r/CredibleDefense • u/AutoModerator • 4d ago
Active Conflicts & News Megathread October 13, 2026
The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.
Comment guidelines:
Please do:
Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,
Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,
Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,
Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,
Post only credible information
Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules
Please do not:
Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,
Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,
Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'
Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.
26
u/2positive 3d ago edited 3d ago
There's new data about starlink limitations and ballistic warnings.
Per Ukr air force spokesperson Ignat, there were no warnings for first wave of missiles. But after Zelensky late night post about it - there were warnings about next waves of missiles after that. Coincidently two very reliable channels that I use for missile warnings were both asleep or something which is about first time this happened ever idk. So it's not all bad, some warnings did come through.
However, per recent Sternenko update, today Starlink was limited even further, with operatable speed now below 60-70 kmh, so basically no more starlink for drones.
-32
u/Glideer 3d ago
I think the lack of ballistic missile warnings (if it is real) is criminal.
However, the restrictions on Starlink use might actually be beneficial. Lately, the official Kyiv has been showing disturbing signs of dissociation from reality - talk about being the most powerful military in Europe, diplomatic incidents with South Korea, picking and choosing EU accession criteria and many others.
The Zelensky government seems to have a severe case of delusion of grandeur. They need to remember that they are a 25 million people country with a GDP that is half of Romania's. Without their allies they couldn't continue resisting for more than six months.
They have forgotten that they are complately dependent on the USA and Europe, and the Starlink restriction might be a useful reminder.
1
u/Alexandros6 2d ago
As always if there is any perspective negative to Ukraine you will adopt it and ignore all others even at the expense of reality.
You could have taken a better main example for correcting behavior such as lack of internal corruption reforms which jeopardises some EU funding and association, but what lesson could Ukraine take from this last of a long line of insane Trump decisions? Mostly one, the US administration is a non rational/semi rational actor treat it as such, which is quite difficult when you don't know where the absurdity will veer.
11
u/_spec_tre 3d ago
...so, what can Ukraine do for it (beyond capitulating to US demands, which I doubt they would)? Are there other ways to apply pressure on Trump and Musk that could actually get them to do something?
13
u/D_Silva_21 3d ago
Hope the midterms go well and that it can maybe give them more support from within the US
10
u/Airf0rce 3d ago
Why do people think midterms will solve it? Even in best case Democrats will get a simple majority in house and senate, not enough to remove Trump, override his veto or anything that could actually force Trump to do anything he doesn't want to do.
If enough Republicans put their foot down on this, then maybe - but chance of that happening is very small.
9
u/LepezaVolB 3d ago
Ryan Evans of War on the Rocks fame wrote a short post about what are some options for Congress that he'd like to see them do when they come into session next month after midterms:
When Congress is back next month, they ought to: 1) Invoke Section 216 of the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA). This will allow Congress to investigate whether the waiver triggers Congressional review.
2) Bring RepBrianFitz's bill to kill the diesel waiver to the floor via a discharge petition.
3) Speedily pass the FY2027 Intelligence Authorization Act. The Senate bill has a provision that would require continued intelligence sharing with Ukraine until a ceasefire or peace agreement, permit restrictions only for specific national security reasons, and require Congress to be notified within 15 days of any restrictions and their consequences.
And Republican and Democratic members need to message they are united on this and it will be happening.
In particular the third point IMO would find almost unanimous support even with the current composition. Trump's hold on GOP is already significantly faltering (hence why Congress is out of session for a while now, they'd have to deal with a number of very harmful resolutions) and it'll only get weaker after midterms. Fact is, no matter what, he is constitutionally out of office on 20th of January 2029 and nothing he does will really change that fact which opens up a lot of space for dissent. IMO Democrats and Republicans will work on this since it so brazenly harms US' interests.
5
u/Airf0rce 3d ago
Trump's hold on GOP is already significantly faltering (hence why Congress is out of session for a while now, they'd have to deal with a number of very harmful resolutions) and it'll only get weaker after midterms. Fact is, no matter what, he is constitutionally out of office on 20th of January 2029 and nothing he does will really change that fact which opens up a lot of space for dissent.
I agree that it will be a crucial test of Republicans willingness to tell Trump no, I'm just not as optimistic that they actually will. There aren't that many friends of Ukraine left in the GOP, and even Trump's supposed heir JD Vance is likely even more hostile to Ukraine than Trump.
4
u/D_Silva_21 3d ago
It can only help. People just want to be optimistic
It definitely allows them to pressure trump way more. They can make deals or just block everything he does
18
u/2positive 3d ago
Putin will always have more arguments (billions of them) to persuade them so no. Just pray republicans will lose majority in both chambers.
55
u/2positive 4d ago edited 3d ago
Late evening yesterday Zelensky said key Kyiv energy object was struck by mass ballistic strike with no warning from partners (again). It’s 5:30 am I’m up because there were a dozen + ballistic strikes at Kyiv my lights were shutting down during the strikes so I assume the strikes were also at Kyiv energy objects. Ukrainians had like 30sec warning from local radars but no warning from partners about multiple waves of ballistic missiles. Rostov oil terminal seems to be burning in response. So we are back where we were a few days ago pre energy ceasefire but Russia has no diesel sanctions and Ukrainians get no ballistic launch warning.
