Ukraine to help open Strait of Hormuz as part of Gulf weapons deals, Zelensky says
Posted by chillichampion@reddit | anime_titties | View on Reddit | 187 comments
Virtual-Pension-991@reddit
Was gonna say this would put Ukraine in a complicated relation.
But Ukraine's already in one complicated situation after another, if you think about it.
wimmick@reddit
I think it would put Ukraine into a very advantageous position because the US can’t do anything against Ukrainian ships, and they will also be able to get better intel on the Iranian made weapons Russians are using
kwonza@reddit
Ukraine has like two ships that are stationed in Turkey. Zelenskiy always overpromises shit.
wimmick@reddit
Like how Putins “special military operation” was only supposed to be for 2 weeks?
esjb11@reddit
Its so fun how people can never mention critisism towards Ukraine about anything whatsoever without people instantly jumping on it with the three days special military operation completely offtopic. Staying on topic seems to be extremely hard for people.
Duck_87@reddit
Brainwashed westerners that have zero clue about what is happening with Ze in Ukraines internal politics.
kwonza@reddit
Kind of like that, politicians lie it’s part of their job
June1994@reddit
Uh, yes?
Neurobeak@reddit
What Ukrainian ships?
wimmick@reddit
All ships that traverse the ocean must “fly under a flag” meaning they have a country of origin/ownership, a Ukrainian ship doesn’t necessarily mean a military vessel
Neurobeak@reddit
Ah, sorry, I thought you meant warships. But then how will cargo ships under their flag help open the strait? They will catch a drone to their face the minute they come there
wimmick@reddit
On open line of dialogue and regular passage through the strait, showing that diplomacy is possible and that the US is actively disrupting global trade, making it even more undesirable for the US administration to keep the strait closed with its bullshit distraction war
Neurobeak@reddit
Sorry, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I genuinely don't follow. If/when the Ukrainians arrive to the strait, why would Iran spare their ships? They actively help all those who Iran is targeting right now. In my opinion, Iran won't miss this opportunity and neither their drone miss the possible UA ship
Duck_87@reddit
Ze is a showman that's only interested in his ego and corruption. It's just empty words at this point.
soowhatchathink@reddit
Iran explicitly said that allies of the US would not be granted passage, so that would not work as Ukraine is an ally of the US
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
What leverage does Ukraine have to negotiate with Iran? What can Ukraine offer Iran?
wimmick@reddit
That’s something that only a Ukrainian can offer, what can Trump offer other than his resignation to reopen the strait?
Kyudojin@reddit
Reparations to Iran, immediate cessation of military activity in the region, dismantling of US bases in neighbouring Gulf states, lifting of sanctions on Iran. There are a lot of options.
wimmick@reddit
Trump will never offer any of those things
Kyudojin@reddit
You asked what he can offer lol did you forget what you wrote?
Dot-Slash-Dot@reddit
The Gerans are based on the Shahed design but have now gone through multiple iterations, and so many have been fired and recovered that outside of new iterations nothing remains to be learned about their design.
Virtual-Pension-991@reddit
The Iranian Shahed and its variants are already cut apart and recycled as can be.
A captured hypersonic missile, now thay would be good.
It could expose a lot from where Iran sources its materialsm
Turgius_Lupus@reddit
Evryone knows were Iran sources it's materials.
recoveringslowlyMN@reddit
Bangladesh of course
Turgius_Lupus@reddit
The Gerans Russia is using barley resemble the base Iranian drone any longer (which is a copy of a Israeli Harpy, which is a copy of a German DAR), Russia makes them themselves in missive purpose built factory floors, they dont import them from Iran. Putting Iranian made at the front or continuing to call them Shaheds does not change reality.
Opening_Pizza@reddit
It's less complicated if you look at who benefits. Western finance capital, Israel.
eagleal@reddit
This confirms my theory that Ukraine is not in fact an EU partner, to the contrary is an US asset.
Case in point the Mediterranean and Baltic sabotages carried by Ukraine on EU strategic assets.
Heroyem@reddit
That's ridiculous. Trump is shitting on Ukraine as much as he can. Ukraine is just trying to broker good will by helping out in the Middle East, because they need all the good will they can get in their fight against fascist Ruzzia.
BobDobbsHobNobs@reddit
Since 2014
ComradeYoldas@reddit
Precisely.
steauengeglase@reddit
If this were explicitly done as a US asset, why did the US explicitly reject the offer?
anhangera@reddit
Ukraine doesnt have a choice but to dance to the beat
Adorable-Database187@reddit
Earning favors for people that make God look poor, there are worse strategic moves.
Stromovik@reddit
Zelensky is doing favours for the country where he will settle down
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
So Ukraine sides with the invaders as long as they get weapons ?
Just asking if that is Ukraine saying that they would support an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that the invading nation did not like. An attack that was assumed by the invaders to not last more than a few hours or days? Ukraine is saying they'll support that. Is that correct?
