BREAKING: The US military is preparing to board Iran-linked oil tankers and seize commercial ships in international waters, per WSJ.

Details include:

1. The report comes just hours after Iran has declared the Strait of Hormuz closed again

2. This move is intended to "step up…

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 18, 2026

The USS Gerald R. Ford has returned to the Middle East, entering the Red Sea escorted by two destroyers, according to Associated Press, citing U.S. defense officials.

The carrier had spent over a month at Souda Bay following a fire on March 12 in a laundry area.

Previously, the… pic.twitter.com/P773gGZbur

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 18, 2026

FLBear5630 said:

---

Assumptions or questions?

I know we are not allowed to ask when what he puts out doesn't match reality. He has no clothes and we are not allowed to comment. All is well, the war is over and Iran is agreeing to everything. Now, tell that to the people still on the AFB's in Saudi...

Or, you can pass it off as incoherent babble.

---

Your assumptions were about what Iran is doing and why. You can ask questions all you want.

Hard to know if Trump is full of BS, or the negotiating team has wires crossed.

To go from "they are giving us the uranium." to "they have agreed to nothing, are closing the strait, will not come to another round of negotiations, I guess we bomb them more" is a ridiculous turnaround. I expect it, but even for him, one of the craziest moments in any American war.

boognish_bear said:

---

The USS Gerald R. Ford has returned to the Middle East, entering the Red Sea escorted by two destroyers, according to Associated Press, citing U.S. defense officials.

The carrier had spent over a month at Souda Bay following a fire on March 12 in a laundry area.

Previously, the… pic.twitter.com/P773gGZbur

— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) April 18, 2026

---

Glad to see it. Need to go hard and fast if war it is.

It is the weekend, time for oil prices to shoot up for the long. Monday, we will have an "agreement in principle" and the Strati open. Oil will go down for the shorts.

It's official:

We are now witnessing the largest energy supply disruption in modern history.

Since the start of the Iran War on February 28th, more than 500 million ​barrels of crude and condensate have been removed form the global market.

In other words, global supply has now… pic.twitter.com/E2pcjPh8yB

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 18, 2026

I'm wondering if there are disagreements or fractures between the military and the political leadership in Iran.

A big problem with the war vs Iran is that their govt is fragmented. Who knows who really has the power or if anyone controls it all? It's possible that Trump has had contact with some who are willing to make real concessions while hardliners in the IRGC want still want a huge conflagration to usher in the 12th Imam.

BearFan33 said:

---

I'm wondering if there are disagreements or fractures between the military and the political leadership in Iran.

---

That's one point. The fact that the Iranians will not be at all likely to say in public what they agree to privately is something else.

Further, it's not too far a stretch to say there are some from the old regime who imagine they can hold on to power if they just hang on long enough. They lose everything if and when another group gains enough internal control to take over.

historian said:

---

A big problem with the war vs Iran is that their govt is fragmented. Who knows who really has the power or if anyone controls it all? It's possible that Trump has had contact with some who are willing to make real concessions while hardliners in the IRGC want still want a huge conflagration to usher in the 12th Imam.

---

It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied.

Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?

NY Times: Iran has about 40 percent of its prewar arsenal of drones, and has been digging out missile launchers and missiles during the ceasefire...it now has around 60 percent of its prewar level of launchers and could reclaim as much as 70 percent of its prewar missile arsenal.… pic.twitter.com/lGyo9ZMczE

— Steve Lookner (@lookner) April 18, 2026

By killing moderates who enforced Iran’s ban on building nuclear weapons & restrained the proxies, we’ve empowered the hardliners who are now far less likely to negotiate with us.

This course of action validates their stance that America is determined to destroy Iran and peace… https://t.co/SFR5OPvoOT

— Joe Kent (@joekent16jan19) April 18, 2026

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons while it loses men and face?

There are two rational possibilities:

1) Iran is selling this claim to garner some credibility in its negotiations; or

2) Iran is receiving drones and missiles from China, and wants to disguise the relationship as much as possible.

boognish_bear said:

---

It's official:

We are now witnessing the largest energy supply disruption in modern history.

Since the start of the Iran War on February 28th, more than 500 million ​barrels of crude and condensate have been removed form the global market.

