US military 'setting conditions' to clear mines from Strait of Hormuz

Yeah, if you have a couple hundred million in ship and cargo costs to insure, the threat or possibility of mines is enough to not insure it through here.

Who would get a picture of one? Scuba diving journalists?

I remember when armchair generals at least to the second paragraph of articles, now they just read the headlines and think they're experts.

Oh and the part five to ten years from now when conservatives don’t want to pay for the healthcare of the soldiers injured during this utterly pointless masturbatory affair. That’s always a “support our troops” classic.

Don’t forget he’ll also invoice all of the ships transiting through the strait of Hormuz. Actually he’ll have Iran rename it to “The Golden Trump International Waterway” and collect the tolls on top of the tariffs and sanction fees.

Are there any mines that didn't self detonate?

Can do both 

The US killed them during peace negotiations, remember?

Nah...Mango Man\_Baby all the way...

Completely agree. Its multi layered and it doesn’t open the strait. But it is good news that hopefully the strait isnt a sea of death bombs. We never know what the real news out there is these days, but if a Us ship sailed in and out ok. Its better than nothing. Trump might try hard to get in on the toll booth action.

fair point...I meant more from sea drones though

The mines are actually on the Omani side which is the traditional navigation channel. Iran wants to change that change to the Iranian side 

Can't create much of a kill zone with half a dozen mines.

Eliminate the chance of any actually sinking. A mine hitting below the waterline does much more damage than a projectile hitting a ship that's very much equipped for fire suppression.

Oh, I’m fully aware. Since the massacre in January by islamic republic, there’s been a massive media push by the islamic republic to bolster a narrative change, and they’re capitalising on the international animosity towards Trump but conflating that sentiment with support for their own brutality. Some people are falling for it, some of it is bots on social media platforms, and some of it is people who genuinely support the terrorist islamic republic.

Yeah, there was a revolution that was co-opted by islamic terrorists who used that opportunity to install a theocratic dictatorship. But for the sake of argument, let’s say that 47 years ago people chose an islamic theocracy (which they didn’t). But let’s say they did. 47 years later, in 2026 when people are demanding a change to the regime, and in response they get indiscriminately gunned down in numbers surpassing 30,000 by the “government”, with the aid of other terrorist militias that are imported by said “government”. When at the end of the massacre, the “government” goes into hospitals and shoots patients receiving medical care, shoots doctors giving medical care, and rapes the nurses. Would you consider this as a legitimate and sovereign state? Or would you consider it as an occupying junta because it is staying in power through massacre DESPITE the Iranian peoples’ wants. I would argue that by the massacre, the islamic republic has forfeited its sovereign immunity. And even if you don’t take my personal view in mind; under Pillar 1 of R2P, a state’s legitimacy is conditional upon its protection of its population from crimes against humanity. I and many other Iranians argue that a regime that treats its own territory as a battlefield against its own people is no longer a government, but a hostile occupier.