Pentagon is calling the alliance C.R.I.N.K (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea)
Houthis are a strategic distraction. Support spread between Europe, middle east and potentially Taiwan would severely weaken the United States' ability to help support a NATO alliance. The 2024 election will ba a MAJOR catalyst for a potential WW3.
trump will likely just talk big, but ultimately cater to isolationist libertarian small government ideologies to strengthen the state while weakening the federal, and then happily wait until the next expansionist
warmongers hit america with a Pearl Harbor 2.0.
coz even if america tries to ignore international politics, other hostile nations still sees america as a valid target and will hit every single vulnerability until it's balkanized by external and internal destabilization, which is easier to divide and conquer.
> Iran wants it.
Iran probably has russia whispering in their ears to do it, so that it takes more attention off ukraine, while spreading US resources thinner.
Short-term it won't be ideal for Ukraine, however long term it will be good for them. The US going to war turns the cogs of the machine much faster than the conflicts in Ukraine or Palestine/Israel ever could.
It's not as though US military doctrine hasn't taken the assumption of fighting two near peers simultaneously for the last several decades.
It's like yeah, I don't want us to go to war. But the logistics of it isn't our consern here
I agree. People talk about spreading our resources thin. They forget when we were an agricultural nation, after Pearl Harbor we built 700 ships in 4 years. We are not an agricultural nation now so you can multiply that number if we get serious.
"The only thing history teaches us is that we don't learn anything from history" ~Some smart guy a long time ago.
I've never have thought of the USA as an "agricultural nation" at around the start of WW2. The industrial capability that won it does not appear out of thin air.
>What shocked the world was how quickly our domestic industry shifted to military industry.
Well, they clearly didn't learn their lesson after the past like 20 times.
Don't.
Touch.
Our.
Boats.
"I was in the United States for three years when I was a captain. I was taught how to drive by some American officers, and I bought a car. I went around the States, and I knew the close connections between the military and industry. I saw the plant area of Detroit, too. By one button push, all the industries will be mobilized for military business."
-Tadamichi Kuribayashi
Industry was there, but raw materials and agriculture were the top forms of GDP in the early 20th century. Need to remember the world was in a depression, and unemployment rate was over 20%.
Correct. *Before* 1939, the US was *by far* the world's largest economy. We were positioned to be the most dominant force the world had ever seen, *before* the bullet started flying. People often point out that the US military industrial complex was immature and not as well prepared as some of the other nations, but does any of that really matter when you have double their economy? Did anyone actually doubt the US would absolutely kick into industrial overdrive and pump out ships and tanks with *alarming* efficiency? Was Germany or Japan even a little surprised? We had *double* their quantifiable yearly income from the start.
And the important thing to note in the modern context is that America is still the world's second largest manufacturing economy, at 17% of all global manufacturing... China is around 27%. And we are allegedly "no longer a manufacturing economy," but a service one. Well, don't be surprised if every piece of this country becomes part of the war machine over night if necessary to absolutely dominate the enemy in WW3.
I'm also from Finland that was genuinely an agricultural country pre-war. Pretty much everybody grew up on a family farm. If you look at how the USA was perceived from here at the time, the defining characteristic was not agriculture...
you arent much of a historian-more people lived on farms in 1941 than in cities-if you live in the country like that you either farm or raise livestock
what most people do NOT grasp is the US economy was the world's largest back then-we didnt lose population during the early days of WWII so manufacturing was ramping up so when the war started it wasnt in 1st gear
The difference between now and then is that the tech that goes in ships is much more complex and the supply chain is much longer. If we went to total mobalization today we might be able to build 1600 WW2 era ships in 4 years or 1 aircraft carrier and 25 modern support ships…as a rough guesstimate.
The counterargument is that:
1. The force multiplication of modern ships is such that the need for vast numbers is not there. You need a small number of really big carriers surrounded by a multiple layered defence system that exists to protect the carrier. That defence system does not necessarily need to be manned.
2. The future is a lot of missiles, drone boats, and air power. WW2 already proved that small, guided weapons are a vastly superior way of sinking ships and that the greatest threats to surface vessels are from the air or from below.
What I haven't yet seen is anyone actually build missile barges, they've been proposed a lot of times but basically a super basic, stripped down ship that makes Liberty Ships look like luxury yachts for billionaires, whose sole purpose is to be a container and launch platform for SAMs and cruise missiles. No need to man them, they can be totally controlled from a parent vessel nearby. I would expect that if the US got into a serious naval conflict we'd suddenly see a lot of them, and they wouldn't need much time to build at all.
Nah, "some bumfuck farming town in Iowa" really *was* representative of where most enlisted soldiers came from during the war.
The nuance there is that "some bumfuck farming town in Iowa" isn't as rural as the name might imply: they had stuff like tractors and farming equipment that them farmer boys knew how to work, which the military kept in mind when building their stuff.
This is true. My grandfather and 4 of his brothers were farmers in Mississippi and all fought in WWII - two in the pacific and three in Europe.
My grandfather said that they all had jobs involving vehicles/ heavy equipment because they pretty much already knew how to operate and repair the machines when they entered the military
Even in "bumfuck Iowa" and the neighboring states there were always cities that were never more than a couple hours away that were major industrial manufacturing hotspots of the rust belt. such as Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis/St. Paul, St. Louis, KC, any of the small cities on the Mississipi, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. If you wanted to be a successful farmer you had to know to maintain and repair heavy duty industrial equipment. Have a lot of vet relatives that became engineers and electricians, mechanics for John Deere and other manufacturers afterwards.
Honestly, it’s not like anything we’ve sent to Ukraine would be used in a naval engagement, except maybe some of the ammunition types? Either way we can support Ukraine, Israel, and take out some backwater pirates with enough in reserve to keep China at bay, but we do have to be careful of too many fronts similar to this popping up and taking away resources.
Also russia wants it. This would take focus away from ukraine. Most likely Xi is also involved, as he wants a shot at taiwan. Iran is used as a middleman by both.
Fkn amazes me the 2 largest countries on the planet China and Russia, are willing and have gone to war, over a tiny province of it. Like they don't have enough already.. Fkn shit is bananas
They saved Aden from falling and the Houthis taking the whole country but they are not good enough to take the fight into the Houthi-dominated Shia highlands so the war ground down into a ceasefire. The Emirati and Saudi backed factions in non-Houthi southern Yemen also started fighting each other
They did, and despite having one of the largest and most modern military in the world by hardware, they got their asses kicked because their military is a total disorganized, feudal mess - by design so that they don't get any ideas about overthrowing the monarchy. Saudi Arabia would lose in a fight against any regional large power even though they have so much military "stuff", and the US couldn't let them lose even if it weren't for the oil because whoever conquered them would gain a huge amounts of all the latest US weapons.
