bonfarr said:

---

AgLA06 said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

It doesn't. APKWS Laser guided Hydra 70 rockets aren't for air defense, but cheap replacements for the hellfire that is used for armor or troop concentrations.

---

Not true, go back and read what I and others posted earlier. There is video of a US jet taking out a drone with APKWS. This is now one of the primary anti-drone weapons we are using.

---

Bonfarr is correct

How badly do we want to rely on other countries to keep it open? And imagine trying to coordinate a multi-national naval force to do the job. The UN of the sea …

AgLA06 said:

---

bonfarr said:

---

Not for taking out ballistic missiles but for drone defense it matters.

---

It doesn't. APKWS Laser guided Hydra 70 rockets aren't for air defense, but cheap replacements for the hellfire that is used for armor or troop concentrations.

---

They're used for shooting anything you point the laser at.

Ground to air APKWS for C-UAS (one of many solutions leveraging the APKWS)

https://www.l3harris.com/sites/default/files/2025-10/l3harris-vampire-sell-sheet.pdf

Agador Spartacus said:

---

I would imagine there are multiple countries that would be interested in sending naval assets to the Strait of Hormuz to keep it open. Not sure why it wasn't a part of the plan from the start.

---

This was played close to the chest, our allies in Asia rely heavily on middle eastern oil and they were not informed. Japan, for example, has very little oil reserves. They're cooked.

Lebanon arrests 12 Hezbohla members.
Gotta do more then that. Eradicate them.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/lebanese-army-reportedly-arrests-12-armed-members-of-hezbollah/

BBRex said:

---

How badly do we want to rely on other countries to keep it open? And imagine trying to coordinate a multi-national naval force to do the job. The UN of the sea …

---

We have been the police of the sea for a long time, our only ask has been for every country that matters to deal in USD. I don't think there was a plan that could have been hatched to keep the strait open.

Ok, just wondering if there is a downside to completely wiping out their military. Nukes, yes, but , and lots of you guys that do this as a living would know better than me, in the 80s we had the Iran-Iraq war. Last I heard, Al Qaeda was still in charge in Iraq. Is there any chance that Iraq might think woohoo, they have no defensive capabilities, USA has expended bukus of their armaments, lets get some more territory? Just an idle thought that wandered through my mind this morning.

Kurds?

carl spacklers hat said:

---

one MEEN Ag said:

---

My take is that you don't drop weapons yet. There's still more degradation of the leadership and military stockpiles to do.

If the objective is just regime change, you only drop creates of weapons when it becomes clear its going to be a protracted battle that needs ground forces. This means you're playing to stop some other faction from gaining hold and you are losing.

If you're playing to install a friendly government and it looks like you're going to succeed, no need to drop weapons to the masses. That just makes more chaos.

This thread points to America and Israel being able to pound leadership until there is no one left and they can walk their made man back into Iran. Then the future leader can decide how it wants their people equipped.

---

Along this same vein, how much of the IRGC needs to be degraded, too? I would think severely depleting their fighting capabilities would be a priority so any attempt at regime change doesn't devolve into a protracted civil war.

---

This is the real question. I think IRGC presents the biggest issue/concern as far as regime change goes. My understanding is that they are true fanatics, numerous (I've heard up to 100k strong), more spread out and well armed. We can take out the political/religious leaders (pretty much have), but if the IRGC won't surrender (as Trump has implored them to do) then they can essentially act as a well-armed insurgency that would be difficult to counter with air power alone.

My hope is that Israel/Massoud have another card up their sleeve to neutralize them in large numbers (like the pager op with Hez). Otherwise, they could pose a real challenge to any sort of peaceful regime change on the ground.

I know the Kurds are a formidable group, but can they hold off Al qaeda, especially since our previous admin left 80 billion of equipment there?

With air support from us/Israel, maybe

jagsdad said:

---

Ok, just wondering if there is a downside to completely wiping out their military. Nukes, yes, but , and lots of you guys that do this as a living would know better than me, in the 80s we had the Iran-Iraq war. Last I heard, Al Qaeda was still in charge in Iraq. Is there any chance that Iraq might think woohoo, they have no defensive capabilities, USA has expended bukus of their armaments, lets get some more territory? Just an idle thought that wandered through my mind this morning.

