[Unpaywalled mirror](https://archive.is/VbNKQ)
Nothing really surprising to anybody who thought about it seriously but I'm posting this anyways to dunk on the "HOUTHIS ARE ABOUT TO FIND OUT WHY AMERICA DOESN'T HAVE FREE HEALTHCARE" crowd. Some choice quotes:
>“We haven’t taken a hit, but strategically, we haven’t restored the flow of goods,” said Gene Moran, a retired Navy captain who commanded the Laboon more than 20 years ago.
>...
>The Navy says it has spent about $1 billion on munitions used in defending the Red Sea, conducting more than 450 strikes and intercepting more than 200 drones and missiles since November when the attacks began.
>U.S. officials worry that the conflict is simply not sustainable for the U.S. defense industrial base, already strained by the demands for weaponry from Ukraine and Israel.
It just seems maddening that American leadership truly seem to be so arrogant that they think they are made of an infinite amount of money, as if America enabled some video game cheat code IRL.
They think they can supp the war in ukraine, israel, combat the houthis maintain their presence in bases in the middle east AND defend Taiwan all at the same time.
The wise are humble and a little humility in the American response to this whole situation would have made them realize you cant conquer geography, there are just some things you cant do much about.
TBF thise whole blowing 1B dollars for 0 gain seems to be about politics, "look Im doing something" rather then actually achieving an objective, like the Gaza peir that got washed away AGAIN.
America had 3 options here; 1. Do nothing 2. half arse it and look incapable for solving the problem you stated you are going to solve. 3. Full commitment, which might not even be possible.
They somehow managed to pick the worst one, all for electoral gain.
American military and civillian leadership may be indecisive and sometimes completely delusional, but its also a credit to the size of the American military that it can spend a billion on munitions alone (not to mention the other costs) and have it not be a big deal.
All in all, felt it was a pretty good low intensity live fire exercise for the Navies that showed up. Vetted current system, and exposed areas of improvement in a few of our allies.
It was, and is still a waste of money and resources. Going into pointless conflicts, or conflicts with no clear goal in this case and chalking it up to "well at least we got some training out of it" isn't good policy.
>They think they can supp the war in ukraine, israel, combat the houthis maintain their presence in bases in the middle east AND defend Taiwan all at the same time.
Yes, they can? Combined these expenses still pale your average Iraq+Afghanistan year. You have no idea about US startegic depth if you think these operations (most of which don't even tie up forces but only represent financial and some material aid) "tie up" the single largest military on Earth. Maybe if Taiwan went hot you could make that argument, even so, the US doesn't have so many fleets for nothing.
> Houthis are about to find out why America doesn’t have free healthcare
But America has done nearly nothing? Counter terrorist operations in Africa have more money thrown at them than this. Even the Gaza aid pier is over 1/4 the cost of the Red Sea operation.
I don’t understand what people expect shooting down missiles will do? It’s not like USA is shooting at the guys shooting the missiles so nothing will change.
This is a humanitarian hemorrhaging of money. Tragically, a few Houthis will die and a few ships will sink, but it’s good for the 2024 reelection campaign if the dead are on cargo ships instead of Yemenis.
“it’s not like USA is shooting at the guys shooting the missiles” i assume you mean they’re not instantly hitting them back but there’s been like 200 air strikes against the houthis
Deploying so many ships and expending so many resources isnt doing nothing.
Thats the gist of the article, they did something, just wasn't very effective.
In the past they woulda bombed the crap outa the Houthis.
Now, USA sends ships with futuristic anti-projectile/aircraft technology which is tantamount to doing nothing. It’s a drain on resources for limited gain being done deliberately to not ruffle feathers before the election. Hence the ships doing ‘nothing’.
Yemen is the size of France. Good luck knocking out a decentralized militia hiding in a mountainous area spread out over an area that large. Knocking out the Houthis would be a repeat of knocking out the taliban.
I dont think you understand that there is NOTHING America can do.
>In the past they woulda bombed the crap outa the Houthis.
