113
Bulletins and International News Discussion from June 22nd to June 28th, 2026 - Shaky Start To Negotiations / Will the Zionist Entity Withdraw Fully From Lebanon? / Cuba Reforms Under Siege (thelemmy.club)
submitted 4 days ago by SeventyTwoTrillion@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net
687 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A reminder that as the US continues to threaten countries around the world, fedposting is to be very much avoided (even with qualifiers like "in Minecraft") and comments containing it will be removed.

Image is (presumably; there's no caption) of Zionist strikes on southern Lebanon, where they are attempting to replicate their strategy from Gaza.

This week's summary of the situation is in spoiler tags below:

preambleDiplomacy between Iran and the US has begun in... perhaps not earnest, but it's certainly started. Iran's very reasonable requirement that the Zionist occupation stop ethnically cleansing Lebanon and withdraw has caused a great deal of consternation throughout their population, and several analysts have suggested that Netanyahu being forced to accept Trump's (and therefore Iran's) demands spells the end of his leadership in the coming elections; then, the occupation is expected to "mellow out" and the conflicts and genocides slow and stop. This view is only really impactful if you believe that, rather than the US and Zionists being in a strongly mutually beneficial relationship based on geopolitical, financial, and clandestine goals, that instead Netanyahu is a devious mastermind bending any and all in the US to his whims. I don't believe this; and, if anything, the events of at least the last three years prove that he's really quite stupid, with "Israel" being in its worst position in decades under his rule.

Nonetheless, Iran has made the issue of Lebanon a not-quite-red-line (an orange line?). It hasn't stopped them from going to Switzerland and beginning negotiations, but they still want to strongly express their discontent by harnessing the newfound superweapon that is Hormuz. Similarly, threats by Trump and others to restart the war if Iran doesn't bend to their whims have been met with formal stoppages of negotiations, but it appears technical teams are still talking to each other and working things out. Trump's threats are fairly idle at this point because most in the US military must know that there's essentially zero effective military actions left to them with their current munition stockpiles.

Trump let slip that the US has about 3-4 weeks of oil reserves left, which aligns moderately well with the projections of analysts like Yves at Naked Capitalism (it's now expected in late July rather than early July as was originally forecasted months ago). This means that even if the negotiation process goes off without a hitch, that there's going to be a period of at least a few weeks where the US is out of reserves but is waiting for new shipments of oil to physically traverse the distance between Hormuz and the US continent. And many analysts have pointed out that it's going to be a long time - at least a few months, and perhaps more like 9 to 12 - before Hormuz flows pick up to pre-war levels, due to logistics companies and insurance companies wanting to be sure that their property isn't going to be blown up mid-transit. Regardless, the fact that the timetable is now so tight could indicate that the Trump admin has finally realized that it cannot outbluff and outwait Iran, and will give them a good deal out of necessity, even if this means forcing their unsinkable aircraft carrier to stop bombing children for five consecutive minutes.

However, there is a palpable anxiety throughout Iran right now, especially due to controversy over the degree to which Khamenei actually agreed with the current course of events. This does seem to be confirmed by his wording (to paraphrase): "In principle, I took a different view, but allowed the President to proceed." Many inside Iran now have more fear that their politicians will not push hard enough for a good deal than that they'll return to war, with all that may imply. This isn't an unfounded fear, especially given how suddenly the 12 Day War ended despite Iran's strengths being medium-and-long-term attrition (now confirmed by this latest war). This is one of those events that reveals how the Supreme Leader in fact doesn't have complete dictatorial power unlike how he's conceived of in much of the West, and that even during existential wars, major concessions have to be made to democratically elected leaders. Though, this could also be a clever move to shift blame explicitly onto the Reformist elements if the deal collapses.

Last week's thread is here.
The Imperialism Reading Group is here.

Please check out the RedAtlas!

The bulletins site is here. Currently not used.
The RSS feed is here. Also currently not used.

The Zionist Entity's Genocide of Palestine

If you have evidence of Zionist crimes and atrocities that you wish to preserve, there is a thread here in which to do so.

Sources on the fighting in Palestine against the temporary Zionist entity. In general, CW for footage of battles, explosions, dead people, and so on:

UNRWA reports on the Zionists' destruction and siege of Gaza and the West Bank.

English-language Palestinian Marxist-Leninist twitter account. Alt here.
English-language twitter account that collates news.
Arab-language twitter account with videos and images of fighting.
English-language (with some Arab retweets) Twitter account based in Lebanon. - Telegram is @IbnRiad.
English-language Palestinian Twitter account which reports on news from the Resistance Axis. - Telegram is @EyesOnSouth.
English-language Twitter account in the same group as the previous two. - Telegram here.

