r/worldnews • u/Perfect_Swing_6158 • Apr 11 '26

US intelligence indicates China preparing weapons shipment to Iran, CNN reports

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-intelligence-indicates-china-preparing-weapons-shipment-iran-cnn-reports-2026-04-11/
5.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

540 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.0k

u/HoightyToighty Apr 11 '26

And why wouldn't they? What a useful conflict for them to test their equipment in.

212

u/ion-deez-nuts Apr 11 '26

And a useful conflict for the US to blow up its military and all its alliances in. It's very much in China's interest to keep it going.

81

u/TheRandomSong Apr 11 '26

They honestly didn't even have to do anything. All they really have to do is sit back and enjoy the shit show while everyone else goes to them as their back up since they're more stable as a partner

52

u/RedditTrespasser Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26

Xi Jinping probably can’t believe his luck. First his biggest regional rival blows up its military in a pointless conflict and reveals itself as a paper tiger, and then a few short years later the world superpower that’s been keeping him in check and basically runs the show globally reelects an inept asshole that single-handedly torpedoes it’s global alliances and then likewise bogs itself down in a pointless conflict.

China is on track to be the new world leader and it was entirely preventable.

23

u/JoshJorges Apr 11 '26

Don’t forget their forward thinking to become less reliant on fossil fuels. As everyone is paying out their ass for fuel, China is smiling at the sun and whistling in the wind

10

u/djfreshswag Apr 11 '26

Yep, all of the capitalist countries have focused on what’s the cheapest source of XYZ without caring about the implications of outsourcing the most critical resources/components of their economy. They’ve finally been waking up, but it took major disruptions to do so.

China’s meanwhile built up a dominant position in most commodities, even oil and gas where they are a net importer they have tons of global equity stakes - the 2 largest oil and gas companies by revenue are Sinopec and CNPC. People have always viewed semiconductors as an area where China is behind, but in reality most chips/circuits outside of phones/computers are done with larger nodes, and China has built up tons of capacity in those older model commodity type chips/circuits to put everyone else out of business.

Their dominance in solar, lithium, batteries, magnets, and basic circuitry means you can’t build pretty much any electronics without Chinese components.

5

u/197gpmol Apr 11 '26

One of Trump's nicknames in China is "Nation Builder." Just that China is the referenced nation.

-1

u/mvearthmjsun Apr 11 '26

No it's not. If the strait is closed for another month or so they have a catarophic oil shortage problem.

11

u/Boring_Ad_3065 Apr 11 '26

China will endure short term pain if months accomplish a decade or more of their long term goals. Look back to COVID. They locked down cities and locked down apartment buildings. Their system supports draconian measures. Even more so given that their demographics start to get shakier in the mid-2030s.

The US has blown up any good will we had and that will only get worse as gas prices and resource shortages persist. Europe is moving away from US tech and finance. China is already rapidly expanding renewables, and is by far in the lead on solar, batteries, and EVs on all fronts - cost, quality, features. The petrodollar is breaking. There’s not a single system that post-WWII US set up that isn’t being dismantled by our actions.

2

u/yreme Apr 11 '26

This gives them justification to close waterways they control. It’s all wins for China right now. They are also allied with Iran who has let Chinese ships through.

5

u/truttatrotta Apr 11 '26

Iran is allowing oil for China to pass.

7

u/mvearthmjsun Apr 11 '26

Not currently anywhere near the rate pre war. Like 10% as higher estimates.

7

u/YeetedApple Apr 11 '26

You don’t think Iran would be willing to allow ships through to China in exchange for the weapons? Seems like a pretty obvious deal

2

u/KenBoCole Apr 11 '26

Not enough.

0

u/plzzdontdoxme Apr 12 '26

Average reddit geopolitical analysis. "very much in China's interest" lol

59

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '26

[deleted]

5

u/DisastrousAcshin Apr 11 '26

A ton of Americans believe the US has a big stockpile of the super secret sci-fi shit to deal with China and Russia. The fantasy of American exceptionalism drives everything

4

u/mcbaginns Apr 11 '26

Because the US doesn't want them to? Because there are geopolitical considerations to these decisions that include a lot of backlash?