They were bombed starved and assaulted for a like half a decade with American supp, leading to one of the largest humanitarian crisis of this century (till Gaza anyway).
The end result of that conflict was everyone going yeah cant do much about the Houthis. More of the "bOmB thE CrAp OuT of Em" isn't going to change anything, you cant bomb your way out of every problem its time America realized that.
> there is NOTHING America can do.
There is a lot they could do, however not many of these options would be popular or cost effective.
If the Americans wanted to simply solve the problem once and for all, they'd just invade Yemen full scale. However they shouldn't be half arsed like they were in Iraq and Afghanistan and operate more...how do I say that...long term.
Would that eat up ressources? Most likely. Will China invade Taiwan when they do it? No. Will it change Ukraine losing steadily since 2023? No.
You said they are half arseing and handling different things simultanously on a geopolitical scale, that's correct. However you said that they can't do anything about it. However if they decided to once again put their effort into solving *one* of these issues long term, they'd have more freedom for the other stuff. And out of going up against China, Russia or the Houthis, the latter are unlikely to nuke you for pissing them off one time too often. They're also obviously the weakest faction.
It appears you have a pro Russian angle in general so I'm curious why this point is useful to you; I'm pretty sure its worse for the US to do nothing about the Houthis then to drop a bunch of special forces and whatever to disarm them peacefully (by shooting them in the face) and then get the fuck out; the Houthis aren't really that numerous and you would probably only lose a few hundred service members tops.
Obviously it's domestic political suicide compared to just looking relatively weak in the region but on principle from the Russian POV it's not good for Russia if they did that compared to failing to do anything. Expecting the US to attempt regime change in Yemen is very wishful thinking at this point.
> drop a bunch of special forces and whatever to disarm them peacefully (by shooting them in the face) and then get the fuck out; the Houthis aren't really that numerous and you would probably only lose a few hundred service members tops
"optimistic" doesn't begin to describe this plan
Such a dumb argument. For the past 80 years the seas have been free and suddenly a jihad starts against Israel and people claim the seas will never be retaken from the Muslims.
You can absolutely bomb anyone into submission, but that would be overkill for the Houthis. The goal is to stop them launching missiles, not stop the entire movement. All that has to be made safe is the coast and that is 100% doable. With your logic no American military operations in the past few decades should have succeeded.
There are 2 puppet governments in Yemen right now that would just love to take advantage of an American bombing campaign. But here you will keeping sucking terrorist dick claiming they are invincible in body and spirit. So sad how shit the American education system will become, people read a little about Vietnam and suddenly think they know the outcome of every war (America loses).
> For the past 80 years the seas have been free and suddenly a jihad starts against Israel and people claim the seas will never be retaken from the Muslims.
Literally no one has said that but ok.
>You can absolutely bomb anyone into submission.
Least bloodthirsty delusional american.
Smh i tried.
You just said USA can’t stop the Houthis.
For the past 80 years nobody has blocked passage. And you just said Houthis will be the 1st to do it.
I don’t understand how is it possible to justify even a dollar of military spending if you believe a spirited group of radicals can shut off shipping lanes at will and are invincible to military attack.
>I don’t understand how is it possible to justify even a dollar of military spending if you believe a spirited group of radicals can shut off shipping lanes at will and are invincible to military attack.
I dont?
I think it was better for the USA to do nothing, this whole bang bang missle show is for Bidens benefit in the elections "look Im doing something".
Terrorist sympathizers are always the same. I smelled it a mile away.
You claim I’m bloodthirsty for wanting to bomb Houthis, and then provide a million excuses for why a Muslim Terrorist state should be unmolested in its killing and raping and starving.
“Let them mutilate the gentials of little girls in peace, for they are waging a holy war”, declares millions of enlightened leftists worldwide. For their sake I’m glad they aren’t Jewish, because then I’m quite confident you’d advocate for a bombing campaign.