P.S. 39 ballistic missiles against ukr energy facilities today per Zelensky
P.p.s. A lot of my recent comments criticizing last USA actions got shadow deleted on this sub. I still believe recent trumps action have nothing to do with diesel as Russia can not supply a meaningful amount but was a pre arranged agreement with Russia to do exactly what’s happening today. Goal is imo to help Russia do max damage to Ukraine while minimizing damage to Russia and normalizing removing sanctions to force Ukraine loss in war and accepting Russia’s terms. Trump and his cheerleaders clearly lied about yesterday lack of ballistic launch warning being some error. Unfortunately USA aligning with Russia (and therefore North Korea too) against Ukraine is a prohibited thought on this subreddit. If more of my comments get shadow deleted I will not be posting here any more so thanks for all the cool discussions in 5 years in advance in case that happens.
Ppps (sorry). Per Sternenko there are now new starlink usage limitations for Ukraine as well. Starlink now not working above 160 km/h above Ukrainian territory and this sudden change already jeopardized important missions, so another data point on the above.
-4
u/moragisdo 3d ago edited 3d ago
It was denied officially that intelligence was cut off, you are just espousing conspiracy theories, like your conspiracy post about a sub that disagree with you politically dropping posts after Yandex was attacked (which was during the middle of the night of the US, when there's less user posting normally) (1):
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga made this statement during the Warsaw Security Forum.
“You are probably wondering whether we are receiving intelligence from the American side. Yes, we are continuing this cooperation,” the foreign minister confirmed, according to a Ukrinform correspondent.
Also, good part of the sanctions are done by EO, if Trump wanted to cut them off he would just not renewed them (which needs to be done every year), but he did renew on 2025 and 2026.
Also the US is helping to do economic damage on Russia (2):
American intelligence shared with Kyiv has enabled strikes on important Russian energy assets including oil refineries far beyond the frontline, according to multiple Ukrainian and US officials familiar with the campaign.
The previously unreported support has intensified since midsummer and has been crucial in helping Ukraine carry out attacks that Joe Biden’s White House discouraged. Kyiv’s strikes have driven up energy prices in Russia and prompted Moscow to cut diesel exports and import fuel.
Similar news came in July 2026.
1
10
u/2positive 3d ago
This is old info. Warsaw security forum ended on October 13. I was talking about night 13-14th October. I posted new data above.
-5
u/moragisdo 3d ago edited 3d ago
24 hours ago. You are too committed to this idea and no facts will be able to change your mind. Now Ukraine have to deny this conspiracy theory every 24 hours.
10
u/2positive 3d ago edited 3d ago
Thank you for your valuable assessment of my thought process and belief updating, but it would sound more congruent from someone not pedaling one idea that Trump admin is doing everything right every day for six+ months despite all and any data and arguments.
25
u/Tasty_Perspective_32 3d ago
Additionally, Zelensky reported that Starlink was turned off during the active operation at a speed of 160 km/h. If you're not dumb, you can already see the pattern here. IMO, given Russia's continued battlefield losses, Russia decided to put pressure on Trump. They might have promised to help with negotiations over Iran or with the elections.
9
u/OlivencaENossa 3d ago
Ukraine has been utterly betrayed, and as it built up something close to an advantage its legs were cut out from under them.
This is nothing but the Phony War 2.0 or worse.
4
u/Tasty_Perspective_32 3d ago
If it weren't for Trump, this war would have already ended. His war with Iran was a lifeline for Russia, which it so desperately needed after China refused to finance its war economy. The moment oil prices go down, the war will end.
0
u/Grouchy-Classroom-26 3d ago
Late evening yesterday Zelensky said key Kyiv energy object was struck by mass ballistic strike with no warning from partners (again).
No offense but I think you are being hyperbolic. One of Saudi's main airport got bombed, 13 people died and they didn't have a siren go off. Plus, the Saudis aren't getting inundated with massive attacks on a daily basis. There were times when Israel also didn't provide early warnings during Iran's attacks, though very rare and they have probably the best IADS in the world. I personally believe that if there was any order of a shutdown in intelligence sharing, it would have leaked by now as it does within minutes of anything major happening.
21
u/2positive 3d ago edited 3d ago
I have more data about stats of missile warnings than other users here because thousands of missiles have been flying at me for 5 years. I’d say 1-2-3 times per year I heard ballistics strikes in Kyiv with no warning. We get a lot of extra warnings when no ballistic launch happen but Russia launches some aa missiles too. Trump saying Ukraine needs new leader while threatening to withdraw intelligence and a lot of waves with dozens of ballistics flying with no warning at the same time as introducing new starlink limitations is no coincidence.
0
u/Grouchy-Classroom-26 3d ago
I gave you two countries where it happened, one just 2 days ago, and you chose not to believe it. Early warning systems are not infallible. I have no idea or way of knowing what happened but I think it will come out either way.
2
3d ago edited 3d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Grouchy-Classroom-26 3d ago
You're right, Israel has had much longer than 5 years. The Houthis bombed that airport going back to 2018 and have been firing missiles at the Saudis since 2015. I think the truth will come out eventually.
9
u/Orange-skittles 3d ago
Checking your profile I can still see your comments although it could just be a lack of engagement as things have slowed around here lately. I would also check your comments as your last paragraph about President Trump and his goals seems to be entering the area of speculation so try to focus on the facts as they emerge for now.