Chipay@reddit
You are aware Iran sold drones to Russia to fire at Ukraine, right?
Who gives a shit who started who when you get to snub the nation responsible for bombing hundreds of your citizens?
no_soy_livb@reddit
Irrelevant, Ukraine is still unnecessarily siding with the invaders and occupiers. Ukraine doesn't care about intl law or whatever. They want attention and money from gulf states and Israel. Lol
MaestroRozen@reddit
Replace "Ukraine" with "Iran", and "Gulf states and Israel" with "Russia" in your sentence, and you get exactly what happened when Ukraine got invaded. In this particular case, Iran is very much reaping what they sowed.
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
Ukraine is also reaping what it sowed.
MaestroRozen@reddit
Of course they are. How could I forget that time when Ukraine invaded a neighboring country? It's all just coming back to them.
Either way, these double standards would be hilarious if not for all the dead people. Iran aids the country invading Ukraine : crickets. Ukraine aids the country invading Iran after : "How can the evil zionist Ukrainians do this?!??".
Dedicated_idiot@reddit
Huh? I remember India getting shit for buying oil we sold back to Ukraine as “financing” the war. Let’s not pretend like Ukraine was not pushed as a moral war by the Western propaganda machine. The reason people call out Ukraine is because their rhetoric was obnoxious about everyone being evil for buying shit from Russia…but I guess it’s okay to sell shit to other invaders, then your own rhetoric is just the usual normal boring geopolitics.
Chipay@reddit
So Iran gets to bomb Ukrainian citizens, but Ukraine cannot bomb Iran because that would ge against international law.
Are you stupid, racist, or just paid extremely well?
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
Don’t lie, Iran has never bombed Ukrainian citizens.
If it worked like that den the US has bombed most of the world, I mean it literally has, but you would also need to blame the US for other countries using American weapons as if it was the US doing it.
Wow..
Chipay@reddit
People are rightly blaming the US for selling weapons to Israel while it actively caused (and still is causing) a genocide in Palestine. The time of sale of also of importance here. It's the same reason why some Euro countries won't offer basing rights to the US right now, everyone is aware those planes will be used to bomb Iranian schoolgirls, and allowing those planes to land and refuel in a nation is directly implicating that nation in those warcrimes.
Similarly, Iran knew full well what those drones were being used for and decided to keep selling them anyhow.
ComradeYoldas@reddit
It's such an idiotic argument. Bayraktar that was sold to Ukraine. Will Russian bomb Turkey? Get your stupid ring wing ass out of here.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
The EU sells weapons to the US to fire at like half the MENA region, so maybe not the greatest point trying to make.
esjb11@reddit
I dont really blame Ukraine for it but I doubt you actually agree with your own statement. Do you think its fine of Russia strikes EU countries that aids Ukraine?
Chipay@reddit
Your question is malformed:
And the answer is obviously yes, lol
esjb11@reddit
It was a response to "who gives a shit who started who when..." I thought you had a moral perspective there.
Chipay@reddit
From a moral perspective, I think Russia is 'justified' in taking hostile actions towards the EU (and I believe they already do so in some sense). Doesn't mean that I wouldn't argue for those countries to then strike back, but the EU cannot (and should not) argue its a neutral/innocent actor when it comes to Russia.
Iran delivered weapons to Russia that were used against Ukraine, now Ukraine wants to sell weapons to countries that will use them against Iran. It's about as close to 'an eye for an eye' you can get in terms of morality.
esjb11@reddit
Then you are consistent :) i just see to many argue one is normally good and one isnt.
Dependent-Dream7180@reddit
That's a lot of mental gymnastics to gloss over the fact that Iran has been actively supporting Russia's invasion of Ukraine for years. Iranian drones have killed/injured hundreds of Ukrainians civilians.
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
So being a weapon supplier is bad and civilians of the seller's entire country is a valid target? So anytime an ISIS or Taliban terrorist kill someone, you share the blame for living in a country that gave them weapons?
Dependent-Dream7180@reddit
Can you strawman any harder? Iran made itself an enemy of Ukraine by assisting Russia's invasion. Ukraine is not in the wrong to offer assistance to other countries against Iran.
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
Is it a straw man when its a one on one comparison of actual events?
Buddy, those terrorists use American and European weapons
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
I mean... zelensky was defending Israel this whole time and Ukraine was always strongly pro Israel, even before the invasion.
So yeah... its not because they are also victims that they are good people in the intentional level.
Dependent-Dream7180@reddit
That's utter nonsense. Ukraine regularly votes against Israeli interests in the UN, its not "strongly pro Israel" at all.
https://unwatch.org/database/country/ukraine/
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
Good people don't defend Israel
upbeatchief@reddit
Ukraine acting against iran after iran supplies weapons to the russia, who used thise weapons for killing Ukrainians civilians, is somehow evil???
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
Yes.
Again its not because their goverment is shit that you have to be down to "turning a country back to stone age" and killing civilians too.