Mirrors of Telegram channels that have been erased by Zionist censorship.

Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Examples of Ukrainian Nazis and fascists
Examples of racism/euro-centrism during the Russia-Ukraine conflict

Sources:

Defense Politics Asia's youtube channel and their map. Their youtube channel has substantially diminished in quality but the map is still useful.
Moon of Alabama, which tends to have interesting analysis. Avoid the comment section.
Understanding War and the Saker: reactionary sources that have occasional insights on the war.
Alexander Mercouris, who does daily videos on the conflict. While he is a reactionary and surrounds himself with likeminded people, his daily update videos are relatively brainworm-free and good if you don't want to follow Russian telegram channels to get news. He also co-hosts The Duran, which is more explicitly conservative, racist, sexist, transphobic, anti-communist, etc when guests are invited on, but is just about tolerable when it's just the two of them if you want a little more analysis.
Simplicius, who publishes on Substack. Like others, his political analysis should be soundly ignored, but his knowledge of weaponry and military strategy is generally quite good.
On the ground: Patrick Lancaster, an independent and very good journalist reporting in the warzone on the separatists' side.

Unedited videos of Russian/Ukrainian press conferences and speeches.

Pro-Russian Telegram Channels:

Again, CW for anti-LGBT and racist, sexist, etc speech, as well as combat footage.

https://t.me/aleksandr_skif ~ DPR's former Defense Minister and Colonel in the DPR's forces. Russian language.
https://t.me/Slavyangrad ~ A few different pro-Russian people gather frequent content for this channel (~100 posts per day), some socialist, but all socially reactionary. If you can only tolerate using one Russian telegram channel, I would recommend this one.
https://t.me/s/levigodman ~ Does daily update posts.
https://t.me/patricklancasternewstoday ~ Patrick Lancaster's telegram channel.
https://t.me/gonzowarr ~ A big Russian commentator.
https://t.me/rybar ~ One of, if not the, biggest Russian telegram channels focussing on the war out there. Actually quite balanced, maybe even pessimistic about Russia. Produces interesting and useful maps.
https://t.me/epoddubny ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/boris_rozhin ~ Russian language.
https://t.me/mod_russia_en ~ Russian Ministry of Defense. Does daily, if rather bland updates on the number of Ukrainians killed, etc. The figures appear to be approximately accurate; if you want, reduce all numbers by 25% as a 'propaganda tax', if you don't believe them. Does not cover everything, for obvious reasons, and virtually never details Russian losses.
https://t.me/UkraineHumanRightsAbuses ~ Pro-Russian, documents abuses that Ukraine commits.

Pro-Ukraine Telegram Channels:

Almost every Western media outlet.
https://discord.gg/projectowl ~ Pro-Ukrainian OSINT Discord.
https://t.me/ice_inii ~ Alleged Ukrainian account with a rather cynical take on the entire thing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Tervell@hexbear.net 68 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

https://archive.ph/ZKWlO

US couldn’t repair battle-damaged ships in war with China, study finds

Battle-damaged U.S. warships could not be quickly repaired and returned to combat during a war with China, according to a new report.

more

U.S. maintenance facilities would be overwhelmed and would lack sufficient spare parts to repair ships in theater, concluded the study by RAND, a Washington-based think tank. Nor can the U.S. Navy assume that its Pacific allies have adequate shipyard capacity — or political willingness — to fix damaged vessels. The U.S. Navy has struggled with overworked ships and crews, as well as overburdened shipyards and repair depots. But a war with China, which has the world’s largest navy, would almost certainly result in American ships being hit by everything from ballistic “carrier-killer” missiles, to hypersonic weapons and torpedoes, the study says. “The Navy has not faced damage at the level likely to occur in a major war since World War II,” warned RAND. The study recommended that command-and-control authority for repair work be streamlined, including prior agreements with allied nations regarding access to facilities. It also urged the U.S. Navy to expand its mobile repair capabilities, including “deployable repair teams, flyaway assessment units, and scalable Expeditionary Mobile Repair Facilities.”

Barriers to repairs

RAND’s analysis was based on a tabletop wargame conducted in August 2025. The setting was a hypothetical war with China, as U.S. ships race to defend Taiwan from invasion or blockade. The American vessels in question were Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, the backbone of the U.S. surface fleet. The U.S. Navy will need every ship it can get, including damaged vessels patched up and rejoining the fight. However, “existing Navy systems for battle-damage repair are burdened by a variety of inefficiencies that hinder the Navy’s capacity for responding to widespread battle damage,” the study warned. Analysts also found that “attempting repairs in a hostile Indo-Pacific environment will be significantly more complex than existing plans allow. This complexity creates serious risks to U.S. and allied rapid force regeneration and maritime dominance.”