As for your original comment I do find the idea that the U.S dropping early warning information as odd. Mostly because Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga said otherwise. Why lie in that situation when there would be so much to gain by confirming it? As it would prompt a large reaction in the U.S and E.U most likely leading to an increase in aid and support. But it does raise the question if any EU based Ballistic warning systems are operational. T.W.I.S.T.E.R and O.D.I.N have been going for over 6 years at this point so I'm assuming some functionality has been established as there have been some satellite launches I recall. Perhaps someone with more information can tell me if any of them are partially operational.
3
u/Bunny_Stats 3d ago
Checking your profile I can still see your comments
It used to be the case that you could see mod removed comments on a user's profile, but I believe reddit changed that within the last few years, so when a comment gets removed it's no longer visible in a user's profile either.
14
u/ChornWork2 3d ago edited 3d ago
Mostly because Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga said otherwise. Why lie in that situation when there would be so much to gain by confirming it?
There is a long line of foreign officials who have lied or misled in an effort to placate trump, or at least not antagonize him. Actually, not just foreign officials but that is another matter.
And we know what zelensky initially said. Dismissing that b/c of subsequent comments by foreign minister is questionable. Would put this in the time will tell category, but again hearing that ballistic missile attacks on kyiv happened with no warning is rather suspect.
9
u/2positive 3d ago
If I log out - I can’t see part of my own comments on the sub. Sybiha comment is old info and was vague, he said about intelligence sharing generally. After this Zelensky confirmed more strikes with no warning and after that I experienced some more myself.
30
u/TSiNNmreza3 4d ago
https://x.com/officialrnintel/status/2110091263118618787
🇾🇪🇸🇦⚡️- BREAKING: The Aramco headquarters in Dhahran, eastern Saudi Arabia, has been struck by an Ansarullah ballistic missile, according to sources cited by Reuters.
Rerum Novarum was told by locals that the facility had been struck and Reuters has now confirmed the report.
After todays attack on Houti oil infrastructure Houthis attacked HQ of Aramco.
Thing I'm thinking since Houti missile campaign is that they have so many missiles.
If Houthis have so many missiles, you could imagine how many does Iran have.
14
u/dr_sloan 4d ago
The Houthis ability to launch ballistic missiles in the long term is much more questionable since their supply routes to Iran have been heavily restricted for years.
6
u/Big-Station-2283 4d ago
They've mastered the art of smuggling advanced parts for their missiles from Iran on small shipping vessels. We make fun of the KSA and the UAE, but if it was that easy to cut off the Houthi supply, they would have done it long ago.
2
u/Autism_Sundae 3d ago
Arab militaries are made fun of because they're deliberately made incompetent by otherwise vulnerable autocratic regimes.
Even with dismantled missiles being split into multiple shiploads needing to be taken, its effectively trickling the flow of something being expended en masse quickly. Iran's continually degraded posture means the tap isn't being opened anytime soon.
6
u/AnimateDuckling 3d ago
>We make fun of the KSA and the UAE, but if it was that easy to cut off the Houthi supply, they would have done it long ago.
We make fun of them for being massively incompetent. It stands to reason they may not have done exactly that long ago.... because of the incompetence.
8
u/RKU69 4d ago
Its not clear to me how much they require supply from Iran to be able to sustain indefinite missile attacks. Iran has transferred a lot of technical know-how and advanced parts, but Yemen has its own domestic manufacturing and industrial capacity to build missiles.
10
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
They can't produce the electronics for the missiles. And I'm doubting they can produce the engines as well, we are not talking about Hamas' rockets that have to fly less than 100 km, Riyadh is 1100km from Sana'a, it's an MRBM.
29
u/username9909864 4d ago
Thing I'm thinking since Houti missile campaign is that they have so many missiles.
If Houthis have so many missiles, you could imagine how many does Iran have.
It's hard to extrapolate any actual data from a handful of attacks, especially because the attacks have been so spread out. The Houthies could have been sitting on these missiles for years and their stocks near depleted. We just don't know.
3
u/TSiNNmreza3 4d ago
It is not handful. It is daily threats to KSA, they striked Mocha for weeks before. Saw videos where, probably short range missiles, striked proKSA Yemeni gatherings.
17
u/username9909864 4d ago
Can we count them then? To me, it seems like it's about one successful attack each day for the last week, maybe two.
3
u/TSiNNmreza3 4d ago
Saudis have very tight OPSEC probably one of the best in world for first thing first. We don't see hits, even videos of missiles flying are very rare.
And lets remove success rate it doesn't matter at all, I'm talking just about sheer number of missiles that were shot by Houthis on KSA.
As I remember from KSA bombing airport which was moment of war restart.
Daily alerts in Narjan, multiple Jeddah airport stops, 2 or 3 hits on King Khalid Riyahd airport in like 4 days (beside Terminal 3, day before 3 people died too), hits on Jeddah refinery, hits on other Western KSA, alerts on airports in East KSA, I think some hits on Eastern fields (as other oil infrastructure mostly verified by FIRMS, some by Sentinel). And this goes for for 3 full months.
12
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
We don't see hits, even videos of missiles flying are very rare.
They published the video inside of the airport on a state tv of Saudi Arabia (1). They have denied before some hits that were later proven to have occurred, but we can't use it as a blank check to any argument about how many missiles are being used.
