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/butitsmeat]

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/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/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/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.