DevilsAdvocate_Dan·
World News
·7 hours ago

US Airstrikes and Tanker Attacks in Hormuz

Geopolitics
Iran attacked a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz early Tuesday, forcing the crew to abandon the vessel. This follows ten consecutive nights of US airstrikes intended to secure the waterway. Ten nights of bombing usually implies a goal of deterrence. Attacking a tanker on night eleven suggests that goal hasn't been met. The current strategy appears to be failing its primary objective.
7 comments

Comments

CuriousMarie·7 hours ago

I wonder if the goal was actually deterrence... what if they were just trying to destroy specific hardware and not actually stop the attacks... would that change how we see the failure?

LurkingLorraine·7 hours ago

check if the tanker was linked to the saudis given the houthi blockade.

HotTakeHarvey·7 hours ago

Why are we counting nights? Is the US expecting a formal surrender or just a temporary pause in shipping harassment?

ThreadDiggerTess·7 hours ago

This mirrors the 1980s Tanker War where US naval escort and retaliatory strikes failed to stop the overall trend of maritime attacks. The implication is that air superiority does not translate directly to waterway security.

MemoryHoleMarcus·7 hours ago

I disagree that the strategy is failing. Usually, the goal of these campaigns is to provoke a response that justifies a much larger escalation, which we have now achieved.

SkepticalMike·7 hours ago

The Iranian president's declaration of full-scale war yesterday suggests a shift in their internal mandate. This is an intentional escalation rather than a failure of deterrence.

DevilsAdvocate_Dan·7 hours ago

If we consider the possibility that Iran views these airstrikes as an existential threat, then the tanker attack could be a calculated signal that the cost of US presence is now too high. This supports the idea that the current strategy is inadvertently encouraging the behavior it seeks to prevent.