Meanwhile, Chinese ships would be operating close to their home bases and repair facilities. “China is not only closer, it also has significantly better industrial repair capability,” Bradley Martin, a RAND analyst who co-authored the report, told Defense News. Though the game focused on Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, repair issues would “apply to all ship classes, and in fact may be more pronounced where nuclear repairs are involved. Issues of access, vulnerability, and industrial capacity apply across all ship classes.” Rather than combat, the game focused on how damaged ships could be repaired in the Pacific theater and returned to combat, rather than spending weeks limping back to U.S. ports. This would likely require U.S. access to ports and shipyards in allied nations. During the game, teams represented the U.S. and its allies, including Japan, Korea and Australia. The four scenarios spanned a variety of situations. They included a U.S. destroyer colliding with a Chinese frigate in the Straits of Malacca, two destroyers damaged by gunfire and rockets from Chinese ships and helicopters while escorting Philippines ships in disputed waters in the South China Sea, several destroyers severely damaged by Chinese anti-ship missiles while defending the Philippines, and multiple destroyers badly damaged while intercepting a Chinese amphibious invasion of Taiwan.

Poor coordination with allies

The common denominator was that all of the American ships needed quick repairs. But that was easier said than done. For starters, there were difficulties determining what resources were needed for repairs, and whether a vessel could be fixed locally or would have to sail back to the United States. Players also “assumed that regulations and standards for repair and maintenance would remain the same in a wartime environment as they are during peacetime,” the report said. Nor were command arrangements clear. For example, “the group that represented the in-theater logistics and maintenance team at times took actions, specifically those related to in-theater repair options, that the theater operational commander had already rejected because of operational constraints,” said the report. In addition, coordination was lacking between organizations in the Pacific and the U.S. The U.S. team didn’t fully understand what its Pacific allies could offer.

“U.S. participants demonstrated knowledge gaps about the locations of host nations’ ports,

tito-laugh Americans will never learn geography, even if it's literally a matter of life or death

not to mention host nations’ capabilities or access requirements,” the study noted. Though Japan, Korea and Australia have significant resources, “some kinds of operations — such as ordnance handling or a lengthy repair — would bring complications.“ Allied nations were also mindful that repairing U.S. warships could bring Chinese retaliation. “Japan, the ROK [Republic of Korea], and Australia are in principle committed to supporting U.S. repair, but this cannot be assumed once the threat level starts to escalate,” said Martin. However, the study did note that “although there were significant knowledge gaps at the outset of the exercise, once ally members explained their capabilities, collaboration was mostly seamless.” Sufficient spare parts were also an issue, especially for older ships. “Even ships within the same class can be significantly different from one another,” the study noted. “Some critical parts or systems from one ship might not translate to another ship.”

[-] BobDole@hexbear.net 44 points 2 days ago

Shit I was saying 10 years ago. But no, we have to pay RAND millions to figure it out

[-] limer@lemmy.ml 36 points 2 days ago

It’s not official until kickbacks occur to the nepo babies at rand

[-] aanes_appreciator@hexbear.net 39 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

But a war with China, which has the world’s largest navy

nice

[-] fox@hexbear.net 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Seems like the only winning move is to keep my ships far away from that area. Why are American ships floating off the coast of China anyways? Seems dumb, that's really far to defend the homeland.

[-] aanes_appreciator@hexbear.net 34 points 2 days ago

the US military presence in East Asia is more or less a tripwire force around a few neocolonial holdings (Japan, Taiwan, South Korea) which maintains the trust of national bourgeoisies in the region, and ensures a swift escalation towards nuclear warfare for anyone big enough to challenge those forces in earnest (China).

[-] demeritum@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 day ago

They defend an empire which has total control over almost every large body of water.

[-] Damarcusart@hexbear.net 27 points 2 days ago

If the US declared war on China, they'd still insist that China needs to keep trading with them during the war so they can obtain the raw materials to actually repair the damage China does to their ships.

[-] CliffordBigRedDog@hexbear.net 17 points 2 days ago

A naval war with China would be like Pacific front but the US is Japan this time

this post was submitted on 22 Jun 2026
113 points (100.0% liked)

news

24807 readers
614 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
Alaskaball@hexbear.net
carpoftruth@hexbear.net
Breath_Of_The_Snake@hexbear.net
Infamousblt@hexbear.net
Redcuban1959@hexbear.net