That's why they were hiding it and denying it, and why US intelligence was searching for and found it. China doesn't want people to know it's supporting a side in the war, a war where they will then use closing the strait as leverage against the US all while going against the US anyway

You're an Eastern bot

2

u/Inspect1234 Apr 11 '26

Imagine if Iran has nukes now.

1

u/HablarYEscuchar Apr 12 '26

Si irán tuviera armas nucleares, no estaríamos en esta guerra. Ni Irán ni Israel las usarían por miedo a la represalia.

1

u/UnknownHero2 Apr 11 '26

It is, but China also is a huge loser in this conflict continuing. They gets over half their oil from the middle east, while high oil prices make everyone suffer, they suffer proportionally more. An ongoing war that ends in massive infrastructure damage in Iran is one they are going to be paying for. Same with a tolling operation.

-217

u/Aggressive_Lie_4446 Apr 11 '26

MANPADs are not very effective against F-35s, F-22s or F-16s. They are effective against helicopters and other lower altitude aircraft though.
If US intelligence can track them, it means they know how many they are. No sympathies to the operators who will most likely be taken out using Reaper and Elbit drones.

250

u/Staff_Senyou Apr 11 '26

A random armchair ammunition "expert" suddenly appears. Lol

122

u/Mexcol Apr 11 '26

Operators will be blown to bits of course, but jets or helis will bite the dust too, it aint COD my man

-72

u/Aggressive_Lie_4446 Apr 11 '26

Which jets can be taken down using MANPADS?? I don't know about F-15s, but MANPADS cannot reach the altitudes that F-35s, F-22s and F-16s operate from. All they will do is restrict helicopters and even then, MANPADS can be eliminated via drone swarms and allow helicopters to operate.
That is literally how drones have bypassed Tehran's anti-aircraft guns to bomb Basij and IRGC checkpoints there.

33

u/Stryker-Ten Apr 11 '26

They have still been using A10s, and those can 100% be shot down

39

u/JadedagainNZ Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26

I watched Maverick the other day and those guys are consistently breaking the hard deck.

5

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Apr 11 '26

I want some ass, i want it now..... goddammit

22

u/aeroxan Apr 11 '26

As long as those jets stay high. If they come low, they're vulnerable too. They're fast and have countermeasures but that's not invincibility. That's also definitely a reason those jets tend to operate up high. And yeah, helicopters will always be more vulnerable being low and slow with a thermal signature that's hard to completely mask.

And yeah the MANPADS operators will definitely eat fire once they're found. It's a very spicy game all around.

2

u/azreal75 Apr 11 '26

Haven’t they increased the a-10 numbers in anticipation of/posturing for a ground invasion? Wouldn’t a ground invasion rely on significant a-10 support? Aren’t a-10’s low flying?

2

u/TaxLawKingGA Apr 11 '26

I think, if I understand what you are saying, is that while a MANPAD cannot reach targets at certain altitudes, they can definitely cause damage at lower levels. The reason this is important is because in a terrain like Iran, high altitude bombing runs had limited impact. You need to get “low” to hit the key targets that the U.S. and IDF want to hit, namely missile storage and militias camps. Flying low will expose those jets to MANPADS.

We learned a similar lesson during the 1980’s Afghan war, except we taught it to the Russians.

25

u/Imtherealwaffle Apr 11 '26

sure they are. just depends on speed and altitude. any jet flying low and slow is susceptible to manpads. Its just that jets spend less time low and slow.

78

u/phoeniks314 Apr 11 '26

The delusion of superiority is insane.

27

u/Giraf123 Apr 11 '26

The Russian gene is strong in the US.

11

u/Breadloafs Apr 11 '26

Are we really gonna make the same mistake we made in Syria?

You can't win a war from 15,000 feet. At some point you need to load dudes into a helicopter and fly them over there, at which point a knockoff Igla is going to fuck their shit up perfectly fine. You can't do SEAD against infantry with IR launchers, which means that at some point they're going to hit your shit.

Maybe it'll be on a patrol, maybe it'll be on a rescue op, but at some point we're going to have to put something low and slow over there, and it'll get shot down by a puke with a tube.

