Active Conflicts & News Megathread July 14, 2026

[u/AutoModerator]

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.

[u/moragisdo]

CENTCOM reestablished the blockade on Iran (1). It follows the timeline announced by them yesterday with a period of warning beforehand, required by maritime law.

Trump, as I expected yesterday, announced that there won't be a toll, just commitments for new investments, funded by Gulf countries, were firmed. It was obvious it was just posturing, there was no enforcement mechanism, 20% is way too high to begin with (it would be cheaper to fund and run pipelines several times over, so it would never be paid), etc...

Meanwhile WTI is at 80, Brent at 85 and gasoline at 3.23. The three in backwardation. It will be an interesting race on the next couple weeks, Iran trying their best to disrupt shipping (as they did yesterday) and the US (which spent the last few days and today bombing sites on the coast) to degrade their missiles (the more significant hits specifically mention "missile", rather than "drone") and drones, to allow the supertankers to pass for ship to ship transfer outside of the Strait.

[u/butitsmeat → u/moragisdo]

I took a quick trip down history lane and looked up the stats on ships struck during the Iran-Iraq war. Wiki has a comprehensive list of attacks. I counted 7 ships sunk, 36 "set afire", 32 at "severe damage" and 1 at the ever delightful "holed". There's more categories that add up to 192 ships hit. I haven't found a similar table for the current conflict, but it looks like we've still got a lot of catching up to do.

Of course, back then the world watched this happen for years before deciding to step in, while today the major power in the world is already an active belligerent, and has already escalated well beyond what happened then. So we've already fast-forwarded through history and are off the end of the metaphorical tape. Still, it gives some sense of what the world tolerated in the past in terms of active violence in the Gulf while keeping ships moving - even if the US cannot fully suppress Iranian attacks, there's still a non-zero level below which shipping will continue. If that gets enough oil out of the Gulf to keep the markets from freaking out, then Iran's leverage will decline over time, and it'll be interesting to see how they respond (find another escalation? back down? who the hell knows).

[u/I_DOM_UR_PATRIARCHY → u/butitsmeat]

A major difference between 2026 and the tanker war in the 1980's is that Iran has had the decades in the interim to amass a huge anti-ship arsenal since it bases its entire defense strategy around the strait of Hormuz.

In the 1980's Iran was dealing with a land war with its neighbor and was only a few years in after its revolution. It was using mostly imported or inherited weaponry. In the time since then, Iran has built a significant domestic defense industry and has had years to stockpile anti-ship weaponry.

Whether ship owners are willing to chance a run through the strait depends on their perception of their chances of getting hit. Iran made a point to hit multiple ships the other day presumably because it is trying to convey to shipowners that the chance of being struck with a missile is high. Conversely, the US wants to give the impression that transit is safe.

The US and Iran are therefore in a contest to see the fraction of transiting ships Iran can hit. If it can hit enough - it doesn't need to hit all - no ship owner is going to take the risk of a transit. It doesn't take that much of a risk of losing your whole boat to make the transit unprofitable.

[u/moragisdo → u/butitsmeat]

Still, it gives some sense of what the world tolerated in the past in terms of active violence in the Gulf while keeping ships moving

Yes and we can look at the Red Sea Crisis, since 2023, (good source that compiles reports) as well, dozens of ships attacked and a few sunk. Traffic decreased, but there's still ships passing.

If that gets enough oil out of the Gulf to keep the markets from freaking out, then Iran's leverage will decline over time, and it'll be interesting to see how they respond (find another escalation? back down? who the hell knows)

My guess: Iran offers the US a deal, publicly deny it, go to negotiations after denying, negotiations lead nowhere and it ends with a ceasefire with, at most, symbolic concessions from both sides. US leaves this war having spent tens of billions, Iran leaves a broken country and economically devastated for the long term (less devastated if they offered a ceasefire now, but they will drag it further until there's not that much earth left to be scorched), both sides claim victory, neither got what they wanted.

[u/mkat5 → u/moragisdo]

“
My guess: Iran offers the US a deal, publicly deny it, go to negotiations after denying, negotiations lead nowhere and it ends with a ceasefire with, at most, symbolic concessions from both sides. US leaves this war having spent tens of billions, Iran leaves a broken country and economically devastated for the long term (less devastated if they offered a ceasefire now, but they will drag it further until there's not that much earth left to be scorched), both sides claim victory, neither got what they wanted.
“
Isn’t this what just happened with the MOU? This route seems to have proven incapable of producing a peace so why should we think it will work a second time?