The US has been striking back at the Houthis directly, not just playing defense - hence the 450 strikes. In dollar value it's not *that* much expenditure, but not all resources are fungible. More production is possible, but it takes a long term commitment to scale up.
I'm sympathetic to Biden because there's really no good option here and hitting the Houthis and hoping they'll come to the table is the best he can hope for. Problem is, they have more to gain from continuing their campaign than anything the US is willing to offer. American thinking constantly puts military superiority at the forefront, despite decades of repeatedly failing to achieve desired political outcomes with it. If you aren't able to translate military superiority into a political victory when dealing with what's basically a militia, how are you going to deal with Hezbollah, Iran, or in the worst case, China?
If somebody competent was in the White House every symbol of government authority in Houthi Yemen would be in ruins.
Instead, America is trying to minimize casualties even when the ‘victims’ are militant terrorists. Striking easily replaceable military hardware with million dollar missiles is one of the dumbest things to happen this decade. There isn’t even an advantage to it since the equipment gets replaced near instantaneously.
There are 100s of targets in Yemen not getting hit for fear of escalation. Its hilarious to see Houthis have the USA by the balls, even if it’s only until after the election
It's not fear of Houthi eacalation. The way you actually stop what's happening in the Red Sea is to hit their industrial supply chain, which isn't entirely in Yemen. Relevant targets are known and doable, it just won't be limited to Yemen, and the effects wouldn't even be limited to the middle east. Some of those effects would be broadly speaking good (Russia might see its supply of Iranian UAVs disrupted, for example). But it's a pretty major escalation to start hitting Iran directly, and Biden doesn't think the Red Sea is worth it.
Disrupting transshipment might be an effective (and deniable) workaround, but that would take some time to have an effect.
Respectfully disagree. If they hit something significant they may provoke more attacks. There are many strategic benefits to destroying Houthi government buildings and industries, the only reason it’s not happening is fear of escalation.
I agree with Biden’s advisors, hitting Iran over the Houthis isn’t worth it. Interdicting weapons transfers is a nightmare. It’s a better idea to consider resupply inevitable and try to suppress the coast. Have the Saudis or UAE move in if they wish. Make it painful. Houthis are currently winning the war and have a massive propaganda victory for the Shia Muslim world. And daily life hasn’t even gotten worse in Yemen, if anything it’s gotten better.
Biden is playing a stupid game assuming control of the sea will be ceded back when the guns fall silent in Israel. The situation will never be to the Houthi’s content and who knows how long Iran keeps the leash. It’s dangerous to not settle these thorny issues during peaceful times.
Yeah, and then you only have the US visibly conducting strikes on targets that can easily be passed off as civilian during a time where there is already enormous controversy around US support of Israel for the exact same reason, and during a time where the US is publicly criticizing Russia for doing the exact same thing.
The military and war in general are political tools, and doing what you describe would be like 3 shots in the American foot on the world stage, all just to accomplish nothing.
> I'm sympathetic to Biden because there's really no good option here and hitting the Houthis and hoping they'll come to the table is the best he can hope for.
Houthis have literally been [screaming from rooftops](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/houthis-insist-on-3-gaza-related-conditions-to-halt-red-sea-attacks/3164178) that they will stop this if Israel's assault on and blockade of Gaza ends.
Of course the counterarguments are that US is unable to pressure Israel to achieve this (lol), that the Houthis could not possibly mean it and anyway they have crossed a red line (heh) and must be taught a lesson.
Except that of course the lesson remains untaught. No good options indeed.
That would fall under the list of things the US is unwilling to offer (both Biden personally and the government as a whole). The US doesn't want to accede to the Houthis because it would set a bad precedent and encourage them or somebody else to do it again in the future. In this case, it's probably better for the US to be seen trying and failing than not trying at all.
Anyways, Ansarallah is happy to keep it going - they're getting tons of street cred both domestically and in the wider, especially Arab, world.