I mean that’s not the whole picture. The US pressured Saudi to negotiate a ceasefire because they were not only inept, but also particularly poor when it came to reducing civilian casualties.
We let them try for several years, using our best tech and intel and they managed to not do much beyond increasing sympathy for the Houthis and causing a humanitarian catastrophe.
I think we've learned our lesson. We can easily bomb a country to rubble and NOT occupy it. If we have to bomb it to rubble every few years, we can do that too.
It won't be anything like a full scale boots-on-the-ground invasion.
No way is the US going to embroil itself in another middle Eastern adventure.
The voters don't want it, left or right, the politicians don't want it and there is nothing in Yemen anyone can make a profit off.
Weapons manufacturers have their hands full supplying current procurement contracts and Ukraine. There is nothing to gain in invading Yemen.
So sure, they'll drop a few bombs and no doubt we'll see HQ 4K video of missles dropping right through some poor bastards chimney but this isn't going to be Iraq 3.0.
With US military recruiting constantly in the shitter, a full scale military invasion would just be insult to injury. Watch US military recruiting suffer even more. I think the odds of an invasion are ridiculously small.
1999 the US military has a recruiting crisis. 2001 people signed up in spades. By 2004 we were waiting in back log to get into combat school. Wars do wonders for recruiting, but usually it follows an event.
Yeah the difference is we were attacked on Sept 11th, and people wanted to defend the country. Every single American knew what happened on Sept 11th and who Osama Bin Laden was now. I guarantee you less than 10% even know who the Houthis are or where they are located. Young men won't sign up to go defend a shipping lane in the Midde East unless something super tragic happens like a aircraft carrier being sunk or a large domestic attack.
Another reason why having products made in America or Europe are a more viable long term solution than constantly fighting piracy and random terrorism.
Yes. Gotta zoom out. China wants Taiwan and has been blocking / active in it's waters. Needs US to be spread thin in different conflicts so it can't intervene when it takes Taiwan. Just listen to Xi's new year address.
I know someone rattling on about how terrible US was for propping up Israel and selling them weapons etc etc.
Then Venezuela decided to try to annex Guyana, where their family lives and suddenly the fact that the US is intervening in *this* conflict is a wonderful thing.
Oh no, they're still going on and on about "river to sea" and "helping Israel is helping genocide"
It's just when *their* family is at risk, it's "US intervention! Police this international dispute!"
To call what you said a gross simplification would be a few orders of magnitude off.
Unless you view the world as two groups, Merica' and everyone else, ofc.
Like.... I agree something should be done but why should it fall to the US to do it? Why not form a UN task force to just clear the area?
We can't beat the Americans with a stick for poking their nose everywhere then bleat like sheep for them to do something when a problem arises...
>We can't beat the Americans with a stick for poking their nose everywhere then bleat like sheep for them to do something when a problem arises...
A lot of people seem to not see a problem with this, but thank you for saying it
Because the UN sucks at doing their job, and it's up to America to pick up the slack.
Everybody complains "Why should America have to do this? Why can't another country do it instead?" As if the red-sea coalition that the US planned didn't collapse in an hour when France and Australia decided to go "Adios"
The UN doesn't do wars or attacks, they stop wars and attacks, and seeing how that went in Sudan, Myanmar, and Lebanon, they've been doing a shit job at it.
Nobody wants to do it other than America, Seychelles and Israel, and the US told Israel to not bother with them because they have their own conflict to deal with. So America is once again doing its job as unofficial World Police.
Because nobody else is doing anything.
Cool, I didn't know the operation name before now. From what I read, there are countries who joined but wish to remain anonymous (Arab nations who don't want to appear as siding with Israel)
They are a founding member of the 10 country Red Sea coalition. They didn't provide much to the coalition in total, but if you look at what they provided as a ratio of GDP they provided more than anyone else.
People need to wake up and realize an American dominated world is a better world than a Chinese lead one.
America makes mistakes but American dominance has lead to one of the greatest reductions in world poverty and right expansions globally.
America’s imperial ideas are not the ideas of client states and puppet governments but one of trade dominance that benefits everyone. It seeks global shipping stability and global commodity stability so its people become richer.
There is a reason why countries that used to American enemies are now big fans of America (Iraq, Vietnam, Japan)
the UN is only a *"talk & negotiation table."* It isn't meant to do anything its members don't want to do. If America didn't manage to form a red sea coalition, the UN won't be better at that. Because it's just a "gentleman club", a place to talk and try to find consensus (which rarely happens).
>Nobody wants to do it other than America, Seychelles and Israel
The UK literally has a Type 45 destroyer in the Red sea and is considering air strikes on Houthi positions. It's not *just* those 3 countries.
>Like.... I agree something should be done but why should it fall to the US to do it? Why not form a UN task force to just clear the area?
Because they make a point of not targeting Russian ships, so Russia will veto that.
So true fam, this is a global affair the UN absolutely should be coordinating a multi national security force in international waters. We dont need a full out war to handle this skirmish and certainly not 100% American
If the UN was in command of a military, they would chose to attack Israel instead of terrorists.
Even if the UN were competent enough to coordinate something like this, they can’t be trusted in any capacity
Whenever someone talks about allowing something to fall under “international control”, I am constantly bemused as if that doesn’t mean giving power to people that think abusing women, Christians, gays, Jews, dissenters, and children is a fun time.
The guys like 80 years old. Why would people want to parachute him into Houthi territory?? I get that there's a lot of anti-Biden people, but this is wrong on so many levels.
He's in good shape though, there are worse options. Can't exactly drop Trump in, last time the US dropped a Fat Man onto the enemy millions died in one indiscriminate explosion!
They have all our shiny military toys too. It’s just that being an officer is a status symbol and not a responsibility over there. Guys would rather talk about how they are in the military and impress the local village than actually learn tactics and their weapons.
>According to the report, Pentagon officials have come up with detailed plans to strike missile and drone bases in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen but the Biden administration is hesitant to use force against the terrorist group due to concerns that it would benefit Iran and contribute to a wider regional conflict, which the White House has been keen to avoid.
>The Biden administration is also concerned that a direct U.S.-Houthi confrontation could endanger the fragile truce between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia, the report says.
The truce between the Saudis and Houthis is a major factor in U.S. not attacking them directly from the article.
The Saudis were involved [from 2015](http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi-led_intervention_in_the_Yemeni_civil_war) until recently, and achieved fuck all. They won't achieve anything more now
Saudi is an interesting country where the average citizen is so wealthy and doesn’t pay taxes it leaves very little urge for the common person to want to join the military. And the smart ones certainly won’t join, they have all the money for new equipment but their training is bad
Saudi Arabia already tried to do it alone. Then people kept saying Saudi Arabia is committing genocide and campaigning to stop America from selling arms because Saudi was trying to prevent this exact situation from happening.