But I think that concept might be too advanced to some people.
UpperInjury590@reddit
Ukraine is at WAR and Iran is providing Russia with weapons that kill its civilians therefore it is an enemy. Any sympathy or moral ground Iran has rightfully goes out of the window in this situation.
Plus considering the fact that Iran is hitting the gulf countries that had nothing to do with the situation Ukraine giving them security is noble.
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
Except that before said war Ukraine was cheering Israel that was for some time already fucking up their neighbors.
So cut the crap, same shitty people in power the difference is that Ukraine has to beg for help and stupid people buy their crap.
UpperInjury590@reddit
Ukraine was cheering Israel, Iran was provding Russia with weapons. Iran is worse here and becomes Iran weapons are attacking Ukraine civilians Iran is an enemy.
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
Except that ukraine was cheering israel before Russia invaded. So your argument doesn't hold op.
Ukraine is just as bad. Difference they are the underdog in their war.
Rei_Caixo@reddit
Putin's only crime was attacking white people, everyone else isn't seem as human
Practical-Pea-1205@reddit
Iran provided Russia with weapons to use against Ukraine.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
And NATO provided Ukraine with weapons to use against Russia.
So what?
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
US supplied weapons to ISIS and Taliban.
Sweden supplies weapons to UAE thats bombing civilians in Yemen
But we only get mad at the brown ones, right?
upbeatchief@reddit
No no, here we stan the ayatollah and his civilian killing army, russia and iran were using their shahed drones to fight imperialism and evil nato hiding in Ukrainian apartments buildings
namikazeiyfe@reddit
And hospitals
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
Ukraine also was among the “coalition of the willing” that invaded Iraq back in 2003.
Said coalition forces keep occupying Iraq to this day, coalition bases in Iraq are directly participating in the war against Iran.
It’s why this whole “aggressors/defender” narrative is mostly for entertainment, what seems to be truly matter is geopolitical allegiances and religion.
Firecracker048@reddit
It would be hard for them to side with the side that has been supporting the invaders of their land.
Probably are more than willing to get their pound of flesh from Iran
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
If weapons suppliers are held to the same level of scrutiny as an invading army, I wonder what your thoughts are on those who supply weapons to terrorists like ISIS or Taliban
Firecracker048@reddit
Your logic aint making sense. Your don't even see why Ukraine MIGHT side with the people who are against the ones helping kill their own people during an illegal invasion.
no_soy_livb@reddit
Exactly. Ukraine is obviously begging for attention and money from the gulf states and Israel. Not surprising honestly.
Silver_Middle_7240@reddit
Ukraine is another theater in the same conflict.
Turgius_Lupus@reddit
Why not? They have been shelling civilians in Donetsk for a decade.
alkbch@reddit
Yes, that’s correct.
Embarrassed_Jerk@reddit
Oh yeah...makes sense... Its okay when it happens to brown people
https://www.cjr.org/the_media_today/media_bias_ukraine_war.php
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
... How?
I mean... dont take me wrong but Ukraine cannot defend itself "properly" against ballistic missiles. Who will bet their ships in Ukraine ability to defend it?
MarderFucher@reddit
It's about interceptor drones. Ukraine has excess production capacity but needs more money, which Gulf Arabs have. It's a win-win.
Acceptable-Device760@reddit
Win win to who?
You are missing yhe point. Their technology is cheaper but its not good enough to defend Ukraine, how exactly it will be good enough to defend the ships? And who will bet in it being good enough and risk their ships?
It can be argued to be usable defend refinery but to what extend? If they attack Iran harder and the drones aren't enough Iran WILL use missiles that Ukraine tech cannot deal with. Albeit I suppose it might be a layered method with saving the more expensive defense to missiles.
Still extremely dodgy. And quite frankly stupid. Specially with Trump saying it will bomb Iran to the stone age.
Past a point a country will just go down trying to bring as many others with them. And Iran CAN make dirty bombs quite easily, effectively turning the middle east into a a radioactive wasteland for decades even if you manage to intercept the dirty bombs.
Paying for cheap drones tech so you can scale the war is stupid, its useless if you dont scale the war... so what exactly the gulf Arabs have to win here?
MarderFucher@reddit
It's obvious not primary about ships, Zelenskyy is being boastful. It's good to defend fixed sites eg oil and gas infrastructure against OWAs.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
An important question is...how will they? Ukraine has experience in blowing ships up not defending against attacks. What can Ukraine do in regards to this?
Engaging Geran drones over Ukraine is a different task. Intercepting them coming from Iran....and targeting ship in iran waters is a completely different beats. Drone interceptors work over friendly area. Not over hostile territory.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
No one is driving through Iranian waters.
kwonza@reddit
In maritime law you prove that waters are international by sailing there. That’s why US regularly sends ships to sail in contested waters around China.
