This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Iran has hit far more U.S. military assets than reported, satellite images show
The Washington Post, May 7, 2026
*The End of the American Way of War?
“The Iran war has called into question the feasibility of the American way of war. For decades, the United States has premised its national strategy on the ability to fight using forces forward deployed close to enemy territory”
The Brookings Institute
Anon, this stuff is literally all just in the news, it’s just that no one is paying attending. Almost every major US base in the Persian Gulf has sustain serious damage (article 1) to the point that the military is concerned that they won’t be able to effectively forward deploy to the Middle East anymore (article 2). That’s just two articles I was able to find with five minutes on Google. There’s hundreds like this.
The Iran missile stockpile:
U.S. Intelligence Shows Iran Retains Substantial Missile Capabilities
“Secret new assessments say Iran has operational access to 30 of its 33 missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, suggesting that its military remains far stronger than President Trump has asserted.”
The New York Times, May 12, 2026
The IAF thing:
Ramat David Airbase hit by missile fragment during Sunday's Iran escalation, IDF confirms to 'Post'
The Jerusalem Post, June 10, 2026
The article is currently claiming “minor damage” from a “missile fragment” but it was enough to cancel Israel’s planned 200 plane strike. Remember, this “minor damage” stuff was the party line we were hearing about the USS Gerald Ford for months.
And in any case, you are misapplying the rule to speak plainly. I’m not required to soooooooooource you just because you don’t like what I’m saying.
Those claims are rather different from your OP.
If you genuinely believe what you are saying, no, the rules don't require you to cite sources for your belief that the moon is made of cheese, or lizard people are running the world (though it is reasonable for people to ask for sources). However, I remain skeptical that you were being sincere in your claims that US military bases have been glassed and the IAF has been destroyed on the runway.
You might disagree on the degree. But look at the communications coming from Trump, Vance, Rubio, Netanyahu and Ben Givr. Does it sound like things are going really well to you? My version of events matches the chatter a lot better than the one where Iran is collapsing in two weeks.
Yes.
The degree of difference between "The US and Israeli militaries have taken more damage than is being reported" and "The US and Israeli militaries have been all but wiped out" is.... significant.
Aircraft carriers totaled, the entire IAF destroyed on the runway, multiple US military bases "glassed" (was this meant to imply that Iran literally nuked them, or was it just hyperbole?)... that is rather different than "Some missiles did more damage than they are admitting."
You claimed the first, then fell back to the latter when pressed.
Rarely has a more textbook case of Motte-and-Bailey been displayed here on the Motte.
I don’t think it’s unfair to call a base that’s been hit by so many missiles that it’s basically rubble and can’t be used anymore “glassed”. You are latching on to an at most slightly hyperbolic term.
You claimed the following:
You are now claiming that a base "has been hit by so many missiles it's basically rubble."
Even assuming that last claim is true (notwithstanding your refusal to provide evidence beyond vibes for anything you have claimed), you are absolutely motte-and-baileying. One wrecked base (which probably does not exist) turning into "all American bases in the Middle East glassed, the IAF destroyed, the Gerald Ford totaled" is not "slightly hyperbolic."
It’s not one base. The lowest mainstream media numbers are 250 separate impacts (and these are one to two thousand kilogram warheads) over at least 16 different facilities in the Middle East. I don’t mean to be a jerk, but you’ve clearly read very little of even just the basic media coverage about this.
Well, it's hard to think of a more polite way to describe what you're doing here. While your numbers and anecdotes keep changing, you still have not provided any credible evidence for all US bases in the Middle East being glassed (even if your definition of "glassed" turns out to be "took some damage"), an aircraft carrier being totaled, and the IAF being wiped out.
Yeah well flashing your cop lights at me just because you disagree isn’t that nice either.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link