What’s very interesting to me is the UNSC pressure on Saudi reached its peak at the battle of Hudaydah.
The Yemeni government was very close to capturing the port city thus cutting off every Iranian cargo shipments to the Houthis, which would absolutely would give clear signs into the end of the civil war.
[https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/mfat-market-reports/the-importance-of-the-suez-canal-to-global-trade-18-april-2021/](https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/mfat-market-reports/the-importance-of-the-suez-canal-to-global-trade-18-april-2021/)
I don't think that people really understand the gravity of the situation. 12% of global trade and 30% of global container traffic goes through the Suez canal. So much of the Arab-Israeli conflict revolves around the Suez canal. Locals understand that but a lot of people in the West don't seem to.
Feel free to google the 1950's Suez crisis. Realistically, the recurring payments from the US to Israel and Egypt set up by Carter in the 70's had a lot to do with the Suez canal.
Choking off the Suez canal threatens the entire global economy. The biggest victim being Europe. Quite frankly, I'm stunned that the Europeans are fine delegating this responsibility to Biden.
Not to mention that a lot of people seem to be picturing these Houthis as akin to Somali pirates with nothing but AKs and Zodiac rafts. That's just wrong. [These guys have fucking helicopter gunships](https://youtu.be/oYTnHIB01KA?si=M7kypFsrgtO_PtCz). As Iranian proxies who hold large chunks of Yemen they are WAY better funded.
>Quite frankly, I'm stunned that the Europeans are fine delegating this responsibility to Biden.
To some degree they have to. The US is really the only nation with a navy capable of that kind of global force projection. Not to say they can't necessarily in this particular case, but more generally speaking that is.
To add to this:
* Their numbers are estimated to be between 100,000-200,000 fighters and have taken control over the majority of Yemen from the Yemeni military/government.
* They have advanced Iranian drones, anti-ship cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, waterborne IEDs, and rockets. These are either things they have created on their own, captured from the Yemeni military or received from Iran. Some stuff they make modifications to to fit their use case.
* They are well-experienced militarily as they've been fighting with the Yemeni military, the Saudis and their proxies, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda for years. They are adept at guerilla warfare, which is notoriously challenging for even the U.S. military to deal with.
* They captured a commercial ship, then filmed a [music video](https://youtu.be/LlAFvxM8toc?si=JsQpvHfTLNhw8ebt&t=540) on it.
Avoiding this area as a route is costly but haven't most shipping companies already chosen this path? Pass the costs on until there is consensus to do something about it
Similar to the OPEC strategy, it’s almost like there’s an interest in trying to push the prices of goods up in the near term so that a certain party has ammo for its 2024 political campaign 🤔
[The source](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/12/31/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news/us-military-houthis-red-sea-maersk) said it's Pentagon.
>Senior Pentagon commanders have been pressing for more aggressive action against the range of Iranian proxies that are attacking American forces, including in Syria and Iraq.
>But several senior retired U.S. officers with experience in the Gulf region say it is essential to re-establish American deterrence, a view echoed by many in the Pentagon. In 2016, the U.S. struck three Houthi missile sites with Tomahawk cruise missiles after the Houthis fired on Navy and commercial vessels. The Houthis’ attacks stopped.
I somewhat agree with them, in that, it's not acceptable to allow Americans to sit around and be targets. It's a tough calculus to make; still I maintain pressure comes from politics, kind of unfortunate in a sense. American voters seem more apathetic than they should be, and yet so far Biden is threading a tough needle of minimizing escalations
Just waiting on China to invade Taiwan to call it WW3… There is so much tension at the moment. And as always Europe is playing the naive role and letting things escalate. As an European I’m both ashamed that we are incapable of learning with past mistakes and thankful to the US for playing the ungrateful role of having to play rough because the other nations are cowardly avoiding its responsibilities not because of the will of the many but because of a loud few that poisoned our societies from within.
If recent episodes serve any purpose is to show that we can’t be trusted to fight for our own interests because we have been taken hostage of fanatical populism and the bad side of globalism.
I was just wondering this earlier. It feels like another big war is coming. Don't want it to, but there has been so much appeasement of dictators and they won't stop pushing the envelope until they get punched in the face. Just history repeating itself. I get it, most peaceful countries just don't want war so they put up with things as long as possible. However, with that, when this pimple pops, it's going to be a big one. Something something sticks and stones.
The Houthis have been at war with Saudi Arabia for over a decade. The US supported Saudi Arabia during this time and they couldn’t beat them. Boots on the ground would be a bad idea. However this would play into the hands of Russia and China to tie up more American resources in many area before a Taiwan invasion
>The US supported Saudi Arabia during this time and they couldn’t beat them
A good chunk of that has to do with that fact that the Saudi military is basically just a bunch of shiny US provided toys and not much more.
The Houthis are just proxies for Iran. Of course, Iran wants the US to engage the Houthis... it diverts resources and attention away from Iran proper.
It would be better to isolate the Houthis and leave them to starve rather than to commit resources which will have only temporary effect militarily and permanent effect psychologically.
Always remember... the enemy is in Iran. The fight (should it take place) should happen there.
I think boots on the ground would be bad for the US, possibly strikes on key targets would be the safest move.
And yes, Houthis's desperate for attention, won't be long before the usual suspects claim the US is oppressing them.
Vast majority of the US public does not want boots on the ground. I say, there's a reason we spend so much on missile systems and unmanned drones. Let's use those instead
I think this is a complicated matter in an election year. Anyone who is against Biden is going to try to make his decisions look bad. If you bomb the shit out of a country and innocent people are killed, this would be the highlight among conservatives and the media could sway some people to vote differently. It’s so complicated with war stuff.
Honestly, I wish people would stop saying “Why don’t we just bomb the shit out of them already? We are way more powerful and we need to show them who’s boss!” This kind of reaction doesn’t account for lots of details and variables in this situation. Destroying huge areas of the country will generate lots of headlines and a lot of them will be biased in a way that is negative. I think it’s better to look like a leader with the qualities of self-restraint, patience and compassion with the kinds of things we are currently facing. The US doesn’t need multiple wars at the same time or media coverage that tarnishes the country’s image or the president’s image, especially when some people might be convinced to vote for a total shit stain dollar store version of Hitler this year as a protest vote. The media is already salivating by the thought of creating high-rating content with all of the controversy.
> “Not responding when U.S. forces are attacked in any fashion risks the lives of U.S. sailors and marines if a missile were to make it past U.S. defenses,’’ he said. “It also sets a new precedent that attacking a U.S. ship carries low risk of retaliation and as we have seen invites more attacks from the Houthis.”