If they want they are free to try and sail through the strait at any moment.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
That's not how that works.
kwonza@reddit
Eh, it’s kind of how that works.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
It really isn't. You can't claim maritime straits.
eagleal@reddit
You can actually. There were wars fought for both Bosphorus, Panama, Suez canal, China sea, etc.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
Canals aren't maritime straits. The Bosphorus, just like the Danish belt or the strait of Malacca are international waterways that cannot be claimed.
thereturn932@reddit
Bosphorus is not an international waterway. It can be used by civilian ships freely because of Montreux Convention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreux_Convention_Regarding_the_Regime_of_the_Straits
If Turkey haven’t signed this then, it could freely control the strait.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
No, the Montreux Convention is simply narrowing of the general case. Without it, Turkey would have to let warships pass through as well.
That is not what Turkey says, but what the ones passing through the Bosphorus say. You still can pass through without a pilot - most smaller ships do so - it is just a stupid idea to do with a large ship. Them being unable to collect tolls from the Bosphorus is the reason why they're building a channel to bypass it.
kwonza@reddit
You can show straits are safe which would make insurance possible because ships don’t sail without it.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
You can also conduct world wide unrestricted submarine warfare and show that the oceans in general are unsafe.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
FTFY so it describes actual US behavior as currently conducted for which nobody is to blame than the US.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
Since WW2, up to including now, no one has conducted unrestricted submarine warfare. What are you talking about?
Alikont@reddit
That's how that works in the mind of a russian.
Rmemeber "the Russian border is where a Russian soldier stands"?
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
In the mind of an Israeli too.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
True. Still though, the lack of self awareness with them is staggering.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
That's the point
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
No, it isn't. No one ever drove through Iranian waters.
Forged-Signatures@reddit
Is this a pedantry thing? "Um, actually, they were piloted through the straight?"
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
The strait of Hormuz is not and never was Iranian territory.
ChaosDancer@reddit
According to US and Europe "Might makes right" doctrine, now it is certainly is.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
If you want might makes right, then Teheran gets annihilated in nuclear fire.
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
Try doing that and become a pariah.
The-Board-Chairman@reddit
And if might makes right without caveats as you are trying to argue for the Iranians, why should anyone care about either their fate or becoming a pariah?
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
You shouldn’t. Drop a nuke and see what happens.
UnluckyAssist9416@reddit
Via the article:
Looks pretty relevant to me.
esjb11@reddit
Except Iran doesnt use ships to block the straight... How are you gonna protect tankers with suicide sea drones against missiles and drones? 🤔
inokentii@reddit
The same way as ships transporting grain protected from the russian drones and missiles
esjb11@reddit
You mean by making the enemy not want to strike them in the first place? Russia has not tried to strike ships transporting grain with missiles nor drones. They tried to make a pfysical blockade by putting their warships around the harbour, but not actually shot on the ships like Iran does. Ukraine stopped the blockade by striking said ships. Russia has however made strikes against the harbour but not at ships traveling.
And no. Ukraine cant magically convince Iran to not want to strike said ships.
inokentii@reddit
Say it to Turkish Viva which was struck by russian drones at 13th December 2025
esjb11@reddit
Ah yeah true. So the one time Russia actually decided to for whatever reason strike a ship it got hit. Clearly doesnt help your point.
inokentii@reddit
It wasn’t a one time, russians systematically trying to attack ships and port infrastructure since 2022. And since Black Sea fleet is decimated drones and missiles are the only tool they using nowadays.
esjb11@reddit
Incorrect. Ports yes, ships no. When was the last strike a ship at sea? 13th december?
There is no systematical strikes on ships. Nor any way Ukraine is preventing it.
inokentii@reddit
Last time was 5th of March russians attacked Panama ship Bull carrying corn and for obvious reasons in news reports we have only cases when russians managed to hit something. And if there’s no prevention of strikes from Ukraine side as you say, then it means Persian Gulf countries paid for nothing lol
esjb11@reddit
Hmm I has missed that one. Thanks. Seems like Russia has started to get more adventuraist in that regard.
Once again it got hit. So clearly Ukraine cant protect ships then. Just send and pray they dont get struck. No we here plenty of Ukrainian interceptions all the time. How great they are at intercpeting during attacks on Ukrainian cities etc. If Ukraine would intercept strike after strike against ships we would definetly hear bragging about it and how they protect global trade etc.
Golf countries has not paid for Ukraine to reopen the straight lol. The interceptor discussion is about protecting the country. You know oil infrastructure etc. Not the ships. The straight is closed.
inokentii@reddit
Hitting one ship in a few months when thousands traveled safely, for me it sounds like protected and most importantly for insurance companies too, which wasn’t a case in 2023
esjb11@reddit
Not if noone isnt attempting to strike them in the first place.
inokentii@reddit
No one attempting, yet in 2025 about 30 civilian ships were damaged by russians
esjb11@reddit
30? So not "one in a few months?"
