this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
298 points (99.7% liked)

News

37777 readers
2444 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.S. Navy has refused near-daily requests from the shipping industry for military escorts through the Strait of Hormuz since the start of the war on Iran, saying the risk of attacks is too high for now, according to sources familiar with the matter.

The ‌Navy's assessments spell continued disruption to Middle East oil exports and reflect a divergence from Donald Trump’s statements that the U.S. is prepared to provide naval escorts whenever needed to restart regular shipments along the key waterway.

Shipping along the narrow strait has all but halted since the start of the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran more than a week ago, preventing exports of around a fifth of the world’s oil supply and sending global oil prices surging to highs not seen since 2022.

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ianhclark510@lemmy.blahaj.zone 72 points 2 months ago (1 children)

No ballllzzzz, what is my 300 billion a year going for if not to support imperialistic resource extractions

[–] Penguin_1024@piefed.zip 5 points 2 months ago

Well how else are the billionaires going to keep getting richer?

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 61 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Send Barron in a tug boat.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 35 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Didn't you hear? He's too tall for a tugboat

[–] GuyFawkesV@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A cat tag, I like where your head is at but don't know how that will improve matters.

[–] GuyFawkesV@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

I simply don’t see how having Barron in the thick of things makes them worse. And in theory maybe it makes things better for our ~~pawns~~ service members forced into this incredibly important mission.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 34 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I wonder if there's a case for the shipping industry to sue the US and Israeli govts

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (4 children)

There’s for sure a case, what would the enforcement mechanism be? They would both tell the UN to fuck right off so I guess sanctions? Think that wouldn’t lead to war anyway?

We’re pretty locked into a horrible conflict that will drastically change the global order unless a lot of people in power have Ebenezer Scrooge moments simultaneously

[–] tacosanonymous@mander.xyz 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

We should be sanctioned, at a minimum. At maximum, someone should launch missiles at our military bases then kidnap our president.

[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Slapping tariffs on goods from everywhere else in the world is kind of a self-sanction.

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 4 points 2 months ago

They can only punch themselves in the dick so much .. though at this point it looks like they probably enjoy it

[–] cmbabul@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I wasn’t suggesting we shouldn’t be, but that will lead to conflict on one level or another

[–] Lodespawn@aussie.zone 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Normally you'd have to pick a jurisdiction to raise the case and then the local court system would deal with it, I assume they would raise it in the US .. so if they won the case the US would enforce it, I guess the US would have some law that saysthe DOD is not responsible for the shit they do though ..

[–] finallymadeanaccount@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I will say this for Trump, he figured out that he can just say, "Yeah, nah" to any authority that tries to stop him, or enforce laws against him. "Don't feel like accepting your judgement today ... old Miss Universe episodes are on, my McDonalds just arrvied, and Lindsey's gonna give me a wank while I eat".

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Europe had no trouble sanctioning Russia for the war, and I'm sure they wouldn't want to be hypocritical.

[–] Mihies@programming.dev 3 points 2 months ago

*entire world

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 33 points 2 months ago (2 children)

"Risk of attack is too great..."

Ah...so the US Navy operates off the same playbook as the Uvalde police department, I see.

Like Bitch, you're a warship. It's literally your job to put yourself at risk during a conflict.

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Warship in a mined strait risk transforming in a single use submarine

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Modern warships basically gave up on heavy armour. Instead they use manoeuvrability and suppressive fire. They are also intended to support each other in a fleet. A single warship, running close escort, loses all these advantages. It can't outmanoeuvre an attack, and it lacks the firepower to suppress a heavy attack on its own. Iran would make a point to try and sink both the escort ship and its protected cargo ship.

In order to work, the American navy would have to run a full convoy. A far bigger logistical challenge.

[–] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I have a feeling that there is or will be a water-borne version of a shahed drone. Something small and cheap and mobile vs big expensive high tech ships.

[–] cynar@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

I suspect it wouldn't be anywhere near as effective. Torpedoes fill that roll already (at least mostly).

A shahed drone carrying a modified torpedo could be terrifying however. The drone gets into range quickly. The torpedo makes final approach. It would also be a lot quicker for Iran to develop and deploy.

[–] VitoRobles@lemmy.today 26 points 2 months ago

I like to remind people that the Vietnam war with America and the Ukraine war with Russians are examples where the outside forces did not want to be there.

And the result has been the same: a bunch of dead outsiders who were either killed by war with the locals, or fragged by their own troops.

[–] MerrySkeptic@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 months ago (2 children)
[–] porcoesphino@mander.xyz 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It was Epic Furry one of their press releases for a few hours

[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

They told Trump that was the name because he said he'd never fucked a furry before and they wanted his buy-in.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's the next one: "Operation: Heckin Huge Chungus LMAO"

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 19 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Can't risk sending military equipment into places where it might be attacked.

Can't make this up.

[–] bassomitron@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I view this as Naval commanders looking out for their personnel. Why would they risk escorting commercial activities if they're not directly ordered to? That isn't their primary mission/objective. The war is completely stupid and the vast majority of people do not want to be involved, but the US and Israeli billionaires are insisting to poke the hornets nest. That doesn't mean commanders on the ground/water want to put their lives on the line for what's an obvious bullshit conflict designed to enrich said billionaires.

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I view this as Naval commanders looking out for their personnel.

I'm quite sure a lot of the high level commanders here have very little actual investment in this "war" as they've seen how unhinged, random and scatterbrained the administration has been with foreign policy.

Imagine spending your life training for the most harrowing missions and highest-level tactics, and then being sent basically to a random country to attack for unspecified reasons, and then being told "Go send your multi-million dollar boats filled with irreplaceable sailors through that channel filled with mines so oil tankers can get around faster or something, don't think about it. We promise we won't pull out of this whole mess in a week bro. Promise."

What exactly is an escort going to do for submerged mines anyway? Take pics? "Oh shit it blew up! Wow. Hope it's not us next."

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 months ago

There's good reason navy has moved far away from Iran. They've struck targets accurately far further than the 10km off their coast that is the Straits. Likely more Americans killed than reported in GCC. The Navy is refusing not only because it is a certain suicide mission that fails, but also because of the extreme embarrassment risk of that certain failure.

[–] Akh@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

The US is not a 2020 fighting force, it is an 1980’s fighting force based on nostalgia, which is why it lost iraq and Afganistan. It is why it is not ready to lose a 3 billion dollar aircraft carrier to a $5,000 drone

[–] manxu@piefed.social 18 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It starts feeling like Trump vibe-coded his Presidency. Stuff happens because it sounds good in the LLM's mind, but of course it has no idea of the knock-on effects and all hell breaks loose.

[–] MousePotatoDoesStuff@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

He's been "vibecoding" years before LLMs went mainstream.

Truly a man ahead of his time.

[–] shittydwarf@sh.itjust.works 18 points 2 months ago
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 months ago

Oh no, the chronic liar has lied?!

[–] RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The use of interceptor missiles will be more expensive than the cargo of the ships being escorted.

The escorts would need to use interceptors to defend the cargo ships. No matter what they do it would be expensive.

As for the ship shortage Trump just cancelled most of the replacement ships that were under design. Oops

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 3 points 2 months ago

🤡🎪🐩🐎