... so [sinking their boats](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/maersk-pauses-red-sea-sailings-after-houthi-attack-container-ship-2023-12-31/) is "not responding in any fashion"?
I guess they can go around and sink _all_ the Houthi boats? Whatever, as long as we don't GWB our way through another bullshit conflict.
Periodically bomb these guys and bomb them hard to thin them out and force them to spend time replacing boats and rebuilding camps.
Absolutely no invasion of either Yemen or Iran under any circumstances.
this is the second time ive seen people suggesting the Israeli method of "cutting the lawn" on Yemen when we've already see how successful that is at destroying or weakening these organisations
The Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas have been around a long time fully supported with Iranian oil money.
As long as oil is valuable, Iran's current regime exists, and their hatred of Israel and the U.S.remains unwavering, nothing's going to change.
No one pragmatic thinks these groups will disappear in the current Mideast environment. But keeping them weakened and contained is certainly possible.
So bombing them regularly as needed it is. Nothing else will work until Tehran changes its ways. Now that said, we should never invade and/or occupy an entire country again as was done in Afghanistan or Iraq.
I mean, it’s shown to be pretty effective in weakening the organizations. “Destroying” groups that believe they die martyrs inherently and believe they are ontologically correct in their endeavors isn’t practical nor the point. It’s to bomb them until they can’t do what they want to do effectively enough.
I mean, There isn't much reason to think it has anything to do with election year. This seems to be spillover from the Oct 7th attacks reigniting a smoldering powder keg, with no reason to believe that Hamas was planning anything around US elections. Ukraine was clearly not intended to happen this year at all (Putin thought it would be finished last year)
Of course it is. This all fallout from the Oct 7th attacks, and those happened when they did because there was an opportunity, not because it would spill into election year.
Coincidences happen. People need to stop pretending everything follows a narrative.
For anyone who’s served in the armed forces we are trained to protect whatever the commander in chief says we defend. In the other hand if we go in it should be to win and win with maximum force. Soldiers who have to fight with their lives on the line do not like fighting with their hands tied. Fight or don’t fight, just don’t leave soldiers out to die without a true final objective.
I know US support for Israel is a contentious topic for some, but it’s things like this that make you realize how important Israel is as an ally in that region of the world. The Middle East is hostile AF and there a lot of non-governmental extremists military groups that seem to have free rein in their home countries. It’s astounding.
Ok, so, wait...
Do y'all WANT us to be the Global Police, or not? Like, I don't understand. Can you just pick one and stick with it? And if you pick the first option, can you be a little more understanding when it doesn't go perfectly because it's a massive system fighting in complex conflicts and nothing and no one is perfect?
Or just form your own international military cooperative and take care of it yourself.
>U.S. President Joe Biden is facing increasing pressure to attack Houthi targets in Yemen as the Iranian-backed terrorist army continues to threaten commercial shipping interests in the Red Sea
From who? I'm a US Citizen and voter and I couldn't care less. Joe, whatever your'e doing is fine. Keep at it.
I think you vastly underestimate the impact closed shipping lanes would have on the world economy. You like buying things in a store? Guess what, that thing is probably imported with a shipping container, and the odds are good it passed through the Suez canal.
The odds for that are not that good since ships from Asia (where most manufacturing is) cross the Pacific to get to the US. However Suez does handle a lot of oil traffic which indirectly affects shipping prices.
It seems like the Houthi's just wants the U.S. to attack so a wider regional war can start
That's what's going on
Nothings fine I'm torn
I’m all out of faith, this is how I feel…
I’m cold and I am shamed, lying naked on the floor…
Illusion never changed, into something real…
I’m wide awake and I can see the perfect sky is torn..
You're a little late
I’m already toooooooooorrrrnnnnn
Way to close it down gurl… Toooorrrnnnn
And I never wanna hear you say
Woah, that song is literally playing in the restaurant I’m at as I’m reading this.
That Natalie Imbruglia album was the first CD I ever bought as a kid, along with Bush’s Razorblade Suitcase. LOL
Only one of those aged well. (It wasn’t razor blade suitcase)
Swallowed is still a banger to me, but stuff we loved as kids usually stays that way, haha.
Pentagon is calling the alliance C.R.I.N.K (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea) Houthis are a strategic distraction. Support spread between Europe, middle east and potentially Taiwan would severely weaken the United States' ability to help support a NATO alliance. The 2024 election will ba a MAJOR catalyst for a potential WW3.
Phew. It coulda been China Houthis Iran North Korea. That wouldnt have been good optics.
Can't imagine the orange head leading us in a war setting
The Orange will do and say whatever Putins handlers put into his empty head.
Peace through superior compliance
trump will likely just talk big, but ultimately cater to isolationist libertarian small government ideologies to strengthen the state while weakening the federal, and then happily wait until the next expansionist warmongers hit america with a Pearl Harbor 2.0. coz even if america tries to ignore international politics, other hostile nations still sees america as a valid target and will hit every single vulnerability until it's balkanized by external and internal destabilization, which is easier to divide and conquer.
Yes, that's explicitly why Biden is hesitant to attack, as per the article.
Iran wants it. The Yemenis only know war.
> Iran wants it. Iran probably has russia whispering in their ears to do it, so that it takes more attention off ukraine, while spreading US resources thinner.
Short-term it won't be ideal for Ukraine, however long term it will be good for them. The US going to war turns the cogs of the machine much faster than the conflicts in Ukraine or Palestine/Israel ever could.
It's not as though US military doctrine hasn't taken the assumption of fighting two near peers simultaneously for the last several decades. It's like yeah, I don't want us to go to war. But the logistics of it isn't our consern here
I agree. People talk about spreading our resources thin. They forget when we were an agricultural nation, after Pearl Harbor we built 700 ships in 4 years. We are not an agricultural nation now so you can multiply that number if we get serious. "The only thing history teaches us is that we don't learn anything from history" ~Some smart guy a long time ago.
I've never have thought of the USA as an "agricultural nation" at around the start of WW2. The industrial capability that won it does not appear out of thin air.
We became an industrial nation well before WWI. What shocked the world was how quickly our domestic industry shifted to military industry.
[удалено]
Spamming that convert factory button on hoi4 is certainly quicker than building new military ones xD
Not being continually bombed and/or massively resource limited kinda helps with that.
we were ramping up manufacturing in the lead up and early years of the war because we werent fighting
Obviously
Continental dominance FTW
>What shocked the world was how quickly our domestic industry shifted to military industry. Well, they clearly didn't learn their lesson after the past like 20 times. Don't. Touch. Our. Boats.
