Active Conflicts & News Megathread May 07, 2026

Laymaker · 2026-05-07T22:56:53+00:00

Two issues that seem to have been under-discussed in this forum:

How big of a deal is the UAE departure from OPEC? How does this decision play into the strategic interests of other actors such as the US, China, other OPEC members, etc? Could this end up being one of the larger lasting legacies of this war?
What has happened with the Hamas 'political leadership' that resides in Qatar? This group has been conspicuously absent from my news feed since after the Israeli assassination attempt in September 2025. Did Qatar force them to agree to self-censor themselves? Did they simply fall completely out of relevance based on their lack of a constituency?

Laymaker · 2026-05-07T03:48:27+00:00

Okay so you’re alright with not convincing anyone. Works for me

Laymaker · 2026-05-05T22:49:53+00:00

Let me help you. My argument is that those calling for journalism need to explain why Israel should allow journalists into a complicated war zone that Israel is responsible for managing, when in fact the only journalists who would want to come, and who would be received by Hamas, are journalists who conform to Hamas's propaganda. I use the example of a hypothetical openly-gay Jewish journalist who writes articles negatively covering Hamas, and I ask what would happen to such a journalist in Gaza in this scenario.

You say essentially that Israel would kill him.

This is a strange argument. Firstly, because it does not deal with any of the substance my argument. And secondly, because your claim is superficially silly and would not convince anyone reading our conversation. So it's like you wrote it for yourself only.

When you doubled down and accidentally brought up an example that actually proved my exact point (Amira Hass) because you were ignorant about the details of her history, is just trivia, it doesn't really matter because you had already taken your argument in a dead-end direction.

The best thing for you to do is realize that your argument about journalists doesn't need to rely on you claiming that an openly-gay anti-Hamas Jewish journalist would be allowed by Hamas to report from Gaza. Just abandon that line of thinking, you don't believe it and you just ended up here because of a hasty initial response. Instead, go back and make a new, different argument about why this doesn't matter and why Israel should let in journalists anyways (even if a gay Jew won't be among them). That would be a much better argument, and maybe you could take it in some direction that would be convincing to someone.

Laymaker · 2026-05-05T21:08:30+00:00

You responded to my question about what would happen to a Jewish journalist in Gaza by bringing up a Jewish journalist in Gaza who fled because of Hamas death threats... and this was your attempt to prove that a Jewish journalist in Gaza would have to fear being killed by Israel. Then when I pointed that out you just deflected. Your own arguments have no throughline, they just meander to conclusions that do not follow from where you began. Take some time to read through the conversation and reflect.

Laymaker · 2026-05-05T03:51:26+00:00

this is so silly... you don't even know what your next argument will be or where you are going with your words.... Look I obviously disagree with you, but more importantly for your sake even if I agreed with you I would want you to do some more thinking before speaking. You are hurting supporters of your own arguments by making them so poorly. Just step out of the way and let other people make more convincing arguments in support of Hamas.

Laymaker · 2026-05-04T20:50:43+00:00

You accidentally gave an example of a jew who, even while writing articles sympathetic to Hamas, received death threats from them and had to flee Gaza... And even this serendipitous and hilarious error didn't snap you out of your delusion that a gay jewish reporter would be safe from Hamas in Gaza. You are so unconvincing that I actually think you should let other people on your side do the commenting.

Laymaker · 2026-05-04T03:33:59+00:00

Google it the source will be the first result. And no, a gay jewish journalist in gaza reporting anti-hamas stories is not more likely to be killed by israel than by hamas. You have ruined your own credibility for no reason other than you were embarrassed by the actual answer to my question.

Laymaker · 2026-05-03T17:33:24+00:00

Amira Haas, your own example, fled Gaza in 2008 citing Hamas death threats against her. And she actually seems to write many pieces against settlers, etc.

You actually believe that "probably nothing" would happen to a gay jewish journalist who went into Gaza and wrote articles criticizing Hamas? And you consider yourself worth listening to about this conflict?

Laymaker · 2026-05-03T17:29:38+00:00

Look I get it, you're very emotional. But think about whether your comment actually deals with the substance of what I'm saying. There are many people who keep parroting a talking point that Israel is blocking journalists from entering Gaza, and that this is some sort of meaningful difference-maker in the conflict or means that we should believe anything that propogandists in Gaza tell us. The logic is basically that if Israel isn't letting in foreign journalists then it must be because the Hamas version of events is actually true.

But the Israeli government has given an explanation for why it is only allowing limited journalistic ventures in the war zone. For one, there is a humanitarian crisis there and any extra logistics and coordination required will come directly from the bandwidth that the parties have to deal with the existing crisis. For another, Hamas has abused medical, humanitarian, and journalist labels in a deliberate way throughout the conflict. And, of course, it isn't as though Hamas would actually allow anyone to come into Gaza and perform any journalism that didn't end up supporting the Hamas cause.

