Member Info for asimpleinvestor

@Gunsup, the logistical reality you highlight regarding food security is precisely why this "war of attrition" is so potent. If 70% of the food for 100 million people in the Gulf depends on the Strait of Hormuz, the blockade is a humanitarian time bomb that cannot be defused through airlifts. Moving 100 million kilograms of food daily through contested airspace is a logistical impossibility; the sheer volume of freight required would exceed the capacity of even the largest global military transport fleets. This makes regional stability a prerequisite for survival, rather than just a political preference.

The current deadlock exists because the initial strategy relying on overwhelming kinetic force to trigger a swift surrender failed to account for Iran's asymmetric resilience. Without a "Plan B" for a protracted economic and psychological conflict, the US is essentially cornered. The administration is forced to choose between a high-risk ground invasion, which carries immense political and human costs, or accepting Iran's demand to negotiate as diplomatic equals. Until a decision is made, the global economy continues to absorb the shocks of a closed Strait, and as you noted, the risk of a massive refugee surge into Europe increases as regional food security fails.

Regarding your house analogy, perspective often dictates the response. While a locked door is a standard measure of security, an "open door" policy over a decade suggests a different approach to community and interaction. However, in the context of global borders, the "surge" you mention is the inevitable byproduct of manufactured instability. If the house next door is on fire, the neighbours will inevitably end up on your lawn; the challenge is that current policies seem better at starting fires than providing the means to extinguish them. Until the "fire" at the Strait is addressed through genuine negotiation, the pressure on everyone’s borders and wallets will only intensify.

@Birdsong, the distinction between democratic electoral pressure and the internal pressures of an autocracy is a central variable in this war of attrition. While democratic leaders are indeed held accountable at the ballot box for rising costs, non-democratic regimes face a different existential threat: the risk of systemic collapse when the state can no longer provide basic subsidies. With the maritime blockade resulting in estimated losses of $455 million per day and Iranian food inflation hitting triple digits, the regime is currently managing a population where the cost of staples like bread has doubled. History suggests that while autocracies can suppress dissent longer than democracies can endure bad polling, the eventual breaking point is often more volatile and less predictable.

Regarding the "green energy" impact on oil demand, the reality of global energy infrastructure makes a 20% supply shock from the Strait of Hormuz impossible to absorb through current renewable capacity. While the transition to green energy is a long-term structural shift, global transport and industrial sectors remain heavily reliant on immediate fossil fuel liquidity. Approximately 20.5 million barrels of oil per day roughly a fifth of global consumption typically pass through the Strait. Even if demand were on a downward trend, an overnight removal of 20% of supply creates an immediate deficit that "green energy" cannot fill in the short term, explaining why petrol and diesel prices have spiked.

The assumption that the world will collectively turn against Iran overlooks the current fragmentation of global geopolitics. While the West and its allies face acute "wallet pain," other powers like China and Russia may view the disruption as a strategic tool to weaken Western led financial systems. This is why we see a shift toward alternative economic blocs; for some, the cost of high energy is a price worth paying to challenge the current international order. This isn't about choosing a "side," but observing that different nations have vastly different thresholds for economic pain based on their long-term strategic goals.

Ultimately, you are right that certainty is an illusion in war. The complexity of these variables ranging from food security in the Middle East to the electoral cycles of the West means any outcome is a matter of probability rather than guarantee. However, the factual "direction of travel" indicates that as long as the economic weapons outpace the military ones, the winner will not be the side with the best infrastructure, but the side with the most durable social and economic floor. In a conflict this fluid, acknowledging the "unknowns" is perhaps the only way to avoid the trap of oversimplification.

@Gray1 The US naval blockade has crippled Iranian maritime trade, causing $455 million in daily losses and 70% inflation. With food prices doubling and industrial imports restricted, Tehran has shifted to an "influence-centric" strategy, using low-cost drones to deplete Western air-defence while leveraging the Strait of Hormuz to demand the blockade be lifted. Their gamble is that the Western public’s "wallet" will break before the Iranian regime’s domestic endurance.

Trump’s unilateral ceasefire extension, which Iran has not agreed to, creates a strategic vacuum. Iran refuses to return to the table until "pressure tactics" cease, viewing the ongoing blockade as a slow-motion siege. This disconnect between idle missiles and active economic strangulation leaves the US tethered to a peace initiative while Iran remains an unpredictable actor.

The conflict is now a test of which side can survive the status quo: a US administration facing domestic inflationary pressure or an Iranian regime managing triple-digit food costs. Without a mutual agreement, the "direction of travel" remains a deadlock where economic weapons are doing more damage than military ones.

Who would possibly pay someone to post about a share that’s been suspended for over a year, with no indication it will be relisted anytime soon? It’s the kind of allegation often made by those who aren’t playing with a full deck.

@Birdsong, military victory is rarely defined by infrastructure destruction; it is determined by psychological endurance and political will. In asymmetric warfare, conventional forces often focus on kinetic destruction, while smaller forces target the exhaustion of the opponent’s domestic support. Iran’s strategy is a sophisticated form of economic attrition, exporting conflict costs to Western citizens. This "war of the wallet" creates internal political pressure that erodes public support for military engagement as economic stability falters.

