TRUMP: I THINK OIL COMPANIES SHOULD USE STRAIT OF HORMUZ

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) March 11, 2026

TRUMP: NOT WORRIED ABOUT ANY IRAN-BACKED ATTACKS ON US SOIL

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) March 11, 2026

TRUMP: ASKED IF IRAN LAID MINES IN HORMUZ: WE DON'T THINK SO

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) March 11, 2026

TRUMP: THINK YOU CAN SEE GREAT SAFETY AT HORMUZ

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) March 11, 2026

TRUMP: US TOOK OUT JUST ABOUT ALL OF IRAN'S MINE SHIPS

— *Walter Bloomberg (@DeItaone) March 11, 2026

I don't think Flynn's first paragraph contradicts the second. The difference in targeting the Iranian Sepah banks and the Iranians targeting commercial financial centers in the region is that the first provides direct support to the Iranian military while the second is a non-combatant.

That's just me though.

chrisocker said:

---

cef88 said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

LMCane said:

---

General Michael Flynn:

Iran has crossed a significant threshold. Following confirmed strikes on banking infrastructure inside Iran, Iranian military sources are now threatening retaliatory action against US and Israeli financial centers across the region, with specific signals pointing toward tech sector targets.

….

Regimes that are winning wars fight on the battlefield. They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers. The decision to escalate toward economic and civilian targets is a calculated gamble by Tehran, an attempt to generate enough global economic disruption and political pressure to force Washington and Jerusalem to stand down before the military situation deteriorates further.

---

---

The second paragraph does contradict the first.

---

Was just about to post this. Glad I am not the only one reading the contradiction. But perhaps the difference is the banking infrastructure that was hit inside Iran was not populated by any civilians? I dunno, just trying to draw a guess as to why one is not like the other.

---

I didn't think the US had bombed any banks? There does seem to be some movement towards attacking STATE owned and operated banks though. That seems to be a pretty big distinction.

Nobody is dropping a nuke on Iran - that would be an escalation that would send things entirely off the rails.

For the military folks on here that know things, would protracted deployment of bunker-busters be able to get the job done. What I mean is, days of consecutive bombings to reach whatever depth they have the material stored.

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

LMCane said:

---

The data center of Bank Sepah, Iran's largest bank responsible for paying salaries to members of the Iranian military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has been hit.

Implication of the damage:
This disruption is expected to prevent them from paying salaries for a period of time, forcing them to find alternative solutions.

---

Tousi said yesterday there are report of IRCG raiding and looting civilian homes

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Nobody is dropping a nuke on Iran - that would be an escalation that would send things entirely off the rails.

For the military folks on here that know things, would protracted deployment of bunker-busters be able to get the job done. What I mean is, days of consecutive bombings to reach whatever depth they have the material stored.

---

Problem is that it is like trying to drop a tennis ball down a 4 inch pipe from 30,000 feet

yes of course we can keep dropping bombs on the same target-

but these are very small air shafts drilled into 300 feet of solid rock mountains

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

considering in world history only two atomic weapons have ever been used in combat and that was 80 years ago

not a precedent we want to start up again

The Fall Guy said:

---

Trump says war to end soon. Israel says no timeliness to stop. Pete H and Rubio say its will continue.

Is this all to confuse??

---

Depends on what the meaning of soon is, and what means we use.

cef88 said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

LMCane said:

---

General Michael Flynn:

Iran has crossed a significant threshold. Following confirmed strikes on banking infrastructure inside Iran, Iranian military sources are now threatening retaliatory action against US and Israeli financial centers across the region, with specific signals pointing toward tech sector targets.

….

Regimes that are winning wars fight on the battlefield. They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers. The decision to escalate toward economic and civilian targets is a calculated gamble by Tehran, an attempt to generate enough global economic disruption and political pressure to force Washington and Jerusalem to stand down before the military situation deteriorates further.

---

---

The second paragraph does contradict the first.

---

I think you're missing the key difference:

They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers.