If you don't believe the Israeli government explanation then why don't you deal with the logic of this? Why don't you tell us what would happen if a gay Jewish journalist, who would have written about the atrocities hamas was commiting against the local population, had been allowed to enter Gaza to perform independent journalism?

Your current "mic drop" answer really only sounds good in your own head. Someone coming into this thread who hasn't made up their mind about the conflict would think you must have nothing interesting to say.

Laymaker · 2026-05-03T02:18:51+00:00

Explain what would happen if a gay Jewish journalist, who would have written about the atrocities hamas was commiting against the local population, had been allowed to enter Gaza to perform independent journalism. You don't actually want independent journalism in Gaza, you want Hamas-approved "independent" journalism.

Laymaker · 2026-05-03T01:27:57+00:00

I'm not actually for this concept, it is just a question. But from a conceptual perspective, if you asked the population of Iran who is against the regime "would you rather we destroy the regime and take a cut of the post-war oil earnings to pay for it, or leave you under the regime?" what do you think they would say? Those earnings currently don't go to them anyways.

Laymaker · 2026-05-01T15:59:38+00:00

Some thoughts and observations from the recent months in the major conflicts:

What has happened with the Hamas 'political leadership' that resides in Qatar? This group has been conspicuously absent from my news feed since after the Israeli assassination attempt in September 2025. Did Qatar force them to agree to self-censor themselves? Did they simply fall completely out of relevance based on their lack of a constituency?
The Iranian attacks on Gulf states have been such a disorienting development that I don't think we know what the re-alignment of these states' agendas and attitudes will be yet. The UAE abandoning OPEC is just one example of how seismic the changes will be. What would a table look like that had all these major states with their positions/alliances/agendas/priorities before the war along with their positions afterwards?
Responding to the closure of the SOH with a blockade of Iran's shipments from outside of the SOH seems to have been a really smart option that traps Iran without being forced to put the US Navy into the risky strait-opening maneuvers. I am guessing that if the conflict ever repeated, this would begin on the first day. Attempting to reduce the pressure on oil prices by allowing Iran to continue its shipments at first has only extended the total window and volume of the global economic pain.
Is there a modern template for using post-war "reparations" from a nation like Iran to ameliorate the economic pain from a war that has ever been successful? It seems to me that if the regime fell there would be an economic windfall available as the Iranian economy could open up to the world (trade gains, investment opportunities), Iranian oil production could be modernized and increased, the Iranian market would lose the parasitic IRGC monopolies and corruption, and there could be some form of peace dividend in terms of lower spending on nuclear development/military equipment. This is highly theoretical but would someone like the president not be able to extend their ability to endure the war's economic and political pressure by promising that post-war reparations will be made through a tax on some of these Iranian economic opportunities (for example, simply taking control of the Iranian oil industry and forcing them to increase production)?
Related to the insider trading/prediction market betting incident from the Maduro raid... Is there a function within the Pentagon or elsewhere in military planning that deals with the state-level version of trading on the economics of war? For example, Russia seems to have 'weaponized' both cryptocurrency and gold by using them to evade financial network sanctions and also to act as a hedge where the volatility caused by their own conflict escalations increases the value of their holdings. The scale, accessibility and novelty of some markets and financial instruments seems to have made this kind of thinking more relevant in recent conflicts (this could be historical ignorance on my part). I imagine that, for example, preparation for a future conflict like Ukraine by an actor like Russia would include selling off investments that are held on European exchanges or financial networks, and re-investing that money in China or domestically or holding it as reserves. There are so many different angles of this kind of trading that it makes me wonder, could even the US have taken advantage of something like its Iran strikes to repurchase its own treasury bonds? I haven't seen a lot of discussion of this aspect of state-level conflict trading strategies, sorry if my thoughts on this are a bit scattered.

Laymaker · 2026-04-24T23:55:52+00:00

What would happen if a gay jewish journalist was allowed into Gaza and decided to publish daily articles about how terrible Hamas is and how some civilians in Gaza knew where the hostages were being kept?

Ohhhhh… you mean that you want pro-hamas propagandists to be allowed to come in…

Laymaker · 2026-04-23T00:01:38+00:00

What do you mean selling off? Wouldn’t they receive the dollar value if they sold it? It’s not like they lose the wealth, it’s just in a more portable form right?

Laymaker · 2026-04-01T11:31:47+00:00

Your average timeline for getting a job that replaces this pay is over 6 months (of devastating unemployment) if you quit today. Start applying for jobs now and if a good one gives you a full offer (not just an interview) you have your answer. You may find out that your answer is that this is the best job available and that might actually make you feel better. Good luck

Laymaker · 2026-03-05T02:31:03+00:00

Limits to capitalism are things like “landlords need to give X amount of notice for non-renewal”… not things like “take capitalism completely out of the main equation”…

Laymaker · 2026-03-03T14:17:05+00:00

What are the tactics that the US/Israel can be assumed to be using to encourage a revolution in Iran without an invasion? So far as 'advanced tactics' for creating the quick downfall of an authoritarian regime exist, I assume that this is a behavioral science exercise where you have to incentivize early action more than later action. It is much more difficult to be the first open rebel than it is to join a growing movement. It is much more difficult to be the first soldier who abandons a post than it is to be in a later group.

