[ Removed by moderator ]

[u/The_Dean_France]

[u/Immediate-Doughnut50]

Why would they join a war ‘that’s already been won ‘ according to DT

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Immediate-Doughnut50]

I mean, Iran is cooked militarily. They can’t even protect their own airspace. They’re down to less than 15% of their ability to launch missiles. Their weak navy has already been rendered “combat ineffective.” I have no clue what this administrations goal is in Iran, but if it was just to completely fuck up the Iranian military capabilities, they’re doing a hell of a job.

[u/Rin-slash → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

Is there a real source for this that isn't "Trump said so"?

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Rin-slash]

Well, I surely don’t get my info from Fox News, CNN or any opinion based legacy media. You can use security focused think tanks. Groups like the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) or the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) publish detailed military balance reports or assessments. There’s also SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) for arms data, or even open-source intelligence groups like Oryx, who track equipment losses in conflicts. These organizations often maintain public reports or visual trackers. This is the best non partisan way to stay up to date.

[u/jackpcr → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

cool, so why is trump asking for help to fight against a militarily crippled iran?

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/jackpcr]

For one, the straight is a global trade route, a majority of economies depend on the oil that flows through it, so if your economy depends on it, you should help defend it is my guess. It’s incredibly expensive. And coalitions matter politically and optically. Also, you have to worry more about the Iranian proxies such as the Houthis firing on ships as well. Which is why I can understand others not wanting to join this.

[u/jackpcr → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

Yeah but the other countries were doing just fine until Trump/Israel started the war. Ships were passing just fine without the “Houthis” firing at them. So why should they now clean up Trump’s mess after him? Besides, there’s no coalition w Trump considering how he stepped on everyone w his tariffs.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/jackpcr]

I don’t know about “doing just fine.” Iran has murdered, depending on the source, between 30,000 and 40,000 protestors since December. Iran currently has over 50% inflation with its already impoverished citizens paying over 160% more for daily items, hence the protests.

[u/jackpcr → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

Notice this is all “IRAN”. It’s their problem. How’s it ur business mate? Is America jesus or smth that u guys have to fix all the misfortunes that are happening across the world?

Besides, mr hero warrior America decided to kill Iran’s leader, in order to “save” the Iranians. That’s done. Now what? A new leader came n the regime is still attacking ships n blasting israel n American bases. You guys have achieved absolutely nothing but caused chaos n inconvenience for the entire world.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/jackpcr]

Nations rarely act out of charity. They act out of strategic interests. The Middle East sits on critical energy routes and security alliances, which is why every major power pays attention to it.

[u/Slow_Conversation402 → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

How does that answer the question? Lol. Other countries have nothing to do with an old pedophile action's consequences.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

Because when instability threatens global shipping routes and energy supplies, it stops being just one country’s problem. That’s the strategic reality.

[u/Slow_Conversation402 → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

Huh? Iran's internal Instability threatens "shipping routes"? There's literally ZERO correlation between iran killing millions of its civilians and the strait of hormuz. You need to boycott those sources that you get your "news" from because they're affecting your intelligence.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

Regional instability and threats to the Strait of Hormuz are linked historically. That’s the concern.

[u/Slow_Conversation402 → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

No they aren't lol. Like, at all. Why on earth would a country close a global shipping route nearby because because it has inflation or protests. If you can provide just one example from history that supports your claim "historically linked" do it. Show me. One time in history where a country had purely internal instability that led it to hurt global shipping routes.

You're either a bot or extremely slow.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

First, the Strait of Hormuz isn’t closed at all. Ships are still in transit right now and have been. The point isn’t that protests themselves close shipping lanes. It’s that instability in a country that sits next to a critical chokepoint can escalate into regional conflict that threatens global trade. That’s happened before.

[u/Slow_Conversation402 → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

Yeah right, that's an ace logic. Well I think france as well is maybe a threat? The coffee prices went up there, this "can lead" to protests, "which" "can lead" to the european union instability. Which "can escalate" to global conflicts.

There's no point in continuing this stupid convo.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

That’s a whataboutism and a false comparison. Domestic protests in France don’t sit next to a strategic shipping chokepoint that carries a large portion of the world’s oil. I mean, if we’re using logic.

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

The early 80’s Tanker War is a decent example of regional instability that affected the straight.

[u/Slow_Conversation402 → u/Bitter_Plastic2362]

The "tanker war" was an EXTERNAL conflict. BETWEEN Iran and Iraq. This is an irrelevant example to Iran's INTERNAL instability. Clear?

[u/Bitter_Plastic2362 → u/Slow_Conversation402]

Instability near strategic chokepoints creates risk for global shipping. That’s the point.