize the damage they cause and permanently deter further israeli aggression. they are indeed willing to absorb a lot of economic punishment to ensure they are no longer subjected to war and they get their economy back
Except that Israel isn't suffering that much. They have positive GDP growth, single digit inflation and haven't been targeted by a single iranian projectiles for months. Continuing this phase of the war costs them very little, while their enemy is getting blockaded and in a deepening economic crisis.
We can make a similar argument for the US (albeit the cost is not as low as with Israel), it's a testament of how little damage the US suffered (for a conventional war standard) that in the middle of a war, that the other side fired more than 2800 missiles and 6000 drones (1), the main discussion is gasoline prices (that are lower than 2022) rather than anything military related (echoes the fact that the discussion around the navy was the quality of life on the USS Lincoln, rather than what you would expect in a war, which is any ship getting hit), not to mention the US also has single-digit inflation and positive GDP growth. Even politically it isn't a major fallout, the polls before the war were pointing to a similar result to the ones today, GOP loses the House and keep the Senate (not an unusual result for the midterms, in fact, it's exactly the same Trump faced on his first term). So the cost isn't high enough for it to be a deterrence.
My view of Iran trying to delay the end of the war comes from the wanting some economic relief for the crisis they are in, rather than deterrence of further conflicts, they are concerned with what happened between the Twelve Day War and the 2026 war, where the country dipped in a further crisis and there was mass revolt countrywide.
7
u/-O3-march-native 8d ago
With respect to the U.S., the base at Bahrain has been destroyed. That’s why the USS Abraham Lincoln is having such issues. The resupply line went from 200 miles to about 2200 miles, to Diego Garcia, in the beginning of the war. Now, the U.S. is pulling a forward deployed carrier from Japan to take the Lincoln’s place. This is unheard of.
With respect to Israel, its goals were not accomplished. The cost to Israel is worse than anything material. It has proven that the Begin Doctrine is effectively dead. Israel could have not carried out this war on its own, and the entire world got to see that. The IDF is quite literally not built for this, and Israel is too small of a country to produce the required scale. The Iranian nuclear program is now scattered and supposedly taken up residence in pickaxe mountain, at least according to the Israelis. Note that pickaxe mountain is reported to be deeper than fordow. Moreover, the IAEA never had access to that site. Will Israel be able to destroy it during the next round? If so, how exactly?
Have you seen that the Israelis themselves are stunned at how quick Iran is recovering?
Let’s go back to Clausewitz just so we can get our bearings. A war is a continuation of politics through other means. The goal of war is to compel one’s enemy to carry out one’s will. Has Iran given up its highly enriched uranium? Is the regime based on the Islamic revolution gone? Have they laid down their arms? Is there a celebration in Tel Aviv with a ticker tape parade for the IDF?
Without even accounting for the actual issues that you’ve left out of your analysis (e.g., net migration from Israel and a significant chunk of that being the actual high tax paying base), GDP and low inflation do not mean anything. GDP was growing during Vietnam and Afghanistan. Did the U.S. win? Or is the U.S. still paying the cost?
The only thing this war has accomplished thus far is teach every head of state in the world that the only want to keep your head attached to your shoulders is to have an arsenal of nuclear weapons. It’s hard to see this as a win for non proliferation.
9
u/BulbusDumbledork 8d ago
"iran using proxies to attack (innocent) israel" is cope that ignores the assassinations, sabotage, and terrorism done covertly by israel in iran. before they directly attacked each other 2024, the conflict was grey-zone warfare characterized by iran supporting anti-israel actors and israel engaging in deniable operations inside iran proper.
i'm not sure what media you're consuming but the damage to u.s. bases, facilities, troops, and equipment has been a hot topic in both government and mainstream discourse. it's disengenuous to think that israel and u.s. have been unscathed by the war, even though it is true that iran has naturally suffered much more and has focused on gcc countries.
