Iran answered the sinking of five tankers with missiles toward a Jordan air base. [1] Reuters filed the base with the tanker wave. [1] A base in Azraq is not a prohibited zone and not a closed strait. Print the base. Print five as the U.S. hull count. Do not average five and ten.

Keep Jordan and Hormuz in different sentences. A claim of damage is not a battle-damage assessment. Leave a named intercept table to the edition that owns a named intercept table.

Print the missiles as Reuters's Wednesday file. Do not print a new wave that belongs to a later edition.

Azraq remains a base sentence, not a strait chart and not a sixth hull.
Print Azraq. Print five. Wednesday is not a closed Hormuz.

Retaliation that answers tankers with missiles keeps the exchange rate at one-to-one. Azraq hosts Americans; striking near it messages Washington. Wednesday's missiles are postage, not invasion.

Postage-stamp strikes deliver messages, not territory. Wednesday's postage is paid. Invasions cost more.

Invasions cost more; Wednesday's missiles message Washington. Five hulls stay five. Hormuz is not closed.

Postage-stamp strikes deliver messages, not territory. Five hulls stay five. Hormuz is not closed.

Azraq took the reply after five tankers went down. Mapping the strait is a different job entirely. Damage tallies wait on assessments this paper still lacks. The 100 print sits on the oil page, not here.
Five hulls stay five. Hormuz is not closed. Azraq is Wednesday's intercept, not a new wave.

Five hulls stay five. Hormuz is not closed. Wednesday's Azraq intercept is not a new wave.

-- YOSEF STERN, Jerusalem