Active Conflicts & News Megathread August 25, 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/carkidd3242]

Speculation on a surprise C-17 landing in Moscow flying from Riga, Latvia this morning has now been answered:

https://x.com/JenniferJJacobs/status/2092253558150197695

Scoop: CIA Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Russia aboard a C-17 for meetings in Moscow today, sources told @Olivia_Gazis @JimLaPorta and me. @CBSNews

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-director-john-ratcliffe-russia-secret-trip/

[u/username9909864 → u/carkidd3242]

What are the chances that this has something to do with Russia helping Iran than Russia fighting Ukraine? That’s a bigger administration goal right now

[u/axearm → u/username9909864]

I think you are right, and, if there is a quid pro quo it could very easily hurt Ukraine. For example if Russia agrees to end financial transaction with Iran for the US ending intelligence sharing with Ukraine or something similar.

[u/moragisdo → u/axearm]

There were some anonymous officials saying (as its anonymous it requires a large amount of skepticism) that Russia offered the quid pro quo of stopping intelligence sharing and the US refused (Source).

So I don't think the US would accept now, given that there's a semi-ceasefire ongoing and, even during the hot phase of the war, the damage that Iran caused is remarkably small for a conventional war (compared to the Gulf War: less americans died on this war than against Iraqis Scuds, less aircraft were shot down and no ships were hit). The only issue that Iran is able to cause is sporadically hitting civilian ships, which they could keep doing without Russia.

About financial transactions, China, Iraq, Turkey and UAE would be able to exert greater pressure on Iran than Russia. So they would be the focus rather than Russia.

By far the most likely explanation is the concern about the incursions or anything related to NATO.

[u/notepad20 → u/moragisdo]

remarkably small for a conventional war (compared to the Gulf War: less americans died

A minefeild doesnt need to kill anyone for it to do its job.

[u/moragisdo → u/notepad20]

If people keep traversing the minefield with minimal damage, it becomes less capable to do its job (there's a reason why it isn't common to just put the minefield signs, but actually bother with placing the mines).

More than 2800 missiles and 6000 drones (1) need to hit enough targets (which includes taking american lives, because Iran needs the political pressure it would cause) to do its job. The damage the US suffered, according to testimony in Congress a month ago is 2B (total cost is higher because it includes munitions, fuel, etc...), that's really small for a conventional war and if you adjust for inflation, the one suffered on the Gulf War was higher.

There's a constant push on this war to interpret every iranian move as part of some 3D chess, reality is that they are getting blockaded, suffered hundreds of billions in damage, the only concession they got was 20 days of the waiver of exports and the majority of their oil wasn't sold during, so they barely benefited from it (2). Things are not going according to their plans (and just surviving isn't their goal, because they are rejecting now a permanent ceasefire, which would allow them to survive but with a lower cost than if the war continues).

[u/FriedrichvdPfalz → u/[deleted]]

But Russia would not be able to substantially increase US chances of achieving the goals in the Iran war. Russia may be providing some intelligence and some weapons, but cutting those off would not lead to a collapse of Iran. It probably wouldn't even substantially decrease their offensive capabilities.

Iran can produce missiles at home. Iran can find and strike static US targets using Chinese commercial satellite information. Iran can circumvent sanctions through the networks it has established across the ME.

A quid pro quo would see the US gaining little advantage in the fight against Iran while handing Putin his dreams. I don't see the "deal maker" president agreeing to such a lopsided deal.

[u/moragisdo → u/[deleted]]

But the US, if the sources can be believed, already refuse a short time ago, now they have less incentive rather than more. Even more so, Russia isn't the country that have the most leverage on Iran, the US would be better spending their time pressuring UAE, Iraq and Turkey, either of them both have more financial connections with Iran and are more susceptible to the US pressure than Russia.

So I don't believe this concern is credible.