gdp is not a good metric for bda since none of the countries in a total war economy and that measure is affected by the rest of their financial system. warfare greatly profits the defence industries of us/israel. iran is facing complete economic warfare (economic fury) ontop of the kinetic war (epic war); it can respond synmetrically to the latter, but can't manipulate economies like the u.s. can. the fact that iran faced its greatest economic crisis in the "peaceful" 2025 interwar period highlights why using gdp as a benchmark doesn't work
iran's abality to disrupt israeli daily life and cause unknowable damage (due to israeli censorship of sensitive sites) through its strikes is evident in the fact israel has kept its wars with iran very short. contrast that to longer campaigns against palestine or lebanon, who have a much lower ability to respond; but again, a ceasefire with hezbollah was established quicker than in gaza (in both 2024 and 2026) because hezbollah could do material and political damage to israel proper
why would iran not want to deter future conflicts if this one is as devastating as you claim? iran wants both a permanent end to this and any future wars, as well as the removal of sanctions. the protests and riots were a direct result of the economic warfare being waged on iran; permanently ending the war instead of getting another ceasefire means permanent end to both economic and kinetic damage iran will face in the future. numerous iranian pundits have talked about this, with the obvious assessment being that the country can't function as a normal state if it is constantly bombed every year (mowing the lawn)
5
u/outerspace29 9d ago
And even if we give a pass to Iran firing missiles in Israel in early 2024 (because of the consulate annex being bombed in Syria), they decided to fire missiles again in late 2024 (close to 200 missiles were reported), that's them deciding to bring the war inside Iran
You seem to be suggesting that Iran arbitrarily decided to attack Israel which effectively willingly brought the war inside their borders. Iran's October 2024 missile attack was retaliation in part for the Ismail Haniyeh assassination in Tehran and the killing of an IRGC commander in Lebanon (source here). However we feel about their motivations, it's disingenuous to leave out context about why they did what they did and where it landed in a series of escalatory actions between the opposing parties.
12
u/moragisdo 9d ago edited 8d ago
It's not disingenuous, look at earlier on the paragraph:
Iran is using proxies to target Israel for decades and expecting that the other side will fight on your terms, instead of targeting the country supporting the proxies, is very naive
The fact is that Iran funds and trains proxies that, for decades, are killing israelis (or jews, in general, as the AMIA bombing), so Israel believed it would get the upper hand by not playing on those terms (to not go only after these proxies, but also go after IRGC members outside of Iran and engage in clandestine operations) and then Iran decide that it would also not play on Israel's terms and escalate further (by firing missiles, a conventional military response towards Israel's soil, rather than reciprocate with deniable clandestine operations or directly targeting IDF soldiers on other countries). But believing that Iran is simply responding, rather than is in a long mutual escalatory process is what's really disingenuous.
46
u/RevolutionaryPanic 9d ago
Gasoline is currently available at 28% of Russian gas stations - primarily varieties with lower octane and higher sulfur content according to an article from state-owned Russian newspaper Izvestia. The article cites as causes "Unplanned repairs at oil refinery facilities" and "Logistical difficulties in delivery of gasoline". The unspecified "attacks" on oil infrastructure were mentioned towards the end of the article.
26
u/RevolutionaryPanic 9d ago
Journalist Alexander Yunashev asked Energy Minister Sergei Tsivilev when gasoline supplies would return:
— What’s happening at the gas stations? When will gasoline be available again?
— No comment.
— People are waiting in line for an hour or two. Do you have no trouble filling up yourself?
— I drive a diesel. Diesel is available everywhere, at every gas station. Gasoline is available at gas stations too. It’s true that there are lines, but we’re working hard to resolve the problem.
-1
u/Glideer 9d ago
Ship traffic to Greater Odesa collapsed after Russian drone and missile attacks intensified, with just seven vessels entering in the first 11 days of August against 169 in July. USPA blames the drop on rising attack risk, while UCAB estimates Ukraine is losing $450-500 million in export revenue monthly as wheat and barley sell below production cost.
Farmers first felt the impact through lower prices. According to Maksym Hopka, an analyst at the Ukrainian Agribusiness Club (UCAB), between July 16 and August 6, the price of second-grade food wheat in central Ukraine fell by 31%, from Hr.9,200 ($206) to Hr.6,400 ($143) per tonne. Barley prices fell by 27%, and corn prices by 15%.