In other words, global supply has now… pic.twitter.com/E2pcjPh8yB

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 18, 2026

---

We're walking the world economy off a cliff, and everyone will know who's responsible.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

I'm wondering if there are disagreements or fractures between the military and the political leadership in Iran.

---

That's one point. The fact that the Iranians will not be at all likely to say in public what they agree to privately is something else.

Further, it's not too far a stretch to say there are some from the old regime who imagine they can hold on to power if they just hang on long enough. They lose everything if and when another group gains enough internal control to take over.

---

Nobody is gaining internal control away in Iran. The Mullahs are literally thousand deep and they all believe the same thing. There is no reasonable voice in Iran ready to step in. They will keep this going for years. They believe they can take more hardship for longer than we can dish it out.

Porteroso: "It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied."

Sounds like you have never negotiated with an Iranian. The three things you can count on, in negotiating with an Iranian, are 1) they have no reason to hurry things, 2) they will not publicly confirm a private agreement, especially if denying it embarrasses their opponent, and 3) the people representing Iran right now, might well not be in power in the near future. They may also delay to gain some personal security for themselves along the way.

Porterosso: "Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?"

Now this is funny. Your side has accused the US of mindless brutality and warned of the cost of occupation. Yet you mock the idea of us negotiating a settlement which saves lives.

FLBear5630 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BearFan33 said:

---

I'm wondering if there are disagreements or fractures between the military and the political leadership in Iran.

---

That's one point. The fact that the Iranians will not be at all likely to say in public what they agree to privately is something else.

Further, it's not too far a stretch to say there are some from the old regime who imagine they can hold on to power if they just hang on long enough. They lose everything if and when another group gains enough internal control to take over.

---

Nobody is gaining internal control away in Iran. The Mullahs are literally thousand deep and they all believe the same thing. There is no reasonable voice in Iran ready to step in. They will keep this going for years. They believe they can take more hardship for longer than we can dish it out.

---

** sigh **

Stop and ask yourself where you got that assumption.

Now take a deep breath, and think.

Yes, there is certainly a culture in Iran which helped the Jihadists come to power in 1979, and which is desperate to cling to that power.

But you forget the Iran Spring of 2009; the Green Movement has not received much press outside the region, but it's never gone away, despite massive efforts by the Jihadists over the years to suppress it. The Greens support democratization, and while they have zero chance of restoring the Shah, there are perhaps half a million Iranians actively working to establish a secular government in Iran, and they put their lives on the line, literally, in protests against the Jihadist regime earlier this year.

Other nations in the region would support a secular Iran, but a framework needs to be built for that, and a lot depends on whether the US shows the support now which was denied those Iranian patriots under Obama.

Here are two good places to improve your knowledge on the matter:



The Arab Spring: Ideals of the Iranian Green Movement, Methods of the Iranian Revolution on JSTOR

Iran's 20252026 Uprisings and the Legitimacy Crisis of the Islamic Republic

Oldbear83 said:

---

And how many of those women are supporting the new leader, because their husbands are at the mercy of that regime and it's well-known commitment to human rights?

---

They do it willingly. It's just different in Islamic nations. Inexplicable at many levels, but people have been choosing and championing their own tyranny for centuries.

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons while it loses men and face?

There are two rational possibilities:

1) Iran is selling this claim to garner some credibility in its negotiations; or

2) Iran is receiving drones and missiles from China, and wants to disguise the relationship as much as possible.

---

Are you talking about the US intelligence report statistics as if they are from Iran?

The structure is not set up for what you want to happen to actually occur. I know you want Trump to have some plan and for this to be following a script directed by DC, it ain't. We van kill another 50 Mullahs and there will be hundreds left. The internal security force is 200k. There is no one that is in competition with the leadership for the role.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied."

Sounds like you have never negotiated with an Iranian. The three things you can count on, in negotiating with an Iranian, are 1) they have no reason to hurry things, 2) they will not publicly confirm a private agreement, especially if denying it embarrasses their opponent, and 3) the people representing Iran right now, might well not be in power in the near future. They may also delay to gain some personal security for themselves along the way.

