There are mentions of them being fishing boats. Other pics show similar numbers and wakes in the same area from last year.

One has to also think that such a large 'mine laying operation' would have gone undetected. But ya never know...

Blockade (boarding and detention of Iranian related sanctioned shipping) would seem to be going global.

WAPO: https://archive.is/20260422165708/ht...-hormuz-mines/

Clearing Strait of Hormuz of mines could take 6 months, Pentagon tells Congress

The Pentagon assessment, shared in a classified briefing for lawmakers, suggests gasoline and oil prices could remain elevated through the midterm elections.

Salute!

don't ya just luv how the usual susects (WAPO, NYTIMES, etc.) always get briefed on the classified briefings before the unclassified version hits the other media ?

Gums sends...
P.S. unless maskirovka

WGOWS in the Gulf.
 

Sal’s report for today on the latest shipping news in the Gulfs and Strait originates from Washington DC sans Hawaiian Shirt but avec shirt and tie.

More decimation of the US armed forces today - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9ml02g5k7o

US Navy Secretary purged - no reason given

IIRC, a blockade of a nation is according to international law, an act of war…..

Ok.... and what we've seen the US/Israel do thus far, isn't?

Pentagon video:

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d6dfe94eda.png

​​​​​​​
​​​​​​​

My small brain tells me that there is only one solution to the current impasse, largely arrived-at through mis-judgement of the Iranian capabilities and resolve, where that solution fulfils POTUS’ aims and that is through the use of overwhelming military action. Not a welcome move, granted, but probably the only way to draw a line through where we are at the moment. Such action, if it were to be entirely successful, would probably involve ‘boots on the ground’ to some degree or other. Whether the US would have to go it alone is debatable, but POTUS seems to think that they need no help from historical allies. I hope I’m wrong, but I see no resolution on the present path.

The problem with this - indeed any resumption of air strikes etc - is that Iran will simply target the Gulf states' oil infrastructure if there is any possibility the regime's survival is in question.

I believe this stalemate will continue for the foreseeable until the Gulf states force the issue with an agreement with Iran.

International law, like any law, is about as good as its enforcement. (By the way, any number of embargoes have been conducted under the auspices of the UNSCRs over the past few decades, but they are careful - semantically - to not refer to them as blockades).
Most historical allies are not interested in putting boots on the ground in Iran: after the mess in Iraq, why would they be interested? As to "no resolution" - same as it ever was.
Within the past few years, various gulf states have made efforts to reach regional stability accords with Iran. Let's say that the results have been mixed, and the decision to strike various Gulf States - "if I bleed, you bleed" - by Iran has probably done some harm to those initiatives.

Iran is probably counting on the Arabs being, in general, gutless and themselves more willing to 'gut it out' until the situation changes.
I don't think they'd be wrong to assess the state of play that way.

The obvious solution is for the US to accept that Trump has made a catastrophic mistake for reasons that are still as clear as mud, and force him to stop before more lives are wasted and more billions go up in smoke. The participation of the former allies of the US in a ground war in Iran is not debatable, it is completely off the table.

I have a strange feeling this will pan out along the lines of a certain SMO except, this time, a significant chunk of the world is indirectly, and without any say in the matter, impacted. Still, not too surprising that fact given the similarities between the "top neddies" in the Kremlin and the WH when it comes to "Strategic Thinking" ........ or whatever they call it.

I see there's another change at the top with NAVSEC going. Given how limited the USN input has been to date, rather than lack of effective action from the Navy, I suspect it's more that Phelan has probably been suggesting that a "catastrophic mistake" has been made.

I guess the thing that is making me ponder right now is what the Gulf States are making of all of this in private? After all, they are, literally, on the Front Line so are stuck - militarily and financially - with this for the foreseeable.

According to Naval Warfare Publication 1-14M, a naval quarantine is a maritime sanction physically enforced in peacetime and defined by its measured nature and intent to deescalate the situation and return it to the status-quo. A blockade is “a belligerent action designed to prevent vessels of all states from entering or departing specified areas without at least subjecting themselves to a search for contraband goods.”

Naval Warfare Publication 1-14M: Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Naval Operations(Washington, DC: Headquarters, Department of the Navy, 2022), 4-10, 7-10.

Seems to be a moot point, the moment Israel started plinking the Ayatollah and his family, it was fair to assume that a state of war had arisen, whether declared, or otherwise. In the background, Iran has been skirting the edges of the protection of the NPT conventions since the first Trump administration tore up the agreement in a fit of pique in 2017/18. Whether Iran was compliant or not with the agreement that had been entered into depends on what news channel you may watch. Contrary to the comments from the WH, Iran had the same right to peaceful use of nuclear technology for medical, research and NPP use as every other signatory to the NPT.