The "banking infrastructure" we and the Israelis hit was operated by the IRGC for the primary benefit of IRGC. Flynn didn't say we bombed bank branches where the tellers worked. Granted, his wording should have been a lot clearer.

SIAP

Channel 12 Israel: Israeli Air Force assessments indicate that Iran has already lost about 80% of its missile launch capability, with the remaining systems expected to be nearly eliminated within days, potentially reaching a 95% reduction.

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) March 11, 2026

G Martin 87 said:

---

cef88 said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

LMCane said:

---

General Michael Flynn:

Iran has crossed a significant threshold. Following confirmed strikes on banking infrastructure inside Iran, Iranian military sources are now threatening retaliatory action against US and Israeli financial centers across the region, with specific signals pointing toward tech sector targets.

….

Regimes that are winning wars fight on the battlefield. They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers. The decision to escalate toward economic and civilian targets is a calculated gamble by Tehran, an attempt to generate enough global economic disruption and political pressure to force Washington and Jerusalem to stand down before the military situation deteriorates further.

---

---

The second paragraph does contradict the first.

---

I think you're missing the key difference:

They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers.

The "banking infrastructure" we and the Israelis hit was operated by the IRGC for the primary benefit of IRGC. Flynn didn't say we bombed bank branches where the tellers worked. Granted, his wording should have been a lot clearer.

---

Never underestimate the IRGC's propensity to utilize otherwise *off limits* targets to hide in.

ReturnOfTheAg said:

---

G Martin 87 said:

---

cef88 said:

---

unmade bed said:

---

LMCane said:

---

General Michael Flynn:

Iran has crossed a significant threshold. Following confirmed strikes on banking infrastructure inside Iran, Iranian military sources are now threatening retaliatory action against US and Israeli financial centers across the region, with specific signals pointing toward tech sector targets.

….

Regimes that are winning wars fight on the battlefield. They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers. The decision to escalate toward economic and civilian targets is a calculated gamble by Tehran, an attempt to generate enough global economic disruption and political pressure to force Washington and Jerusalem to stand down before the military situation deteriorates further.

---

---

The second paragraph does contradict the first.

---

I think you're missing the key difference:

They do not threaten banks, financial centers, and technology campuses populated by civilian workers.

The "banking infrastructure" we and the Israelis hit was operated by the IRGC for the primary benefit of IRGC. Flynn didn't say we bombed bank branches where the tellers worked. Granted, his wording should have been a lot clearer.

---

Never underestimate the IRGC's propensity to utilize otherwise *off limits* targets to hide in.

---

Exactly. Or even deliberately target their own civilian infrastructure (like schools) for propaganda purposes.

[Stop derailing this military action update thread with jokes and memes -- Staff]

LMCane said:

---

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

considering in world history only two atomic weapons have ever been used in combat and that was 80 years ago

not a precedent we want to start up again

---

We vaporized two cities and killed scores of civilians. The use case matters.

Use of nukes in 2001 when we had Bin Laden bottled up in Tora Bora was seriously considered. Hindsight 20/20, how would the next 20 years have played out if we took him out there?

If this ends with the citizens unarmed, the radical regime still in power, and with 400 kg of 60% enriched uranium; we will regret it. Future administrations probably won't have the resolve, or may be handcuffed with a nuclear iran. FINISH THE JOB.

Yep, an utter failure if there is not regime change. It will happen again if that is the case.

Dave Robicheaux said:

---

LMCane said:

---

The data center of Bank Sepah, Iran's largest bank responsible for paying salaries to members of the Iranian military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), has been hit.

Implication of the damage:
This disruption is expected to prevent them from paying salaries for a period of time, forcing them to find alternative solutions.

---

Tousi said yesterday there are report of IRCG raiding and looting civilian homes

---

I have not seen these reports, and no clue who Tousi is but the hack on Sepah bank I posted yesterday about. Now I see a physical strike to their 'main' data center:

🚨 Breaking: The main data center of Bank Sepah, Iran's largest bank, was attacked tonight. The bank pays the salaries to all regime forces. pic.twitter.com/NFqHT4dgoh

— Dr. Eli David (@DrEliDavid) March 11, 2026

I recommend folks interested read this thread. This is the real underpinning of the regime (note the separate UK location) and is what I think will wind up being their undoing. Boring perhaps compared to slaughtering murderers via smart bombs, but also very different than previous air campaigns ostensibly interested in triggering regime change.