Daily alerts in Narjan, multiple Jeddah airport stops
Alert doesn't mean necessarily that a missile strike occurred. If they fly a few shaheds that are shot down by helicopter with APKWS, given the short range, it can trigger alerts.
Same for airport stops. It would be irresponsible to land a plane even if one shahed is being used and have to be shot down. If a bird can take down a engine, metal/fiberglass fragments being sucked by the engine are even worse.
13
u/LegSimo 4d ago
The Houthi did warn Aramco employees that they were not safe.
This implies a very high capability by the Houthis to back up their threats. Which in kind makes me wonder if Saudi Arabia can even deal with them on their own.
9
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
To be fair, they warned several spots and only hit one (similar to what Iran did earlier this year, later everyone only remember the ones they got right). It's just them "getting even" because KSA warned about evacuating their oil company today (and they only warned one, the one hit).
-1
u/TSiNNmreza3 4d ago
Which in kind makes me wonder if Saudi Arabia can even deal with them on their own.
Who can even deal with Iranian and AoR missile and drone threats. USSR as superpower that used war doctrine of AD ?
Yes Iran probably shot 1000 missiles, but you have now Houthis as good proxy but from one of the poorest countries and they are lobbing missiles daily and destroying daily infrastructure around KSA.
And you need to think that Iran is industrial powerhouse when you compare them to Yemen.
10
u/Positive_Box_7395 4d ago
Iran was only able to get a hit every few weeks on Israel.
So much so that they switched to cluster missiles which can't be intercepted, even if their damage is substantially lower, to actually have some success.
0
3
u/ChornWork2 4d ago
look at the distance from iran and size of israel.
look at the distance from yemen and size of KSA.
20
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
So, yesterday there were theories on social media (and a post here) about the US having cut intelligence sharing with Ukraine when the sirens didn't sound with a missile strike. It was denied officially today (1):
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga made this statement during the Warsaw Security Forum.
“You are probably wondering whether we are receiving intelligence from the American side. Yes, we are continuing this cooperation,” the foreign minister confirmed, according to a Ukrinform correspondent.
Which fits with news of September, that strikes by missiles sometimes are too fast for sirens to sound (2)
Previously, Ukraine's air-defence network and military intelligence gave residents a degree of predictability. Large-scale attacks could often be detected in advance, allowing people to spend the night in shelters, leave the city or take other precautions. But since the summer, Russia has changed its tactics.
It has relied less on aircraft, whose movements can be spotted ahead of time, and more on ballistic missiles that travel at tremendous speed and provide little warning. Air-raid alerts sometimes begin only moments before impact, or even simultaneously with the first explosions.
35
u/Tasty_Perspective_32 4d ago
According to reports from Ukraine, it has happened again for the second time. Some sources say the US blamed bad weather.
20
u/WulfTheSaxon 4d ago
I’m pretty sure that if anything were to be cut off it would just be the assistance for the refinery strikes themselves. I don’t think people realize that Trump expanded intelligence sharing to strikes deep into Russia last year, and that these strikes are being aided by that.
27
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
American intelligence shared with Kyiv has enabled strikes on important Russian energy assets including oil refineries far beyond the frontline, according to multiple Ukrainian and US officials familiar with the campaign.
The previously unreported support has intensified since midsummer and has been crucial in helping Ukraine carry out attacks that Joe Biden’s White House discouraged. Kyiv’s strikes have driven up energy prices in Russia and prompted Moscow to cut diesel exports and import fuel.
Also there are videos of AksaykardanDetal plant (produces mechanical components) in Russia, burning today, so maybe the US changed the focus of the intelligence being shared to other economic targets.
By the way, recently the US sanctioned again the Sberbank because their dealings with Iran, it would be smart for them to help Ukraine to kinetically sanction their data center in Balakovo when it's finished.
2
u/NordicUmlaut 3d ago
Your manifested pretty well with your last comment: https://x.com/NOELreports/status/2110236018016227565?s=20
42
u/Brushner 4d ago
The Gulf state economies are taking a beating.
Qatar's revenue fell 42 per cent in the first half of this year
LNG exports from Qatar, the world’s second-largest supplier before the conflict, has fallen sharply due to the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz as well attacks on its Ras Laffan complex.
QatarEnergy has said repairs will take three to five years, meaning even a safe reopening of Hormuz would restore access to only part of Qatar’s prewar supply. Gas prices have soared globally due to the disruption.
Economies across the Gulf are projected to contract by an average of 4.3 per cent for 2026, down 5.7 percentage points from April, driven by lower export volumes due to the Strait of Hormuz's closure, leading to significant losses in output and government revenue, the World Bank said last week.Qatar's economy is estimated to be hit the hardest among all countries in the region, facing a 20.9 per cent contraction this year, compared to 1.8 per cent growth in 2025, the World Bank said.
Qatar's first-quarter GDP falls 7% as Iran war weighs on energy production
Qatar's first-quarter gross domestic product fell to 170.8 billion riyals ($46.9 billion) from a revised 183.7 billion riyals in the same period of 2025.
Compared with the fourth quarter of 2025, economic output fell 7.9%.
Qatar has lost $24 billion in gas sales since the war began six months ago. Based on Reuters calculations using 2025 economic data, that amount is equivalent to nearly five months of national income. Before the conflict, Qatar supplied about one-fifth of the world's daily LNG.