A secondary blockade is a consequential act of war, but it follows the firing on internationally flagged commerce traffic by Iran, which itself follows the attack on Iran by Israel and the USA when the brain trust of those 2 countries decided that it was a great idea to go and start an excursion.

To put the concept of ground invasion of Iran into perspective, a quick read of the losses between Iran and Iraq in the 1980-88 war is interesting to have a look at. The impact on global economy as it is going will be substantial, and there is a modest risk that even remaining within the boundaries of the Persian Gulf, the consequences will come up towards Round 2.0's total costs and the indirect civilian losses from the potential impact of famine will start to make headline numbers. As this affects China directly, it is a push on the side of a balloon by a bunch of dunderheads of some historical significance. Within the gulf itself, the GCC may well become a victim of these circumstances, there is no love lost between the GCC and Iran, but there was a form of stability that functioned. Beyond that, the House of Saud has been in a state of crisis since pre Bin Laden times, and the numbers have not been looking good for their own stability for some time. Turns out gold plated toilet seats on hundreds of private jets doesn't increase the happiness of the punter in the street that happen to be the masses that are dispossessed from the cool dudes at the top that are dripping in trinkets. That Saudi can run a deficit is the 8th wonder of the world.

The irony of threatening the release of TNWs to stop another nation getting the very same seems to be lost in the moment.

Operationally, the US and Israel have fundamental weaknesses in their position in an air war, their regional bases are well within the striking capacity of Iran, which seems to have a fair capacity to attack remaining. That puts an inordinate load onto the AAR capabilities which are a mixed bag today, if the air assets are to be kept outside of ground striking distance. The Iranians have been getting good intel on USAF asset positions on the ramps, enough to be a major pain, and the skill and diplomacy of the WH has led to a position that finding a state other than Israel which is pretty well bracketed as far as aviation support goes, is starting to look lean on the ground. Apparently, being bellicose at allies while being obsequious with states undertaking war crimes is not without ramifications.

The off ramps do exist, but they seem to be jet blast bound notwithstanding the fact they are central to the use of air power to deal with the consequences of stupidity. The guys and girls that get hurt here are certainly any on the ground on either side, those that may be tasked by their CIC to go and make a fashion statement, in boots, boats or BUFFS, those Iranians that are the 90% of the population that are not impressed with their leaders but are not empowered to do anything about it, and the 3-4 billion others that have an existential threat to their food supply, which happens to include India and China along with various other nations. As to cost, ultimately the dismantling of 80 years of Bretton Woods functioning to some extent will end up costing more than that Great Depression and Round 2.0 combined, and not without some flow-on effects. Destabilising the polar world order has been on the wish list of certain parts of those in power for a long time, it didn't seem to be a good idea when first floated, and it isn't shaping up so well now either, but who knows; out of chaos comes opportunities, sometimes; if you survive.

Interesting tidbit of info, China is the only nuclear armed nation on the planet that has a stipulated, under no circumstances, no first release policy; they seem astute with their 5 year plans rather than 5 second internally inconsistent tweets.

What level of oversight in overseas missions do you think the Secretary of the Navy has?

Referring back to my #5501, again, I hope I’m wrong with my analysis of the way ahead. With all of the combined military experience (in so many aspects of the military) of the combined PPruners, what do you see as the way ahead? I would agree that the denial of a potential, viable, nuclear weapon probably has primacy. The freeing of the Strait of Hormuz from an Iranian stranglehold has to be an immediate objective. Can this be achieved through negotiations? If those negotiations are apparently successful, how would guarantees of continuing compliance be achieved?

Salute!
"So what's your solution?"
Well, the rest of the world has used economic and outright force off and on a few times to enforce the "international" agreements and such that so many here favor to slow down the acqusition of both the weapon and a good means of delivery. The rocket means is now there to reach out over most of Europe, and intercontinental missiles are not even a big step away. So we are all at their mercy with the bomb to back up their will. If they can wreck this much to the economies of so many who still rely on petroleum, and not just for transportation or power, then maybe we should do our best to keep them from acquiring the unltimate vengeance weapon.

For now, reducing humans' dependence upon oil, gas, coal, windmills and landscapes of solar panels to produce electricity is part of the solution to their closing the strait threats. So the irrational fear concerning nuclear power plants needs to be overcome and realize the fusion solution will be decades away ( as it has been for decades, heh heh). If we don't need the strait so much, that's a start. Just one big thing as a start, but beats learning how to duck and cover.

Gums muses...