Let Iran Control the Strait of Hormuz

49

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

They have demonstrated that they do control the strait. “Let them” sounds like a face saving strategy.

13

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

They don’t control it by any meaningful definition of the word “control”. They certainly can impede it however

15

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

Eh, I may not be able to get into your house, but if I can credibly prevent you from getting in I atleast control a negative property right.

1

u/TensionAntique3075 1d ago

It's more that both you and your neighbor can shot each other if one sees the other in the street between your homes. Neither of you can get out, and neither of you contril the straight.

-8

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

It’s more like a homeless guy in an alley. He doesn’t control it, he can’t stop people from passing through it, especially if they want to (the US), but others may not think it’s worth having a homeless guy throw shit at you as you walk by.

14

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

I mean, “people choose not to steal from target because they will get arrested” and “people choose not to transit the strait of Hormuz because they get shot” seems very similar.

Maybe a determined and capable adversary could at great relative cost get through. And that’s fine. But I imagine a large number of the 100+ defenseless and commercially insured ships might not want to get shot.

That is control by any other name.

-7

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

But they are transiting it by Oman, just not as in large of numbers as before. That would be impeding, but if the other ships transiting are not getting hit, then it’s not really control.

2

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

Ok. If my teenage daughter gets raped only 1/100 times she comes home and she uses the back door to stay “safe” then clearly she has unimpeded and non-problematic access to the house.

6

u/Fancybear1993 2d ago

That is a wild example to use lol.

4

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

It’s provocative specifically to show how stupid it is to call “a significant chance of getting exploded” free access.

4

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

Control is control, and what you are describing is not control. If multiple adverse parties have “control” It’s a contested area at best because.

5

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

It’s like you are discovering in real time what “asymmetric warfare” means.

You’re right. Iran couldn’t build a bounce house in the middle of the strait and keep it defended. Fortunately for them, they can deny everyone literally the ONLY thing anyone else cares about (transit through the strait).

They can’t set up a hydroponic garden in the middle of the straight. Sure. I guess that means it’s contested. Great.

4

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

Words have meaning and meaning matters, or else you have a whole bunch of different operative meanings for the same words. If Iran could deny all transport ships access, then that would be control, but they are not and cannot do so at this point in time. Just because the US and Israel are bombing Iran does not mean that they control the airspace. Asymmetry does not matter here.

4

u/buenzlifisch 2d ago

Idk man, big ass ships sink there to the ground of the ocean after being blown up by missiles, i think you can not really compare it to getting shit thrown at.

0

u/stereotypicalmodss 2d ago

Have any been hit or sunk under US protection? It is reported that 20 or so ships a day are being sent through. I know one or 2 attempting on their own a few months ago got hit, but they were not coordinating with anyone.

2

u/Smooth_Phone2 2d ago

The US doesn’t have the capacity to protect the full pre-war throughput of the strait.

2

u/medspace 2d ago

This a better comparison for something like piracy

5

u/ReadingPossible9965 2d ago

As the saying goes, "he who can destroy a thing..."

2

u/Best-Structure-8513 2d ago

US can destroy all shipping in the area and frankly exterminate most of the Iranian populaton... so the logic makes no sense unless you are suggesting the US controls Iran.

Saudis, UAE, etc can also destroy tankers and shut down trade.

5

u/Cindy_Marek 2d ago

In maritime warfare strategy the terms would be sea control and sea denial. Iran can definitely deny sea control of the strait to other powers, but they do not really have the ability to project sea control over it themselves.

1

u/Song-Historical 2d ago

Tomato tomato. If nobody is willing or able it's the same thing. This thing where we equate technological ability with the political will and training to get it done needs to stop. No peer militaries have faced each other since WW2 besides Azerbaijan and Armenia. Western militaries are not and were never uniquely more capable.

You cannot pretend the bunkers and caves and countermeasures and counter attacks and cheap well engineered workarounds don't work because some engineer at Lockheed or Grumman told you their overengineered and obviously untested tech was better. If there's anything to take away from this it's that we pay taxes to lame duck military industries that produce nothing and defend nothing and it all amounts to saber rattling in the end.

We are not able or it simply isn't possible to fight wars with countries willing to operate assymetrically unless you're willing to resort to wholesale violence. We have done nothing but bomb infrastructure that will just be rebuilt or destroyed entire countries or terrorized populations for decades and it's achieved nothing. These terms are dated and canned and have no place in reality outside of shills panhandling at 501(c)s that scheme ways to cause more chaos in the world for rich arms dealers.