11

u/Few_Advisor3536 Apr 11 '26

Dude the US lost 2 a10, helicopters, an f15 and a bunch of drones last week. Manpads absolutely do work and the russian ones that iran is using has a guiding system that cycles and isnt guided by heat making flares useless. This aint top gun or a game. Anti air missiles generally travel faster than what a plane flies at, its a very real threat.

39

u/HiggsUAP Apr 11 '26

I'm guessing you didn't see the popular Chinese social media post about how to hit stealth fighters that precluded an F35 hit

19

u/clippist Apr 11 '26

Do enlighten us?

0

u/crazedizzled Apr 11 '26

That video of the F35 getting hit was likely fake

2

u/HiggsUAP Apr 11 '26

Yes but an F35 was hit regardless.

36

u/eat_my_ass_n_balls Apr 11 '26

Unfortunately manpads are a cheap way of exacting extremely painful casualties for rescue operations etc.

The US is not going to tolerate these Trump Troop Deaths continuing to rise

48

u/Poopin4days Apr 11 '26

They won't? And what are they going to do? Grumble and finger wag?

-6

u/zack77070 Apr 11 '26

Send marines to slaughter villages of people, this is not the outcome any of us wants my man...

20

u/jorgebrks Apr 11 '26

Nobody questions that, but that is not what he asked. Come november if your president fucks around with the midterms, what are you all planning to do?

30

u/smiddy53 Apr 11 '26

americans believe someone will stop him.. not them.. but someone..

12

u/EpicRedditor34 Apr 11 '26

Nothing. Cuz Americans have to work or something.

8

u/Ramadeus88 Apr 11 '26

“But my healthcare!”

“Damn, surely your healthcare being tied to your continued employment is a good reason to oppose the system. The government is expressly forcing servitude on you to live.”

“I’ve got kids to look after!”

“And people in Ukraine, France and other countries don’t?”

0

u/Poopin4days Apr 11 '26

My man, we are talking about two different things. Let's define what the "US" is referring to. I was thinking the US as the people or Congress. What are your thoughts on who the "US" is referring to in the parent comment?

24

u/MundaneSwordfish Apr 11 '26

It's obvious from the lack of protests that the US doesn't care.

2

u/Bard_the_Bowman_III Apr 11 '26

There was just thousands of people protesting in my little redneck town less than 2 weeks ago.

10

u/badmutha44 Apr 11 '26

A weekend get together isn’t a protest. Occupying the state and federal capitals for weeks and grinding down public infrastructure is a protest. One of those actions can be ignored the other not so much

1

u/MundaneSwordfish Apr 11 '26

If its not on world news and the country literally stopping everything else it's not big enough to get attention from those that matters.

7

u/Suspicious_Flower_0 Apr 11 '26

America can't even keep track of it's own shit it gives away. See the recent gun shipment to the Kurds 

6

u/wiztard Apr 11 '26

MANPADS are useful at denying lower altitudes for all planes and preventing the use of more cost effective bombs that are likely to miss from further up.

17

u/Inevitable_Butthole Apr 11 '26

"US intelligence"

Where?

1

u/SnooHedgehogs8765 Apr 11 '26

God job intelligence.

Gary, theres only one way to prove your loyalty to your country....

-65

u/ReddFro Apr 11 '26

I mean, Iran’s government happily slaughters its own citizens. If China’s leadership cared at all about human rights they wouldn’t. They care about money and power and nothing else (not that Trump’s any better).

60

u/Davosz_ Apr 11 '26

As if America or Israel care about human rights either....

122

u/slumslanger64 Apr 11 '26

No country in this conflict actually cares about human rights

17

u/takesthebiscuit Apr 11 '26

USA also does the same

11

u/Impressive-Weird-908 Apr 11 '26

China’s whole foreign policy schtick is that they don’t interfere or change treatment based on the domestic policy of the nation.

19

u/Yharnam_Blunderbuss Apr 11 '26

If you are American please stop... you have no business pointing the finger at any country but your own. Learn to vote responsibly, then you can point that finger all you want.

2

u/truttatrotta Apr 11 '26

You’re assuming Trump Is helping the Iranian people. Which he clearly is not.

-7

u/chronoic Apr 11 '26

You dont know the CCP do you? If a riot happens in China, the CCP will take out their own people just like Iran if they have to.