2/ Bank Sepah isn't just "a bank." In 2019-2020, five IRGC/Basij-affiliated banks, Ansar Bank, Mehr Eqtesad Bank (IRGC), Ghavamin Bank (police), Hekmat Iranian Bank, and Kosar Credit Institution (defense ministry), were all merged into Bank Sepah. Their ~1,800 branches still…

— Miad Maleki (@miadmaleki) March 11, 2026

At least seize or destroy the enriched uranium.

WILD FOOTAGE 🔴

Video captures the moment an Iranian Shahed-136 suicide drone hits an oil storage facility at the Port of Salalah in Oman. pic.twitter.com/UFt6z2vdgD

— Open Source Intel (@Osint613) March 11, 2026

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2026/03/11/iran-war-may-force-us-to-shift-missile-defenses-from-south-korea-seoul-says/

This article is claiming that the US is moving some of its THAAD missile defense systems from South Korea to the Middle East. Didn't expect this with how well things seem to be going.

Iranian state media reports Israeli drones are striking IRGC/Basij checkpoints in Tehran — Fars News

— Faytuks Network (@FaytuksNetwork) March 11, 2026

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

I'm no expert, but I don't think that a nuclear weapon would do the job as well as conventional bunker busting bombs. If our bunker busters won't do it, nukes probably won't help.

This may be a deal where you have to send in a special forces unit either to seize and remove the stuff, or ensure demolition of the stie in a way that it would be impossible to access.

The Iranians are giving Baghdad Bob a run for his money.....

We have only used our old missiles, wait till we use the new ones!
We have killed hundreds of Americans and zionists!
We will shut down the straight of hormuz!

Now....We have super duper underwater missiles that can travel 100m/s!

NEW:

🇮🇷🇷🇺 Iranian IRGC commander warns they that they have 100 m/s underwater missiles and they are ready to use them

He claims 'only two countries have them — Russia, the manufacturer, and us' pic.twitter.com/pkc6wLdRqd

— Megatron (@Megatron_ron) March 11, 2026

twk said:

---

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

I'm no expert, but I don't think that a nuclear weapon would do the job as well as conventional bunker busting bombs. If our bunker busters won't do it, nukes probably won't help.

This may be a deal where you have to send in a special forces unit either to seize and remove the stuff, or ensure demolition of the stie in a way that it would be impossible to access.

---

My thinking is that A-bombs air burst over the target. But to be fair, that could be outdated thinking based solely on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Nobody is dropping a nuke on Iran - that would be an escalation that would send things entirely off the rails.

For the military folks on here that know things, would protracted deployment of bunker-busters be able to get the job done. What I mean is, days of consecutive bombings to reach whatever depth they have the material stored.

---

The problem is finding it. At this point, I don't think even the Israelis know where it is. That's why the initial post said we need boots on the ground or the widespread destruction of a nuke.

Raiderjay said:

---

The Iranians are giving Baghdad Bob a run for his money.....

We have only used our old missiles, wait till we use the new ones!
We have killed hundreds of Americans and zionists!
We will shut down the straight of hormuz!

Now....We have super duper underwater missiles that can travel 100m/s!

NEW:

🇮🇷🇷🇺 Iranian IRGC commander warns they that they have 100 m/s underwater missiles and they are ready to use them

He claims 'only two countries have them — Russia, the manufacturer, and us' pic.twitter.com/pkc6wLdRqd

— Megatron (@Megatron_ron) March 11, 2026

---

What are they going to launch them with?

Raiderjay said:

---

The Iranians are giving Baghdad Bob a run for his money.....

We have only used our old missiles, wait till we use the new ones!
We have killed hundreds of Americans and zionists!
We will shut down the straight of hormuz!

