Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

gcaptain.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 500 posts

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#421

Post by genman »

wolverine876 wrote: post #113
nomilk wrote: post #4

Something 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…

I read a lot of professional international relations material (but I'm not an expert in any way). IME what may differ the most between 'popular' takes on IR and professional ones is the response to incidents. Arguably the #1 priority of professional IR is to prevent wars (with occasional exceptions, such as Russia or Hamas recently, but even they want to control when, where, and how). Wars can and do happen whether y…

> Another mechanism that causes warfare is a lack of flexibility, a lack of options.

That is very true but my conclusion is the opposite. US diplomacy did everything to not create options for Russia. Everything the US did deepened the impression that the invasion would be a walk in the part for Russia and US will do nothing. Russia had just one option left - to attack.

If US had rapidly moved a division into Ukraine for joint exercises when Russia started to threaten at the end of 2021 then it would have created options for Russia.

Sometimes you have to escalate to de-escalate.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#422

Post by maxglute »

throwup238 wrote: post #389
s1artibartfast wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe there is a disconnect on what we call prediction. There is more than enough information to predict if China would be in favor or against US building a military base in Taiwan. There isn't enough information to predict what Xi Jinping will have for breakfast.

There's definitely a disconnect because if that's the best example of a game theoretic prediction, I stand by my statement that game theory is useless in geopolitics. What would China's first concrete move be after it's final final warning [1]? Which faction in the party would have most influence over Xi Jinping in such an event and how much influence do they have over the military? How much would China be willing to…

China's final warning meme is actually very illustrative. The context is PRC was both warning and doing - actively attempting to shoot down TW / US based U2s despite having limited capabilities. The chefs kiss that this is an USSR meme is that PRC end up shooting down more U2s using modified soviet hardware than USSR herself. Even more so when consider PRC issued final warning to USSR that ended up in border skirmishes. PRC's actual final warning is "don't say we didn't warn you" has been predictative of PRC kinetic action with near certainty. USSR/India border skirmishes. Korean war against UN. PRC also has directly supported North Vietnam against the French, and threatened UK when they hinted at granting HK independence under Thatcher. That's every NPT nuclear state over territorial/security issues less important than TW. It doesn't always lead to immediate action, but has consistently been prelude to it.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#423

Post by s1artibartfast »

throwup238 wrote: post #389
s1artibartfast wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe there is a disconnect on what we call prediction. There is more than enough information to predict if China would be in favor or against US building a military base in Taiwan. There isn't enough information to predict what Xi Jinping will have for breakfast.

There's definitely a disconnect because if that's the best example of a game theoretic prediction, I stand by my statement that game theory is useless in geopolitics. What would China's first concrete move be after it's final final warning [1]? Which faction in the party would have most influence over Xi Jinping in such an event and how much influence do they have over the military? How much would China be willing to…

That wasnt intended as the best example, but the end of a range for predictive specificity (with breakfast being the other end).

After thinking for a while, I think it also depends on your definition of game theory.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#424

Post by adolph »

ceejayoz wrote: post #416
adolph wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The organizational mission statement is off-topic?

Here? Yes. We don’t quote Facebook’s motto in every article about them, either.

I for one was unfamiliar with the Houthi org’s credo and was rather shocked how antisemitic it sounds.

People here don’t quote the Facebook motto often, to be sure, but “move fast and break things” is quoted often as is the old Google one “don’t be evil.”

It doesn’t make sense that quoting the mission statement isn’t helpful information when there isn’t much about the Houthis posted here.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#425

Post by postsantum »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #231
pydry wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We were promised a victory many times thanks to the overwhelming power and sophistication western weapons repeatedly. Not "hold off Russia for 2-3 years, not fight to a standstill". Victory and a return to 1991 borders after first severing the land bridge to Crimea. It was a very specific prediction. To say that they havent lived up to their promise is an understatement given how abysmally they performed in the summe…

> We were promised a victory many times thanks to the overwhelming power and sophistication western weapons By whom?! The American establishment has been repeatedly forecasting doom and gloom for Ukraine.