---

It's possible. Completely (or even mostly) wiping out their military and security apparatus will necessarily create a power vacuum, and it's an open question as to what will fill it. I think when we implemented de-Baathification in Iraq, it had some knock-on effects that weren't entirely benign, to say the least.

Could be Iraqis looking to get even, could be homegrown militias filling the gap, or could be US-backed leadership (e.g., the Shah's descendants). My money is on the Chinese working overtime to fill the gap in some way.

Agador Spartacus said:

---

I would imagine there are multiple countries that would be interested in sending naval assets to the Strait of Hormuz to keep it open. Not sure why it wasn't a part of the plan from the start.

---

The US wouldn't let them even if they wanted to. Too much risk for collateral damage. Hell, Kuwait has already shot down three of our jets by accident.

So, sounds like the mullahs will not be in charge anymore…they are all gone…

I think there are hundreds of them.

Just googled "how many mullahs in Iran?" answer = 180,000


!!!!!

You can what if to the point of inaction. That's why it reached this point

leftlane4passing said:

---

BBRex said:

---

How badly do we want to rely on other countries to keep it open? And imagine trying to coordinate a multi-national naval force to do the job. The UN of the sea …

---

We have been the police of the sea for a long time, our only ask has been for every country that matters to deal in USD. I don't think there was a plan that could have been hatched to keep the strait open.

---

I get ya. I was think more of in general.

Yeah, keeping the strait open right now is almost impossible because it isn't just a naval/seapower issue. Land-based missiles would be difficult to stop with no shipping damage.

Wearer of the Ring said:

---

Just googled "how many mullahs in Iran?" answer = 180,000


!!!!!

---

What passes as a 'mullah' in Iran is rather loose. Of those 180k, less than 500 matter

jagsdad said:

---

I know the Kurds are a formidable group, but can they hold off Al qaeda, especially since our previous admin left 80 billion of equipment there?

---

I would bet in his call with Kurdish leaders Trump promised them the US would support an independent Kurdish state in Iraq if they help defeat the IRGC. If that happens then you have a bit of a buffer but the Turks aren't going be happy though.

BBRex said:

---

leftlane4passing said:

---

BBRex said:

---

How badly do we want to rely on other countries to keep it open? And imagine trying to coordinate a multi-national naval force to do the job. The UN of the sea …

---

We have been the police of the sea for a long time, our only ask has been for every country that matters to deal in USD. I don't think there was a plan that could have been hatched to keep the strait open.

---

I get ya. I was think more of in general.

Yeah, keeping the strait open right now is almost impossible because it isn't just a naval/seapower issue. Land-based missiles would be difficult to stop with no shipping damage.

---

Also important to remember that the people working on those vessels are not military. I would not go to work if there was a threat I could be RPGed in my hatchback.

909Ag2006 said:

---

I think there are hundreds of them.

---

Well, there were hundreds of them. We have no idea how many are dead now. We know we've killed several of the main ones, but how many were killed alongside them that aren't important enough to mention? There is a distinct possibility even they don't know.

If the conditions are such that ships can't safely pass, it's effectively closed, no matter what anyone says. There's enough pressure to move oil that if passage was safe, ships would be sailing through.

BBRex said:

---

If the conditions are such that ships can't safely pass, it's effectively closed, no matter what anyone says. There's enough pressure to move oil that if passage was safe, ships would be sailing through.

---

Well, that doesn't jive with what everyone else is saying.

I listened to a call with General Richard Clarke and Sir Alex Younger today, regarding the latest on Iran, and they discussed the insurance issue as well.

Iran is now targeting the Gulf states.

"Increased targeting of Gulf Arab States' oil and natural gas production is part of a clear Iranian strategy to put pressure on those countries to, in turn, create complications for the United States. As the economic pressure builds, the idea is that these countries will seek to end the conflict, and/or that relations with the U.S. will sour. The prospect of major, long-term disruptions in energy exports from the region has global ramifications, as well, which could bring immense external pressure to end the conflict."

ARABS

Head Iranian responsible for Lebanon killed in Iran

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/top-irgc-commander-responsible-for-lebanon-killed-in-tehran-strike-idf/

They have already done that. The iranian capability to do that is rapidly being diminished

YouBet said:

---

Why do people keep harping on the Strait being closed due to attacks? It's open.

The problem is the insurance issue covered multiple times in this thread.

Y'all need to read the thread.

---

If ships won't sail because of insurance worried about attacks, it's effectively closed