this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2026
202 points (97.6% liked)

News

36375 readers
2492 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

U.S. Navy could soon be escorting commercial ships through the Strait of Hormuz, where maritime traffic has effectively stopped due to the current conflict with Iran, according to President Donald Trump. Doing so would demand that American naval vessels transit through the Strait, shifting them away from other duties. More importantly, it would also mean putting them right in a super weapons engagement zone full of Iranian threats that could include cruise and ballistic missiles, one-way-attack drones, explosive-laden kamikaze boats, and naval mines.

“If necessary, the United States Navy will begin escorting tankers through the Strait of Hormuz, as soon as possible,” President Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social social media network.

“Effective IMMEDIATELY, I have ordered the United States Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to provide, at a very reasonable price, political risk insurance and guarantees for the Financial Security of ALL Maritime Trade, especially Energy, traveling through the Gulf,” he also wrote. “This will be available to all Shipping Lines.”

“No matter what, the United States will ensure the FREE FLOW of ENERGY to the WORLD. The United States’ ECONOMIC and MILITARY MIGHT is the GREATEST ON EARTH,” he added. “More actions to come.”

U.S. Central Command declined to comment when reached for more details. TWZ has also reached out to the White House.

...

This is not the first time that the United States has been faced with this predicament or decided to start escorting commercial vessels through the region as a result. The U.S. Navy did just this in the late 1980s during the Tanker War sideshow to the Iran-Iraq War. At the same time, that experience underscores the immense amount of resources such a campaign could require, as well as the risks.

At the peak of those operations, there were some 30 American warships escorting commercial vessels to and from the Persian Gulf. Aircraft, special operations forces, and other assets were also deployed in support. The risks to American service members, as well as the ships they were tasked to safeguard, were very real.

...

top 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Its also just obviously stupid.

It can't possibly reliably work.

We don't have enough interceptors to do that.

Our THAAD radar arrays that would track incoming high altitude missiles ... already got taken out by Iran.

https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/irgc-destroys-second-us-thaad-system-uae-radar-qatar-early-warning-iran-missile-dominance/

We'd have to do convoy escort formation kinda like fucking WW2, (or the more modern parellel would be the Tanker War of the 80s) and use our naval defense systems... to intercept anything incoming... which would run us out of that kind of ammo even faster...

... and also potentially just still would not work against very high altititude, very fast missiles...

... meaning that then after maybe a month or three of that, oops, we lost a fucking aircraft carrier.

Thats why nearly none of the ships have moved, despite this 'guarantee'.

See all those clusters of red and green dots?

That's everybody just parked in a holding pattern.

https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/home/centerx:56.8/centery:25.6/zoom:8

[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sal's What's going on with Shipping? Channel did a video that adds to your points, while covering other things that happened in between too.

We don't have the destroyers to so this, let alone the stocks to keep them full. Last time we tried something similar with the Houthi when we stood off and bring them down along the Red Sea we ran out.

The best we might be able to do is the 5 or so US flagged vessels. Apparently France is going to do the same for their vessels. All the rest of them are probably just going to wait for the War insurance to get sorted and then start running it again (like some of them are apparently).

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Good of you to link him, I watch his stuff regularly, and I guess was arguably just sort of badly summarizing / riffing off him, lol.

As the saying goes:

Ship happens.

[–] tomatolung@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ship be happen' now

I just watched his newest video and Sal's doing it daily right now. Not much new in broad substance, but details are developing.

I went back and looked twz reported 770 missiles expended over the 9 months of their Hohthi protection. This is all missiles, so it's unclear how much of this was offensive vs defensive, but:

Many of these weapons were used in direct defensive actions to protect commercial shipping and U.S. Navy and allied warships operating in and around the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. While there is no price on human life and even a drone packed with explosives could severely damage an American destroyer, putting it out of action for months and possibly injuring or killing members of its crew, it’s interesting to put a price tag on what these weapons might have cost. This is becoming an increasingly important issue as the U.S. evaluates its own stockpiles and what would be needed to sustain a conflict in the Pacific against a foe exponentially more powerful than the Houthis.

Without knowing the exact breakdown of the missiles and other munitions employed during the IKECSG’s recent deployment, it is impossible to put a dollar figure on all of the weapons expended. The unit price of a single Block V Tomahawk is $1.89 million or so, so launching 135 of those missiles would have cost the Navy $255,150,000.

So stockpiles, resupply, and production becomes a big issue, beyond the astronomical cost of this.

(All for the fucking ego of a Cheeto.)

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

(All for the fucking ego of a Cheeto.)

Cheeto's got an ego at least partially 'cuz he's the chosen instrument of God on earth.

Holy War ain't gonna fight itself:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-hosts-pastors-from-across-us-at-white-house-as-faith-leaders-pray-over-him/ar-AA1XCWcw

I think in the last 24 hrs, at least 5 prominent US political figures have just outright said this is a religious war, Mike Johnson, Lindsey Graham, etc.