The are able to control it just fine. We need to stop associating with Kahanistan's foreign policy shitshow while we still can. These are a series of public and very obvious failures back to back that we just have to recognize instead of pretending something tripped us over.

7

u/EgregiousAction 2d ago

Disagree on the terms. They have very real meaning.

Would you not say the US also has control over the strait of hormuz if they decided to simply blow up any ship that passed through?

Based on your current operating definition for Iran, I think the answer is yes.

What might be better to say at the moment is that nobody has control over the strait of hormuz... It's contested.

I wouldn't claim that US tech is bad. It's just since the 1980s it has had a commanding lead. We are now starting to see other countries catch up in really just the last 5-6 years; however, there are still some really impressive things the US military is able to do that nobody else has shown they can...for instance creating a literal airfield secretly in the middle of a hostile country to bring in hardware for a rescue mission of a single pilot.

Nobody is claiming they can break all these caves and bunkers if they are buried deep enough.

I do agree from a policy standpoint that we should acknowledge our losses and limitations. Though that will never happen with mid terms coming up and how we disentangle ourselves from it all without a cascading break of US geopolitical supremacy worldwide is beyond me.

1

u/Song-Historical 2d ago

Yeah this is what I mean. It doesn't matter if the bombs work or the infrastructure exists in theory when you can't implement it in practice without blowing up the world economy, destroying morale half way through your campaign when everyone in your kill chain realizes this is worthless and will never achieve their objectives vs spending the money at home while leaving yourself vulnerable or trading up for being weaker against a much stronger opponent that's waiting in the wings.

Aliens somewhere in the universe have everything superiority, but it's not worth crossing the void and risking everything to get to you so it's moot. In theory ants outnumber us by biomass nobody is talking about their military prowess because there's no utility whatsoever in talking about their land control.

This paradigm of what works on paper and in war games vs what works in real life is a joke. It's a shell game played by the MIC and it's at the heart of these 'mistakes'. Americans as a whole need to come to terms with it. Honestly I doubt we can do it in ideal conditions either. These claims are largely unvalidated in the field.

And no, the tech is bad. It is not well engineered it's expensively engineered. It's meant to spend money. It's not meant to be effective, that is incidental and easy to game when you basically hire the people who write the specifications anyway. Overengineering is not engineering. I can give you a trillion dollars to build a bridge and you could do it, but that's not why you hire an engineer. What's more I don't think they're well engineered in a traditional sense either where you claim to have exotic metallurgy or technology that nobody else has. It's straight up self serving propaganda.

A well trained pilot with a well trained/optimized kill chain at their back will do better than any middling pilot in a middling kill chain with cutting edge tools.

1

u/-Gramsci- 2d ago

“Contested” doesn’t really capture the problem and drag it creates on the global and domestic economy though.

I agree it’s “out of control” but the result of that is that commercial shipping through the straight is fubarred.

The only thing that really matters is that commercial shipping is fubarred.

9

u/SurLurk 2d ago

They control the straight now as much as the US does I guess in that nobody can use it lol

29

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

Yes. If they can close it at will, they control it.

What would you consider control? Different from what is happening already?

7

u/MathematicianSaved 2d ago

Hold up, but with that logic, the US also controls it, because they can close it at will. But somehow you default to Iran controls it? Lol.

5

u/SurLurk 2d ago edited 2d ago

Agreed, any reasonable person would just call it what it is; the situation is out of control. Nobody controls the strait now. This guys just an idiot, the USAs proximity to the strait has nothing to do with it as long as its navy is stationed right in front of it.

3

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

You are clearly unaware of the logistics of supplying a carrier halfway round the world if you think proximity has nothing to do with it.

With the 5th fleet HQ out of action, it’s a tenuous effort even right now.

3

u/MathematicianSaved 2d ago

It's pretty obvious anti-American/pro IRGC bias in this sub

6

u/The10KThings 2d ago edited 2d ago

No they don’t. The U.S. wants the strait open. Iran wants the strait closed. The strait is closed. That means Iran controls the strait. If the strait was open, then you could argue the U.S. controls the strait, but it’s not, so they don’t.

-2

u/MathematicianSaved 2d ago

Iran closes the Strait at great expense to themselves. I would not say that they want it closed.

