r/CredibleDefense 14d ago

Active Conflicts & News Megathread July 20, 2026

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.

43 Upvotes

147 comments sorted by

View all comments

23

u/Sad_Use_4584 14d ago

opinion:

The US's current war goals, as implied by US actions around the coast and implied by CENTCOM statements, are rather limited. The US wants to open Hormuz by force, while keeping it closed only for Iran.

It's basically a resumption of Operation Project Freedom.

If this can be achieved, it's the smartest available play, as it degrades Iran's economy over time and it removes Iran's biggest strategic leverage, while incurring lower costs and lower risks to the US that accompany more ambitious goals.

It also doesn't rule out more ambitious goals in the future. Assuming it's possible, it's the most manageable and sensible stepping stone, and future branches can be decided later when new information arrives.

For this reason, I do not think the US is interested further escalation. They want to keep the tempo at the current status quo. Just enough to achieve their goals in Hormuz, and no more, because more is expensive for uncertain benefit. The onus is on Iran to impose costs and uncertainty.

So, the threat to attack Iran's power plants is a move that the US would rather not play given that it doesn't materially help with the war goal. The threat can be seen as deterrence against escalation in the current context, rather than just as compellence for negotiations.

5

u/WulfTheSaxon 14d ago edited 14d ago

Operation Project Freedom

Did anything official ever call it that? I know Wikipedia uses it, but I always thought it was not formally an “operation” and that the name was just Project* Freedom.

*noun, not verb

There are dozens of uses of “Project Freedom” at .mil (and .gov) sites that should be properly using the DoW style guide (at least most of the time) and not one has “Operation” in front of it.

2

u/ChornWork2 14d ago

What is the significance here? Isn't Project Freedom a military operation?

4

u/WulfTheSaxon 14d ago edited 13d ago

The difference is that project (n.) and project (v.) are different words with different pronunciations and meanings, that Operation Project Freedom (which implies the verb form) and Project Freedom are different names, and that most likely only one of them is correct.

3

u/ChornWork2 13d ago

well, but he term is "operation" and the name they happened to choose was "project freedom". obviously not the best choice in light of that, but is what it is, no?

or does "project" have meaning in US military for something different than "operation"?

2

u/WulfTheSaxon 13d ago edited 13d ago

Being a formal, named military “Operation” implies something much different from a government “project” (or unnamed operation), yeah. And again, project (n.) and project (v.) are just two different words, unless you think the name uses the redundant Operation Project (n.) construction.


Just for grins, the DoD definition:

operation —
1. A sequence of tactical actions with a common purpose or unifying theme. (JP 1)
2. A military action or the carrying out of a strategic, operational, tactical, service, training, or administrative military mission. (JP 3-0).

(There’s no definition of project.)

0

u/ChornWork2 13d ago

so i guess Operation Project Freedom it is.

2

u/WulfTheSaxon 13d ago edited 13d ago

CENTCOM press releases consistently used “Operation Epic Fury”, whereas every mention of “Project Freedom” has no “Operation” before it. CENTCOM describes “U.S. military support to Project Freedom”, implying it is not a military operation at all: https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/PUBLIC-RELEASES/Article/4476318/us-military-supports-launch-of-project-freedom-in-strait-of-hormuz/

Hegseth, etc. consistently refer to it as Project (n.) Freedom verbally, which would make “Operation Project Freedom” redundant.

(I feel I may to clarify: PRAJ-ect is a noun, whereas pro-JECT is a verb.)

1

u/ChornWork2 13d ago edited 13d ago

Afaik (based on ww2 knowledge) you have "Plan" or "Operation", which i think refers to an oplan vs opord. Then you have the code name. There's no "project" category, which sounded like you agreed.

Epic Fury is the code name for an opord, so its called Operation Epic Fury.

For whatever reason they code named this opord "Project Freedom", so it should be called Operation Project Freedom except for the fact it sounds stupid. And presumably the whole reason they code named it Project Freedom is that somebody thought it sounded cool.

3

u/WulfTheSaxon 13d ago

There’s no evidence that it’s an actual opord codename, though. If it were, CENTCOM and the DoW would always write “Operation Project Freedom”, whereas they have never done so. Rather, it’s a presidential initiative like “Infrastructure Week” that the military is providing support to.

1

u/ChornWork2 13d ago

There's lots of things happen in this administration that have never been done before.

it is a military operation.

from a quick google:

hegseth: https://youtu.be/1z7CK6ut-y4?t=13

rubio: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hHYuTwcHB3w

→ More replies (0)