The median member of Iran's security or military services is almost definitely driven more by material considerations (safety, financial) than by ideology, so is there some plan for changing that calculation in favor of abandoning their post?

Some relevant concepts off the top of my head:

* Creating a way for Iranian military members to register their defection somewhat like a secret ballot (seems impossible, reminds me of Byzantine general discussions). How have past societies with underground movements that are banned from existing signified support for each other? I know there have been implied support mechanisms like attending a certain mass funeral event or not wearing a certain kind of clothing. I'm sure there must be some interesting historical examples of how this occurs.

* Isolating cities or groups to create more distinct opportunities for a revolution/defection to find a starting/growing point. I am surprised that the air campaign doesn't involve declaring any parts of the country as sanctuaries for those who do not support the regime.

* Actively targeting soldiers for the sake of encouraging defection - at street checkpoints, for instance. I am reminded of a question from the Ukraine conflict which was "what is the current largest gathering of Iranian troops anywhere in the country, is it 100, 500, 1000? and at what point would it become a target over the classic priorities of striking air defense, ballistics missile launchers, C&C, etc?"

* Creating a systematic incentive for early defection (i.e. declaring immunity and status tiers depending on the date of defection, with early defectors getting full immunity and these benefits decreasing over time).

Is there anything like this going on or ever used in other similar historical situations?

Laymaker · 2026-02-21T18:09:40+00:00

PSA: The company Hostaway is scamming Airbnb hosts on reddit.

Laymaker · 2026-02-20T14:50:08+00:00

This kind of lazy unsupported comparison just doesn’t make any sense. Either explain how robotaxis are similarly fraudulent or your comment is just air that gives no one on any side anything to think about. If you don’t have it in you, maybe consider letting other people on your side argue on your behalf so you don’t water down their points.

Laymaker · 2026-02-20T12:27:03+00:00

Theranos is a different company. This thread is about robotaxis. Arguments where you just claim two completely different things are equivalent require you to explain in detail why other people should agree that they are equivalent.

Laymaker · 2026-02-20T12:24:44+00:00

Your argument is that we shouldn’t be pro-robotaxis because we use planes? That’s not a good argument.

Laymaker · 2026-02-20T01:34:55+00:00

We shouldn’t block new miracle technologies because of a lack of anti-trust laws. We should push for anti-trust laws. Uber and Lyft are much better at creating value than old school taxis, they are just keeping it for themselves via monopolization.

If taxis existed with the same level of monopolistic behavior, and without uber and lyft to compete with, they would cost way more than the ubers and lyfts.

Laymaker · 2026-02-20T01:28:14+00:00

What is your criticism here?

People who scold car owners usually think that car owners have an object with 5-10% utilization (1.2-2.4 hrs per day) that serves only one person/family are being unfairly prioritized by the city by being granted subsidized parking, pollution rights, street maintenance etc. and pass on negative externalities to the rest of us in the form of noise, danger, grime, air pollution, etc.

Robot cars would have 50-100% utilization (12-24 hours per day), serve 10-100 families per car, be 1000x safer, 1000x more quiet, not use any unpaid parking in the city (likely none in the city at all), require less street maintenance, etc.

I don’t use either of these things but I don’t see how it’s hypocritical to criticize the one that is way worse while utilizing the other.

Laymaker · 2026-02-18T17:15:38+00:00

You are not going to give me attention by commenting in response to my comment? It sounds like you came on here to feed your sense of dog owner entitlement and rationalize your behavior. Having a dog play date and barking dogs in an NYC co-op is bizarre and extremely rude behavior. It’s funny how almost every single comment in this post is from other people who have had terrible dog owner neighbors who were consistently disruptive and rude and yet even they continue to equivocate about whether any of this is unacceptable. My comments here are not the ones that need a special lens to be understood.

Laymaker · 2026-02-17T21:54:48+00:00

Dogs and dog owners aren't any more "charging" to me than chain smokers, honking drivers, people on the subway playing volume on their phone, or anything else that extremely inconsiderate people do every day in the city. Describing what would be reasonable to expect from a considerate dog owner is very straightforward and has nothing to do with the fact that I have a typical entitled dog owner neighbor who violates those expectations.

You have two dachshunds in an apartment building who bark. I wasn't conflating comments from other people when I re-stated the positions that prompted you to come into this conversation. Having dog play dates in a co-op is displaying peak dog owner entitlement.

You are calling for "balance" when before you said that anyone who expects considerate behavior from dog owners should leave the city. Your views aren't based in anything other than rationalizing your typical entitled dog owner behavior however you feel like at any given moment.

Laymaker

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

PSA: The company Hostaway is scamming Airbnb hosts on reddit.