Now....We have super duper underwater missiles that can travel 100m/s!

NEW:

🇮🇷🇷🇺 Iranian IRGC commander warns they that they have 100 m/s underwater missiles and they are ready to use them

He claims 'only two countries have them — Russia, the manufacturer, and us' pic.twitter.com/pkc6wLdRqd

— Megatron (@Megatron_ron) March 11, 2026

---

Like Russia is going to give/sell to Iran their tier 1 weapons.

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

The problem is that's about 90% of the global population.

If we let any being offended stopping us from finishing the job, then we deserve the disaster that will ultimately follow. Fornicate opinion of the "world".

jwhaby said:

---

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2026/03/11/iran-war-may-force-us-to-shift-missile-defenses-from-south-korea-seoul-says/

This article is claiming that the US is moving some of its THAAD missile defense systems from South Korea to the Middle East. Didn't expect this with how well things seem to be going.

---

It's hard to tell exactly what we've lost because it isn't going to be broadcast, but there is a lot pointing to THAAD radar losses, either from ballistic missiles or suicide drones. Iran is basically trying to hit us the same way the Ukrainians hit Russian S400 and S300 radar. We need much better point defense and short range systems.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

twk said:

---

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

I'm no expert, but I don't think that a nuclear weapon would do the job as well as conventional bunker busting bombs. If our bunker busters won't do it, nukes probably won't help.

This may be a deal where you have to send in a special forces unit either to seize and remove the stuff, or ensure demolition of the stie in a way that it would be impossible to access.

---

My thinking is that A-bombs air burst over the target. But to be fair, that could be outdated thinking based solely on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

---

I believe they're capable of doing both now. I had to look it up but the B61 mod 11 and B83 were looked into as possible earth penetrating weapons. So in theory I guess it's possible but I think the cost would make use of such a device less likely to be used, possible contamination aside. Which is why I guess we build the GBU-57 or the MOP and are looking to build more of those.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Nobody is dropping a nuke on Iran - that would be an escalation that would send things entirely off the rails.

For the military folks on here that know things, would protracted deployment of bunker-busters be able to get the job done. What I mean is, days of consecutive bombings to reach whatever depth they have the material stored.

---

The problem is finding it. At this point, I don't think even the Israelis know where it is. That's why the initial post said we need boots on the ground or the widespread destruction of a nuke.

---

So if the idea is to prohibit Iran from developing a nuke, why not just destroy the means of production? 400+ kilos of enriched uranium is useless if you don't have the facilities to develop it into a viable nuke. I reckon the targeted bombings are taking out all of the Iranian means of production for such.

akaggie05 said:

---

Why the hell not? Wouldn't be nuking a city and killing tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Would be using them as a large scalpel to penetrate down and destroy their uranium stockpile. Big smoking hole in the ground in the middle of nowhere, minimal civilian casualties, and stockpile gone. Anyone who screams escalation in that scenario is looking for a reason to get offended.

---

Even with a bunker buster, the explosion isn't going to be contained completely underground. Plus, you will have 400+ kg of uranium possible ejected into the atmosphere. That will create a lot of fallout. I don't think anyone in Washington wants to deal with the actual or political fallout of that.

carl spacklers hat said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

carl spacklers hat said:

---

Nobody is dropping a nuke on Iran - that would be an escalation that would send things entirely off the rails.

For the military folks on here that know things, would protracted deployment of bunker-busters be able to get the job done. What I mean is, days of consecutive bombings to reach whatever depth they have the material stored.

---

The problem is finding it. At this point, I don't think even the Israelis know where it is. That's why the initial post said we need boots on the ground or the widespread destruction of a nuke.

---

So if the idea is to prohibit Iran from developing a nuke, why not just destroy the means of production? 400+ kilos of enriched uranium is useless if you don't have the facilities to develop it into a viable nuke. I reckon the targeted bombings are taking out all of the Iranian means of production for such.

---

Would need to destroy all of their centrifuges and make damn sure they don't get more.