UAE economy slows as war hits business activity
Real GDP, a measure of economic growth adjusted for inflation, fell a little more than 2 percent year on year to AED477 billion ($130 billion) in the quarter ended June 30
Non-oil activities contracted by 1.1 percent as the Middle East conflict disrupted travel and hit sectors including tourism, transport and trade
In April the IMF lowered its 2026 real GDP growth forecast for the Middle East and North Africa to 1.1 percent, nearly three percentage points below its pre-war projection. It expects a recovery in 2027.
What happens with another year of two of the status quo of escalation and de-escalations and the Houthi war heating up?
7
u/grenideer 4d ago
What happens with another year or two of the status quo
My understanding is that the status quo already greatly improved in the 3rd quarter, and we're now well into the 4th. It's obvious the beginning of the war was disastrous for the Gulf. We would need to see more up-to-date data to extrapolate current trends into a future outlook.
9
u/Professional-Bit1957 4d ago
This isn't really news. And the verb should be "have taken" rather than "taking" given the situation has been improving for these countries. Reports about the first half of the year or the first quarter, which is now 6 months behind us, aren't revealing anything new.
6
23
u/username9909864 4d ago
I imagine these countries still have massive sovereign wealth funds and can ride the storms easier than Iran.
Long term I see the pivot away from oil even faster. These countries will be forced to diversify.
2
u/FriedRiceistheBest 4d ago
Gulf states aren't used to hardship unlike Iran. They'll break faster than Iranians who has been enduring sanctions for decades.
5
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
Wrong, if they were resistant to it, a few months ago they would not had such widespread popular revolt that the regime resorted in shooting thousands on the streets to quell.
The impression that I get when talking about Iran's economy is that often times being in a downward spiral (their GDP was set to fall 6% and inflation to cross 70% before the war even started, which is worse than the 2008 crisis on the US when the GDP fell 4.3% and inflation was one digit) is seeing as being resilient. It's like seeing someone that just got run over by a bus and believing that this person, because they are still alive, they are capable to survive the next bus.
-3
u/FriedRiceistheBest 4d ago
There are tens of millions of Iranians that also didn't take part in the protest.
6
8
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
That's one of the most absurd arguments I've ever read here. There was also millions not protesting against Assad as well, how did that work for him ? Or how many soviets didn't protest against the regime ?
This argument is on the level of arguing to look on how many people a serial killer haven't killed.
8
u/username9909864 4d ago
I don't think that's a fair comparison. By most reports, Iran's entire economy is hurting. Gulf states might need to cut back on luxuries like air travel and filling their swimming pools.
1
u/FijiFanBotNotGay 3d ago
There’s more to it than economic numbers. Their economy may be hurting but the gulf states are more likely to experience an uprising compared to Iran by other “metrics” if you can even call it that considering it’s pure speculation on both sides. Some gulf states are demographically split. Also if one gulf state falls it will likely spread. So again that raises the odds comparatively
4
u/AnimateDuckling 3d ago
>are more likely to experience an uprising compared to Iran by other “metrics”
can you expand on what exactly you mean here? To me this claim seems very unfounded but I am interested why 'you' think so.
2
u/BulbusDumbledork 3d ago
arab spring 2.0
these gulf states are autocratic dictatorships with even worse democratic metrics than iran (iranians don't have electoral democracy, but they do vote for the president and other bodies who have limited influence over state policy)
thanks to the kafala system, many of them have skewed demographics where a migrant underclass does all the "work" supporting a minority population of actual nationals. while iran has a liberal immigration policy with porous borders and serious problems with secessionists/separatist groups, they have a massive population with tens of millions loyal to the state
to that end, even endogenous citizens of many of these gulf states are antagonistic to the government (take the shia plurality in bahrain for example, who were a majority population before being persecuted by the ruking family and maintain strong ties to iran).
the dissatisfaction and divisions in gulf states appears less severe than in iran for three reasons: first, heavy-handed security policy and police state tactics means there's little avenue for citizens to express their grievances. large scale protests break out in iran every few years because iran allows protests in the first place;
second, gulf states have booming economies so people can focus on living their lives and have more to lose from revolutionary protests - sanctions in iran are designed to increase pressure and dissatisfaction with the government by hurting the population and also exaggerating failures in state policy (e.g. iran could not invest billions in a failed boondoggle to create a mile long wall-shaped city made of glass in the middle of the desert without triggering mass demonstrations);
finally, both of the above as well as state policies means problems in iran are emphasized and highlighted in mainstream media more than issues in "moderate muslim states" (even calling them that - contrasted with the "leading state sponsor of terror" - is in service of protecting gulf regimes while advocating regime change in iran)
all of this presents the broad framework that makes gulf states more likely to experience an uprising than iran is. but that is a very narrow and specific assertion. it says nothing about how likely the iran war is to actually trigger another arab spring, because it's very unlikely to do so. it's also not very useful in assessing how likely iran is to experience a successful revolution, or how much success an arab uprising would have once it's started. finally, this isn't trying to paint iran in a positive light, it's to highlight how the gulf states are worse than iran in many ways.
overall its a valid statement while also being largely irrelevant outside of highlighting the increased pressure on gulf states to return to a state of prosperous normalcy to keep all these factors at bay, since things would rapidly spiral if the social contract is voided for too long
0
u/FijiFanBotNotGay 3d ago
Well any argument either for or against this is hand waivey by nature but first and foremost Iran has a strong national identity tracing back thousands of years and it is shared by the numerous ethnic groups to one extent or another
But I mean compare this to other countries in the area like Iraq and Syria for the Arab South Asian split and certain gcc’s especially ones like Bahrain but all rule over a substantial foreign worker population. There’s not nearly as strong of a national heritage though. The gulf states were conjured together in the last 100 years
-3
u/FriedRiceistheBest 4d ago
A poor person can be poorer and it wouldn't be much of a change for them. Significant difference for a rich person slowly becoming poor and their lifestyle slowly degrading.