Ya'll Qaeda, ya'll!

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 7 points 1 day ago

Makes the area dangerous, asks the people doing business there to pay for protection because it is now dangerous...

Man this sounds so familiar for some reason.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Sounds like an AI strategy.

Great Idea! Would you like me to write up a quick invasion plan for you?

[–] sturmblast@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Trump is a fucking idiot

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 66 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

US citizens can't get out of the middle east, but we gotta protect our oil.

[–] Bakkoda@lemmy.world 36 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Have we figured out yet how our oil got over there in the first place?

[–] Restaldt@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Well you see much like missiles the oil is where it is because it is not where it wasn't.

Hope that helps

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Article fails to highlight complete impotence towards Iran's impositions on Straits of Hormuz. Even if Iran could not see the traffic flowing, it can already reach with cheap drones, it is rumored to hold in the tens of thousands, targets that are farther than the ports the ships would load/unload from. While strikes on Israel are censored, they and ones in Gulf are still penetrating daily.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Iran used a floating drone to inflict sinkable (big hole in the hull at sea level) damage to an oil tanker today.

[–] wuffah@lemmy.world 30 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Don’t worry, this is an ordained holy war, so Jesus will protect those ships.

Jesus, take the wheel!

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Can't do: Jesus was picked up by ICE and deported.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why would Jesus return in the USA. He's already been murdered by Israel last year where he was labeled a "Hamas" operative while feeding the poor and the homeless.

It's like when Rick keeps getting cloned to the fascist dimensions, Jesus here thinking "Fuck when did this shit become the default"

[–] Upgrayedd1776@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

and little sweet baby Jesus, my favorite; has the measles in the tx facilities, we are hoping he keeps his eye sight

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Jesus, take the joy stick!

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

that is the plan. it’s straight “manufacturing consent” while he tries to make a gulf of tonkin lie

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 28 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I mean, no need to lie; Iran is absolutely going to shoot at any US navy ships in their backyard.

[–] HasturInYellow@lemmy.world 14 points 2 days ago

As they should, and are fully within their rights to do.

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 23 points 3 days ago

The spice must flow

[–] Bieren@lemmy.today 21 points 3 days ago (2 children)

He wants them in the cross hairs. He wants escalation.

[–] Graymouzer@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

The US is launching all the missiles and bombs at them. How do you escalate that? Nukes?

[–] parsizzle@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago

I'm getting the feeling he saw Roosevelt was elected for a third term during WWII and one of his yes men said he could totally replicate that third term...given the right circumstances 

[–] Jumi@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

We make you pay for a shitty solution for a problem we created ourselves

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

But it's a very reasonable fee! And a beautiful plan. The most beautiful, some people say.

Remember that if you don't pay I'll increase the tariffs on your no good, very bad countries that are acting un-americanly!

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Narrow water passage controlled by opposing faction, hmm? Ask the British about Dardanelles and see how it worked out for them. It doesn’t t need to be a complete closure; an occasional artillery barrage or rocket would suffice.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I am surprised they didnt have underwater mines to drop in on day 1.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Not sure if relevant but it’s deep through there - 60-100m.

I’m not a marine engineer but I think mines would need to be anchored. Might be cheaper to have drone boats hidden in every bend in the coastline.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

Yeah but the navigable channels are 60 or less. 40-60 meters doesn't seem ridiculous to me... But I am also not a marine engineer.

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Mines is something they used decades ago. Drones are just as effective, plus let friendly ships through.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yeah. Iran can just shoot at anything passing by with minimal risk. The only way to stop them would be to land troops as push them out, but even then you would have to push them back quite a bit to stop missiles from hitting the straight. And of course, landing troops is going to be bloody, very very bloody. Can the US afford it?

But don't worry, all those ships sunk by the Iranians can just be replaced by the shiny new Trump class battleships.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Trump class battleships

Fat, with blingy fake guns and engines installed the wrong way around so that they go faster backwards than forwards?

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip -1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They don't need to land troops. They can strike the launchers from the air.

[–] Kirp123@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Like they did with the Houthi? Didn't they bankrupt the only Israeli port on the Red Sea? And they weren't nearly as organized or prepared as the Iranians.

[–] andallthat@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Trump's plan... F**k's sake. Quick someone ask him about the ballroom before he starts again.

[–] fizzle@quokk.au 11 points 3 days ago

Ah yes, this genius is going to fix everything.

[–] TheWeirdestCunt@lemmy.today 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Why wouldn't the US navy be in the crosshairs anyway? If you start a war you don't get to pick which branch of your military gets attacked.

[–] voxthefox@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 days ago

Because they're typically out of range of Iranian missiles, this would change that.

[–] Tapirs_Are_AI_Slop@lemmy.org 5 points 2 days ago

US DFC gets its financing for a losing insurance plan from where?

It says they mobilize private capital... But it's a .gov entity.

[–] kokesh@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Do it tRump, it will be fun to watch