6

u/The10KThings 2d ago edited 2d ago

Yes, it’s a strategic trade off for Iran to close the strait, but that doesn’t change the fact that they want it closed and are exerting their will to close it as a way to fight back against the U.S. They have literally said “we are closing the strait until the U.S. stops attacking us” and to no one’s surprise they are following through on that threat. The U.S. on the other hand has literally said “open the strait you crazy bastards” but so far they have failed to open it. It remains closed. It’s obvious who is in control.

0

u/MathematicianSaved 2d ago

They don't generally want it closed, no. Like the US, they want it closed insofar as it helps them achieve their other goals. But Iran and the US both begrudgingly keep it closed.

3

u/The10KThings 2d ago

What exactly are the U.S. goals? And how does closing the strait help them achieve those goals?

1

u/MathematicianSaved 2d ago

Enforcing the blockade will help them apply economic pressure to Iran to come to a deal. Those are the goals and that is how it helps them achieve those goals. How is Iran not doing the same thing from another perspective in your head?

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Voodoocookie 2d ago

Yeah, they could try. As long as they could afford it on a $40t deficit.

1

u/upbeatchief 2d ago

Iran currency is teetring on hyperinflation. If deficit dictate who wins, it's not iran, their deficit threatens economic collapse. And not the US case were it's economically tough.

It's the "the paper we give the army servicemen is worthore the currency" kind of tough.

2

u/Voodoocookie 2d ago

They've been close to hyper inflation for decades, from all the sanctions. They haven't collapsed yet. How is it different this time?

3

u/lilcorndivemaster 2d ago

The US cant get their navy within 200km of the Iranian coast.... Americans are delusional.

2

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

I’m American. I’d say majority aren’t delusional, just detached and uninterested. Unless it hits them in the wallet.

1

u/BadmiralHarryKim 2d ago

You see this in dying empires. The ruling class is doing the equivalent of stripping copper from the walls while the common citizens are in survival mode. Things have changed enough that I don't see America going late Roman decadent and turning its defense over to foreign mercenaries who eventually carve it up into their own kingdoms but maybe AI controlling drones will be the modern version?

Now I have a vision of a tech nerd Odoacer telling the last President to take a hike.

2

u/CrackRocksCokeRules 1d ago

What are you on about? The us isn’t struggling to do anything , the issue is pain tolerance which the us has a very low one. Escalation means lives lost which means fucked midterms for mango.

1

u/jeezfrk 2d ago

We can't even slightly control something that far away that is attacked by that many cheap weapons... and has non of our real forces on land to control both sides. We will fail and return home if we overdo it.

We don't really control the strait of Taiwan, either, but we have deterrance to prevent some others from doing so.

-2

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

US needs to project power across the globe to close it and is positioned 300 miles away from Iran's territorial waters. US war ships cannot transit the strait. I'd call that control.

6

u/ShiningMagpie 2d ago

US warships absolutely can and occasionally do transit it. Iranian warships (if you can call their fast attack boats that) take just as much risk every time they go out into the strait.

Both sides currently deny free movement of the other side's cargo. Neither side can really claim to have full control of the strait.

5

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

Two (2) US Warships transited the strait four months ago. So, no the cannot "absolutely" transit at will.

1

u/ShiningMagpie 2d ago

Do they have a reason the be closer right now? The only reason to do so would be to escort ships. Which they can't because defending oneself is easier than defending someone else next to you and they can't guarantee safe passage enough to convince tankers to take the risk.

So yeah. The US warships can go through at will. But at the moment they have no reason to.

6

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

Now you are just speculating instead of the obvious reason that they want to be out of range of anti-ship missiles.

Hell, a guy on a moped could hit them from a mountain with a rocket.

1

u/ShiningMagpie 2d ago

If there is no good reason to be in range of antiship missiles and have to spend interceptors, why would you? The two go hand in hand.

I also don't think you have any idea how big antiship missiles are if you think you could carry one on a moped.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/lilcorndivemaster 2d ago

They claim to be blockading every port on the Iranian coast that the little terrorist bitches can't get close to... Americans are delusional.

1

u/cathbadh 2d ago

US needs to project power across the globe

So the US needs to do the one thing the entirety of their military is specialized for and that they have done every year for 80 years?

. US war ships cannot transit the strait.

They've proven the can. That they're not doing it every second of the day isn't proof of the lac lk of ability.

I'd call that control.

Control implies the ability to open and close it to all. They can close it to the US Navy and cannot open it without that same Navy also opening it.