11
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
If you get too poor there won't be food on the table (good read about the food prices compared to wages there), there's only so much you can adapt. We have a trove of historical records about food prices fueling popular revolt and often triggering revolutions.
3
u/username9909864 4d ago
Both sides are getting degraded, therefore it depends on the relativity of the degradation as well as the speed. And perhaps the minimum point in which a society fights back against those factors cause they have nothing left to loose.
7
12
u/Skeptical0ptimist 4d ago
> diversify [their economy]
Or diversify the methods of their oil shipment. Pipelines, canals, hardened tankers, etc.
17
u/Emotional_Goal9525 4d ago
Which is hopeless task. Gulf states are losing money on everything they do apart from selling oil. The gulf states will go back being deserts when the oil revenue dries.
7
u/Shackleton214 4d ago
Iraq presumably is the bigger concern for the economic damage from the war leading to political instability, given their lack of financial reserves compared to countries like Qatar and Kuwait.
21
u/Lighthouse_seek 4d ago
They had diversification plans. Unfortunately all their diversification strategies hinged on the states being stable oases in a dangerous neighborhood.
The playbook (for the uae at least) was to have theme parks, shipping, financial services anchored by their massive airlines.
43
u/D_Silva_21 4d ago
Wasn't sure if I had seen this report on the sub yet
"Russia had more than 50,000 casualties in Ukraine last month, with as many as 28,000 personnel killed — vastly more than losses by Ukrainian forces, according to a senior NATO military official.
The Russian military has been trying to make offensive gains in Ukraine, sending troops into “kill zones” rife with armed drones, land mines, artillery fire and other defenses, the official said. Ukrainian forces suffered about 5,000 casualties in the same period, said the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.
That has intensified the stakes for Moscow at a critical time, as deep aerial strikes by Ukraine destroy oil refineries and data centers, and a ground offensive has recaptured more than 125 square kilometers of territory."
If we believe these numbers to be even roughly correct then the last couple of months have been quite terrible for Russia. They are not making gains and they are losing more troops than ever before I believe. The only positive for Russia is the jet powered drones and ballistic missiles advantage they currently have
25
u/moragisdo 4d ago edited 4d ago
I'm a bit skeptical about these figures, if the officer is correct that would be a 10:1 casualty ratio in favor of Ukraine, which is just too one sided for how close this conflict is. Even if the journalist misheard and it's 5000 fatalities instead that would still be wildly advantageous for Ukraine.
39
u/rng12345678 4d ago
which is just too one sided for how close this conflict is
What makes you say that? This conflict consists of one side primarily sitting in highly dispersed, prepared underground positions and engaging primarily through the use of remotely operated precision fires - while the other side sends infantry forward in small groups over open fields to be picked off by said precision fires day in, day out. The Ukrainians primarily take casualties during resupply, rotation, or when a position is entirely cut off and forced to attempt a withdrawal. The Russians simply use tactics that accept heavy casualties as a constant of life.
16
u/Alexandros6 4d ago
How 10:1? seems extremly unlikely Ukrainian casualties are 5k a month, that simply doesn't fit either the Open source, leaks or the manpower constraints. Casualty numbers are tricky but I think we can agree Ukraine is over the 5k casualties monthly
6
u/rng12345678 4d ago
You say it doesn't fit, but can you cite specific information sources that make you disbelieve this figure? There is a definite disparity in the amount of visually confirmed casualty data floating around between the sides.
1
u/Alexandros6 4d ago
I mean the disparity between UA losses and Mediazona is definitely not 10:1 nor have any credible analysts reported to this, Tatarigami some time ago was proposing closer to 1:2, 1:2.1
It also doesn't work with the recruitment rate, even counting increases AWOL it would leave a generous surplus of 8k+ per month while at best Kofman described the Ukrainian army just slightly increasing. The most positive CSIS estimate was 1:8 in some positive areas not overall.
In other words no it simply doesn't work
11
u/Cassius_Corodes 4d ago
None of those are talking about last month, nor is this claim that this is happening every month. Given they have spoken up about it, it makes it fairly likely this month was unusual in some way. Trends in this war are constantly changing, so it might pay to have more humility in regards to the limits of how much can be said this close to the month.
3
u/Alexandros6 4d ago
Then it becomes from the matters of the impossible to those of the extremely unlikely. Everything would need to go well for Ukraine this month for a 1:10 rate.
The offensives would need to be based on highly drone centric warfare which allow them to capture and kill Russian forces with minimal losses while intermingled limiting Kab effectiveness, deepstrike very successful and Russia focusing excessively on civilian targets while improving deep strikes.
