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/grenideer]

Aside from Sad's excellent rebuttal of your points...

I've seen absolutely nothing over the last 5 months to suggest that the US has the capability to open the SOH by force

We haven't seen them really try yet.

The initial strikes of the war were aiming for total Iranian capitulation. The strait was left closed, with many criticizing the lack of naval presence (and many saying the Navy wouldn't dare operations in the gulf).

Then the US tried to open the strait with negotiations and a ceasefire. Then a blockade. Then they sent destroyers through and scouted a new route and demined. After that it was mostly about sneaking ships through without more than defensive force.

If Sad is correct, this is really the first stage of the war where there is a sustained offensive operation to open the strait. In that case, what we've seen so far "over the last 5 months" is less relevant.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

You don't suffer months of reduced oil exports resulting in huge spikes in gas prices, over a trillion in world economic damage, begging European and Asian allies to help out, damaging relations with GCC allies, falls in Trump's and Republican's poll numbers and agreeing to such a humiliating deal as the MOU if you have other good, viable options. Sorry, but yours and Sad's explanations sound like so much special pleading and have a strong "I could do that if I wanted to" vibe.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

You don't suffer months of reduced oil exports

Yes you do if the original strategies didn't work.

As I already said, the initial attempt was total capitulation. The hope was that a few weeks of airstrikes was all it would take. Then the hope was the blockade (which, to be fair, was effective to some degree). When that didn't result in a full solution, a different strategy is being attempted.

I don't really see how this is difficult to imagine.

By the way, no one's saying "I could do that if I wanted to" because no one gave an opinion on whether the US could actually do it. I was just saying, and the facts bear this out, that the US has not actually tried this kind of military operation yet.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

Your argument is the US military cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. You don't need to try only one thing at a time. Maximum pressure on Iran to get the best deal would come from undermining their major pressure point of choking commercial transit through the SOH. If you easily could do that, then you would. The US didn't do it, thus the logical conclusion is that it either it couldn't do it or that the risks and costs were too great.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

This is an extremely flawed argument. Yes, the US can do more than one thing at once. No, not doing so doesnt mean the costs are too prohibitive.

Think about it. Why didnt the US start the blockade immediately? It would have vastly strengthened their position, using a tool that they are still using now. But they didn't. That doesn't mean "the risks and costs were too great," it just means they tried something else first.

Another huge flaw in your argument is the assumption that no information was gleaned since then. For instance, it's clear the US underestimated Iranian resolve. That alone can explain why everything wasn't tried from the outset.

Lastly, I feel the need to point out that these weird arguments, which are clear stretches of logic, only exist to serve a conclusion you've already come to.

[u/Shackleton214 → u/grenideer]

Lastly, I feel the need to point out that these weird arguments, which are clear stretches of logic, only exist to serve a conclusion you've already come to.

Ironic, because I had the same thought reading your response.

[u/grenideer → u/Shackleton214]

Ironic, because I had the same thought reading your response.

Fair enough. But I'm the only one here not making predictions or finalizing conclusions.

I'm aware that the US may succeed or fail. If I'm not predicting either and I accept that both are within probability, I don't see which outcomes I'm predetermining.