Since the conflict began, US CPI has reached 3.3% with a 0.9% monthly jump, while petrol has spiked 37% to $4.08 and diesel 48%. These shocks have driven a 40% rise in logistics costs. Critically, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has choked supplies of helium and essential fertiliser minerals during the planting season, prompting concerns that food security may fail in several nations. This pressure turns the public against the engagement as leaders effectively do the enemy's work for them by managing the domestic fallout.

The burden is even more acute for UK and European allies facing industrial slowdowns, while East Asian nations suffer currency devaluation and manufacturing crises. As the conflict persists, the global economy shifts toward fragmentation and stagflation, incentivising countries to bypass Western-led systems for alternative economic blocs. Iran wins not by destroying American infrastructure, but by making the cost of aggression unsustainable for the Western public. Until success is measured by the erosion of resolve rather than tactical dominance, this cycle of attrition will likely continue regardless of how many targets are neutralised.

@SteveE60The court case is a separate matter and isn’t connected to the company’s application for lifting the suspension. There is no active governance reason preventing the company from completing that form and hitting send.

Sauvignon blanc should be served 'well chilled' rather than ice cold. Serving too cold and the delicate chemical compounds that create the aroma are suppressed. You’ll be able to tell it’s crisp, but you won't be able to smell or taste the specific fruit notes which sort of drinking wine pointless unless you do so purely for the purpose of getting pished.

Eightyeight88 Everything I write is evidence-based and can be checked and verified, unlike your own claims. If you believe this isn’t true, feel free to provide evidence to support your statements. The UK isn’t a “free country” either; it’s a parliamentary democracy governed by the rule of law.

"That's an uncomfortable truth for someone like 88 who also knows that Sir Keir is not a liar and did not intentionally mislead Parliament."

Even a basic understanding of Whitehall procedure makes that hard to swallow. Having been involved in security checks myself, I know they aren't 'casual' especially Developed Vetting (DV). The idea that the Prime Minister was never briefed that Mandelson failed his UKSV check in January 2025 stretches the limits of 'plausible deniability.'

While Sir Olly Robbins has been sacked to provide a fall guy, the paper trail shows Starmer was warned of "reputational risks" as early as November 2024. In high-level appointments, the system follows the principal's will; if Mandelson failed and was cleared 24 hours later by a Foreign Office override, it’s highly improbable the PM’s office was kept in the dark. Don't confuse the official 'fury' for anything other than damage control after the Guardian exposed the reality.

8888... You’re mixing unrelated topics to avoid addressing the main discussion about the Iran war. It’s clear you’re out of your depth, so you’re bringing up Kier Starmer, whose intelligence or lack thereof has nothing to do with the matter at hand. personally, I couldn't care less about Kier Starmer so your argument is falling on deaf ears.

"Firstly the main issue nuclear weapons...The US and Israel seemed to have in the main destroyed the infrastructure needed to build nuclear weapons."

Firstly, regarding the primary issue of nuclear weapons: the US and Israel claim to have largely destroyed the infrastructure required to produce them. However, this is the second time in less than twelve months that such assertions have been made, yet on both occasions, no verifiable evidence has been provided to confirm this as reality. Since the ceasefire began, President Trump has officially claimed "total victory" at least three times in formal addresses, supplemented by daily social media assertions that the US is "winning by a lot" as he prepares for negotiations in Islamabad. In truth, "winning" remains a distant prospect in a war of attrition a form of warfare in which Iran is far more experienced than the United States.

Iran isn't going to agree to a 20 year pause in enrichment to weapons grade which is the offer from the US so unless the US start negotiating like adults then the ceasefire will end without any agreement.

@Gray1 I expect the internet will be locked down again once the ceasefire ends, but using VPN nodes within the Middle East is handy for accessing news sites, as it helps bypass much of the Western propaganda and information both the US and Israel don't want people to hear.

Here is the verified data broken down into specific claims:

1. The "19 Million" Figure

Fact: The UK does not have 19 million spy cameras.

Data: The figure of 19 million specifically refers to the number of custody images held on the UK Police National Database (PND). These images are used as the reference database for Retrospective Facial Recognition searches. Total CCTV cameras in the UK are estimated to be between 4 million and 7 million, the vast majority of which are privately owned (e.g., doorbell cameras, retail security).

2. Camera Density: UK vs China

Fact: China’s surveillance density is vastly higher than the UK’s.

Data: Recent global surveillance indices show China operates approximately 10,342 cameras per 10,000 people (effectively one camera per person). The UK operates approximately 617 cameras per 10,000 people.

City Comparison: London has roughly 1,553 cameras per square mile. Shanghai has approximately 6,151 cameras per square mile.

3. Microphones in Buildings and Vehicles

Fact: Mass public audio recording is not deployed and is heavily restricted.

Data: Continuous public audio surveillance violates the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR. While acoustic sensors exist in some cities to detect specific emergency triggers (such as car crashes or screams), recording everyday conversations in public spaces, buildings, and private vehicles is unlawful and not in operation.

