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 -
Bloomberg: Goldman Says Gulf Oil Flows Two-Thirds of Prewar Level
A lot of ships are still making the crossing dark with transponders turned off but the trend is clear. Iran’s (supposed) leverage over the strait is basically nullified, oil is passing through despite Iranian proclamations. Independent analysts now agree with what the US government was saying weeks ago, that millions of barrels are passing through the strait under American auspices.
US CENTCOM agrees, putting out this statement that the US has escorted a few thousand ships through the Gulf, carrying through three-quarters of a billion barrels of oil over the past few months.
What changed?
Axios: "That sucker is open": U.S. gains the upper hand in the battle for Hormuz
The US has apparently de-mined the Straits of Hormuz, although, interestingly, there don’t seem to have been many mines in the first place!
It seems as though Iran’s capacities to threaten ship traffic the Strait were severely degraded by US military action, but that Iran was successfully able to convince news reporters and insurance companies that it could target ships.
For instance, Brady Sullivan at CNBC says
Meanwhile, Reuters: Pipelines and ports: Iran war spurs Gulf infrastructure investment
Not only has Iran lost control over the Straits, but Gulf states are building new pipelines to reroute oil around the Straits so that Iran can never threaten them again.
And how does it look inside Iran?
WSJ: Labor Protests and Panic Buying Signal Growing Pressure in Iran
————
Some might remember Trump’s infamous comments on this subject some months ago:
The Shakes take: Iran will never toll the straits, Iran will never have nuclear weapons, Trump was right about everything, a lot of people who believed Iranian claims are looking very, increasingly, increasingly!, foolish.
Goldman is extrapolating from Kpler data with the assumption that Kpler’s estimates are artificially low. Goldman is assuming: because Kpler’s estimates from months ago were later revised to be higher, this means that their estimates this week should also be revised higher. This assumption is speculative and IMO unwarranted. Kpler’s data from months ago was revised because AIS-off transfers were relatively new, but since then they have been tracking crossings by other means, like with satellites. Kpler has not announced in any of their publications the belief there is a large amount of dark shipping through the strait which they haven’t been able to count; they can find ships before and after they pass through even if the passing itself is dark. Maybe there is something more happening (how would anyone know but a guy on the shores with binoculars), but it’s telling that Kpler has never mentioned such a prospect to anyone or in any publication, as far as I can tell. If someone has access to the full Goldman report, that would be cool to check why they actually think it’s warranted to revise the Kpler data upward.
Iran and Oman recently agreed in principle on a route in which ships pass through Iranian waters, only barely passing through Omani waters. The Iran-Oman agreement bans US warships. There continues to be ships struck in the strait. Kpler has only been able to confirm transits through Iranian waters recently. The authoritative information is not looking good.
edit I looked into the Kpler details for more accurate numbers:
Per their Aug 19 report, between July 22nd and Aug 11 there were 4.83 millions of barrel per day on average of crude/condensate that were clearing, ignoring other liquids. [ctrl-f: clearance (mb)]. In 2025 that number was 14.95 mb/d crude + condensates. This is focusing only on crude/co, not the other products. So that’s 32% of prewar levels.
per the report, Kpler’s 12-16 Aug mbd estimate is 4.02 (2.3*1.75). Importantly they state here that their recent estimates are subject to a 1.5-2.0x correction, hence my 1.75 multiplier on their estimate or 2.3. That’s the lowest five-day avg going all the way back to June.
There’s nothing much newer by Kpler, but we can look at the number of vessel crossings between 12-16 which resulted in 4.02mbd to find a relationship. On X they post infographic gifs on this: that’s 10 vessel crossings on average. So, 10 vessels for 4.02mbd. The last three day period reported by Kpler averages 7 vessel crossings. So the last days reported = 2.81mbs crude/co. Which is 18.7% of pre-war levels. And again this is all only for crude/co, not other products, because I think the crude/co category is considered the most economically significant (?). However, the three days before that had some days in the 20s for crossings, so maybe the last 3d inspected period was unusually bad.
It’s possible America has gotten even better at stealth transits, but for that to be possible it would need to have occurred after the 12th. It’s also possible America is pushing more unladen vessels. (Kpler says laden transit fell 27% between Aug 21-23.)
Corrections on my math welcome
False. The image you posted shows routes published months ago and there is zero evidence that those routes are related current negotiations.
According to Iranian authorities, known for pants on fire lies on countless occasions.
I would like to point out that your link has zero connection with your claim.sorry I got my links mixed upIt’s the same route according to a Bloomberg journalist reporting on Gharibabadi’s interview, and the same graphic was used in Bloomberg reporting as of two days ago, a report written by the same journalist.
And WH refuses to respond about it… to Fox News of all outlets.
Is that even true? Has anyone compared the number of false statements by our President vs by official Iranian channels?
So, who do you think struck the Kuwaiti tanker near Omani waters? The ghost of Ahura Mazda?
Well then that journalist is stretching the truth. There is no legitimate evidence that the temporary route under negotiation between Oman and Iran is the same route that was claimed by Iran in June. But simply slapping the same map on top of every article is a neat lazy way to spice it up without being techncially false, if you don't make claims that image relates to the article content.
It's a super common practice for joirnalists to put stock photos or other assets not directly of the event being reported on, just to provide some filler and vibe. Just open any paper and look carefully at the captions.
Examples: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/29/tuareg-rebels-free-more-malian-soldiers-in-prisoner-swap-sources-say
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/29/in-south-korea-it-is-to-travel-to-dangerous-countries-journalists-say-its-making-their-work-impossible
https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/28/asia/taiwan-china-ships-record-intl-hnk
https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/28/politics/trump-venezuela-oil-deal
Trump lying doesn't make Iran's lies less of lies. But I do honestly believe the Iranians and Pakis were saying different stuff behind closed doors than publicly, so the number of pants on fire lies from Trump is actually quite low. Most of his lies I would categorize as "mostly false"
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