It would still need everything to work and before I see a source with a minimum of reliability report this then I have no reason to believe in the pleasant but absolutely extremely improbable compared to the more normal rates of this tragic war.
11
u/rng12345678 4d ago
1.2:1 in favor of Russia is an abjectly nonsensical figure given the tactical reality of the war, where Russia is attacking over open ground and not gaining any significant amount of territory. Anything less than the break-even 1:3 in favor of Ukraine is probably a non-starter, given the conventional wisdom for the defender's advantage and the static nature of the war, and that's lowballing it.
You're deliberately using extremely conservative estimates for Russian losses while relying on unclear figures for Ukrainian ones.
4
u/Alexandros6 4d ago
In favour of Ukraine, with Ukraine suffering 1 casualty for each 2.1 Russian casualty, though it was some time ago so I might miss remember and be 1:3. Ukraine has the defenders advantage among many advantages (less so recently) but Russia has mantained a consistent degree in sheer firepower. Also 1:3 isn't a casualty rule, it's the battlefield capacity needed to successfully attack a position not the automatic losses you will incur.
I am literally using the highest semi reliable casualty estimates for Russia 1:8 and it's still not 1:10. During no leak, no credible analysis that puts the overall exchange (meaning not a specific area but a monthly loss rate) at anything over 1:5.
Most Ukrainian analysts themselves don't support those numbers since they are aware that wishful numbers don't actually improve the situation.
Consider this, if we took the Ukrainian official number of 1.5 mill total Russian casualties and had Ukraine be 1/10th of its losses it would be 150k which is less then the US losses (KIA plus a good share of MIA making roughly 200k) estimates as open source. This is while taking the lowest Ukrainian semi certified floor and the highest estimate on Russia it still doesn't math.
How many of this are irredeemable casualties is another question (though you will still never get 1:10) but it's simply not credible.
3
u/rng12345678 4d ago edited 4d ago
If the break-even balance of forces for an assault to be considered likely successful is 3:1 then the casualty ratio for an ongoing grinding assault that is making marginal to no gains ought to be in the same ballpark, simply because of how feedback loops work. The russians are exchanging right at the threshold of success in an attritional fight so it's a good starting figure,
you will never get 1:10
again, based on what? there's no physical law preventing this. if Russia insists on using boneheaded tactics and blind persistence, even if they bring high casualties, then there is really no upper limit to the casualty ratio. wars can and do have extremely lopsided casualty ratios.
highest reliable casualty estimates
for what period? and where did you derive the conclusion that these are reliable and others are not? and now we're suddenly up from 1.2 in russia's favor to 8 in ukraine's, funny how you keep dodging.
2
u/Alexandros6 3d ago
There is no physical law but there is ample evidence of lower number. It's really a simple thing, if historically 1:10 ratios are exceedingly rare even in aggressive campaigns (for example Italian offensives against Austrian lines), if all credible reports don't go over 1:5, if the manpower replenishment rate doesn't make sense with 5k casualties, when both sides have rough parity in technological capacity and overall counterbalancing advantages (Russia more firepower and forces, Ukraine more efficient Ooda loop and defending advantage), if Open source sources tell us of a more even exchange then the most likely conclusion is that the ratio is between 1:2 to 1:5, not 1:10.
I can't say that it's physically impossible for this to happen, but the evidence is only on one side, such a bold claim would need overwhelming evidence, not none.
The 1:10 wars are those with either significant technological gap or the rare exception of the manouver warfare six day war.
Also apparently you didn't understand my previous comment so I will reiterate. 1:2.1 meaning 1 Ukr casualty for each 2.1 Russian is Tatarigamis estimate based on open-source. 1:8 was the highest CSIS estimate based on specific areas of the front, not the entire war.
How do I choose if a source is credible? 1 past accuracy 2 reputation and expert background 3 personal motivation (if Tatarigami a Ukrainian officer proposes 1:2/3 in favour of Ukraine I know he isn't favouring Russia)
I can't think of any credible source (to be honest not even non credible now that I think about it) who proposed a 1:10 for a prolonged amount of time.
1
u/rng12345678 3d ago
if the manpower replenishment rate doesn't make sense with 5k casualties,
Manpower replenishment rates are a lagging, low-pass filtered indicator that won't respond to monthly fluctuations in casualty figures. Russia can have an exceptionally bad month and Ukraine still needs to make up the losses they suffered in prior months or expect to lose over the subsequent ones. Similarly, if Ukraine experiences a casualty spike it also likely won't show up even if you have reliable data.
→ More replies (0)22
u/D_Silva_21 4d ago
Russia is unsuccessfully trying to attack while also losing territory. So that could explain it. But it does sound very high
Hopefully further confirmation elsewhere soon
17
u/username9909864 4d ago
Ukraine has been doing plenty of counterattacks lately too.
6
u/A_Vandalay 4d ago
They have, but they have been making more limited attacks on very narrow fronts with heavier use of unmanned systems and armored vehicles. Of particular relevance is their use of unmanned ground vehicles that appear to be functioning in a similar fashion as Russian infantry. Where these UGVs are the first groups to advance and engage enemy strong point.