4. ANPR Passenger Recording

Fact: ANPR does not systematically track and record passengers.

Data: The UK ANPR network logs approximately 60 million vehicle reads per day. However, National ANPR Standards for Policing strictly mandate that the technology focuses on capturing vehicle registration marks (VRM). While the camera may capture the front of the vehicle, police do not use facial recognition on ANPR feeds to log passengers, nor is the standard resolution sufficient for this purpose.

5. Face, Voice, and Gait Recognition

Fact: Facial recognition is expanding rapidly; voice and gait are not.

Data: Police use of Live Facial Recognition (LFR) and Retrospective Facial Recognition (RFR) is actively increasing, with the Home Office funding national expansions (including LFR vans) into 2026. Conversely, while AI gait and voice recognition are growing private-sector markets globally, they are not deployed as mass public surveillance tools by UK police.

@skier1 Care to back up your claims? And while you’re at it, tell me where I can find the other cameras in my area if there really are an average of 200 spy cameras per square mile. This estate is about 5.65 square miles (1,464 hectares) in diameter, which according to you should have around 1,130 spy cameras, yet in reality there are no government-owned ones and only two privately owned cameras on the entire property. I know the location of every local government-controlled camera within a 10-mile radius, and there are only two council-controlled cameras yet by your count there should be over 2,000. Pop up the road to Credenhill and it’s a different story; while there aren’t any in the village, the Hereford gun club has hundreds scattered across buildings, fences, towers, and lamp posts. Step outside their gates and you won’t see a single one. We allow the gun club access to one woodland on the estate which is around 283 hectares in circumference for night time training sessions, and with occasional VIP visitors to the estate, the estate is regularly scanned by government agencies for security and privacy. The only surveillance here comes from drones, and we get three weeks’ notice before they arrive and are there for the safety of visitors to the lodge. Other than that we get the Hereford gun club fly over whenever they're going on mission, as we are on their flight path. While you're at it maybe you can inform me where the microphone is in my car, as it doesn't even have an onboard computer. I'm having your claims verified by my own personal AI system and its still computing a reply. As soon as it completes, I will post it. In the meantime, I look forward to reading your reply.

Quote "You could try reading the RNS issued by the company for that information, it is there to see."

The RNS doesn’t address that specific question, as the suspension was directly tied to an accounting issue. Now that the issue has been resolved, there’s no governance matter preventing the company from applying to be relisted and resume share trading. In fact, the RNS seemed to suggest that was the plan, so it’s a fair question to ask, why aren’t the shares trading?

Define troll, as in this case the share is suspended and not trading, so anything posted has no impact on the share price or the direction it’s headed.

8888, when you refer to 'the majority of Iran', which specific regions are you citing? I currently have access to over 100 data nodes throughout the country to verify real-time internet availability. I am presently connected via Bandar Abbas near the Strait of Hormuz after disconnecting from Tehran. Thats two separate locations in two different provinces with a distance of 1283km between them.

As history in Vietnam, Korea, and Afghanistan has demonstrated, sustained bombing campaigns rarely translate into political control or a 'won' war. Iran’s naval doctrine relies on high-volume, agile craft that often evade detection by conventional high-cost US radar. Similarly, their dominance in the skies is currently driven by low-cost, radar-evading drones rather than traditional manned aircraft that can penetrate ground defence systems. While the US and Israel deploy billions of dollars in hardware, Iran is employing an asymmetric strategy that prioritises low-cost technology and attrition.

Trump appears to be seeking an exit strategy, and his recent pattern alternating between public threats, periods of silence, and severe escalations reflects a familiar tactical cycle before a potential concession. This diplomatic friction suggests that rather than a total denial of nuclear capabilities, the current impasse may simply result in a delay before a future framework is established.

@skier1 The nearest surveillance camera to my location is 10.2 miles and the nearest to that one is a further 8.6 miles so when you say the UK has more surveillance cameras and listening devices per-mile than China I recommend you visit China and confirm your assumption. In reality surveillance camera density in the UK equates to 61-68 cameras per 1000 people compared to 494-570 per 1000 people in China. In the UK most cameras are privately owned and include doorbell cameras and other CCTV systems compared to China where they're state owned. This makes your argument weaker as the paragraph increases in volume. City wise in London there are approximately 1,553 cameras per square mile. (Based on 942,000 cameras over 607 sq miles) compared to Shanghai which has approximately 6,151 cameras per square mile. (Based on ~15.06 million cameras over 2,448 sq miles). In relation to mics the UK has acoustic sensors which pick up things like the honking of horns in built up areas and 'scream detection' for public safety but in relation to listening devices a small percentage of public-sector CCTV cameras in the UK have audio-recording capabilities along with CCTV systems used by private individuals and companies. Their use is strictly regulated under the Data Protection Act 2018 and GDPR, which generally prohibits continuous audio recording in public spaces due to privacy concerns. Skier you're talking out of your ringpiece. There ya go I've called you a rude word and I've not been arrested 'Russian-style' nor imprisoned.

@iDoji The UK police forces have utilised facial recognition technology in public spaces since 2015, thats over a decade