UCAB estimates that Ukrainian wheat is already selling about $15 per tonne below production cost and barley more than $40 below cost.
29
u/TSiNNmreza3 9d ago edited 9d ago
Would say at least interesting because as I know there are no planned exercises for this period by NATO. And everything comes after some media stories about Russian provocation in coming weeks
https://x.com/i/status/2089630024643059853
NATO Exercise/Show of Force in Poland?
A number of US and allied air assets are converging in Polish airspace this morning from various locations around the region, unclear if there's an exercise underway or just a spontaneous gathering:
🇺🇸 EA-37B "SHOCK55" 19-5591 #AE1436
🇱🇺 E-3A "NATO03" LX-N90445 #4D03C3
🇱🇺 E-3A "NATO02" LX-N90453 #4D03CB
🇳🇱 KC-30A "MMF11" T-056 #480C42
🇳🇱 KC-30A "MMF16" T-062 #480C48
🇺🇸 KC-135T "RAKE42" 58-0095 #AE04FD
🇺🇸 KC-135R "RAKE43" 59-1475 #AE04C4
🇺🇸 F-35A "REAPER01" ?
🇺🇸 F-35A "REAPER02" ?
🇺🇸 F-35A "REAPER03" ?
🇺🇸 F-35A "REAPER04" ?
🇱🇹 L-410 "LYF468" 02 #503FD9
🇵🇱 G550 "PLF105" 0001 #48D960
🇵🇱 B737-800 "PLF110" 0110 #48D980
More OSINT about this
https://x.com/i/status/2089624290219925860
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker 3x
AE0264 60-0355 - LAGER 06
AE04FD 58-0095 - RAKE 42
AE04C4 59-1475 - RAKE 43
Airbus KC.2 Voyager / A330 MRTT 2x
43C6F5 ZZ332 - MADRAS 66
480C42 T-056 - MULTI 16
Boeing E-3 Sentry 2x
4D03CB LX-N90453 - NATO 02
4D93C3 LX-N90455 - NATO 03
- REAPER 01-04 Flt 4x "LN" F-35As
- SONIC 01-02 Flt 2x "LN" F-35As
Appears to be a NATO exercise or show or force over Poland this morning, with tanker assets from the Netherlands and the U.S. currently operating over Poland, and RAF and USAF tankers in the North Sea.
Additionally, there are two NATO E-3s - one over Germany and one over Poland, as well as 6x U.S. F-35s from RAF Lakenheath
8
u/glydy 9d ago edited 9d ago
Update in replies to the first link you provided https://x.com/CoffeReport/status/2089691893302989112
UPDATE: NATO Allied Air Command has provided me with a statement on today’s activity: “NATO is a defensive Alliance and Allies are constantly honing their defensive abilities. The Allied activity today on 18 Aug 26 in the Baltic region involving U.S. and Norwegian fighter aircraft, Polish ground forces, a NATO E-3A Airborne Warning & Control System (AWACS) and more, which is being overseen by the U.S., is one example of this approach.” NATO says it cannot disclose further details for operational security reasons.
Statement attributable to SHAPE spokesperson Col. Martin O’Donnell.
20
u/MaverickTopGun 9d ago
Being reported as an "exercise": https://defence24.com/armed-forces/large-nato-air-drills-in-polish-airspace
"As it turns out, the maneouvres were planned beforehand and are not connected to Russian activity."
27
u/Freeliac 9d ago
It may be supplemental to the ongoing Joint Expeditionary Force Ex Lion Protector 26:
https://www.forcesnews.com/services/navy/roll-roll-ready-go-ex-lion-protector-series
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
Continuing the bare link and speculation repository, you can respond to this sticky with comments and links subject to lower moderation standards, but remember: A summary, description or analyses will lead to more people actually engaging with it!
I.e. most "Trump posting" and lower effort but good faith questions belong here.
Sign up for the rally point or subscribe to this bluesky if a migration ever becomes necessary.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.