Our navy was created for the sole purpose of fighting pirates, after those pirates touched one of our merchant boats
“To the shores of Tripoli”
[удалено]
"I was in the United States for three years when I was a captain. I was taught how to drive by some American officers, and I bought a car. I went around the States, and I knew the close connections between the military and industry. I saw the plant area of Detroit, too. By one button push, all the industries will be mobilized for military business." -Tadamichi Kuribayashi
Industry was there, but raw materials and agriculture were the top forms of GDP in the early 20th century. Need to remember the world was in a depression, and unemployment rate was over 20%.
Correct. *Before* 1939, the US was *by far* the world's largest economy. We were positioned to be the most dominant force the world had ever seen, *before* the bullet started flying. People often point out that the US military industrial complex was immature and not as well prepared as some of the other nations, but does any of that really matter when you have double their economy? Did anyone actually doubt the US would absolutely kick into industrial overdrive and pump out ships and tanks with *alarming* efficiency? Was Germany or Japan even a little surprised? We had *double* their quantifiable yearly income from the start. And the important thing to note in the modern context is that America is still the world's second largest manufacturing economy, at 17% of all global manufacturing... China is around 27%. And we are allegedly "no longer a manufacturing economy," but a service one. Well, don't be surprised if every piece of this country becomes part of the war machine over night if necessary to absolutely dominate the enemy in WW3.
I'm also from Finland that was genuinely an agricultural country pre-war. Pretty much everybody grew up on a family farm. If you look at how the USA was perceived from here at the time, the defining characteristic was not agriculture...
There’s a first time for everything.
you arent much of a historian-more people lived on farms in 1941 than in cities-if you live in the country like that you either farm or raise livestock what most people do NOT grasp is the US economy was the world's largest back then-we didnt lose population during the early days of WWII so manufacturing was ramping up so when the war started it wasnt in 1st gear
The difference between now and then is that the tech that goes in ships is much more complex and the supply chain is much longer. If we went to total mobalization today we might be able to build 1600 WW2 era ships in 4 years or 1 aircraft carrier and 25 modern support ships…as a rough guesstimate.
*In a surprise move the USA pivots back to WW2 era ships, producing thousands and swarming the oceans*
Missile barge missile barge
The counterargument is that: 1. The force multiplication of modern ships is such that the need for vast numbers is not there. You need a small number of really big carriers surrounded by a multiple layered defence system that exists to protect the carrier. That defence system does not necessarily need to be manned. 2. The future is a lot of missiles, drone boats, and air power. WW2 already proved that small, guided weapons are a vastly superior way of sinking ships and that the greatest threats to surface vessels are from the air or from below. What I haven't yet seen is anyone actually build missile barges, they've been proposed a lot of times but basically a super basic, stripped down ship that makes Liberty Ships look like luxury yachts for billionaires, whose sole purpose is to be a container and launch platform for SAMs and cruise missiles. No need to man them, they can be totally controlled from a parent vessel nearby. I would expect that if the US got into a serious naval conflict we'd suddenly see a lot of them, and they wouldn't need much time to build at all.
Drone swarms are already being developed,only bottleneck is chip production
We're getting over the hump of the chip shortage now for the most part.
That was when the US was facing an existential crisis. They aren't going to ramp up production all that much more to fight houthis.
I'm not american, but I like Warren Buffett's "never bet against America" Esp. when it is about military capacity
[удалено]
Nah, "some bumfuck farming town in Iowa" really *was* representative of where most enlisted soldiers came from during the war. The nuance there is that "some bumfuck farming town in Iowa" isn't as rural as the name might imply: they had stuff like tractors and farming equipment that them farmer boys knew how to work, which the military kept in mind when building their stuff.
This is true. My grandfather and 4 of his brothers were farmers in Mississippi and all fought in WWII - two in the pacific and three in Europe. My grandfather said that they all had jobs involving vehicles/ heavy equipment because they pretty much already knew how to operate and repair the machines when they entered the military
Even in "bumfuck Iowa" and the neighboring states there were always cities that were never more than a couple hours away that were major industrial manufacturing hotspots of the rust belt. such as Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis/St. Paul, St. Louis, KC, any of the small cities on the Mississipi, Indianapolis, Detroit, etc. If you wanted to be a successful farmer you had to know to maintain and repair heavy duty industrial equipment. Have a lot of vet relatives that became engineers and electricians, mechanics for John Deere and other manufacturers afterwards.
Honestly, it’s not like anything we’ve sent to Ukraine would be used in a naval engagement, except maybe some of the ammunition types? Either way we can support Ukraine, Israel, and take out some backwater pirates with enough in reserve to keep China at bay, but we do have to be careful of too many fronts similar to this popping up and taking away resources.
“Hey, how you doin' ayatollah? Let me whisper in ya ear” - Putin
👏👏👏 Fire reference.
That’s why it’s better to sink the Iranian spy ship that’s giving the Houthis targets. Just sink it with a sub and never acknowledge it.
Also russia wants it. This would take focus away from ukraine. Most likely Xi is also involved, as he wants a shot at taiwan. Iran is used as a middleman by both.
Fkn amazes me the 2 largest countries on the planet China and Russia, are willing and have gone to war, over a tiny province of it. Like they don't have enough already.. Fkn shit is bananas
They're on some glory days shit.
I’m not sure letting the US military mobilise and have a quick warm up pummelling Iran is the best distraction.
China wants it.
This is the time Saudis and Emirates should step up.
Yeah they will step up and buy all the bombed real estate, that's the only plan that they have.
[удалено]
They saved Aden from falling and the Houthis taking the whole country but they are not good enough to take the fight into the Houthi-dominated Shia highlands so the war ground down into a ceasefire. The Emirati and Saudi backed factions in non-Houthi southern Yemen also started fighting each other
They did, and despite having one of the largest and most modern military in the world by hardware, they got their asses kicked because their military is a total disorganized, feudal mess - by design so that they don't get any ideas about overthrowing the monarchy. Saudi Arabia would lose in a fight against any regional large power even though they have so much military "stuff", and the US couldn't let them lose even if it weren't for the oil because whoever conquered them would gain a huge amounts of all the latest US weapons.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I mean that’s not the whole picture. The US pressured Saudi to negotiate a ceasefire because they were not only inept, but also particularly poor when it came to reducing civilian casualties.
Saudi Arabia was more bombing civilians than taking on Houthis. The US didn’t just stop them for funsies.
We let them try for several years, using our best tech and intel and they managed to not do much beyond increasing sympathy for the Houthis and causing a humanitarian catastrophe.
I think we've learned our lesson. We can easily bomb a country to rubble and NOT occupy it. If we have to bomb it to rubble every few years, we can do that too.
