Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.): Politically, “blockade the Strait of Hormuz” sounds decisive. Operationally, it means sustained sea control, mine countermeasures, logistics, intelligence integration, and escalation management against an adversary that doesn’t need to defeat the U.S. Navy to complicate the mission. Iran only needs to replace mines in the water, threaten shipping, and keep the cost of oil and other commodities high.
When Trump was reportedly considering ground operations in Iran, I wrote that the troop-to-task ratios were scary—some of the objectives in public conversation would have required very large forces to accomplish. The ship-to-task analysis looks similar here: Cutting off some Iranian ports from the strait looks straightforward; completely controlling the strait would require thousands of sailors, dozens of ships, and continuous operations in a confined, contested environment.
Professionals in this kind of fight focus on two things: the obstacles and the number of merchant ships that slow them down, and the partners needed to overcome them and gain control.
Right now, both matter more than ever.
Markdd8 on
One of the latest news reports: *US blockade of Iran ports ‚irresponsible and dangerous‘, China says*. That’s interesting. Another report:
>According to U.S. intelligence reports from April 2026, China is preparing to send, or has recently sent, advanced weapons systems to Iran, including MANPADS (shoulder-fired anti-air missiles)…
Iran started this whole Gulf-control business, declaring after the ceasefire that they were going to bomb any ships that did not pay their new toll. Now we have an America blockade in response and Iran not having clarified what it is going to do regarding its threat.
whisperwind12 on
China just shipped through the blockade. lol
LuvSandoz on
Almost everything we buy comes from China. If America blocks China from getting oil what will China prioritise with the energy it still has, American consumers or CHINA?
Nice shot in the foot Donnie…….
Leave A Reply
Du musst angemeldet sein, um einen Kommentar abzugeben.
4 Kommentare
Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling (Ret.): Politically, “blockade the Strait of Hormuz” sounds decisive. Operationally, it means sustained sea control, mine countermeasures, logistics, intelligence integration, and escalation management against an adversary that doesn’t need to defeat the U.S. Navy to complicate the mission. Iran only needs to replace mines in the water, threaten shipping, and keep the cost of oil and other commodities high.
When Trump was reportedly considering ground operations in Iran, I wrote that the troop-to-task ratios were scary—some of the objectives in public conversation would have required very large forces to accomplish. The ship-to-task analysis looks similar here: Cutting off some Iranian ports from the strait looks straightforward; completely controlling the strait would require thousands of sailors, dozens of ships, and continuous operations in a confined, contested environment.
Professionals in this kind of fight focus on two things: the obstacles and the number of merchant ships that slow them down, and the partners needed to overcome them and gain control.
Right now, both matter more than ever.
One of the latest news reports: *US blockade of Iran ports ‚irresponsible and dangerous‘, China says*. That’s interesting. Another report:
>According to U.S. intelligence reports from April 2026, China is preparing to send, or has recently sent, advanced weapons systems to Iran, including MANPADS (shoulder-fired anti-air missiles)…
Iran started this whole Gulf-control business, declaring after the ceasefire that they were going to bomb any ships that did not pay their new toll. Now we have an America blockade in response and Iran not having clarified what it is going to do regarding its threat.
China just shipped through the blockade. lol
Almost everything we buy comes from China. If America blocks China from getting oil what will China prioritise with the energy it still has, American consumers or CHINA?
Nice shot in the foot Donnie…….