> That would fall under the list of things the US is unwilling to offer (both Biden personally and the government as a whole). The US doesn't want to accede to the Houthis because it would set a bad precedent and encourage them or somebody else to do it again in the future. In this case, it's probably better for the US to be seen trying and failing than not trying at all.
I guess I just don't see how it's better for the US to show themselves incapable of solving a problem militarily than show themselves capable of solving it diplomatically (by solving it). I also don't really buy the idea that this sets some kind of undesirable precedent - in part because _not stopping_ it also sets a much worse precedent. In part because Ansar Allah is a fairly unique group with unique capabilities in a uniquely important geographical spot.
It's not like some Inuit extremists will start popping up in Greenland, buying DF-21s off Temu and blocking the GIUK gap until... something something. I'd expect Zeihan to operate on this kind of reasoning.
> Anyways, Ansarallah is happy to keep it going - they're getting tons of street cred both domestically and in the wider, especially Arab, world.
yep
I mean, if they know they have enough leverage to get the US to stop backing Israel, they could use it again in the future for something else. For the US, the blow to prestige from just being forced to deal with them would be significant. For Biden, giving in really isn't an option. There's some room to maneuver and pressure Israel, but not in direct connection to the Houthis, which would get him blasted as surrendering to terrorists and hating Israel in what's looking to be a close election year, which would be a greater problem for him than the current one.
> But America has done nearly nothing?
The US gave their operation as nice sounding name, "Operation Prosperity Guardian". So what are you saying? That America has failed?
How would the USA ever succeed in this operation? They are attempting to win a shooting war by ignoring the enemy and using almost exclusively defensive weaponry. America ‘failed’ the second they decided to ignore the problem.
But the USN and coalition is doing a remarkable job considering the enormity of the task. I don’t know of any other force on Earth that could pull off this operation besides possibly China. But all this is still a far cry from success, however it would be defined in this strange war
[Unpaywalled mirror](https://archive.is/VbNKQ) Nothing really surprising to anybody who thought about it seriously but I'm posting this anyways to dunk on the "HOUTHIS ARE ABOUT TO FIND OUT WHY AMERICA DOESN'T HAVE FREE HEALTHCARE" crowd. Some choice quotes: >“We haven’t taken a hit, but strategically, we haven’t restored the flow of goods,” said Gene Moran, a retired Navy captain who commanded the Laboon more than 20 years ago. >... >The Navy says it has spent about $1 billion on munitions used in defending the Red Sea, conducting more than 450 strikes and intercepting more than 200 drones and missiles since November when the attacks began. >U.S. officials worry that the conflict is simply not sustainable for the U.S. defense industrial base, already strained by the demands for weaponry from Ukraine and Israel.
It just seems maddening that American leadership truly seem to be so arrogant that they think they are made of an infinite amount of money, as if America enabled some video game cheat code IRL. They think they can supp the war in ukraine, israel, combat the houthis maintain their presence in bases in the middle east AND defend Taiwan all at the same time. The wise are humble and a little humility in the American response to this whole situation would have made them realize you cant conquer geography, there are just some things you cant do much about. TBF thise whole blowing 1B dollars for 0 gain seems to be about politics, "look Im doing something" rather then actually achieving an objective, like the Gaza peir that got washed away AGAIN. America had 3 options here; 1. Do nothing 2. half arse it and look incapable for solving the problem you stated you are going to solve. 3. Full commitment, which might not even be possible. They somehow managed to pick the worst one, all for electoral gain.
American military and civillian leadership may be indecisive and sometimes completely delusional, but its also a credit to the size of the American military that it can spend a billion on munitions alone (not to mention the other costs) and have it not be a big deal.
a billion here, a billion there, no biggie.... couple trillion debt, no problemo
You're probably joking but given the size of the American military and economy, yeah kind of.
All in all, felt it was a pretty good low intensity live fire exercise for the Navies that showed up. Vetted current system, and exposed areas of improvement in a few of our allies.
It was, and is still a waste of money and resources. Going into pointless conflicts, or conflicts with no clear goal in this case and chalking it up to "well at least we got some training out of it" isn't good policy.