Porterosso: "Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?"

Now this is funny. Your side has accused the US of mindless brutality and warned of the cost of occupation. Yet you mock the idea of us negotiating a settlement which saves lives.

---

You're off the mark, as usual. I seriously think we should only negotiate if we think the result will be honored. Does no good to negotiate with someone who cannot get the IRGC to stop shooting at oil tankers.

Also, Trump is famous for bringing up the cost of the Middle East wars. Stop the charade that it's all some Obama plot any time we talk about tax dollars at work, this "your side" drivel. Try to be better.

ATL Bear said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

And how many of those women are supporting the new leader, because their husbands are at the mercy of that regime and it's well-known commitment to human rights?

---

They do it willingly. It's just different in Islamic nations. Inexplicable at many levels, but people have been choosing and championing their own tyranny for centuries.

---

There's no real mystery about it. Given the choice, most people prefer their own tyranny to that of their conquerors.

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

" Are you talking about the US intelligence report statistics as if they are from Iran?"

The article is from the New York Times. No actual Intelligence agency is mentioned.

Pop quiz: Do you know which agency would actually have that kind of information?

Spoiler alert - the agency that would have that information would never reveal it to media.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "It's not seeming like that. Nobody is coming out and saying Trump's version is right. All the Iranians are saying he lied."

Sounds like you have never negotiated with an Iranian. The three things you can count on, in negotiating with an Iranian, are 1) they have no reason to hurry things, 2) they will not publicly confirm a private agreement, especially if denying it embarrasses their opponent, and 3) the people representing Iran right now, might well not be in power in the near future. They may also delay to gain some personal security for themselves along the way.

Porterosso: "Also say there is an Iranian, somewhere, agreeing to all this.... why is Trump negotiating with them if they have no power?"

Now this is funny. Your side has accused the US of mindless brutality and warned of the cost of occupation. Yet you mock the idea of us negotiating a settlement which saves lives.

---

You're off the mark, as usual. I seriously think we should only negotiate if we think the result will be honored. Does no good to negotiate with someone who cannot get the IRGC to stop shooting at oil tankers.

Also, Trump is famous for bringing up the cost of the Middle East wars. Stop the charade that it's all some Obama plot any time we talk about tax dollars at work, this "your side" drivel. Try to be better.

---

You're bickering because you know I am on the mark (as usual, in these matters).

I notice you can't admit when you get caught in your contradiction. Not a surprise, though.

well,, if it isn't Officer Outlier! Just checking this morning to see how your gold Jesus doing relative to the Straight. Oh, closed again. Love it when a plan comes together. Viva la Donnie, Viva la Cheeto!. Viva la Pedo!

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

For anyone considering this latest propaganda piece from Iran, just why would a nation at war hold back a significant portion of its munitions and weapons...?

---

Because history teaches that a long, asymmetrical war is a loss for the US, obviously.

---

You need to understand the difference between occupations and what we are doing now.

---

Said nothing about occupation. I'd be curious to know how launching your entire arsenal in the first few weeks of a war is ever a good idea, though.

---

You seriously think we exhausted our arsenal?

---

In some respects, but I thought we were talking about Iran.

---

You really have no idea how our logistics works. Let me help you out:

We don't have a shortage of weapons. Our main issue right now is selecting valid targets.

We can destroy buildings, utility stations, etc. but for all the noise that's not what we do or want.

One downside of taking out Iran's command structure, is that while Iran has no way for leaders to issue orders, it's now harder for us to track who is giving orders and take out those targets.

Also, the message is clear that we can destroy anything in Iran. What we need to do is identify a valid leadership with the ability to make a deal. There's good odds the men who went to Pakistan for Iran the first time, had no authority to actually make a deal.

That would explain the confusion, if the original group went along because they were told just to keep us talking.

---

I see no evidence for any of that, but in any case, Iran certainly isn't out of ammo.

---

Depends on what kind of 'ammo' you mean.

If you honestly believe that story, that Iran just found a bunch of functional drones and missiles in what even the NYT describes as "rubble", much less that an actual US intel agency would offer such a claim, well I have lakefront property in the Sinai I can sell you for a song.

---

No, I don't believe they have any need to do that.