[oraphalous]

I've heard analysis that a significant proportion of middle east water and food supply - in the form of desalination plants, and cargo through the Strait of Hormuz - is within reach of Iran's capabilities. The logic is that you use this to collapse middle eastern economies which blocks the flow of the investment from Arab states into AI infra that is propping up the US economy.

[OgsyedIE]

Iran is unlikely to target food and water without being further backed into a corner, since the escalation would mean reciprocal strikes (possibly independently by the KSA air force) on the Kharg and Bandar Abbas export terminals, which have so far avoided being targeted.

[oraphalous]

What corner is there left to be backed into when the the US is trying to assassinate you?

[OgsyedIE]

Oh, certainly the surviving leadership are backed into corners, but they are individual people.

The nation-state is not backed into a corner. For one thing, the west has refrained from using CBRN weapons on urban centres.

[vintermann]

Israel will not tolerate an economically developed or at all democratic Iran. They want Iran to be where Gaza is and Libanon is heading. It's not just the leaders who have nothing to lose.

[applicative]

You would think the hebrew population is just exhausted and hardened and driven a little crazy by several generations of 'deathtoisrael' 'deathtoisrael' drilled into the brains of millions of schoolchildren every year - each /year/'s school intake of impressionable brains is larger than the total world Jewish population. In the end the hebrew-speakers' response will not be simply rational as they are as much mentally affected as the iran citizenry, which is orders of magnitude larger.

It's typical the world community has put up with the naked genocidal intent of the Iran government - which is by now in a sense woven into its constitution and mystical-apocalyptic self-conception - as if it were a musical curious style -- as they build militias saying the same on every border, financing the bizarre suicide campaigns of early 2000s etc. to stop a 2 state solution and keep the party going.

With 'deathtoamerica deathtoamerica' noblesse oblige requires us to pretend it is merely comical. But the 'uppity, arrogant' jewish state is microscopic by comparison with titanic Persian Empire. The disproportion (80x) is far more extreme than even USSR or USA v Afghanistan or USA v Vietnam (30x.

[g8oz]

You're talking about Iran's genocidal intent as if Israel has not just finished actually committing one. And their supposed exhaustion from hate from their neighbors - The truth is they are gleefully hyper aggressive and hyper violent and ultra racist as well.

[Jensson]

Israel doesn't have the power to choose here though, Israel is far from strong enough to invade Iran so it doesn't matter what they think.

[tim-tday]

Nothing like impending death to make a man act like he has nothing to lose.

[JumpCrisscross]

> is within reach of Iran's capabilities

Analysts have been playing fast and loose with this phrase. Within reach assuming no air defenses and able to be struck are separate. I believe Iran could hit this infrastructure if it were undefended. It’s not practically able to due to air defenses. (Iran already targeted the small Gulf states’ airports. Given how much food they import by air, that’s an attempted blockade strike.)

[bluegatty]

Those nations do not have the ability to defend civilian infrastructure - it's the weak point we see in Ukraine.

Nobody does.

These are large regions, AA coverage is narrow, using F16s to shoot down Shaheds wears down fast.

If Iran has stockpiles, and the wherewithal for mission planning, they can steer them around AA and hit the 'back office' at will.

Those states also have no practice coordinating the in-between methods - they have only very expensive ways to stop Shaheds, and only jet fighters outside of AA coverage.

Now - hitting a lot of things like civic buildings etc. doesn't have much effect, but it depends how the civilians react and cope.

Some very specific things like energy desalinization are acute problems.

These are authoritarian states that can keep information dispersal minimal and the civilians will just have to 'eat it' - but only for so long.

The biggest damage will be to Straight of Hormuz - of those drones can be used to hit Oil Tankers ... if there are enough muntions, it will be bad

All of that said, China and India would be super duper upset about that, and Iran may depend on China for parts. They would have 'no friends' at that point.

So it's all plausible.

But it requires Iran to have capabilities.

The entire Middle East is lit up right now - and that puts US forces on a 'clock' - this is going to be an interesting form of attrition on all sides, not a good situation.

[JumpCrisscross]

> If Iran has stockpiles

And launchers.

> of those drones can be used to hit Oil Tankers ... if there are enough muntions, it will be bad

Not really. During the Iran-Iraq war hundreds of tankers were sunk, including in the Strait [1]. Iran's supposed 'nuclear' option was mining the Strait. But for whatever reason, they weren't able to or chose not to do that.

> this is going to be an interesting form of attrition on all sides

I'm sceptical of this read. With missiles, the launchers are the weak link. With drones, the factories. In the meantime, the U.S. gets to refine the anti-drone kit it's been working on (based on lessons from Ukraine and the attacks on the Houthis).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanker_war

[bluegatty]

The factories are the weak link to all munitions.

The Iran-Iraq war was decades ago, every weapon system has changed.

Iran has anti-ship missiles they can fire with impunity at tankers - and - as I said Shaheds.

Shaheds are not yet used against moving targets, but it's plausible they are ready for that.

If they are, then they can close the straits.

The reason they would not likely close the straits is that China is the primary recipient of that Oil, and it's a bit of a client state. China paradoxically provides parts for those drones. And they are the 'last remaining frenemy ally of Iran'.

So the nuclear option is very nuclear.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Iran-Iraq war was decades ago, every weapon system has changed

Not the point. The point is when the world was even more dependent on oil, hundreds of tankers getting potted was no more than a major nuisance.

> Iran has anti-ship missiles they can fire with impunity at tankers

But limited launchers. And if by “with impunity” you mean losing launchers every time they fire, sure.

> Shaheds are not yet used against moving targets, but it's plausible they are ready for that

This would be an issue.

> then they can close the straits

As you say, this gives everyone in the Gulf, EU, China and India a motivated reason to ensure the war ends.

Also, Iran closing the Strait (note: singular) is self siege. A legitimate American strategy could be just waiting them out while potting shit from the air.

> the nuclear option is very nuclear

There are no nuclear tactics on the table at this time.