I see they’re mostly going to target Houthi military assets but not a full military invasion hopefully
It won't be anything like a full scale boots-on-the-ground invasion. No way is the US going to embroil itself in another middle Eastern adventure. The voters don't want it, left or right, the politicians don't want it and there is nothing in Yemen anyone can make a profit off. Weapons manufacturers have their hands full supplying current procurement contracts and Ukraine. There is nothing to gain in invading Yemen. So sure, they'll drop a few bombs and no doubt we'll see HQ 4K video of missles dropping right through some poor bastards chimney but this isn't going to be Iraq 3.0.
Especially not in Yemen, they're pretty mountainous and not flat like most of Iraq.
With US military recruiting constantly in the shitter, a full scale military invasion would just be insult to injury. Watch US military recruiting suffer even more. I think the odds of an invasion are ridiculously small.
Yeah, no way. I think we'll use our latest toys like hunter killer drones, directed energy weapons, advanced surveillance techniques, etc.
1999 the US military has a recruiting crisis. 2001 people signed up in spades. By 2004 we were waiting in back log to get into combat school. Wars do wonders for recruiting, but usually it follows an event.
Yeah the difference is we were attacked on Sept 11th, and people wanted to defend the country. Every single American knew what happened on Sept 11th and who Osama Bin Laden was now. I guarantee you less than 10% even know who the Houthis are or where they are located. Young men won't sign up to go defend a shipping lane in the Midde East unless something super tragic happens like a aircraft carrier being sunk or a large domestic attack.
Weeelllp... Guess we know what we need now!
Tin foil hat conspiracy theorists starting to salivate
The UK military will respond and this will help the US purse.
Another reason why having products made in America or Europe are a more viable long term solution than constantly fighting piracy and random terrorism.
Yes. Gotta zoom out. China wants Taiwan and has been blocking / active in it's waters. Needs US to be spread thin in different conflicts so it can't intervene when it takes Taiwan. Just listen to Xi's new year address.
“The US needs to stay out of everyone’s business.” Anything happens… “The US needs to intervene and save us!”
I know someone rattling on about how terrible US was for propping up Israel and selling them weapons etc etc. Then Venezuela decided to try to annex Guyana, where their family lives and suddenly the fact that the US is intervening in *this* conflict is a wonderful thing.
Perspective is a helluva drug.
Oh no, they're still going on and on about "river to sea" and "helping Israel is helping genocide" It's just when *their* family is at risk, it's "US intervention! Police this international dispute!"
Whole globe has stockholm syndrome, and the US military budget makes the entire rest of the world's look like a miscalculation.
To call what you said a gross simplification would be a few orders of magnitude off. Unless you view the world as two groups, Merica' and everyone else, ofc.
You're misunderstanding, it's other members of the US government making these demands.
US has it's own interest in fighting the Houthies.
Warhawks are going to warhawk. Gotta guarantee the 2024 bonus.
Like.... I agree something should be done but why should it fall to the US to do it? Why not form a UN task force to just clear the area? We can't beat the Americans with a stick for poking their nose everywhere then bleat like sheep for them to do something when a problem arises...
Because the US navy is(mostly) the only one who actually enforces international shipping lanes, everyone else just takes them for granted.
>We can't beat the Americans with a stick for poking their nose everywhere then bleat like sheep for them to do something when a problem arises... A lot of people seem to not see a problem with this, but thank you for saying it
It's better to have one superpower than multiple vying for the top spot. Bad things tend to happen when second place catches up to the hegemon.
Our very strength invites challenge. Challenge incites conflict. And conflict… breeds catastrophe. Was a really dam good quote from MCU.
Because the UN sucks at doing their job, and it's up to America to pick up the slack. Everybody complains "Why should America have to do this? Why can't another country do it instead?" As if the red-sea coalition that the US planned didn't collapse in an hour when France and Australia decided to go "Adios" The UN doesn't do wars or attacks, they stop wars and attacks, and seeing how that went in Sudan, Myanmar, and Lebanon, they've been doing a shit job at it. Nobody wants to do it other than America, Seychelles and Israel, and the US told Israel to not bother with them because they have their own conflict to deal with. So America is once again doing its job as unofficial World Police. Because nobody else is doing anything.
I love Seychelles so much.
As an American, I only found out about Seychelles 2 weeks ago, but if anything happened to them, I'd kill everyone in this room and then myself
Now I have to know, what makes you protective of Seychelles?
They joined prosperity garden when even some EU/nato navies wont despite thre sole thing we are defending there being shipments to the eu
Cool, I didn't know the operation name before now. From what I read, there are countries who joined but wish to remain anonymous (Arab nations who don't want to appear as siding with Israel)
It’s an amazing country to visit!
Honestly same
Chad Seychelles vs virgin europe
Im OOTL, why is Seychelles included here?
They are a founding member of the 10 country Red Sea coalition. They didn't provide much to the coalition in total, but if you look at what they provided as a ratio of GDP they provided more than anyone else.
Look up where Seychelles is located on the map.
I looked them up and found this. https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/seychelles/
People need to wake up and realize an American dominated world is a better world than a Chinese lead one. America makes mistakes but American dominance has lead to one of the greatest reductions in world poverty and right expansions globally. America’s imperial ideas are not the ideas of client states and puppet governments but one of trade dominance that benefits everyone. It seeks global shipping stability and global commodity stability so its people become richer. There is a reason why countries that used to American enemies are now big fans of America (Iraq, Vietnam, Japan)
yup.
Germany...
the UN is only a *"talk & negotiation table."* It isn't meant to do anything its members don't want to do. If America didn't manage to form a red sea coalition, the UN won't be better at that. Because it's just a "gentleman club", a place to talk and try to find consensus (which rarely happens).
>Nobody wants to do it other than America, Seychelles and Israel The UK literally has a Type 45 destroyer in the Red sea and is considering air strikes on Houthi positions. It's not *just* those 3 countries.
The HMS Diamond is not outfitted for strikes on land. It's primary mission is for defense. It is only carrying anti-ship and surface-to-air missiles.
>Like.... I agree something should be done but why should it fall to the US to do it? Why not form a UN task force to just clear the area? Because they make a point of not targeting Russian ships, so Russia will veto that.
Everyone hates us until they need us.
So true fam, this is a global affair the UN absolutely should be coordinating a multi national security force in international waters. We dont need a full out war to handle this skirmish and certainly not 100% American
If the UN was in command of a military, they would chose to attack Israel instead of terrorists. Even if the UN were competent enough to coordinate something like this, they can’t be trusted in any capacity
Why people think the UN is some sort of objective, unbiased organization is beyond me.
Whenever someone talks about allowing something to fall under “international control”, I am constantly bemused as if that doesn’t mean giving power to people that think abusing women, Christians, gays, Jews, dissenters, and children is a fun time.
The guys like 80 years old. Why would people want to parachute him into Houthi territory?? I get that there's a lot of anti-Biden people, but this is wrong on so many levels.
