(credit to RomCom1989 for the title)
Image is of an Iranian soldier exulting in the launch of a ballistic missile aimed towards the imperialists.
short summary this week: US doing pretty bad and Iran doing pretty good all things considered, Strait of Hormuz is closed and will almost certainly remain so until the end of the war, Trump has no idea what to do, global economic crisis from strait closure is basically guaranteed at this point but who will ultimately benefit most and who will ultimately lose most is still up in the air.
longish summary is below in the spoiler tags
longish summary
While there are still major debates raging about how badly things are actually going right now and what the post-conflict map may look like, as we blaze past the two week mark on this conflict, it’s becoming ever more obvious to almost everybody involved that this war is not going according to plan, if there ever was one. US airstrikes are, from what I can best determine, still mostly done with relatively less powerful (but still very dangerous!) and much less plentiful standoff munitions launched from bombers, though certain border and coastal areas are being struck with more powerful and more plentiful short-range guided bombs. This indicates that Iranian air defense is still sufficiently functional throughout most of Iran that the kinds of true carpet bombing done against Korea and Vietnam in the past (and Gaza very recently) is still too risky, though their airspace is still very much under assault, as we appear to have images of small groups of Western fighters breaching relatively deep into the country. Under some kind of Iranian pressure (drones? missiles? speedboats?) one aircraft carrier has retreated to a thousand kilometers from Iran, hiding behind the mountains of Oman; the other is sitting in the Red Sea, rather pointedly out of range of Yemen. As such, the ranges that Western aircraft must travel to bombard Iran is increasing, which reduces their frequency and increases strain on maintenance and logistics in the medium and long term.
While there is tons to say about the current social, economic, and military state of Iran, I don’t think I have a reliable enough picture to give a good summary beyond “they aren’t close to defeat or regime change”. What has instead captured much of the world’s attention is the continuing blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which has inspired some of the most delusional statements I have seen so far in my life, which is sincerely a profound achievement. For those out of the loop: the strait is currently closed to all shipping except those going to very particular countries (I’ve seen China and Bangladesh mentioned, and apparently India is in the process of working something out and may succeed or fail). This is because most ships are not risking the trip due to the ~20 tankers and container ships that Iran has already struck and disabled in the strait and in the Persian Gulf. Additionally, the threat from Iran’s military to Navy ships is such that attempting to create a convoy to guide tankers through it is suicidal to both the Navy and merchant ships. Right now it cannot be done, and it very well might be the case that it could never be done, simply due to the combination of Iran’s naval forces (hundreds, perhaps thousands, of armed, specialized speedboats designed for exactly this purpose), their drones (in the tens of thousands), their torpedoes, and if all else fails, their naval mines.
The Western reaction to this has been so moronic that it has almost integer underflowed into being philosophical: what does it truly mean for a passage to be “closed”? Has Iran truly “closed” the strait, or is the risk of traversing it simply too high for these cowardly sailors (who, for some strange reason, seem to care about their “lives” and “families”)? How is it possible for Iran to have closed the strait if, according to the West, Iran’s military has been totally obliterated? All these questions and more plague the minds of those who cannot accept the now-proven fact that there are indeed military forces on this planet that the US Navy with all its aircraft carriers and destroyers and submarines cannot defeat; and one of those minds is, rather hilariously, Trump himself. His thrice-daily positive affirmations that Iran has been defeated are taking on an increasingly deranged and almost pitiable tone; the lamentations of a man who has finally found a situation where him merely stating that something is true is insufficient to change the situation one iota. Despite stating that some kind of naval compact or alliance is being established to protect shipping, every Western country so far - from the UK, to France, to Japan, to Australia - has publicly stated that they will not risk their ships to do so. All this as the continued blockade yet further guarantees a worldwide energy, production, transportation, and food crisis that will have major global ramifications for at least the rest of the decade and almost certainly beyond.
If the anti-imperialists play their cards right, the US could lose much from this crisis, and others, like China and Russia, could gain a great deal. To quote Nia Frome (co-founder of Red Sails): “An effective Marxist has to be enough of an accelerationist/pervert to treat the obviously bad things that are going to happen as the political opportunities they are.”
Last week’s thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.
Please check out the RedAtlas!
The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.
The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine
Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:
UNRWA reports on the Zionists’ destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.
English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.
Mirrors of Telegram channels that have been erased by Zionist censorship.
Russia-Ukraine Conflict
Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict
Sources:
Defense Politics Asia’s youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don’t want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it’s just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists’ side.
Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.
Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:
Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.
https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR’s former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR’s forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster’s telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a ‘propaganda tax’, if you don’t believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.
Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:
Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.


Based off of what, one plane getting hit? I’m sorry, this is the usual delusion from armchair warlord. The US had 50-60 aircraft hit by hostile fire 20 days into the Gulf War. That did not stop overflight then, why would one plane getting hit stop overflight now? After an F-117 was shot down, the US kept flying F-117s over Serbia. In Iran, they continued the B-1B bomber missions right afterwards.
We’ve got to stop taking armchair warlord slop seriously. He’s been wrong about almost everything. Same with simplicous, moon of Alabama, all these posters. Simplicous said this war was only going to last a few days. Moon of Alabama has been denying that the F-15Es got shot down by Kuwaiti forces, even when it’s on video. These guys hate of the US is blinding their analysis. They already look silly now that the war has lasted over three weeks, when they said only a few days of bombing is possible.
If people want to take them seriously, that’s fine. But they’re going to keep getting stuff wrong.
The US of today is not the US of the '90s. Its tolerance for casualties has been steadily going down with each year. Would the US of the '90s have preemptively evacuated nearly all their bases in the region?
Because the B-1s were probably lobbing JASSMs and were safe? Like, what is even this statement, these are completely different mission sets.
I… fundamentally disagree with this assertion? Like, citations please, I’ve found his analysis on the Ukraine war and military topics more broadly very insightful. Simplicius’s analysis has been useful too, although I haven’t kept up with him for a while (the military stuff anyway, his political takes are deranged).
You once dismissed a very insightful post of his about infantry quality which you seemingly had not even read, and proceeded to argue completely different points that what the post was talking about. Whose analysis is being blinded?
They said this… when? I don’t follow Simplicius or MoA, but I haven’t seen ArmchairWarlord give that particular take.
What alternative, better analysis sources can you present? I’m all ears.
I’ve had several arguments with you already where I challenged some points you were making, and you just ghosted me. Not that anyone has any obligation to respond to each comment they get, obviously, but why should I trust your analysis over theirs? Back during the 12-Day War, you insisted that Iran’s missiles just didn’t have the accuracy to carry out successful strikes - this war is showing that to have been completely wrong, and besides, footage released afterwards has shown that Israel did in fact take some bad hits, it was just censored at the time. I pointed out that damage to Israel was likely highly underestimated due to censorship, and what’d we get this war? ‘Our coverage is not truthful’: How Israel is censoring reporting on the war. You insisted that Israel was totally and completely penetrating Iranian airspace - I offered counter-arguments, and got nothing in response.
You’ve insisted, on numerous occasions, that American expenditure rates are somehow sustainable, which I just don’t understand, like we truly are starting from a base set of assumptions about the state of US stockpiles and industry so radically different that we’re talking past one another. You made the point once that “The US doesn’t care about traditional gun based artillery”, which I still remain baffled by.
In my experience, there is a lot of technical correct but ignoring large externalities and context which reshape the analysis that marmite posts. I also remember once seeing something about an aircraft’s aerodynamics and fly-by-wore that was wrong because it had some basic, like aerospace 201 assumptions still in it which you unlearn later.
Marmite makes very useful technical analysis, but I don’t think they are strongest at seeing technical things as subservient to other fields (political, economic, cultural, or even just human interaction). Very open to criticism on this, but it’s how I read most of the posts.
If I had to reply to every post on here that was inaccurate I’d have no life. It takes time and effort to do this, to work through why certain things are not what is stated. It’s simply not worth it with the amount of things that gets posted to the news mega from random x accounts and telegram, the aforementioned sources, random AI slop substacks, etc. If people want that kind of content, that’s fine. I’m not the thought police, and have no intention to be one. Disagreement is good and healthy. But I’m going to point out that they’re wrong when I see it and have time. It’s nothing personal, I’ve thanked you multiple times for posting insightful things, please don’t see it that way.
If you’re going to point out what’s wrong, point out what’s actually wrong, engage with the points being made and don’t vaguepost about how this guy was wrong at some other point. I appreciate your technical insights, like for the Chinook doing CSAR thing, sure, I’m not as familiar with flight altitude and speed limits, so sure, I defer to you on that one.
But I wouldn’t have reacted like this if you hadn’t already dismissed a point made by this guy and then not even bothered to engage with the actual point he was making. And you did it again! I didn’t even notice when I was writing the above comment since I was in a hurry, but his post did not at any point make the argument that they the US would stop overflights because of a plane being shot down. This is a broader argument about doctrine - about whether the USAF investment into stealth technology is actually panning out.