Altough I would suspect those ships were damaged during strikes at harbour and not at sea ;)
Either it completely destroys your claim, or it was not at sea.
inokentii@reddit
May bad sorry, it’s total number for years 2022-2025. And with annual traffic around 9000 ships it can be called successfully protected
esjb11@reddit
Again, you need to look at prevented strikes. Not ships passed. If Russia doesnt try to strike them it has nothing to do with protection.
And again, where most of those 30 ships damaged in harbour? ;)
inokentii@reddit
Again you don’t have exact numbers for prevented attacks cuz news reports writing only about successful hits, but with attacks happening on daily basis(only from beginning of this year numbers already reaching two hundred) looking on ship traffic gives clear picture
esjb11@reddit
Dont need exact numbered. Show me those 200 strikes at travelling ships and its fine.
BroMan001@reddit
And what is that way? How did they do that?
inokentii@reddit
Air defence, electronic warfare, sea drones with surface-air missiles there’s huge complex of tools
UnluckyAssist9416@reddit
esjb11@reddit
US radar and awacs are superior to Ukrainian simular systems.
Same goes for electronic warfare.
Ukraine are good at interceptor drones but they dont work that way. You dont use it to protect naval units. They have limmited range. You put them in between the target and the launcher and intercept as much as possible since its cheaper than interceptors. They have a significantly lower interception rate and needs to be in between not ontop. So not good for ships.
Surface defence? So just cannon fodder so America dont have to suffer said cassulties?
Point defence? Again on the ship and something US can do just aswell. Just Ukrainian cannonfodder over American.
mdedetrich@reddit
While true, this doesn’t paint an entire picture and it’s obvious why when you open a map.
The straight of Hormuz is incredibly narrow which means interceptor drones still maintain a lot of their effectiveness. Ontop of that, the Iranian coast on the straight is a giant mountain range and because of this, anti ship missiles don’t work well (as they are designed to skim over flat land/water). Drones likewise don’t do that well with the range but it’s less of an issue because of how flexible they are to deploy, however drones are also not designed to hit moving targets.
The biggest risk to ships in the straight are speedboats/sea mines (which Iran can deploy via missile now) and similar types of harassment
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
These are such dumb takes..
The straight being narrow mostly means you won’t have much, if any, time for interception and you also won’t have much, if any, room trying to evade and maneuver.
As such your point makes about as much sense as claiming the US running out of stand-off munitions is a good thing because forcing F-35 to fly in range of Iranian AD is somehow an advantage, it’s not.
Dot-Slash-Dot@reddit
Iran doesn't have to attack there, it can attack ships anywhere on their route to the export terminals.
mdedetrich@reddit
True, but Iranians entire coastline of the straight is mountains.
I mean the reason why Irans strategy works is that you only need to destroy/damage a couple of ships and that is enough of a deterrent, but at the same time it’s not incredibly easy from a military point of view to do what Iran is doing.
It was much easier when Iran could use conventional missiles to harass ships, but that only applies up until early next week as US striked almost all of the missile silos on the coast
Dot-Slash-Dot@reddit
Iran has enough capabilities to fire missiles and drones. Iran also has capabilities to mine the strait and use sea drones (or in the worst case suicide bombers with speedboats).
There is no forcing open the strait unless you are prepared to accept continuous losses, especially loosing and recovering ships.
esjb11@reddit
That the straight is small does not favour interceptor drones. If something it makes it harder for them aswell. Having them at the target will always bassicly half the reach. If the drones are launched from closer distance it still reduces its capacity to intercept with as much.(actually more due to lack of tracking) Your window to intercept will still be half as small in comparison to what they can achieve in for example Ukraine.
In Ukraine its even more effective since they will have several teams at different distances helping eachother track and intercept them so even that oversells their usecase here.
Its not patrolboats we see intercept tankers as of now. Its drones and missiles.
UnluckyAssist9416@reddit
Sure, the US has it all, but it costs a lot. Ukraine does it at a fraction of the price. The current war is a war of attrition. If you can lower the price of your defense system against someone who is throwing cheap weapons at you then you can fight them longer.
duncandun@reddit
lol the interception rate isnt great for Ukrainian defense systems. No one’s going to put a boat through Hormuz if there’s even a 10% chance it gets hit.
esjb11@reddit
Ukraine does it but worse for a fraction of the price yes. Interceptors are great if you can put them in between, decrease the amount of drones that gets trough and the. Intercept the rest with proper antiair. But not as main protection of valuable targets.
When it comes to the straight of hormoz the daily cost of having it closed is so high its not the material cost of opening it thats the reason its not open but the capability to do so. The economic incentive to open it is massive.
Can USA opening it without alot of Americans coming home in boxes they would. Its not the price of interceptors. And again, the interceptor drones would do an even worse job and lead to somewhat significant cassulties.
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
Yeah the world’s most powerful military doesn’t know how to do this but Zelensky does😹.
