Diplomatically, we saw Lebanon, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia expelling Iranian diplomats (some even threatening war with Iran). And the entire gulf region unite against Iran. All while Iran's allies were mostly passive.

It's quite likely that Iran would need to deal with the mess both internally (as the power grab in the leadership vacuum could take place), and externally with the neighbors it bombed. Iran needs to make it appear as a win internally, and that's something that would affect any long term agreement.

Regardless, whether it's a win to ETTHER side remains to be seen when a more permanent agreement is signed. If for example Iran actually manages to impose a fee on passing ships, then that's a major achievement for Iran, and could create a dangerous pretendant for other regions (like the strait of Malacca in Indonesia, Bab El-Mandeb and even the South China sea.

If AI will indeed become superintelligent, we won't matter.

It seems like rage-baiting, polarizing titles and vibe based comments are being upvoted, with no interest in the facts. For example, in this case:

1. The growth of the gold reserve in comparison to US Treasuries have very little to do with growth in gold acquisition, and has everything to do with gold more than doubling in price in a year.

2. To make it even worse, gold has since fluctuated in value, and treasuries overtook gold momentarily just a week ago. These price fluctuations has nothing to do with geopolitics.

3. Central bank buying of gold has been trending down in the last year, down 21% from 2024. So far in 2026 it's been going even lower.

4. Gold owned by central banks was higher than US treasuries in the 90s (this is mentioned in the article at least).

This is a little meta - but the thing that bothers me is that this low quality discussion like in this thread is spreading everywhere with the same mechanism - bring politics and polarization into every place, no matter how tangentially related it is.

I don't know why a study that focuses on discontinuation didn't split the groups that restarted or transitioned against the group that actually just stopped.

It’s like stopping a blood pressure medicine and then being surprised that people have more heart attacks afterwards.

Happy to hear other suggestions as well with more nuance on the topic.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47448569

Points: 6

# Comments: 1

So we would still build stuff, but it would not be out of necessity.

That photo is taken directly from AP news reporting, taken by Airbus.

https://www.reddit.com/r/war/comments/1rh2f41/the_residence_...

But their goal is targeted and precise attacks, that effectively destroy targets based on specific, and high quality intelligence.

The other part is that defense against missiles is significantly harder and more expensive than sending missiles. Iran, while relatively poor, has dedicated a significant part of its economy for missile development and production.

In fact, after Vietnam war congress specifically created a law to restrict hostilities without congress approval to up to 60 days, which is what the current (and prior) administrations are acting on.

I'm not sure what's the logic behind that PR-wise, but regardless, it didn't happen.

Given how popular (and expensive) it is for horses, it likely delivers on the results people are looking for. Note that current cloning techniques don't clone the mitochondria, which represents 1%-2% of the genome.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horse_cloning