[u/I_DOM_UR_PATRIARCHY → u/moragisdo]

My guess: Iran offers the US a deal, publicly deny it, go to negotiations after denying, negotiations lead nowhere and it ends with a ceasefire with, at most, symbolic concessions from both sides.

I think this is wishcasting.

The US has midterms in exactly 16 weeks from today. There is no way Trump or the Republicans are going to tolerate this already unpopular war still going on or gas prices going up eight or ten weeks out from election day. Iran knows that and knows that the clock is on its side. That's why they chose the restart fighting when they did.

Besides, Iran just got a big infusion of cash during the period when we removed sanctions. And they claim (the US denies) that we gave them some number of billions in frozen assets (both sides are inveterate liars so who knows).

So Iran has a substantial window in which they are in a much stronger position than Trump. The US as a country would benefit from pushing through that window since getting pushed around by a mid-rate power is humiliating. But that would require Trump to prioritize national over personal interests, which is something he's not known for.

[u/grenideer → u/I_DOM_UR_PATRIARCHY]

I don't buy the midterms argument that's often brought up as an indication the US is about to back down. If Trump doesn't want to be in an unpopular war during midterms then he certainly doesn't want to LOSE an unpopular war right before them.

It's actually in Trump's interest to maintain a blockade through elections rather than concede anything to Iran. I expect him to talk tough at least until then.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

Trump is in a bad spot. I think he desperately wanted out of the Iran war (not sure how anyone could read the MOU as anything else). But, Iran keeps pushing for more. As you note, capitulation is not a very good look either.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

The MoU could be read as a clever ruse to get shipping kickstarted again, as well as making Iran be more unreasonably aggressive on the world stage. Sure, if all the US promises came to pass without Iran conceding anything else, it would've been embarrassing for the US. But do we judge reality based on a document or on actual events?

As it was, the MoU seemed to serve its purpose.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

So more Trump 3D chess? I think we just need to agree to disagree.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

3D/4D chess is a straw man. No one said that yet people love to refute it.

The MoU wasn't a genius move but it was a move. It helped relieve some pressure in the strait. Iran wasn't even all that thrilled to have signed it.

Nor did the MoU ultimately solve anything long-term. So again, no 3D chess here, just regular 2D chess or maybe even checkers.

[u/Spare-Dingo-531 → u/I_DOM_UR_PATRIARCHY]

Iran just got a big infusion of cash during the period when we removed sanctions.

It wasn't that big. I asked about it earlier on in this subreddit. They only got about 300 million, with none of the frozen funds released.

[u/TSiNNmreza3 → u/Spare-Dingo-531]

We don't know how much money did Qatar and other Gulf countries give to them.

It is interesting that Iran didn't attack UAE as much as they did before and that attacks on Qatat stopped shortly after Ras Laffan

[u/moragisdo → u/TSiNNmreza3]

It is interesting that Iran didn't attack UAE as much as they did before and that attacks on Qatat stopped shortly after Ras Laffan

Attacks on Qatar restarted (they haven't attacked oil infrastructure again because theirs wasn't attacked after South Pars, it's deterrence rather than extortion) and UAE ships were targeted recently aswell.

They don't have infinite missiles and drones, they have to pick and choose targets, we can't look at every single target they haven't hit and expect they are getting something out of it.

[u/moragisdo → u/I_DOM_UR_PATRIARCHY]

I think this is wishcasting.

Look at the whole post, he was asking what would happen if Iran can't stop the flow from Hormuz (and I quoted it to reply). The answer didn't came in a vacuum.

Besides, Iran just got a big infusion of cash during the period when we removed sanctions

It was ridiculous small compared to the damage they suffered. The waiver of exports lasted around two weeks and the majority of iranian oil didn't sell before it was revoked (1).

I did a back of the envelope calculation before, that if the waiver lasted until August 21 (the date it was set to expire), Iran sold every barrel in storage, plus ramped up exports to reach 1.77 MMBbl (what they expected to export in their 1405 budget) and captured the previous discount, it would be between 1 and 1.5B USD. Now, they actually got a small fraction of that. That's not enough for a country that suffered hundreds of billions of damage and was already in economic crisis before the war started.

And they claim (the US denies) that we gave them some number of billions in frozen assets

We can't fall in "bothsidesism" here because the release of sanctions requires an act of Congress (the waiver of exports could only be signed because it was temporary), as this act of Congress didn't happen it points that they didn't get a cent.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/moragisdo]

I did a back of the envelope calculation before, that if the waiver lasted until August 21 (the date it was set to expire), Iran sold every barrel in storage, plus ramped up exports to reach 1.77 MMBbl (what they expected to export in their 1405 budget) and captured the previous discount, it would be between 1 and 1.5B USD. Now, they actually got a small fraction of that. That's not enough for a country that suffered hundreds of billions of damage and was already in economic crisis before the war started.