LickNipMcSkip@reddit
you don't stay on top by smelling buying your own hype
ManBearPigIsReal42@reddit
He is absolutely better at stopping drones and missiles than the us currently. Especially for a reasonable price.
esjb11@reddit
Doubtful on that claim. Got any data supporting it?
Amadon29@reddit
The main difference is that Ukraine has experience doing it for much cheaper. Can the US send two warships along with every ship to effectively protect them while they cross? Yes. Is that cheap or feasible to do long term? No.
mdedetrich@reddit
Ukraine has the highest amount of experience fighting against Iranian/Russian drones.
They also have experience in destroying naval blockades (Russia blocked the Black Sea which Ukraine reopened and is now exporting via the sea at record rates)
UnluckyAssist9416@reddit
Zelensky has been at war with Iranian weapons for years.
The biggest difference is the price of their system. They have had to go cheap and the Middle Eastern countries want a cheaper solution then the US missiles that cost a couple of million each.
Possible_Top4855@reddit
Sounds like it’s time to just mine the straight.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
Which US does have. But they can't open it. Ukraine doesn't. It actually gets these systems from US.
Again, that is provided by US and EU engineers.
Yes. But Ukraine does "Chase interceptions". What this means is that drones are intercepted when over friendly territory. Not outside. Otherwise, Ukraine would be intercepting Gerans Russia. Have they done so far?
What does this even mean?
And where will they deploy this? Inside Iran? On ships? In Oman? Where.
Ukraine has an okay interception rate (Unless you believe the insane 99% interception rate claimed by Z man). It will go even lower when doing head on interception.
Ukraine adds nothing to the table. This is clearly Z man trying to get back on the limelight.
UnluckyAssist9416@reddit
In 4 parts.
haggerton@reddit
Zelenskyy is talking out of his ass, as usual. He has 0 expertise in this area.
His "experience" with the Black Sea corridor is that Russia has the restraint not to hit his commercial shipping after the defunct grain deal, despite the VKS operating mostly unchallenged over the Black Sea (shootdowns were very rare and newsworthy).
That's not counting the the fact that Russia hasn't even resorted to stand-off weapons to hit commercial shipping like Iran has.
Dot-Slash-Dot@reddit
Yeah, that is against mines and an enemy navy/airforce.
The strait of Hormuz is not mined, the Iranian airforce barely operates over their own territory and the remaining navy only consists of small vessels and drones. Add to that the very different topology of the strait and Ukraine has very little to offer here.
studio_bob@reddit
It's complete nonsense.
Sea drones do not and cannot "unblock sea trade routes." They are seaborne area denial weapons, akin to mines. They can prevent shipping from safely passing into/through an area but they cannot ensure their safety.
Just think about it for a moment. Iran is controlling the Strait by present a credible threat to shipping with their own drones (air, surface, and subsurface) and anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles. What can the kind of sea drones Ukraine fields do about such threat? Answer: practically nothing.
Rindan@reddit
It's a different task, but not entirely. Ukraine defends cities closer to Russia than the gulf states are to Iran. They can probably adapt many of their techniques to the Gulf by forward deploying in small boats the same way they might do the same in Ukraine with a truck. The thing Ukraine really offers is an answer to an enemy that can fire at you forever very cheaply.
It's a smart deal for all involved. No one in the world knows drone defense better than Ukraine. No one crazy for trying to learn from the best. Ukraine gains because they need cash. Getting some Gulf production lines up and running is also extremely valuable in the long term.
FRIENDLY_FBI_AGENT_@reddit
Not really. Cities closer to the Ukranian border are pounded pretty regularly with little to no interception so that's a lie. Ukraine has marginal success when drones are deep within their territory.
That won't be the case over strait
Like US doesn't have boats. Ukraine has tried boat thing alot of times and there are alot of videos of them being blown up.
No they don't. They have marginal success using land based system over friendly area.
Strait isn't that place.
alkbch@reddit
April fool's day was yesterday. The title is very much click-bait...
Ukraine is already struggling to keep their own country safe, they should probably focus on that first.
Z3B0@reddit
They need investments in their defense industry for that. Who has a lot of cash, are getting hit by low cost drones and need a working solution yesterday? The gulf states.
Interceptor drones are working great. Do some drones get through? Yes. Do most of them get intercepted for a few thousand dollars per ? Also yes.
Patriot and other THAADs are in very short supply. Interceptor drones have some inventory available.
Sending a few thousand of them with the operators in the gulf could secure a lot of money and goodwill for Ukraine, helping them ultimately win.
Professional-Syrup-0@reddit
Let’s just keep ignoring how the Ukrainian economy is wholesale artificially propped up by EU financial aid and instead go: “Omg but the Ukrainian MIC needs financing too!”
esjb11@reddit
You cant use interceptor drones to protect the straight tough. Range is limmited. They would bassicly have to be in the ship, which is already very suboptimal since you want them between the launch and the target to optimize range and tracking ability. Now they would be and die on the ship.
Would bassicly like equiping the ships with signficiantly worse antisirsystem and sacrifice soliders lives over interceptors.
