> The US set up a multinational naval taskforce to protect the Red Sea transit route, which carries up to 12% of global trade.
Reminder that might is needed to create a peaceful space within which peoples can trade.
Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
71–80 of 500 posts
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#72Once again we see "blowback" in action. Here's the cycle: 1. A major power backs a side in an internal struggle for their own end. If necessary, a conflict is manufactured by propping up rebels, a coup, etc; 2. The other side, which tends to be the internally popular side, resists. Because of that popular support, they can survive, thrive and grow; 3. Insurgencies are incredibly effective. Counter-insurgencies are in…
> And now the Houthi rebels have become battle-hardened guerillas and insurgents, capable of projecting force into the vital shipping lanes of the Red Sea. Their ability to attack the red sea has nothing to do with being "battle-hardened". They can only do so because Iran decides to supply them with missiles.
They only exist as catspaws for Iran in the first place...
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Russia is not a superpower or even remotely close to such a status. No country besides the US is currently considered a superpower.
Any country with the ability to completely erase entire countries (i.e. has an enormous stockpile of nuclear weapons) is a superpower.
North Korea and Pakistan are superpowers?
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#74How 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?
Do you have a plan for doing there where the Houthis don’t turn KSAs’ oil fields into hell on earth?
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#75"anti-ship ballistic missiles" Interesting guidance problem.
as opposed to meaning "parabolic", ballistic means they don't have propulsion after the launch phase, they are in free-fall under the influence of gravity, but like a person in a parachute, they're still able to steer within the envelope of hurtling to the earth
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#76Something 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…
It's a function of how powerful one's adversary is. Russia is a superpower.
It absolutely is not a superpower, but it has a madman and some nukes, and at this point no one is willing to risk.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#77Something 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…
[deleted]
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#78Once again we see "blowback" in action. Here's the cycle: 1. A major power backs a side in an internal struggle for their own end. If necessary, a conflict is manufactured by propping up rebels, a coup, etc; 2. The other side, which tends to be the internally popular side, resists. Because of that popular support, they can survive, thrive and grow; 3. Insurgencies are incredibly effective. Counter-insurgencies are in…
> The US carrier group may even adequately suppress the Houthis but this is attrition and Houthi investment is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost to the US.
Between this, Ukraine, and the decades-long misadventures in the Middle East, the US is learning how to handle the next generation of conflicts. (As is everyone else that is paying attention.)
The future looks increasingly more drone dependent. Explosives tied to cheap and plentiful delivery systems. Startups like Anduril are going to take over.
Submarine drones, jet-powered drones, assassin drones. Signals intelligence and radio algorithms...
This is old, and a bit too Black Mirror, but seems to be tracking the future of conflict correctly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-2tpwW0kmU
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#79"anti-ship ballistic missiles" Interesting guidance problem.
[flagged]
The Houthis possess both true ASBMs and land attack ballistic missiles which have been shot at and hit ships in the past few weeks. The second can only ever work if the ship is totally stationary but these were identified as ASBMs by U.S. Central command which can presumably tell the difference based on whether or not the missiles actually maneuver to hit moving targets. The US navy shot a few more down immediately afterwards.
Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea
#80[flagged]