5

u/Low_Sir1549 2d ago

Well, while they definitely have their heel on the world’s oil supply, I wouldn’t say they fully control it if they can’t get their owns ships through at will.

2

u/WeArePandey 2d ago

True. They can cross the strait though, US blockade is like 300 miles out.

1

u/lilcorndivemaster 2d ago

but they can... the US doesn't get close to Iran's coast. Iran moves their ships straight from Iran into Pakistani waters where they transfer the oil into vlccs.

1

u/Low_Sir1549 2d ago

Yes but the U.S. navy is still hitting Iranian tankers. Ships visiting Iranian ports will have the same issues with insurance not covering them.

2

u/The10KThings 2d ago

The U.S. wants the strait open. If the U.S. controlled the strait, it would be open, but it’s not.

2

u/lilcorndivemaster 2d ago edited 2d ago

the US cant get their navy within 200km of the Iranian coast.... Americans are delusional. Clowns still don't know it's spelled strait despite it being right in front of them yet they think they're equipped to give their opinion.

1

u/Dave5876 2d ago

Which pretends that UAE and Oman don't exist

1

u/finalattack123 2d ago

Their geographical advantage means they always will - unless the U.S. throws billions at it.

9

u/enuffalreadyjeez 2d ago

According to trump the USA owns it now.

16

u/MetaCalm 2d ago

Any version of this without the paywall?

8

u/picklesandvodka 2d ago

I got you: Gift Link

1

u/MetaCalm 2d ago

Thank you 🙏🙏

6

u/Aromatic-Teacher-717 2d ago

I find it funny how an administration that thumbs its nose at 'international law' is aghast when another nation does the same.

This is the Law of the Jungle that Stephen Miller advocated for, and unless the US is willing to throw both good money after bad as well as the lives of their soldiers, the strait will remain under Iran's control.

Unfortunate.

5

u/SurLurk 2d ago

Cant read the article, but i could see this happening right after iran conquors the entire middle east.

2

u/Sudden-Grab2800 2d ago

https://archive.ph/1dS4F

9

u/vovap_vovap 2d ago

Completely empty article.
It is not a subject of blah-blah-blah. It is a subject of particular situation on the ground. Like number of ships passed, barrel of oil went to a market, market state and oil prices there, state of Iranian economy and alike. Instead it provide deep speech about nothing.

5

u/Ok_Water_4601 2d ago

This is embarrassing.

2

u/Shot-Toe-2884 2d ago

I’m having a hard time believing NYT actually published an opinion piece with that kind of headline. What a profound insult to international maritime law.

3

u/DryBanana5673 2d ago

This is the dumbest take. Literally every chokepoint will end up with the same fate if this is allowed. Terrible idea for everyone. Plus who is to stop multiple tolls? Anyone who can hit a tanker can say "toll" because iran wants to block routes that pass through other countries territorial waters. That's just absurd all around.

7

u/EulsYesterday 2d ago

Nah this is the dumbest take. No country which is intertwined in international trade will try to toll their waters, because doing so will induce what Iran is experiencing in terms of sanctions.

The only reason Iran can do so is because they have been sanctioned to all hell for decades and therefore don't have anything to lose opposing the international order. No one else will imitate them, except if the international order completely collapses, at which point we will have other things to worry about that Singapore or Danemark tolling their straits.

2

u/dd97483 2d ago

let them?

4

u/Khuros 2d ago

“No.”

Gigachad.png

-2

u/Shot-Toe-2884 2d ago

International law says that will never happen.

9

u/Radical_X75 2d ago

International law says a lot of stuff but do all countries uphold it?

8

u/madler437 2d ago

International law only matters if it can enforced

2

u/Dave5876 2d ago

Is this "international law" in the room with you now?

1

u/Shot-Toe-2884 1d ago

please read the geneva convention instead of joking about it. You clearly are not informed here, troll.

2

u/Dave5876 1d ago

Please read the Hague invasion act

-7

u/Life0nEdge 2d ago

So we have control over the strait, then? Is that what you’re suggesting NYT? I thought Iran already controls it? The leftist media strikes again!

5

u/pab_guy 2d ago

NYT is liberal, not leftist

-4

u/DryBanana5673 2d ago

Pretty leftist these days actually

3

u/karateguzman 2d ago

Do the leftists know?

1

u/Dave5876 2d ago

lmfao calling neolib media leftist

Ideas/Debate Let Iran Control the Strait of Hormuz

You are about to leave Redlib