Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28) |
Author: albaby1 SILVER
SHREWD
  😊 😞

Number: of 84362 
Subject: Re: The seized Iranian ship...
Date: 04/21/26 7:14 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 13
This last point just is beyond head scratching. Here's some numbers:

Why is that head scratching? The relevant factor isn't how many missiles get blocked, but how many get through. Iran was able to hit a fair number of targets, exactly by sending a ton of missiles and drones and overloading the systems so that a small number could get through. They haven't needed to make Bahrain a hole in the Gulf, any more than they needed to sink dozens of ships in the strait to close it. They just needed to demonstrate that they could overwhelm the defensive systems and cause massive damage to energy infrastructure if we pushed them to the brink, and that the U.S. systems couldn't completely stop their attacks. It is absolutely not in their interest to take that escalatory step at this time - just to demonstrate that they can, as a last resort, so that we don't go after their energy and domestic infrastructure.

That's what drove energy prices sky high. That's what's caused the U.S. to pivot to a ceasefire rather than bomb them back to the stone age. Because we can't stop them from blowing up the Gulf, if we take things too far. Same deterrent effect as having a nuke - you don't want to use it, just to have it so that you can't be destroyed without inflicting cataclysmic damage on your attacker.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to albaby1 here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (28) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community