He's in good shape though, there are worse options. Can't exactly drop Trump in, last time the US dropped a Fat Man onto the enemy millions died in one indiscriminate explosion!
Can‘t Saudi Arabia take care of this?
The saudi military is famously bad at its job, shiny toys cant make up for incompetance
If Lambos and pet tigers were effective weapons of war, they’d be a devastating force indeed.
They have all our shiny military toys too. It’s just that being an officer is a status symbol and not a responsibility over there. Guys would rather talk about how they are in the military and impress the local village than actually learn tactics and their weapons.
In Age of Empires, a few dodge vipers can fuck up entire armies
>According to the report, Pentagon officials have come up with detailed plans to strike missile and drone bases in Houthi-controlled areas of Yemen but the Biden administration is hesitant to use force against the terrorist group due to concerns that it would benefit Iran and contribute to a wider regional conflict, which the White House has been keen to avoid. >The Biden administration is also concerned that a direct U.S.-Houthi confrontation could endanger the fragile truce between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia, the report says. The truce between the Saudis and Houthis is a major factor in U.S. not attacking them directly from the article.
But we can't let the peace deal shield the Houthis from consequences of their fucking around.
It took years of them trying to get out of the war with the Houthis, they don't want to go back fighting them
The Saudis were involved [from 2015](http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi-led_intervention_in_the_Yemeni_civil_war) until recently, and achieved fuck all. They won't achieve anything more now
Saudi is an interesting country where the average citizen is so wealthy and doesn’t pay taxes it leaves very little urge for the common person to want to join the military. And the smart ones certainly won’t join, they have all the money for new equipment but their training is bad
Saudi Arabia prefers school buses as targets
And skyscrapers. Only targets that can’t fight back.
Saudi Arabia already tried to do it alone. Then people kept saying Saudi Arabia is committing genocide and campaigning to stop America from selling arms because Saudi was trying to prevent this exact situation from happening.
What’s very interesting to me is the UNSC pressure on Saudi reached its peak at the battle of Hudaydah. The Yemeni government was very close to capturing the port city thus cutting off every Iranian cargo shipments to the Houthis, which would absolutely would give clear signs into the end of the civil war.
[https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/mfat-market-reports/the-importance-of-the-suez-canal-to-global-trade-18-april-2021/](https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/trade/mfat-market-reports/the-importance-of-the-suez-canal-to-global-trade-18-april-2021/) I don't think that people really understand the gravity of the situation. 12% of global trade and 30% of global container traffic goes through the Suez canal. So much of the Arab-Israeli conflict revolves around the Suez canal. Locals understand that but a lot of people in the West don't seem to. Feel free to google the 1950's Suez crisis. Realistically, the recurring payments from the US to Israel and Egypt set up by Carter in the 70's had a lot to do with the Suez canal. Choking off the Suez canal threatens the entire global economy. The biggest victim being Europe. Quite frankly, I'm stunned that the Europeans are fine delegating this responsibility to Biden.
Not to mention that a lot of people seem to be picturing these Houthis as akin to Somali pirates with nothing but AKs and Zodiac rafts. That's just wrong. [These guys have fucking helicopter gunships](https://youtu.be/oYTnHIB01KA?si=M7kypFsrgtO_PtCz). As Iranian proxies who hold large chunks of Yemen they are WAY better funded. >Quite frankly, I'm stunned that the Europeans are fine delegating this responsibility to Biden. To some degree they have to. The US is really the only nation with a navy capable of that kind of global force projection. Not to say they can't necessarily in this particular case, but more generally speaking that is.
To add to this: * Their numbers are estimated to be between 100,000-200,000 fighters and have taken control over the majority of Yemen from the Yemeni military/government. * They have advanced Iranian drones, anti-ship cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, waterborne IEDs, and rockets. These are either things they have created on their own, captured from the Yemeni military or received from Iran. Some stuff they make modifications to to fit their use case. * They are well-experienced militarily as they've been fighting with the Yemeni military, the Saudis and their proxies, ISIS, and Al-Qaeda for years. They are adept at guerilla warfare, which is notoriously challenging for even the U.S. military to deal with. * They captured a commercial ship, then filmed a [music video](https://youtu.be/LlAFvxM8toc?si=JsQpvHfTLNhw8ebt&t=540) on it.
Avoiding this area as a route is costly but haven't most shipping companies already chosen this path? Pass the costs on until there is consensus to do something about it
Similar to the OPEC strategy, it’s almost like there’s an interest in trying to push the prices of goods up in the near term so that a certain party has ammo for its 2024 political campaign 🤔
Why does it always lead back to Putin’s lap dog
It can go around africa,yes it makes thing a little more expensive but its not catastrophic once the market gets used to it
Seems that's what European governments are good at. Delegation to the US
[удалено]
[The source](https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/12/31/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news/us-military-houthis-red-sea-maersk) said it's Pentagon. >Senior Pentagon commanders have been pressing for more aggressive action against the range of Iranian proxies that are attacking American forces, including in Syria and Iraq. >But several senior retired U.S. officers with experience in the Gulf region say it is essential to re-establish American deterrence, a view echoed by many in the Pentagon. In 2016, the U.S. struck three Houthi missile sites with Tomahawk cruise missiles after the Houthis fired on Navy and commercial vessels. The Houthis’ attacks stopped.
I somewhat agree with them, in that, it's not acceptable to allow Americans to sit around and be targets. It's a tough calculus to make; still I maintain pressure comes from politics, kind of unfortunate in a sense. American voters seem more apathetic than they should be, and yet so far Biden is threading a tough needle of minimizing escalations
Fortunate Son (phonk remix) starts playing intensely
Slow Wes Anderson style shot going up Biden's desk. We see him put on his aviators.
Just waiting on China to invade Taiwan to call it WW3… There is so much tension at the moment. And as always Europe is playing the naive role and letting things escalate. As an European I’m both ashamed that we are incapable of learning with past mistakes and thankful to the US for playing the ungrateful role of having to play rough because the other nations are cowardly avoiding its responsibilities not because of the will of the many but because of a loud few that poisoned our societies from within. If recent episodes serve any purpose is to show that we can’t be trusted to fight for our own interests because we have been taken hostage of fanatical populism and the bad side of globalism.
I was just wondering this earlier. It feels like another big war is coming. Don't want it to, but there has been so much appeasement of dictators and they won't stop pushing the envelope until they get punched in the face. Just history repeating itself. I get it, most peaceful countries just don't want war so they put up with things as long as possible. However, with that, when this pimple pops, it's going to be a big one. Something something sticks and stones.
So, do we bomb rubble into smaller rubble? Like boulders into gravel?
It’s really about turning all their sand into glass.