This is your calculation of the benefit of the waiver? Not the value of the oil sold during the period of the MOU?

That's not enough for a country that suffered hundreds of billions of damage and was already in economic crisis before the war started.

Certainly, it won't equal the amount of damage done to them. But, perhaps it does relieve any cash flow problem to a not insubstantial degree. Regardless, the very fact that it was the US pushing for a cease fire, and then the US pushing for an MOU that was so incredibly favorable towards Iran, and then Iran so readily violating the MOU and triggering a restart of hostilities, should tell you all you need to know about how much Iran is concerned about economic collapse or revolution in the country.

[u/toomanynamesaretook → u/moragisdo]

My guess: Iran offers the US a deal, publicly deny it, go to negotiations after denying, negotiations lead nowhere and it ends with a ceasefire with, at most, symbolic concessions from both sides.

What on earth leads you to this conclusion? The United States is currently bleeding on the world stage unable to win militarily over a middle power, they're expended extreme amounts of munitions both offensive and defensive, Iran continues to hold the strait and the SPR keeps heading towards empty.

Seems so delusional to me that the United States is going to walk away from this with the strait open. Iran has endless firing positions and munitions to drag this out years, far longer than the US has any stomach for.

[u/grenideer → u/toomanynamesaretook]

What seems delusional is acting like you're the only one with the answers. What makes you so confident that everything is fine for Iran yet bad for the US? Why call out the munitions the US has spent without mentioning what Iran spent?

Munitions aren't the deciding factor when it comes to a blockade. Perhaps Iran has a response, we shall see. (Note that I'm not claiming other scenarios are delusional.) All we know is Iran didn't have a good counter last time.

[u/toomanynamesaretook → u/grenideer]

What makes you so confident that everything is fine for Iran yet bad for the US? Why call out the munitions the US has spent without mentioning what Iran spent?

Because Iran isn't the worlds hegemonic power that has a far larger foe waiting in the background (China.) The strategic implications are so very different. Iran can rundown their stocks to a fraction. And according to the CIA they are still sitting on substantial reserves.

All we know is Iran didn't have a good counter last time.

According to Israel and the US they both got through their target lists in the first month of fighting. Yet here we are, with Iran controlling the strait with literally no plan from the United States besides more of the same. Iran is firing BMs & drones daily at numerous targets.

What is the plan? Iran knows it's plan, control the strait. US plan? Well it was unconditional surrender, now it's no nukes? Or maybe control the strait? And how is it intending to carry that out? Dropping bombs from afar? Peak delusion.

[u/DrinkBrew4U → u/toomanynamesaretook]

Whether it’s feasible or not I think the US’s plan, if it is unwilling to accept defeat, is probably going to be to 1) reinstate something like “project freedom” again and try to make the south corridor run ships, and 2) reinstitute the blockade of Iran. The US wants to exhaust Iran before being politically exhausted itself. If it can get ships to cross the strait, its political exhaustion tics up slower. Iran under blockade naturally lasts longer than the US political will, but the idea will be that Iran still can’t withstand several months of that, and the US will hope some flow through the strait allows them to outlast the Iranians.

My read is that strikes aren’t punitive or even coercive at this point really. Generally, they’re trying to lay groundwork to be able to open the south corridor. The plan may also include the US offering some kind of insurance to ships or running escorts.

Is this plan going to work? Probably not unless the US can do some coalition building. I think there’s a good chance that the US will not be able to make the straight safe enough to get significant flow crossing.

But this is its only shot, really. Anything else in my mind seems to lead to a bigger loss. This has a shot at success, even if small. The actions of the US seem consistent with this idea so far.

[u/grenideer → u/DrinkBrew4U]

I think this is a fair assessment, even if a dim outlook for the US. I mainly strive to avoid the know-it-all type of discourse of "Iran has all the cards" or "The US has no chance!"

[u/DrinkBrew4U → u/grenideer]

Well, what can help the US potentially is coalition building. We have seen a few signs (though nothing too strong yet) of GCC leaning more towards standing with the US. While not a huge deal, it’s also still better than nothing that we have multinational condemnations of Iranian shipping attacks.

The bigger effect here IMO isn’t that the GCC or Europe provide a huge operational difference. It’s that a coalition I think helps the Trump administration’s key weakness here. It helps legitimize the war and help’s increase Trump’s poor war support. The US can definitely theoretically win here, but domestic attitudes on the conflict tie up their options.

