"anti-ship ballistic missiles" Interesting guidance problem.
[flagged]
This may sound silly, but until this comment I, a non-gun-user, always vaguely thought that the AR in AR-15 stood for Assault Rifle. Apparently it's ArmaLite Rifle. Huh.
Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
61–70 of 500 posts
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#62Something I'm unsure about is what does and doesn't trigger wars. Russian jets downed a US drone over the black sea in March 2023, I thought for sure there'd be a commensurate US military response. But there didn't appear to be one. Was it because no human was aboard the drone (so no response was justified), from fear or escalation, or something else? In any case, if a large cargo ship were sunk, would the US or othe…
Because events never cause wars. Countries want war and then they wait for an inciting event to go in. The US wants a war with Russia without putting boots on the ground. Ukraine was a convieinient excuse. 9/11 triggered a war with random middle eastern countries that the US wanted to invade anyway. If Cuba downed a large cargo ship, then the US will have annexed it before midnight. If China downs one in South China…
So then how did the US trick Putin into invading Ukraine?
That's the simple question that nobody who espouses this silly set of beliefs can ever answer.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#63Something I'm unsure about is what does and doesn't trigger wars. Russian jets downed a US drone over the black sea in March 2023, I thought for sure there'd be a commensurate US military response. But there didn't appear to be one. Was it because no human was aboard the drone (so no response was justified), from fear or escalation, or something else? In any case, if a large cargo ship were sunk, would the US or othe…
Because events never cause wars. Countries want war and then they wait for an inciting event to go in. The US wants a war with Russia without putting boots on the ground. Ukraine was a convieinient excuse. 9/11 triggered a war with random middle eastern countries that the US wanted to invade anyway. If Cuba downed a large cargo ship, then the US will have annexed it before midnight. If China downs one in South China…
>The US wants a war with Russia without putting boots on the ground. Ukraine was a convieinient excuse.
This is a complete fiction. The defense apparatus was in the process of shifting its focus from the middle east to China when this broke out. It is making the preparations for a pacific war much harder.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#64How much longer can this go on? It seems like there are so many parties whose economic interests all align that this would just be dealt with swiftly and decisively. Am I just naive? Is there no reasonably straightforward way to stop the Houthis? Wouldn't much of Europe, Saudi Arabia and others be very interested in ending this as quickly as possible?
From what I understand, and I could be very wrong, the fear is that directly attacking the Houthis will be seen as an escalation by Iran. The west doesn't want to get mired in yet another war in the Middle East, so instead they've adopted a defensive posture around their shipping lanes with Prosperity Guardian. This is also why Saudi Arabia's own navy vessels are conspicuously absent from the operation, despite the Houthis being a geographically prominent thorn in their side.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#65Something I'm unsure about is what does and doesn't trigger wars. Russian jets downed a US drone over the black sea in March 2023, I thought for sure there'd be a commensurate US military response. But there didn't appear to be one. Was it because no human was aboard the drone (so no response was justified), from fear or escalation, or something else? In any case, if a large cargo ship were sunk, would the US or othe…
> Something I'm unsure about is what does and doesn't trigger wars.
According to Clausewitz, "war is the continuation of politics through other means." A state goes to war when it believes it can achieve a political objective through force that is infeasible through diplomacy, deterrence, soft power, intimidation, etc.
The US and Russia fighting directly would be quite dangerous due to the nuclear capabilities of each, so whatever political objectives America might wish to achieve through a hot war would be (quickly) overshadowed. Thus the US has revived its Cold War stance of supporting Russia's enemies without direct involvement.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#66"anti-ship ballistic missiles" Interesting guidance problem.
[flagged]
The United States Central Command referred to these as anti-ship ballistic missiles.
https://x.com/centcom/status/1741259817602429357?s=46&t=AtAA...
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#67"The Singapore-flagged, Denmark-owned/operated container ship requested assistance, and the USS GRAVELY (DDG 107) and USS LABOON (DDG 58) have responded to the ship." Why does a Danish owned and operated container ship fly under the Singapore flag? Why did the US Navy get involved?
> Why does a Danish owned and operated container ship fly under the Singapore flag?
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience
> Why did the US Navy get involved?
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maritime_security#Theoretical_...
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#68Something I'm unsure about is what does and doesn't trigger wars. Russian jets downed a US drone over the black sea in March 2023, I thought for sure there'd be a commensurate US military response. But there didn't appear to be one. Was it because no human was aboard the drone (so no response was justified), from fear or escalation, or something else? In any case, if a large cargo ship were sunk, would the US or othe…
Wars tend to happen slowly, then all at once.
Arguably the US and Russia were already in a war (albeit fairly cold) when the drone was hit. They were in the process of maneuvering and prepare the information space.
After the drone strike, civilian support for conflict with Russia increased, and America used that increased support to put increased pressure on Russia in various places.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#69I’m fairly concerned this Red Sea thing can turn into what sets off inflation for real. These routes were major efficiency factors to the economy. If we lose them, there’s nothing but added cost coming for us all, and at the worst time for consumer confidence in central banks ability to manage the situation. Can we just keep our shit together? It’s been a rough decade and it’s only 3 years into the 2020s…
You're underestimating how staggeringly cheap ocean freight is. A 40ft container can be shipped from China to NYC for under $3000; it's a very small portion of the retail cost of most goods.
Even if cargo vessels all have to travel around the cape of good hope for a year or two, this increases the cost by a small percentage and is not going to kick off major inflation.
Futures markets back this up, pricing in very modest increases in ocean freight shipping costs for the next several years involving this route, e.g. https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/energy/freight/container-fr...
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a function of how powerful one's adversary is. Russia is a superpower.
Russia is not a superpower or even remotely close to such a status. No country besides the US is currently considered a superpower.
The point is more that Russia has nuclear weapons, so the end result (if things go badly wrong) could be extremely tragic.