this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
202 points (97.6% liked)

News

36375 readers
2924 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

U.S. Navy could soon be escorting commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz, where maritime traffic has effectively stopped due to the current conflict with Iran, according to President Donald Trump. Doing so would demand that American naval vessels transit through the Strait, shifting them away from other duties. More importantly, it would also mean putting them right in a super weapons engagement zone full of Iranian threats that could include cruise and ballistic missiles, one-way-attack drones, explosive-laden kamikaze boats, and naval mines.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” President Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social social media network.

“Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf,” he also wrote. “This will be available to all Shipping Lines.”

“No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD. The United States’ ECONOMIC and MILITARY MIGHT is the GREATEST ON EARTH,” he added. “More actions to come.”

U.S. Central Command declined to comment when reached for more details. TWZ has also reached out to the White House.

...

This is not the first time that the United States has been faced with this predicament or decided to start escorting commercial vessels through the region as a result. The U.S. Navy did just this in the late 1980s during the Tanker War sideshow to the Iran-Iraq War. At the same time, that experience underscores the immense amount of resources such a campaign could require, as well as the risks.

At the peak of those operations, there were some 30 American warships escorting commercial vessels to and from the Persian Gulf. Aircraft, special operations forces, and other assets were also deployed in support. The risks to American service members, as well as the ships they were tasked to safeguard, were very real.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Its also just obviously stupid.

It can't possibly reliably work.

We don't have enough interceptors to do that.

Our THAAD radar arrays that would track incoming high altitude missiles ... already got taken out by Iran.

https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/irgc-destroys-second-us-thaad-system-uae-radar-qatar-early-warning-iran-missile-dominance/

We'd have to do convoy escort formation kinda like fucking WW2, (or the more modern parellel would be the Tanker War of the 80s) and use our naval defense systems... to intercept anything incoming... which would run us out of that kind of ammo even faster...

... and also potentially just still would not work against very high altititude, very fast missiles...

... meaning that then after maybe a month or three of that, oops, we lost a fucking aircraft carrier.

Thats why nearly none of the ships have moved, despite this 'guarantee'.

See all those clusters of red and green dots?

That's everybody just parked in a holding pattern.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:56.8/centery:25.6/zoom:8

[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sal's What's going on with Shipping? Channel did a video that adds to your points, while covering other things that happened in between too.

We don't have the destroyers to so this, let alone the stocks to keep them full. Last time we tried something similar with the Houthi when we stood off and bring them down along the Red Sea we ran out.

The best we might be able to do is the 5 or so US flagged vessels. Apparently France is going to do the same for their vessels. All the rest of them are probably just going to wait for the War insurance to get sorted and then start running it again (like some of them are apparently).

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Good of you to link him, I watch his stuff regularly, and I guess was arguably just sort of badly summarizing / riffing off him, lol.

As the saying goes:

Ship happens.

[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Ship be happen' now

I just watched his newest video and Sal's doing it daily right now. Not much new in broad substance, but details are developing.

I went back and looked twz reported 770 missiles expended over the 9 months of their Hohthi protection. This is all missiles, so it's unclear how much of this was offensive vs defensive, but:

Many of these weapons were used in direct defensive actions to protect commercial shipping and U.S. Navy and allied warships operating in and around the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. While there is no price on human life and even a drone packed with explosives could severely damage an American destroyer, putting it out of action for months and possibly injuring or killing members of its crew, it’s interesting to put a price tag on what these weapons might have cost. This is becoming an increasingly important issue as the U.S. evaluates its own stockpiles and what would be needed to sustain a conflict in the Pacific against a foe exponentially more powerful than the Houthis.

Without knowing the exact breakdown of the missiles and other munitions employed during the IKECSG’s recent deployment, it is impossible to put a dollar figure on all of the weapons expended. The unit price of a single Block V Tomahawk is $1.89 million or so, so launching 135 of those missiles would have cost the Navy $255,150,000.

So stockpiles, resupply, and production becomes a big issue, beyond the astronomical cost of this.

(All for the fucking ego of a Cheeto.)

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

(All for the fucking ego of a Cheeto.)

Cheeto's got an ego at least partially 'cuz he's the chosen instrument of God on earth.

Holy War ain't gonna fight itself:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-hosts-pastors-from-across-us-at-white-house-as-faith-leaders-pray-over-him/ar-AA1XCWcw

I think in the last 24 hrs, at least 5 prominent US political figures have just outright said this is a religious war, Mike Johnson, Lindsey Graham, etc.

Ya'll Qaeda, ya'll!