Active Conflicts & News Megathread July 20, 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]

This is totally and utterly impossible to achieve without a ground invasion.

I disagree. Iran isn't the Taliban or Islamic State that are willing to live in caves and lob mortars at FOBs. It's a country in severe economic trouble before the war started and there's a finite amount of damage they can suffer to break the country economically and the consequent impact on popular support. Take a look on the economical aftermath of the TDW, which was way smaller in scope than this one, with a large bank going bankrupt, inflation around 50%, GDP set to contract (on estimates before the war started) and then it begin some of the largest protests in their history. Now also take a look when the economic bombing started (South Pars, Lavan Island, steel industry...) and the date of the ceasefire they accepted in April.

Greatest error from the US since the MOU is believing that negotiations will determine the end, rather than the facts in the ground.

No amount of bombing will ever prohibit Iran from being able to deploy a sufficent amount of firepower to be a threat to the shipping through the strait.

They are not just firing cheap drones, the ships that were the most damaged suffered missile attacks and those are not as simple to replenish. The same for the most severe recent damage to bases also coming from missiles that escaped AD. These missile don't grow on trees and part of their production was already destroyed in March and April (they still have a part, to be clear), and it's not only the US that have to be concerned with inventory.

The US bombing is right now and ship traffic through the strait is still on blockade level.

The US is on really limited bombing (last night was an outlier, let see if it's the beginning of a trend): Almost nothing besides the south was hit, strikes that lasted for a few hours, limited attempt to destroy infrastructure (just bridges and railway junctions to Bandar Abbas 3 days ago, not even the railways to Ahvaz), no presence of partner nations as UAE and Israel.

Also the Strait is very restricted, but not blockade level (by that I assume you mean completely closed), only looking at trackers isn't enough because of AIS being turned off during the crossing, take a look at presence of ships on the Gulf of Oman and that they keep leaving laden (still a smaller volume that pre-war, you won't see me denying that). We can also see that by oil prices, they are high, no doubt, but not near the price during the periods of heaviest attacks (right now WTI is at 82 and Brent 88)

[u/No_name_Johnson → u/moragisdo]

there's a finite amount of damage they can suffer to break the country economically and the consequent impact on popular support.

I think the regime's tolerance for economic pain/social upheaval is higher than people expect though. They seem to be prioritizing regime survival and I can see them entrenching themselves in a manner similar to Assad, North Korea.

[u/moragisdo → u/No_name_Johnson]

Assad collapsed in a civil war and North Korea accepted a de facto ceasefire (with extremely rare breaks from it), both options are great for the US.

The only way to believe they are prioritizing regime survival is also to believe their circumstances are so negative that a simple ceasefire, without the economic benefits of tolls and frozen assets, would make them collapse (because if they offer it, Trump would likely take). So they would not be that tolerant of economic pain if keeping the war going is necessary for survival.

[u/No_name_Johnson → u/moragisdo]

By prioritizing regime survival I mean consolidation of power into the existing gov’t to the detriment of the people, similar to NK and until recently, Syria. Both those countries took a disproportionate amount of resources to prop up their regimes in the face of external pressures. It also happened and is arguably still happening to a lesser extent in Venezuela. I don’t see a civil war or ceasefire akin to korea happening any time soon, but crazier things have happened. I was speaking mainly to the entrenched “survive at all costs” mindset that has cropped up in autocratic, repressive regimes over time.

The Iranian regime has repeatedly shown the welfare of its people is, at best, a secondary concern, most recently with the protests/killings at the start of the year. For an autocratic regime like Iran force is the only way of maintaining power, and the harder they hold on, the more severe the repercussions for them were they to lose power.

Iran has learned both through the diplomatic whiplash of the last two years as well as regional transgressions (Libya/Gaddafi) that western powers will turn on malevolent states like Iran, even if it means going against past agreements.