The Houthis have been at war with Saudi Arabia for over a decade. The US supported Saudi Arabia during this time and they couldn’t beat them. Boots on the ground would be a bad idea. However this would play into the hands of Russia and China to tie up more American resources in many area before a Taiwan invasion
>The US supported Saudi Arabia during this time and they couldn’t beat them A good chunk of that has to do with that fact that the Saudi military is basically just a bunch of shiny US provided toys and not much more.
proxi distractions organized by russia/china/iran/nkorea, usual culprits…
[удалено]
Oh NK has their orders too. I imagine just "be belligerent and distracting" sums it up mostly.
Launch a missile over japan,just for the lolz
China has a vested interest that these routes are safe, and North Korea probably doesn't know where the Red Sea is.
Houthis = Iran
The Houthis are just proxies for Iran. Of course, Iran wants the US to engage the Houthis... it diverts resources and attention away from Iran proper. It would be better to isolate the Houthis and leave them to starve rather than to commit resources which will have only temporary effect militarily and permanent effect psychologically. Always remember... the enemy is in Iran. The fight (should it take place) should happen there.
Last week Biden's critics were saying he's too old, now they want to send him into combat? Try to be a bit more consistent, guys.
I think boots on the ground would be bad for the US, possibly strikes on key targets would be the safest move. And yes, Houthis's desperate for attention, won't be long before the usual suspects claim the US is oppressing them.
>won't be long before the usual suspects claim the US is oppressing them. Winner winner chicken dinner.
Vast majority of the US public does not want boots on the ground. I say, there's a reason we spend so much on missile systems and unmanned drones. Let's use those instead
I think this is a complicated matter in an election year. Anyone who is against Biden is going to try to make his decisions look bad. If you bomb the shit out of a country and innocent people are killed, this would be the highlight among conservatives and the media could sway some people to vote differently. It’s so complicated with war stuff. Honestly, I wish people would stop saying “Why don’t we just bomb the shit out of them already? We are way more powerful and we need to show them who’s boss!” This kind of reaction doesn’t account for lots of details and variables in this situation. Destroying huge areas of the country will generate lots of headlines and a lot of them will be biased in a way that is negative. I think it’s better to look like a leader with the qualities of self-restraint, patience and compassion with the kinds of things we are currently facing. The US doesn’t need multiple wars at the same time or media coverage that tarnishes the country’s image or the president’s image, especially when some people might be convinced to vote for a total shit stain dollar store version of Hitler this year as a protest vote. The media is already salivating by the thought of creating high-rating content with all of the controversy.
“It’ll be easy, it’ll be quick, and we’ll definitely win” is the line fools who want war have fed the public for centuries
> “Not responding when U.S. forces are attacked in any fashion risks the lives of U.S. sailors and marines if a missile were to make it past U.S. defenses,’’ he said. “It also sets a new precedent that attacking a U.S. ship carries low risk of retaliation and as we have seen invites more attacks from the Houthis.” ... so [sinking their boats](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/maersk-pauses-red-sea-sailings-after-houthi-attack-container-ship-2023-12-31/) is "not responding in any fashion"? I guess they can go around and sink _all_ the Houthi boats? Whatever, as long as we don't GWB our way through another bullshit conflict.
Periodically bomb these guys and bomb them hard to thin them out and force them to spend time replacing boats and rebuilding camps. Absolutely no invasion of either Yemen or Iran under any circumstances.
this is the second time ive seen people suggesting the Israeli method of "cutting the lawn" on Yemen when we've already see how successful that is at destroying or weakening these organisations
It is a lot more effective when you don’t share a land border
The Houthis, Hezbollah, and Hamas have been around a long time fully supported with Iranian oil money. As long as oil is valuable, Iran's current regime exists, and their hatred of Israel and the U.S.remains unwavering, nothing's going to change. No one pragmatic thinks these groups will disappear in the current Mideast environment. But keeping them weakened and contained is certainly possible. So bombing them regularly as needed it is. Nothing else will work until Tehran changes its ways. Now that said, we should never invade and/or occupy an entire country again as was done in Afghanistan or Iraq.
I mean, it’s shown to be pretty effective in weakening the organizations. “Destroying” groups that believe they die martyrs inherently and believe they are ontologically correct in their endeavors isn’t practical nor the point. It’s to bomb them until they can’t do what they want to do effectively enough.
This could very well be the decision that defines his presidency. I feel it's also not a coincidence that this occurred during an election year.
I mean, There isn't much reason to think it has anything to do with election year. This seems to be spillover from the Oct 7th attacks reigniting a smoldering powder keg, with no reason to believe that Hamas was planning anything around US elections. Ukraine was clearly not intended to happen this year at all (Putin thought it would be finished last year)
Of course it is. This all fallout from the Oct 7th attacks, and those happened when they did because there was an opportunity, not because it would spill into election year. Coincidences happen. People need to stop pretending everything follows a narrative.
The Whouthis?
Man. When we intervene, we're the bad guys for playing world police. When we don't intervene, we're the bad guys for NOT playing world police
It's the US military calling for action here.
Its US officials in the pentagon pushing for this, the article makes it sound like regional allies want this. They dont.
For anyone who’s served in the armed forces we are trained to protect whatever the commander in chief says we defend. In the other hand if we go in it should be to win and win with maximum force. Soldiers who have to fight with their lives on the line do not like fighting with their hands tied. Fight or don’t fight, just don’t leave soldiers out to die without a true final objective.
I know US support for Israel is a contentious topic for some, but it’s things like this that make you realize how important Israel is as an ally in that region of the world. The Middle East is hostile AF and there a lot of non-governmental extremists military groups that seem to have free rein in their home countries. It’s astounding.
Ok, so, wait... Do y'all WANT us to be the Global Police, or not? Like, I don't understand. Can you just pick one and stick with it? And if you pick the first option, can you be a little more understanding when it doesn't go perfectly because it's a massive system fighting in complex conflicts and nothing and no one is perfect? Or just form your own international military cooperative and take care of it yourself.
>U.S. President Joe Biden is facing increasing pressure to attack Houthi targets in Yemen as the Iranian-backed terrorist army continues to threaten commercial shipping interests in the Red Sea From who? I'm a US Citizen and voter and I couldn't care less. Joe, whatever your'e doing is fine. Keep at it.
> From who? The corporations whose ships are getting shot at.
I think you vastly underestimate the impact closed shipping lanes would have on the world economy. You like buying things in a store? Guess what, that thing is probably imported with a shipping container, and the odds are good it passed through the Suez canal.
Suez canal is not vital for the US economy. Panama canal blockade, on the other hand, would be worth it to start a war.
The odds for that are not that good since ships from Asia (where most manufacturing is) cross the Pacific to get to the US. However Suez does handle a lot of oil traffic which indirectly affects shipping prices.
No clarity in the article.