That's crazy that the gaslighting stage has already begun

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#426

Post by maxglute »

ceejayoz wrote: post #417
maxglute wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not enough, hence a lot of DoD logistics is now done on civilian shipping via Maritime Partners program. Including Maersk who was dropping DoD contracts in September, the few ships on contract by DoD in region was refusing to go a couple weeks ago even with US escorts. The big revelation is Houthis has demonstrated US Transportation Command / US military's sealift ability is being challenged by small time Iranian pro…

> The big revelation is Houthis has demonstrated US Transportation Command / US military's sealift ability is being challenged by small time Iranian proxy, so good luck on an IndoPac campaign against PRC. This is a very odd takeaway from this incident.

This is pretty common takeaway from martime analysts. 90% of US transport command missions are run by commercial operators. Maersk contracted DoD vessels refused to transit red sea pre Prosperity Guardian when they already had USN escorts is pretty big red flag on US ability to rely on civilian shipping (and air) for protracted conflict. And right now a lot of rear logistics has been outsourced to civilian sector, frequently international crew, whose interests are not always aligned with US DoD. And since they're civilian, and frequently not American, US can't leverage/pressure them to go into active war zones. Some of civilian shipping is run by US agencies, but again civilian with retention issues. They might get drafted but overall there's large margin of uncertainty on current model of US sealift if Houthis can disrupt so much.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#428

Post by bawolff »

psunavy03 wrote: post #357
bawolff wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like all things - wars are a combination of rational self-interest, emotions and random chance. The action itself matters less than the consequence. The typical example is that USA gets away with shit other countries can't because nobody wants to invade usa. My understanding is that in this particular situation - yemen is a humanitarian disaster after their civil war. Any country that invades is going to be seen as r…

> Like all things - wars are a combination of rational self-interest, emotions and random chance. You’ve just hit on Clausewitz’s “wonderous yet paradoxical trinity,” which usually gets misquoted as “war is the continuation of politics by other means.”

Everyone in this thread is mentioning Clausewitz. Sounds like i should add it to my to read list.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#429

Post by JumpCrisscross »

TMWNN wrote: post #403
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if one has a job—albeit with hours cut—and a place to live and everyone else doesn't, who is better off? You’re both fucked. This is like asking if a massive asteroid hit the other side of the Earth, the people on the other side are not “much, much poorer.” That’s plainly idiotic. > Depression has a unique place in US history because it hit the US harder and earlier than the rest of the world It was also a massive…

>You’re both fucked. This is like asking if a massive asteroid hit the other side of the Earth, the people on the other side are not “much, much poorer.” That’s plainly idiotic. In the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king. >It was also a massive and unprecedented drawdown. People first and foremost measure their lives relative to their recent past. Not how folks halfway around the world are doing. I said what I…

> was addressing those who in 2017 and today immediately respond to any talk of the US raising tariffs, or reducing its military commitments abroad, with how the US will suffer the most economically (often with invokings of the "petrodollar" nonsense)

Sure. I agree with you here. But that’s not how your original comment reads. It contests that we’d get poorer in a Smoot-Hawley scenario, not that we’d be relatively richer in a drastically-poorer world.

Re: Maersk ship hit by missile in the Red Sea

#430

Post by JumpCrisscross »

maxglute wrote: post #390
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> US protects US flagged shipping Not true. FON protects non-US flagged ships; most ships aren’t U.S. flagged. > non US flagged vessels got hit without US intervention during tanker wars for years America doesn’t protect all ships all the time. Sure. We’re selective about which FON issues we exert influence over. But when we get there, we protect everyone. > because Maersk and other civilian shippers that DoD depends…

>Not true Historically true. Entire US protects global shipping narrative, that got popular post Zeihan, ignore the fact that US explicitly did not protect non US flagged vessels during tanker wars for years - the last large scale SLOC disruption. And when US "got there" they didn't protect everyone, Kuwaiti vessels had to reflag as US to get protection. US protected everyone in the sense that Stark getting hit trigg…

> ignore the fact that US explicitly did not protect non US flagged vessels during tanker wars for years

Granted. And as I mentioned were lazy deployers. But to a greater tendency than any historic great power, once we intervene, we haven’t tended to discriminate.

> Sal Mercogliano of What's Going on in Shipping

Thank you! Will watch.

> presuppose US is some benevolent provider of global security

No. It hypothesises that we are entering into a trade that is no longer at advantageous terms.

> Houthi/Iran targetting is discriminating enough for PRC to ride things out

True. I wager they’ve been lucky, but that’s neither here nor there. Maybe I should retract and propose the greatest beneficiary is the KSA, not PRC.

Post reply on HN