The “reliably penetrate” is the key point here - the F-35 can certainly succeed at penetrating hostile airspace, but at what success rate? How many F-35s are actually managing missions like that?
He’s not denying that F-35s are striking at stand-in distances, he’s arguing about proportions. You seem to approach these discussions as if we’re arguing the binary question of “are they flying deep into Iran or not”, and, well, there’s evidence of at least one plane doing that, so they are. But that’s not what we’re doing at all! It’s about ratios - have F-35s flown 100 sorties into Iran, or 1000, or 3000? What portion have been over the coastal regions, over Western, Central, or Eastern Iran? These distinctions matter.
What evidence do we have that a significant proportion of strikes are being executed by F-35 dropping cheaper munitions? An occasional F-35 is not evidence of a sustained campaign of F-35s. Based on what evidence could we argue that a significant portion of strikes are performed by F-35s penetrating deep into Iranian airspace? Not occasional strikes, a significant portion, which is what’s required for US doctrine to be vindicated. We do have evidence for lots of JASSMs having been lobbed, since strategic bombers are much more visible, and they fly off of airbases where people can manage to photograph their loadouts, and we also have evidence for Tomahawks. Do we have similar evidence for a high rate of F-35 strikes deep into Iran?
There’s been a handful of JDAM remains found in-and-around Tehran (https://xcancel.com/Doha1389960/status/2033260418206986398) - but as I’ve argued before, there’s a route that could be taken to bomb that region without needing to slice through half of Iran, so it doesn’t necessarily prove such severe degradation of air defense.
Your counterargument about B-1s flying afterwards has absolutely no bearing on this, and in fact could be interpreted to support his point of the strikes being mainly reliant on standoff munitions! (although there was at least the one time the B-1s were seen loaded with JDAMs - but those could well have been for strikes close to the coastline, and CENTCOM specifically talked at one point about hitting Iranian missile launching facilities in that region)
And as for simplicius’s comment, again, argue the point being made - what about
is actually incorrect? You’ve literally made that same argument! (about a different country, but the same geographic idea)
And going by @carpoftruth@hexbear.net’s comment, you seem to be putting words in MoA’s mouth too. And in the other post you made about the FPRI article, where I think you were actually arguing about the Economist article and not the actual FPRI one (admittedly, the Hexbear interface is a bit treacherous here, since links to comments work kind of weirdly in sub-threads, and usually don’t open the actual comment being linked but something higher up in the sub-thread)
Like, how am I supposed to trust you pointing out people being wrong like this? You can’t point out someone being wrong if you don’t even engage with what they’re actually saying! If you don’t have the time to read through, okay, that’s fair, modern digital war-watching presents a truly overwhelming flood of information, but you can just not say anything in that case instead of vagueposting about how they were wrong at some other point so whatever they’re saying right now can probably be dismissed too.
I continue reading your posts, even though I’ve found your argumentation unsatisfactory on previous occasions, since I still find you have insight to offer, even when we disagree. But this immediately dismissive attitude towards these other people just confuses me. I simply have not found their analysis to have actually been incorrect at anywhere near the rate you seem to insist it is.
As long as everyone is having fun then by all means have at it, but nevertheless I encourage both of you to stay cool and remember the spirit of the comm.
Both you and @MarmiteLover123@hexbear.net bring a lot to the table and your contributions are appreciated.
Respectfully, I don’t think you are correct about MoA in this. From them in January:
https://www.moonofalabama.org/2026/01/trump-wants-to-win-but-iran-is-no-easy-target.html
MoA has commented on trump only wanting to do a quick smash and grab, but I don’t recall them saying that the US couldn’t do a longer war militarily.
I haven’t found any live feed source more reliable than them on military matters honestly. I was hoping that AoR social media could be a substitute, but the collapse of Assad’s Syria sadly proved me wrong. The fact is that MSM journos and leftist commentators have a lower batting average than some Sinophobic Aussie who thinks every large explosion is set off by a tactical nuke. Obviously, there’s going to be military journals and blogs that are more knowledgeable than these cranks, but those military articles aren’t being published daily on top of being heavily slanted towards portraying Western imperialism in a favorable light, which will obviously affect their analysis on military matters. Reactionary malding about globohomo and trans people doesn’t necessarily have any impact on an analysis on whether the US has air superiority within Iranian airspace.
As of now, I use Aussie-crank-who-thinks-every-large-explosion-is-a-tactical-nuke et al for military analysis, AoR social media for political, cultural, and religious analysis, and Marxist commentators on economic analysis. It seems to give a pretty workable analysis that’s also pretty fast in reacting to immediate events.