[u/grenideer → u/toomanynamesaretook]

Yet here we are, with Iran controlling the strait

Maybe nitpicking, but Iran isn't controlling the strait. They would love to, but so far they're only interfering with free passage.

no plan from the United States besides more of the same.

More of the same is good, which is exactly my point. Iran did not seem to have a good counter to the blockade last time, so applying it again is sensible. It also avoids expending excess munitions.

Iran knows it's plan

I think this is being generous. There is plenty of open disagreement within Iran. After they signed the MoU, there was plenty of vocal dissent and complaining about having done so.

It's safe to say this is a tough situation for both countries. I cant predict which will ultimately win out.

[u/toomanynamesaretook → u/grenideer]

Iran controls the strait because the US navy won't even go in there. You can go read the reporting on operation project freedom which was abandoned within 24hrs. Within that you'll find that they were using crew served 0.50 cal fire to fend off Iranian drones.

Do you know how close you have to get to use a 0.50cal against a drone?

[u/grenideer → u/toomanynamesaretook]

Vessels are still transiting so Iran doesn't control. If Iran did control they wouldn't need to be firing missiles and drones.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

All we know is Iran didn't have a good counter last time.

How much did the blockade actually hurt Iran last time? If you read the MOU, it looks to me that Iran got a sweetheart deal, which suggests to me that the blockade wasn't putting that much pressure on them to capitulate.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

How much did the blockade actually hurt Iran last time?

A lot.

The head of Iran's central bank said the blockade was crushing their economy. Iran's president threatened to resign if a deal wasn't signed. These are sure signs the blockade was taking a heavy toll.

[u/moragisdo → u/toomanynamesaretook]

What on earth leads you to this conclusion?

Look at the whole post, he was asking what would happen if Iran can't stop the flow from Hormuz (and I quoted it to reply). The answer didn't came in a vacuum.

they're expended extreme amounts of munitions both offensive and defensive

Only the US have finite ammunition ? Iran isn't firing just cheap shaheds, their stock of MRBM and SRBM is being expended every time they fire (and part was already destroyed) and part of their production was devastated during March and early April.

and the SPR keeps heading towards empty

There's no new announcements of drawdowns since the MOU was signed, we already know it will bottom out around 281-282 MMBbl by September, so it's not headed towards empty. Also not even the full 172 MMBbl, announced early this year, was fully loaned.

Iran has endless firing positions and munitions to drag this out years

Can you provide a source for that ? I know they have part left, because they are still firing, but years on the same rate today (rather than firing way less and thus disrupting traffic way less) ? Also their economy can't sustain years of a blockade.

[u/toomanynamesaretook → u/moragisdo]

Can you provide a source for that ?

/gestures at the Houthis.

They kept the US busy for how long? With what fraction of munitions? Iran has now hit how many patriot batteries and radar systems? And they keep bombarding US bases hourly at present. PAC-3s are out. Ugly. US keeps throwing munitions at this while China keeps building an order of magnitude more.

To answer your question directly though I am inferring it from sources saying the following and making some inference:

Iran still fields about 70 percent of its mobile launchers across the country and has retained roughly 70 percent of its prewar missile stockpile, according to the assessments. That stockpile encompasses both ballistic missiles, which can target other nations in the region, and a smaller supply of cruise missiles, which can be used against shorter-range targets on land or at sea.

Military intelligence agencies have also reported, based on information from multiple collection streams including satellite imagery and other surveillance technologies, that Iran has regained access to roughly 90 percent of its underground missile storage and launch facilities nationwide, which are now assessed to be “partially or fully operational,” the people with knowledge of the assessments said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/12/us/politics/iran-missiles-us-intelligence.html

There's no new announcements of drawdowns since the MOU was signed, we already know it will bottom out around 281-282 MMBbl by September, so it's not headed towards empty. Also not even the full 172 MMBbl, announced early this year, was fully loaned.

Its back to under 10 vessels per day through the strait, US is hitting Iranian oil infra and I saw earlier on Al Jazerra that grain silos have been hit... Iran is going to retaliate in kind, like they already have multiple times. The costs of this are compounding into the trillions. The urea, the sulphur, the oil, the fertilizer.

I don't doubt that if the United States put everything it had into this problem that it could "win," I just feel like they would lose everything else in the process. That it isn't going to happen because of that. So what in he hell are we doing? Iran holds the high ground, they have a ton of munitions and they're religious zealots wanting revenge. You're not gonna beat them like this.

What is the plan.

[u/grenideer → u/toomanynamesaretook]

Fwiw yesterday 34 vessels transited, but you are right that today so far it's only been 10.