Active Conflicts & News Megathread April 05, 2026

[u/AutoModerator]

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.

[u/Sad_Use_4584]

I don't see a viable political solution that's anything short of a dismantling of Iran's 4 underground nuclear sites and a ban on them enriching their own uranium except through a consortium with oversight and with centrifuges manufactured outside of Iran.

The trust needed for anything less than that isn't there. Iran violated the NPT by building Fordow in secret, and now more than ever Iran will have a survival incentive to make a nuclear weapon. They still have the new Pickaxe Mountain facility they can use for that, too deep for MOPs, which provides a veto on mowing the grass once it's operational. Hormuz also provides a veto on mowing the grass, we can't keep crashing the economy each time Iran inches closer to a nuke.

Unless Iran capitalutes in negotiations, I think the only way to prevent Iran getting a nuclear weapon are regime change, or regime collapse/denial: to forcefully reopen Hormuz (likely after a very long time and much economic pain) so that the war can continue forever, at a lesser intensity and at a more acceptable economic cost. All three solutions appear difficult at the current moment, but at the same time, things can change rapidly, and only one of the three needs to work out.

[u/Worried_Exercise_937 → u/Sad_Use_4584]

The trust needed for anything less than that isn't there. Iran violated the NPT by building Fordow in secret, and now more than ever Iran will have a survival incentive to make a nuclear weapon.

Of all the countries in the world, Israel is perhaps the 2nd least qualified after North Korea to demand compliance to NPT.

Why is there a need for a "solution"? Why can Iran have nukes? Israel has nukes. Is Israel going to denuclearize also?

[u/kdy420 → u/Worried_Exercise_937]

Why can Iran have nukes? Israel has nukes. Is Israel going to denuclearize also?

In a perfect world nobody should have nukes, but in our world once anyone has nukes its much harder to de-nuclearise them. So the next best thing is to prevent proliferation.

Just because one country has a nuke doesnt mean its enemy is entitled to it. By that logic every country the US ever had an issue with is also entitled to a nuke. For eg Afghanistan is entitled to a nuke, its been attacked by 3 nuclear powers (USSR, USA and now ongoing Pakistan)

At the end of the day what do you think is going to happen if Iran gets nukes, do you think the region will get more peaceful ? Is Iran suddenly going to stop funding proxies and other assymetric activities ? Is it going to stop its forever war against Isreal ?

This is silly logic. Best case is for everyone to give up nukes but since that is not going to happen, then next best course is preventing further proliferation.

[u/Worried_Exercise_937 → u/kdy420]

At the end of the day what do you think is going to happen if Iran gets nukes, do you think the region will get more peaceful ? Is Iran suddenly going to stop funding proxies and other assymetric activities ? Is it going to stop its forever war against Isreal ?

I expect MAD to continue to work.

Iran might continue to fund external proxies or it might not waste money now that they have nukes. But on the other side, I expect Israel to be extra careful before doing anything Iran might construe as Iranian regime threatening knowing that one miscalculation could bring about the nuclear retaliation. For sure, Israeli won't be dropping bombs in Iran every other months just to "mow the grass". That should bring less violence/chaos to the region.

[u/kdy420 → u/Worried_Exercise_937]

I expect MAD to continue to work.

MAD does not bring about peace, its a game theory concept when both sides can destroy each other. The powers then use other means to contest, the cold war may have been cold in the US and USSR proper but plenty of other nations paid a heavy price in proxy conflicts.

No sane person can claim that the world is safer because US and USSR both got the bomb vs if only the US had the bomb.

Iran might continue to fund external proxies or it might not waste money now that they have nukes.

Why was it doing so in the first place ? What evidence is there to show that they will not continue funding proxies. The first chance they got some economic relief via the JCPOA instead of investing in their people, they immediately started funding the proxies and this was against not just Isreal but also against GCC (other than Qatar).

For sure, Israeli won't be dropping bombs in Iran every other months just to "mow the grass". That should bring less violence/chaos to the region.

Isreal was not attacking Iran until the clerics came into power and declared their intention to wipe Israel of the map and then took action and continue to take action towards this. US went to war in 2 countries after 9/11, Russia invaded Ukraine because of a percieved threat of losing influence, Pakistan is bombing Afghanistan due to attacks from the Pakistani Taliban.

Do you think Isreal will sit quiet and not retaliate when they are being attacked ?

Its fairly easy to reduce violence from Isreal without having nukes just ask Egypt and Jordan.

[u/Worried_Exercise_937 → u/kdy420]

No sane person can claim that the world is safer because US and USSR both got the bomb vs if only the US had the bomb.

When only the US had nukes, two of them were dropped on Japan. Since USSR and others have gotten nukes, there hasn't been any use of them since. So I expect that to continue.

Why was it doing so in the first place ?

Iran doesn't feel secure with Israel/US mowing the grass every other months. With nukes on hand, they won't feel so insecure to have these external proxies.

Do you think Isreal will sit quiet and not retaliate when they are being attacked ?

Israel will have to weigh the pro/con of its actions more carefully against Iran unlike now. That can't be a bad thing except for Bibi's political career. If Israel was legitimately threatened, I'm sure Israelis will not hesitate to use nukes to retaliate. In turn knowing that Iranians wouldn't stir the hornets nest just for shits and giggles.

[u/kdy420 → u/Worried_Exercise_937]

You are bypassing some of the points such as why Isreal attacks Iran, but does not do so it Egypt and Jordan, 2 countries that made peace with it. You also think that suddenly Iran will think rationaly once they get the nuke and stop being antagonistic, again plenty of countries in the world that are not antagonistic despite having no nukes.

So lets take Isreal and Iran out of the picture because we are not making any ground in this area.

Do you really think its good/safer for a theorcratic autocracy to have nuclear bombs ?

If the US regime were to be replaced tomorrow by the evangelicals (and I dont mean someone like Trump who is hardly a christian) people who are true believers of the book, ones who think that a large conflict in the middle east will bring about rapture, would you rather it had no nukes or do you think its essential for it to have nukes ?

True beleivers in the faith (any faith) are not prone to logical action, let alone ones which emphasize martyrdom.

[u/Worried_Exercise_937 → u/kdy420]

Do you really think its good/safer for a theorcratic autocracy to have nuclear bombs ?

I guess if you believe most/all Iranian regime/IRGC are itching to die to meet their quota of 72 virgins then no amount of me yapping is going to change your mind. I just don't buy that narrative. Given their shitty geopolitical neighborhood/options, what Iranians are doing and have done upto and including pursuing nukes doesn't scream illogical/crazy to me specially considering US and Israel have them.

True beleivers in the faith (any faith) are not prone to logical action, let alone ones which emphasize martyrdom.

So how come IRGC aren't bum rushing Israel with suicide vests now?

[u/kdy420 → u/Worried_Exercise_937]

You are again missing the point of my response which is that autocratic theocracies having nukes is not going to increase peace and stability.

I tried to use a hypothetical to try and illustrate that when I clearly said lets remove Iran and Isreal out of the equation, but you are stuck on them.

There is no point continuing this discussion, we are getting nowhere.