With this in mind it stands to reason that Ukrainian attacks such as operation Vivaldi would not have particularly high casualties when compared to the broader less well supported infantry focused assaults Russia is carrying out. Russian claimed casualty inflicted also support this, as we don’t see a spike in claimed inflicted casualties since Vivaldi started. Perun did a fairly detailed breakdown of claimed Russian casualties inflicted on Ukrainian forces as well as claimed equipment destroyed, there was no significant change to any category over the period where Ukraine was conducting that offensive and taking ground. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cR0SmZlfeVY&t=1859s&ra=m
The MOD casualties figure section starts around 22 minutes in.
5
u/Glideer 4d ago
They have, but they have been making more limited attacks on very narrow fronts with heavier use of unmanned systems and armored vehicles. Of particular relevance is their use of unmanned ground vehicles that appear to be functioning in a similar fashion as Russian infantry. Where these UGVs are the first groups to advance and engage enemy strong point.
So they say. What they say is not a proven fact. It is natural for them to want to frame their attacks as much smarter and generating lower casualty rates than the Russian ones. Is it true? Who knows. The Ukrainians attack into the teeth of hundreds of glide bombs and thousands of fiber-optic drones. Imagining that they are consistently managing to pull off some perfect drone-mech ops is a very tall order.
27
u/Angry_Citizen_CoH 4d ago
I would take casualty numbers with a grain of salt the size of Lot's wife.
The battlefield can be assessed only by which side is making progress in its key operational goals. Right now, Ukraine is successfully (and rapidly) reestablishing important defensive lines along natural geographical boundaries, while Russia is ever so slowly grinding its way to Kramatorsk via Dobropillya. That tells me Russia is not able to successfully defend their lines while concentrating forces for a push in one area, which then tells me they probably lack the resources to do anything else.
That does give credence to a kill:loss disparity in Ukraine's favor, but it could also be explained by changes in tactics, logistical bottlenecks, or Ukraine's own reserves being committed in advantageous areas. Russia may have slowed its optempo for a major offensive, allowing these gains. Who knows. I just know that casualty figures from anonymous sources are not credible.
7
u/Moifaso 4d ago
These figures aren't credible because they're completely detached from reality and from other expert estimates. "Senior NATO officials" definitely have access to accurate figures, not sure why they'd bullshit quite so brazenly.
As for the current state of Russia manpower, financial analysis seems to indicate the overall force is stagnating/slowly growing, with the caveat that a sharp increase in demand for air defense in the rear could well have lead to a net decrease in manpower at the front.
6
u/Sa-naqba-imuru 4d ago
"Senior NATO officials" definitely have access to accurate figures, not sure why they'd bullshit quite so brazenly.
Because they are an indirect combatant in the conflict and like any combatant in a conflict, they lie about casualties.
-15
u/Glideer 4d ago edited 4d ago
Kluge's analysis shows that the Russian army continues to grow (albeit slowly) while recruiting about 30k men per month.
https://x.com/jakluge/status/2102375161722741014?s=20
That alone is sufficient to address various outlandish claims about Russian losses.
Ukrainian forces suffered about 5,000 casualties in the same period, said the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.
Have we already forgotten the Polish PM saying that, according to Ukrainian sources, Ukraine was suffering 27,000 casualties per month, the highest number ever.
35
u/Shackleton214 4d ago
I am agnostic/skeptical of anonymous NATO official casualty reports. But, I don't see how Kluge's tweet (in mid September based on historical data about the overall size of the Russian army) disproves the report (about Russian casualties in September).
16
u/Rhauko 4d ago
Agree I am sceptical of both claims as Kluge’s analysis seems to be based on Russian figures of defence spending and is not complete as per his descriptions exclude classified spending. Also Russa knows defence spending is analysed so they would not report that they spend less on salaries as their recipients have died.
7
u/Moifaso 4d ago
Also Russa knows defence spending is analysed so they would not report that they spend less on salaries as their recipients have died.
The numbers they do report still imply vastly higher attrition than what they publically admit, so I'm not sure this is true. When they actually want to hide some budget item they usually just stop publishing it outright.
44
u/roionsteroids 4d ago
A few weeks ago:
DoD confirms ‘refrigeration disruption’ at military commissaries
With more than a half-dozen commissaries on military bases in the continental U.S. reporting refrigeration outages this week, the Pentagon is acknowledging the problem but not making any guesses as to its source.
Similar to the fridge incidents in (some) French supermarkets yesterday.
One such vulnerability was disclosed (and fixed, in theory) in 2025:
Freeze the Controller, Defrost the Food: Uncovering Vulnerabilities in Danfoss Refrigeration Controllers
Back then the researchers found thousands of "Danfoss StoreView" control panels exposed to the internet for remote management including a "code-of-the-day" authentication mechanism that could be abused to bypass normal authentication.
'S' in IoT stands for security after all.
31
u/jason_abacabb 4d ago
Zero suprise here. Stuff like this should be isolated from any internet facing networks and require VPN for external communication. Utility companies across the world should take note, but won't until there are large enough disruptions that legislation requires it.
•
u/AutoModerator 4d ago
Continuing the bare link and speculation repository, you can respond to this sticky with comments and links subject to lower moderation standards, but remember: A summary, description or analyses will lead to more people actually engaging with it!
I.e. most "Trump posting" and lower effort but good faith questions belong here.
Sign up for the rally point or subscribe to this bluesky if a migration ever becomes necessary.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.