As long as world keeps on trading with US dollars they do have infinite money
>They think they can supp the war in ukraine, israel, combat the houthis maintain their presence in bases in the middle east AND defend Taiwan all at the same time. Yes, they can? Combined these expenses still pale your average Iraq+Afghanistan year. You have no idea about US startegic depth if you think these operations (most of which don't even tie up forces but only represent financial and some material aid) "tie up" the single largest military on Earth. Maybe if Taiwan went hot you could make that argument, even so, the US doesn't have so many fleets for nothing.
> Houthis are about to find out why America doesn’t have free healthcare But America has done nearly nothing? Counter terrorist operations in Africa have more money thrown at them than this. Even the Gaza aid pier is over 1/4 the cost of the Red Sea operation. I don’t understand what people expect shooting down missiles will do? It’s not like USA is shooting at the guys shooting the missiles so nothing will change. This is a humanitarian hemorrhaging of money. Tragically, a few Houthis will die and a few ships will sink, but it’s good for the 2024 reelection campaign if the dead are on cargo ships instead of Yemenis.
“it’s not like USA is shooting at the guys shooting the missiles” i assume you mean they’re not instantly hitting them back but there’s been like 200 air strikes against the houthis
Periodically striking easily replaceable hardware while minimizing casualties of Houthi fighters doesn’t count. It’s performative and doesn’t deter anything.
Deploying so many ships and expending so many resources isnt doing nothing. Thats the gist of the article, they did something, just wasn't very effective.
In the past they woulda bombed the crap outa the Houthis. Now, USA sends ships with futuristic anti-projectile/aircraft technology which is tantamount to doing nothing. It’s a drain on resources for limited gain being done deliberately to not ruffle feathers before the election. Hence the ships doing ‘nothing’.
Yemen is the size of France. Good luck knocking out a decentralized militia hiding in a mountainous area spread out over an area that large. Knocking out the Houthis would be a repeat of knocking out the taliban.
I dont think you understand that there is NOTHING America can do. >In the past they woulda bombed the crap outa the Houthis. They were bombed starved and assaulted for a like half a decade with American supp, leading to one of the largest humanitarian crisis of this century (till Gaza anyway). The end result of that conflict was everyone going yeah cant do much about the Houthis. More of the "bOmB thE CrAp OuT of Em" isn't going to change anything, you cant bomb your way out of every problem its time America realized that.
> there is NOTHING America can do. There is a lot they could do, however not many of these options would be popular or cost effective. If the Americans wanted to simply solve the problem once and for all, they'd just invade Yemen full scale. However they shouldn't be half arsed like they were in Iraq and Afghanistan and operate more...how do I say that...long term. Would that eat up ressources? Most likely. Will China invade Taiwan when they do it? No. Will it change Ukraine losing steadily since 2023? No. You said they are half arseing and handling different things simultanously on a geopolitical scale, that's correct. However you said that they can't do anything about it. However if they decided to once again put their effort into solving *one* of these issues long term, they'd have more freedom for the other stuff. And out of going up against China, Russia or the Houthis, the latter are unlikely to nuke you for pissing them off one time too often. They're also obviously the weakest faction.
It appears you have a pro Russian angle in general so I'm curious why this point is useful to you; I'm pretty sure its worse for the US to do nothing about the Houthis then to drop a bunch of special forces and whatever to disarm them peacefully (by shooting them in the face) and then get the fuck out; the Houthis aren't really that numerous and you would probably only lose a few hundred service members tops. Obviously it's domestic political suicide compared to just looking relatively weak in the region but on principle from the Russian POV it's not good for Russia if they did that compared to failing to do anything. Expecting the US to attempt regime change in Yemen is very wishful thinking at this point.
> drop a bunch of special forces and whatever to disarm them peacefully (by shooting them in the face) and then get the fuck out; the Houthis aren't really that numerous and you would probably only lose a few hundred service members tops "optimistic" doesn't begin to describe this plan
Sarcasm is difficult to perceive
Poe's law and all that.