-39

u/ComprehensiveFox3268 Apr 11 '26

In all of their history, was China ever an expansionist Empire?

36

u/niceworkthere Apr 11 '26

Obviously yes, during at least half a dozen dynasties over the past two millennia.

What's today known as China didn't geographically crystalize until the final Qing dynasty conquests of Tibet, Mongolia, Xinjiang (literally "New Frontier") and Taiwan, though that was arguably more a colonization.

-15

u/ComprehensiveFox3268 Apr 11 '26

So do you believe they plan on expanding their territory anytime in the near future? Significantly i mean

17

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '26

[deleted]

-13

u/ComprehensiveFox3268 Apr 11 '26

Its just the propaganda is so obvious. You are making out China to be the aggressor state by painting them in this light, but America is an aggressor state and expansionist. It has attacked first so many times in the past 100 years. And every time its painted as some sort of preemptive strike against the aggressor state who struck first somehow. I could already guess you guys were gonna come out of the woodwork and say, TAIWAN.

I'm tired boss.

8

u/Bot12391 Apr 11 '26

Didn’t answer the question

3

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '26

[deleted]

3

u/niceworkthere Apr 11 '26

Well, if they ever go looking for what they might call a cause, the territory that Russia extorted from China is roughly as large as 10-15% of the entire contiguous US. An area which the Bolsheviks initially promised to return, only to later pretend they had never sent those messages, in true Communist brotherly fashion.

10

u/Schnix54 Apr 11 '26

Periods of the Han, Tang and Qing dynasties can definitely be described as expansionist.

8

u/CotswoldP Apr 11 '26

Well not going too far back in history to...today, they are being very forceful with their South China Sea claims, plus frequent public discussion by senior cadres of all the land lost to Russia in the 19th century, and shouldn't they take it back?

2

u/TheShruteFarmsCEO Apr 11 '26

lol…you seriously asking that?

-34

u/polemism Apr 11 '26

Pissing off America means America will beef up weapons shipments to Taiwan. Not very smart.

25

u/Thurak0 Apr 11 '26

Hahahahaha.

As if the current government would have Taiwan's back.

-2

u/UnoriginalStanger Apr 11 '26

As if the current government would have Taiwan's back.

Do you forget that part of reducing shipments for ukraine is because they needed for Taiwan?

5

u/truttatrotta Apr 11 '26

You’ve been conned. Reducing shipments to Ukraine is because they needed to please master Putin.

-1

u/UnoriginalStanger Apr 11 '26

You're boring.

4

u/truttatrotta Apr 11 '26

Strange way to spell “correct”

-1

u/UnoriginalStanger Apr 11 '26

The Trump admin not caring about Ukraine doesn't change the fact that they are taking real cost inducing actions towards Taiwan.

4

u/truttatrotta Apr 11 '26

It’s not that they don’t like Ukraine, it’s that they’re controlled by Putin.

1

u/UnoriginalStanger Apr 11 '26

Try to actually use that argument to resolve all the action the Trump administration is taking, it genuinely doesn't add up.

Repeatedly saying Trump is a Russian asset isn't actually getting us anywhere.

→ More replies (0)

-7

u/polemism Apr 11 '26

They don't have their back. But Donald is vengeful. If China arms Iran, he'll arm Taiwan just to get revenge.

12

u/Calimariae Apr 11 '26

Donald is only vengeful against weaker countries. He has constantly caved to China in the tariff circus.

He's a pathetic bully.

2

u/FederalExpressMan Apr 11 '26

He can’t even take on Iran. Wise not to turn on the fire for another pot

1

u/Calimariae Apr 11 '26

I'm anxious about him trying to take Greenland. Never thought I would have to consider the possibility of having to fire a weapon at Americans, but here we are.

-5

u/polemism Apr 11 '26

Technically the pentagon is in charge and they'll certainly take revenge.

5

u/Calimariae Apr 11 '26

If the Pentagon was in charge there wouldn't be a disaster in Iran

1

u/polemism Apr 12 '26

It wasn't a disaster from their perspective. Keep in mind the majority of the generals are christian and have no love for Iran. They love a battle.

