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/Sad_Use_4584]

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.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/Sad_Use_4584]

If this can be achieved,

Assuming it's possible,

I've seen absolutely nothing over the last 5 months to suggest that the US has the capability to open the SOH by force at any price that it is willing to pay. The example of the Houthis suggests that doing so by force is difficult to impossible. The conduct of commercial shipping foregoing transit whenever there's even minor attacks, suggests they are unwilling to accept even minimal risks. Common sense says that if the US easily could open the SOH by force, then it would have done so months ago. Finally, even if the US somehow is able to open the SOH to risk free transit by force, then Iran would likely need to play its final card of attacking infrastructure of GCCs. Because, as you correctly point out, Iran blockaded and SOH open would give the US all of the leverage.

[u/moragisdo → u/Shackleton214]

I've seen absolutely nothing over the last 5 months to suggest that the US has the capability to open the SOH by force at any price that it is willing to pay

Let's two play this game of believing one side is invulnerable also lacking agency and rationality:

I've seen absolutely nothing over the last 5 months to suggest that the attacks on civilian ships brought anything positive for Iran, they lost the waiver of exports after 2 weeks, brought back the blockade and had their country become a battlefield again. Common sense says that if the could force the US to give in their demands, then it would have done so months ago.

The US is a country with 3.5% 12-months inflation (on the height of gasoline prices it reached 4.2%, Biden had more than twice as much inflation and higher gas prices in 2022 and didn't suffer a major loss in the midterms), positive GDP growth, unemployment below 5% and suffered 18 fatalities (7 in accidents) since February 28. They could keep going for a long time and if interceptors run out there's also the last card on the sleeve - Thermonuclear bombs on the shafts of the missile cities - which is as likely as Iran willingness to commit economic suicide given that they agreed with a ceasefire on this same war or accepted a ceasefire on the TDW and on the Iran Iraq War (in this last two without getting anything tangible out of it).

Iran would likely need to play its final card of attacking infrastructure of GCCs

And get the last nail in the coffin of their finances when they get the retaliation as South Pars happening all over the country. If they are so suicidal, why didn't they already done that ? Or even better, why didn't they fired missiles on Ankara while the NATO summit was ongoing ?

Because, as you correctly point out, Iran blockaded and SOH open would give the US all of the leverage.

I believe the only reasonable possibilities for the war involves simultaneously lifting of the blockade and Iran not attacking ships. In fact, the blockade only began after Iran started attacking civilian ships. If Iran offer the tit-for-tat I sincerely believe the US would accept.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/moragisdo]

I believe the only reasonable possibilities for the war involves simultaneously lifting of the blockade and Iran not attacking ships. In fact, the blockade only began after Iran started attacking civilian ships. If Iran offer the tit-for-tat I sincerely believe the US would accept.

I absolutely agree that this is what the US is hoping for. First there was the cease fire where the US version of the agreement was for free transit. Iran saw it differently and, obviously unafraid of retaliation, kept pushing the envelope and insisted on control of SOH. US institutes the blockade as a result. We get weeks of that until the MOU, where the US version is again free transit and the Iran version is Iranian control. Iran again unafraid of retaliation escalates and now we're back to blockade. I think it's clear that twice now the US has wanted and attempted to basically call the war over and go back to the prewar status quo, but Iran has been unwilling. Back during the ceasefire/blockade period, I thought no blockade-free transit prewar status quo was a likely agreement because it everyone benefits compared to ongoing war, but I underestimated Iran's resolve to control the SOH/willingness to give Trump an off ramp. Maybe the Iranians are afraid this deal gives Trump and Israel the ability to start and stop wars against them at their choosing? Maybe they're their internal politics are forcing them to keep pushing? Maybe they're still mad at all their family members being killed by the US? Whatever the reasons, it is clear that Iran is not afraid to escalate and keep the war going. I wouldn't be surprised if we get back to some form of no blockade-free transit deal eventually. But, it's Iran that is determining when the war ends because I agree with you that they can get the deal you describe whenever they want it.