Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

A wargame simulating a Strait of Hormuz conflict just before the actual events accurately foresaw the outcome: a low-intensity, cyclical "drone war" with no decisive military solution. This highlights the value of wargaming in setting realistic expectations for conflicts that lack clear military resolutions.

Related Insights

Low-cost, mass-produced drones create strategic advantage by forcing a disproportionately expensive defensive response ($4M missiles for $20K drones). This 'weaponized financial asymmetry' can extend conflicts by draining an opponent's budget, even if the drones are successfully intercepted.

Despite facing conventionally superior US and Israeli forces that can degrade its missile and nuclear capabilities, Iran leverages low-cost asymmetric tactics like drone strikes. This strategy allows it to inflict continuous damage and prolong the conflict without needing to match its adversaries' military might.

The conflict progresses through predictable stages: 1) US bombs, strengthening the regime; 2) Iran retaliates by taking the Strait of Hormuz; 3) US considers a ground war. This creates a trap where each step leads to a fork between a ground war or Iran's rise as a world power.

Iran's victory condition isn't military dominance but strategic disruption. By using asymmetric warfare—mines, drones, and missiles—to create chaos in the Strait of Hormuz, it can halt the flow of oil. This cracks the petrodollar system and achieves its primary geopolitical objective without needing to defeat the US Navy in a conventional battle.

The Hormuz crisis, like the war in Ukraine, demonstrates that cheap, numerous drones can effectively challenge even the most powerful militaries. This technology acts as a "beta test" for a new era of warfare, empowering smaller nations to control strategic chokepoints and permanently altering global energy security calculations.

Iran's strategy isn't a quick military victory but a war of attrition. By accepting a long timeline and inflicting small but consistent damage, it aims to erode US domestic support for the war, especially in an election year, and outlast the current administration.

The US and Israel are operationally successful in degrading Iran's military capabilities. However, leadership has failed to articulate a coherent strategic objective for the war, making it difficult to define victory or know when the conflict will end.

Major conflicts are defined by the media technology that documents them (e.g., photography, TV, Twitter). The Iran conflict marks a new era where prediction markets are the defining technology, documenting events through public wagers and creating a new form of decentralized intelligence.

The conflict with Iran highlights a new reality in warfare. Inexpensive, easily produced drones create an asymmetrical threat, as defense systems are vastly more expensive to deploy per incident, making traditional defense economically unsustainable.

By successfully demonstrating its ability to close the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has fundamentally altered the deterrence equation. The threat is now a proven capability, not a hypothetical, which grants Iran a more credible and powerful card to play in future conflicts and diplomatic standoffs.

Recent Wargames Correctly Predicted the Iran Conflict Would Be a Protracted Stalemate | RiffOn