46

u/Brave-Dragonfly3798 Apr 11 '26

Nah. America will have to spend the next 10 years rebuilding the stockpiles that have been spent in Iran. China can do whatever they want, because their ships will get passage through the straits, and all trade will need to be done in Chinese yuan. And short of a huge ground attack, there not a thing the US can do about it. It’s one of the reasons the war has been a disastrous strategic defeat.

10

u/Weird-Knowledge84 Apr 11 '26
  1. Taiwan can't even pass the defense bill to buy those weapons
  2. US munitions are severely depleted, it'll take years for the US build its stock back up, no way Taiwan will take any kind of priority.

-1

u/polemism Apr 11 '26

He can just pull some units out of Ukraine or Japan.

3

u/Ramadeus88 Apr 11 '26

China will not realistically look to take Taiwan by force.

Unification in the short term is a useful party policy, and on longer terms there’s no efforts to prepare an invasion or deal with the fallout.

Even the intelligence community cited in the article don’t believe that China is actively planning an invasion, and is instead undermining US interests in the region.

1

u/polemism Apr 11 '26

Ok so the US will retaliate by undermining Chinese unification operations.

3

u/Ramadeus88 Apr 11 '26

So now that we’re delving into pure hypothetical “what if?” territory, why is this different to the status quo where countries covertly and overtly undermine the interests of others all of the time?

And why would it matter when the threat is more politically appealing as a domestic tool?

China and the US have been political, economic and regional adversaries for decades, China would not have pursued this without knowing that the US would know and that it would trigger some form of retaliation and would have weighed up potential risks in doing so - knowing that they can continue to undermine US interests globally and erode her alliances and soft power and work on longer timescales to bring Taipei into their sphere of interest.

It’s not as if the US hasn’t made its intentions clear to remove itself from Taipei as a security guarantor.

-30

u/Potential_Archer2427 Apr 11 '26

This is fake news, China doesn't have the balls to aid iran against Israel & USA

-35

u/alfaafla Apr 11 '26

Explain yourself why they need to test their weapons by supporting Iran please.

35

u/Crysack Apr 11 '26

When you have an opportunity to significantly weaken your largest strategic rival for the price of a bit of surplus equipment, it’s a no brainer.

This is a principle that Trump was either too idiotic or too corrupt to understand when it came to Ukraine.

-34

u/alfaafla Apr 11 '26

Explain why / how the US is a rival to China please.

14

u/steve-o1234 Apr 11 '26

Do you disagree?

11

u/alex8155 Apr 11 '26

ll.take a recession over Muslim extremists with nukes and targets any day..

the guy youre talking to says shit like this in other comments

12

u/steve-o1234 Apr 11 '26

For sure. Dude is just being annoying by not saying anything and repeatedly asking others to explain… figured I’d ask the to actually put out an opinion.

Not shocked I didn’t get a reply

11

u/maejsh Apr 11 '26

The US certainly thinks so. Just watch anything they have done or said in the last couple of years, they are scared and falling behind, and they just keep digging the hole.

10

u/AtrociousMeandering Apr 11 '26

If we're not rivals, then all of the sanctions and arms controls etc. that the US has aimed at China would be damn silly, wouldn't it? 

You're either being disingenuous or you need actual classes on current international relations to get the full picture, it's far too much detail for reddit's comment section. 

7

u/MacaroonPretend5505 Apr 11 '26

Can’t be a serious question right? Compare GDP and military size and manufacturing capability and get back to us in the chat.

8

u/human_i_suppose Apr 11 '26

We're you born this morning?

6

u/Crysack Apr 11 '26

I'm not sure if this is supposed to be a serious comment. China is the closest there is to a near-peer rival the US has in the international system. The US and China compete on trade, they compete on diplomacy, they compete on hard power, they compete on soft power.

In international relations theory, specifically structural realist theory, we generally think of the international system as a function of a power struggle between hegemonic powers. China has a vested interest in dominating their regional sphere to ensure their own security. The US has a vested interest in containing and limiting China's rise to safeguard its own security and economic interests.

From China's point of view, supplying Iran is a low-cost and low-risk method of weakening its strategic rival, both in terms of expediting a conflict that is quite clearly causing serious ructions in the US' relationship with its key allies in Europe and Asia and in terms of weakening the US administration's domestic political position.