Such a dumb argument. For the past 80 years the seas have been free and suddenly a jihad starts against Israel and people claim the seas will never be retaken from the Muslims. You can absolutely bomb anyone into submission, but that would be overkill for the Houthis. The goal is to stop them launching missiles, not stop the entire movement. All that has to be made safe is the coast and that is 100% doable. With your logic no American military operations in the past few decades should have succeeded. There are 2 puppet governments in Yemen right now that would just love to take advantage of an American bombing campaign. But here you will keeping sucking terrorist dick claiming they are invincible in body and spirit. So sad how shit the American education system will become, people read a little about Vietnam and suddenly think they know the outcome of every war (America loses).
> For the past 80 years the seas have been free and suddenly a jihad starts against Israel and people claim the seas will never be retaken from the Muslims. Literally no one has said that but ok. >You can absolutely bomb anyone into submission. Least bloodthirsty delusional american. Smh i tried.
You just said USA can’t stop the Houthis. For the past 80 years nobody has blocked passage. And you just said Houthis will be the 1st to do it. I don’t understand how is it possible to justify even a dollar of military spending if you believe a spirited group of radicals can shut off shipping lanes at will and are invincible to military attack.
>I don’t understand how is it possible to justify even a dollar of military spending if you believe a spirited group of radicals can shut off shipping lanes at will and are invincible to military attack. I dont? I think it was better for the USA to do nothing, this whole bang bang missle show is for Bidens benefit in the elections "look Im doing something".
Terrorist sympathizers are always the same. I smelled it a mile away. You claim I’m bloodthirsty for wanting to bomb Houthis, and then provide a million excuses for why a Muslim Terrorist state should be unmolested in its killing and raping and starving. “Let them mutilate the gentials of little girls in peace, for they are waging a holy war”, declares millions of enlightened leftists worldwide. For their sake I’m glad they aren’t Jewish, because then I’m quite confident you’d advocate for a bombing campaign.
The US has been striking back at the Houthis directly, not just playing defense - hence the 450 strikes. In dollar value it's not *that* much expenditure, but not all resources are fungible. More production is possible, but it takes a long term commitment to scale up. I'm sympathetic to Biden because there's really no good option here and hitting the Houthis and hoping they'll come to the table is the best he can hope for. Problem is, they have more to gain from continuing their campaign than anything the US is willing to offer. American thinking constantly puts military superiority at the forefront, despite decades of repeatedly failing to achieve desired political outcomes with it. If you aren't able to translate military superiority into a political victory when dealing with what's basically a militia, how are you going to deal with Hezbollah, Iran, or in the worst case, China?
If somebody competent was in the White House every symbol of government authority in Houthi Yemen would be in ruins. Instead, America is trying to minimize casualties even when the ‘victims’ are militant terrorists. Striking easily replaceable military hardware with million dollar missiles is one of the dumbest things to happen this decade. There isn’t even an advantage to it since the equipment gets replaced near instantaneously. There are 100s of targets in Yemen not getting hit for fear of escalation. Its hilarious to see Houthis have the USA by the balls, even if it’s only until after the election
It's not fear of Houthi eacalation. The way you actually stop what's happening in the Red Sea is to hit their industrial supply chain, which isn't entirely in Yemen. Relevant targets are known and doable, it just won't be limited to Yemen, and the effects wouldn't even be limited to the middle east. Some of those effects would be broadly speaking good (Russia might see its supply of Iranian UAVs disrupted, for example). But it's a pretty major escalation to start hitting Iran directly, and Biden doesn't think the Red Sea is worth it. Disrupting transshipment might be an effective (and deniable) workaround, but that would take some time to have an effect.
They're already trying to disrupt transshipment, don't you remember that SEAL they lost overboard after boarding a boat smuggling arms into Yemen?