Z3B0@reddit
They can be on smaller, faster ships, positioned between the Iranian coast and the sea lane.
Or do the same thing, but to protect the land. Many drones are fucking up the coastal installation. If the majority of interceptions is made with cheap drones on small ships patroling 30/40km out, the need for million dollar interceptors is much lower, allowing them to be used on real, high end threats like ballistic missiles.
esjb11@reddit
Smaller faster ships? Look on a map. If you dont go in the middle you will be near the shore. Thats completely suicidal. How many Ukrainian soldiers do you think they are willing to lose? The interception rate would also be way to low to actually have the straight open.
Do the same thing? You mean launch drones at the shore? First of that would require long range drones. Something Ukraine still wants more of at home. Otherways you would see large scale strikes on Russia regularly simular to how is done to Ukraine. Now they have to cherrypick targets.
It is also what USA has been trying to do for the last month but with actual advanced systems. Ukraines way would be cheaper but worse. Considering the cost of having the straight closed its not the price of missiles that keeps it closed
To actually have the straight open you would need to make it quite safe to pass. That would require a very high interception rate. Not something interceptor drones have. They are just more sustainable, espically for lower value targets.
It sounds like you just rather sacrifice Ukrainian lives than interceptors altough neither is enough to open the straight.
Z3B0@reddit
I was talking about having drone teams on small boats near the Saudi/quatari coast to intercept incoming shaheds on their refineries. I doubt the Iranian have weapons capable of hitting a dinghy 100km off their coast, and even if they have, they'd much prefer using them on much more valuable targets.
The strait is 55km large at the smallest. Even in the middle, you still have 30km of room to intercept things, and be a very difficult target to even detect, much less hit.
This is not standing in the open 200m from Iranian shores like you make it seem like.
esjb11@reddit
Ukraine could definetly help the Arab states protecting refineries etc with interceptor drones. Perhaps not as much USA since they mainly have smaller bases but definetly countries there such as saudi. Patrol boats their is a struggle since they need to pass the the smallest place first but they could be at land for that if allowed. Its not just the shore you need to worry about. There are quite some Islands where Iran has fortifications.
But yes they could definetly protect oil refineries etc. That was however not the topic at hand. We were talking about opening the straight. Allowing shipping to pass trough. Thats vastly different. Thats where Ukraine aid would mostly just be cannonfodder to avoid American cassulties.
alkbch@reddit
It’s remarkable you still think Ukraine has a chance to win, whatever your definition of winning is.
Stubbs94@reddit
Nah, they'll go from fighting a defensive war to help in a war of aggression.
ComradeYoldas@reddit
There's a reason you see the Israeli and Ukrainian flag hand in hand
Chipay@reddit
Ukraine's production capacity is bigger than its purse, hence why it's going left and right selling licenses to drone production.
The Middle East is shook by the US's inability to keep their airspace secure, so they're looking towards nations that do offer capable (anti-)drone technology. Leading tech is obviously either Ukrainian, Russian or Iranian. Iran is off the table, Russia is collaborating with Iran, and frankly Ukraine is much more eager anyway.
Ukraine gets cash and economies of scale, GCC countries get leading, battle-tested drone tech. It's a win-win.
esjb11@reddit
Not really. Its however the one thing they can produce at somewhat of a scale and hence is trying to trade for other things they need but can be hard to get gifted.
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
He can't "open" Russian-occupied territory in his own country which is almost four times the size of Belgium, but he's going to do what the U.S. Navy can't with all its advancement and arsenal? Get lost.
The more time goes on the more his statements and behavior remind me of Trump in the way no other two world leaders are alike. Both are incessant, constant, 24/7 showman whose only thought and orientation is ME ME ME and how to find a way to twist every issue, even the most unrelated, into being about them.
Rindan@reddit
That "showman" has held the Russian army off for longer than it took for Nazi Germany to drive all the way to Moscow, fight Stalingrad, retreat all the way back to Germany, and surrender. In that time Russia has never even come close to reaching the highs they achieved in their surprise attack, and all they have a huge pile of dead bodies, burned resources, and uninhabitable wasteland to show for it.
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
A lot of the territory Russia both formally annexed and de facto controls in the southeast of Ukraine didn't have active battles or didn't have active battles for very long at their locations so it isn't like a lot of those cities and towns they captured, especially the ones early on, resemble the burned out ruins of a place like Marinka.
But regardless, litigating the Ukraine conflict here is really beside the point. The point is: Do you seriously attribute any of that to him as a person, as some military genius? Rather than the material circumstances of the involved sides.
There isn't a thing he has done in Ukraine which has a lick of relevance to anything going on in and around the Strait of Hormuz.
Rindan@reddit
Yes, I seriously attribute Zelenskyy's decision to stay in Kyiv as a key point in the war that prevented the collapse of the state. Likewise, his forward leadership where he visits the front line in drone range has undoubtedly contributed to Ukraine's firm resistance and his extreme popularity in Ukraine. His diplomatic efforts to secure for Ukraine the weapons to fight Russia and it's allied autocracies North Korea and Iran has also been instrumental in holding of the Russian invasion for over 4 years.
Ukraine has held Russia back longer than the entire duration of WWI, and longer than the entire German/Russian war during WWII. I know I sure as shit didn't expect Ukraine to still be holding Russia in Donbas 4 years later. But sure, the guy leading Ukraine is incompetent. I'm sure you'd have taken Moscow by now.
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
I'm not sure what bringing up conflicts like either WWI or WWII is supposed to prove. Those were total wars with a mass draft and entirely different situations from start to finish. Many wars have lasted a lot longer than those. You have near-peer conflicts, counterinsurgencies, and civil conflicts that all lasted 10, 20, 30+ years. Doesn't mean that any of the belligerents were more powerful or more strategically and tactically capable than any of the parties of the world wars. That isn't how that works. Totally divorced material circumstances.
Anyway, bringing it back to the main point of this topic, again the issue at hand is that there is nothing he has done inside Ukraine which, if replicated in the region under discussion, would do a damn thing to lift the Iranian blockade on Hormuz. That's self-evident.
No country in the world today possesses air defenses advanced and extensive enough that would provide the level of protection required for those ships to receive shipping insurance for transit and anti-naval warfare in the Black Sea isn't relevant when the ships are threatened by air and land-based missile systems.
Firecracker048@reddit
For a showman, he sure has been doing a good job of keeping his country together.
Ill never understand this cope about Zelensky
Chipay@reddit
To be fair, US drone technology is hopelessly behind compared to what Russia and Ukraine are putting out on the battlefield. American doctrine as well, the USAF is still putting planes out in the open like Russia was nearly half a decade ago.
upbeatchief@reddit
Because sea mnes can be eventually dealt with, theres are reason that iran is chuxking drones at shipping vessels, they can operate in hormuz waters safely enough to effectively mine it.
So if Ukraine can provide a good enough protection against shaheds, on american ships. movment thru the strait can resume.
And seeing as Ukraine is the best at providing a cost effective soliti8for drones they have a key position to play in this conflict.
I am just waiting now for people downvote me because somehow iran has a right to drone strike ships at sea
ThevaramAcolytus@reddit
It isn't about possessing a "right" or not. No side is adhering to legality. The U.S. and Israel ensured that when they launched an illegal war of aggression and of choice. Wars of aggression is "the supreme international crime" from which all others of all parties derive from and follow, as defined in the post-WWII Nuremberg trials.
There is no foolproof protection against Shaheds (or the Russian analog of Gerans based on the same aerial UAV technology). If there were, then Ukraine still wouldn't be having their own war materiel and properties blown up by them within their own country. It's that simple.
So it's not a matter that right now no ship can sail through without Iranian authorization if they so choose. Some might even by some stroke of luck evade Iranian notice. The point is that as long as a single ship can go kablooey - and they can and will, then the maritime insurers' won't insure and cover them. So they won't sail.
chillichampion@reddit (OP)
He’s a 🤡. What do you expect?
no_soy_livb@reddit
We know, Ukraine, you're begging for attention. The war in your country is becoming unpopular with all the abductions and kidnappings perpetrated by the TCC so you're doing a new PR stunt to show the world you're defending Europe and the West from terrorism or whatever. Sure Ukraine sure.
Promise_OW@reddit
Or they are just trying to fund their own defensive war against Russia, crazy concept.
Firecracker048@reddit
Man the comments here are exactly what I expected. Somehow, someway, you are all dumbfounded Ukraine would have beef with Iran for supplying drones and drone tech to Russia for the last 3 years and killing countless Ukrainians with them
YaBoiJim777@reddit
Some of y’all are so dumb. You seriously think Ukraine is going to send cruisers and frigates to the straight?
Turgius_Lupus@reddit
More a excuse for the Euros to send the things they are already making for Ukraine, while saying they are not involved.
eelsandpeels@reddit
The topic of Ukraine on this subreddit always attracts the strangest comments.
cut_rate_revolution@reddit
What exactly is the Ukrainian navy?
This is like a quadriplegic person saying they'll help you move.
Thanks for the offer but I'm not really sure what you can bring to the table.
kaschperli@reddit
Ukraine can't even deal with it's home defense without billions and billions of foreign money and weapons. They totally lost their mind inside their propaganda machinery exactly like Russia and china.
AutoModerator@reddit
The link you have provided contains keywords for topics associated with an active conflict, and has automatically been flaired accordingly. If the flair was not updated, the link submitter MUST do so. Due to submissions regarding active conflicts generating more contrasting discussion, comments will only be available to users who have set a subreddit user flair, and must strictly comply with subreddit rules. Posters who change the assigned post flair without permission will be temporarily banned. Commenters who violate Reddiquette and civility rules will be summarily banned.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.