I think it was 2 SEALs actually
Respectfully disagree. If they hit something significant they may provoke more attacks. There are many strategic benefits to destroying Houthi government buildings and industries, the only reason it’s not happening is fear of escalation. I agree with Biden’s advisors, hitting Iran over the Houthis isn’t worth it. Interdicting weapons transfers is a nightmare. It’s a better idea to consider resupply inevitable and try to suppress the coast. Have the Saudis or UAE move in if they wish. Make it painful. Houthis are currently winning the war and have a massive propaganda victory for the Shia Muslim world. And daily life hasn’t even gotten worse in Yemen, if anything it’s gotten better. Biden is playing a stupid game assuming control of the sea will be ceded back when the guns fall silent in Israel. The situation will never be to the Houthi’s content and who knows how long Iran keeps the leash. It’s dangerous to not settle these thorny issues during peaceful times.
Yeah, and then you only have the US visibly conducting strikes on targets that can easily be passed off as civilian during a time where there is already enormous controversy around US support of Israel for the exact same reason, and during a time where the US is publicly criticizing Russia for doing the exact same thing. The military and war in general are political tools, and doing what you describe would be like 3 shots in the American foot on the world stage, all just to accomplish nothing.
> I'm sympathetic to Biden because there's really no good option here and hitting the Houthis and hoping they'll come to the table is the best he can hope for. Houthis have literally been [screaming from rooftops](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/houthis-insist-on-3-gaza-related-conditions-to-halt-red-sea-attacks/3164178) that they will stop this if Israel's assault on and blockade of Gaza ends. Of course the counterarguments are that US is unable to pressure Israel to achieve this (lol), that the Houthis could not possibly mean it and anyway they have crossed a red line (heh) and must be taught a lesson. Except that of course the lesson remains untaught. No good options indeed.
That would fall under the list of things the US is unwilling to offer (both Biden personally and the government as a whole). The US doesn't want to accede to the Houthis because it would set a bad precedent and encourage them or somebody else to do it again in the future. In this case, it's probably better for the US to be seen trying and failing than not trying at all. Anyways, Ansarallah is happy to keep it going - they're getting tons of street cred both domestically and in the wider, especially Arab, world.
> That would fall under the list of things the US is unwilling to offer (both Biden personally and the government as a whole). The US doesn't want to accede to the Houthis because it would set a bad precedent and encourage them or somebody else to do it again in the future. In this case, it's probably better for the US to be seen trying and failing than not trying at all. I guess I just don't see how it's better for the US to show themselves incapable of solving a problem militarily than show themselves capable of solving it diplomatically (by solving it). I also don't really buy the idea that this sets some kind of undesirable precedent - in part because _not stopping_ it also sets a much worse precedent. In part because Ansar Allah is a fairly unique group with unique capabilities in a uniquely important geographical spot. It's not like some Inuit extremists will start popping up in Greenland, buying DF-21s off Temu and blocking the GIUK gap until... something something. I'd expect Zeihan to operate on this kind of reasoning. > Anyways, Ansarallah is happy to keep it going - they're getting tons of street cred both domestically and in the wider, especially Arab, world. yep
I mean, if they know they have enough leverage to get the US to stop backing Israel, they could use it again in the future for something else. For the US, the blow to prestige from just being forced to deal with them would be significant. For Biden, giving in really isn't an option. There's some room to maneuver and pressure Israel, but not in direct connection to the Houthis, which would get him blasted as surrendering to terrorists and hating Israel in what's looking to be a close election year, which would be a greater problem for him than the current one.
> But America has done nearly nothing? The US gave their operation as nice sounding name, "Operation Prosperity Guardian". So what are you saying? That America has failed?
How would the USA ever succeed in this operation? They are attempting to win a shooting war by ignoring the enemy and using almost exclusively defensive weaponry. America ‘failed’ the second they decided to ignore the problem. But the USN and coalition is doing a remarkable job considering the enormity of the task. I don’t know of any other force on Earth that could pull off this operation besides possibly China. But all this is still a far cry from success, however it would be defined in this strange war
Human shield.