gazzzwp
Member
Latest:
US launch Tomahawks at Yemen radar sites. Pentagon Secretary Peter Cook released the news:
US missiles destroy Houthi-controlled radar sites on Yemen coast | Fox News
The US strikes back!
Conflict in Yemen
- Thread starter Muukalainen
- Start date
US launch Tomahawks at Yemen radar sites. Pentagon Secretary Peter Cook released the news:
US missiles destroy Houthi-controlled radar sites on Yemen coast | Fox News
The US strikes back!
gazzzwp
Member
Well the Houthis should know that you when pays your money you takes your chances. Did they really think that the US would sit back and do nothing?
Agreed, ideal COA by the USN for all reasons.
https://news.usni.org/2016/10/13/vi...thi-controlled-radar-sites-retaliatory-strike
Still waiting on BDA
gazzzwp
Member
Not much detail on this one yet but Iran has apparently sent two warships to The Gulf of Aden as they put it to 'prevent piracy'.
Looks like this little conflict is about to heat up a few degrees. Fox is talking about a proxy war between US and Iran in Yemen and would anyone disagree?
Looks like this little conflict is about to heat up a few degrees. Fox is talking about a proxy war between US and Iran in Yemen and would anyone disagree?
Boatteacher
Active Member
I can only hope Fox is wrong.
Why would the US want to do that? Let the Saudis drown in their own quagmire; don't join them in it.
And I find it difficult to believe that the US would want a proxy or actual war with Iran. Really neither the Saudis as leaders of the Sunni world nor Iran as the leading force in the Shiite one are offering the US or the rest of the world any preferred model for engagement with Islam. Both are exporting a vile version of the religion (the Saudis probably more so).
Surely the US doesn't need to go this far to keep the oil flowing and it hardly seems consistent with the more hesitant approach of the Obama administration.
Some BDA video of the US retaliation strikes against the Houthi positions. It's also an interesting reminder that despite popular videos of un-uniformed fighters in sandals, the Houthis are actually a fairly sophisticated fighting force.
Хм.. ИнтереÑное видео поÑледÑтвий американÑкого удара о йеменÑким РЛС - Юрий ЛÑмин
Хм.. ИнтереÑное видео поÑледÑтвий американÑкого удара о йеменÑким РЛС - Юрий ЛÑмин
Which means that the U.S. has now become an active participation in the conflict. Previously it was only providing logistics and intelligence support to the Saudis. No doubt the Saudis - who are stuck in something with no end in sight - will be hoping that the U.S. gets more involved. It reminds me off the situation in Lebanon in 1982, no doubt the circumstances in Lebanon compared to the present ones in Yemen are different but there are similarities. When the New Jersey hit Druze and Syrian positions in support of the Lebanese army the U.S. was seen as actively taking sides in the conflict.
The question is what will the U.S. do next if more missiles are fired by the Houthis and is there a solution to the conflict?
My god, I had never imagined the extent of USA's involvement in the Yemen war. I thought they were just providing weapons and ammo, intel ... not actively taking part in the operations!
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/world/middleeast/yemen-rebels-missile-warship.html
Related article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/opinion/americas-moral-duty-in-yemen.html
Yeah, strict limits, "only" US tankers refuelling the (US-provided and US-trained) saudi/UAE aircraft that bomb the Houthis with US bombs. A very principled stance, as usual.
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/13/world/middleeast/yemen-rebels-missile-warship.html
Related article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/11/opinion/americas-moral-duty-in-yemen.html
Technically the U.S. was not taking active part as it only provided intelligence and logistics support [similar in some ways to the help provided to Britain in 1982]. Of course all that's changed now but it remains to be seen if the strike on the radars positions was a one off thing. I'm actually surprised that they're any functioning radar sites in Yemen as I would have thought that by now the Saudis and their allies would have taken care of such targets. IS and AL Qaeda would love for the U.S. to be dragged in the conflict as it would be a rallying call to attract more volunteers but I fail to see why the Houthis would want the U.S. to to be directly involved.
The question that still remains is whether the people who fired those missiles knew the target was a USN ship. It can be argued that from a Houthi perspective, a USN ship is a legitimate target given the level of U.S. support provided to Saudi and other countries.
The question that still remains is whether the people who fired those missiles knew the target was a USN ship. It can be argued that from a Houthi perspective, a USN ship is a legitimate target given the level of U.S. support provided to Saudi and other countries.
Apparently the Houthuis are claiming they didn't fire at any US warships. Could this be a Gulf of Tonkin 2.0? An excuse to hit Houthi AShM capabilities, in support of the Saudis, after the HSV was hit?
EDIT: The Houthis hit a Saudi convoy, destroying 3 tanks, 6 light armor vehicles, and killing/wounding dozens.
http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3013018.html#cutid1
EDIT: The Houthis hit a Saudi convoy, destroying 3 tanks, 6 light armor vehicles, and killing/wounding dozens.
http://colonelcassad.livejournal.com/3013018.html#cutid1
Last edited:
The US tried hard for years not to get more involved into the Yemen debacle. And now they stage a Tonkin 2.0 just to hit some radar sites? As if the Saudis couldn't JDAM any fixed installations all by themselves.
I guess 2 questions have to be asked.
1. Assuming the Houthis weren't the ones who fired the missiles; who did and who has to gain and how by dragging the U.S. into the conflict?
2. Assuming the U.S. is seeking a casus belli to enter the conflict, what does it have to gain; given that it has to deal with the Syrian issue, has to keep a close watch on what China does in the Asia Pacific and has concerns over Russia in Europe.
One theory is that the missiles were indeed fired by the Houthis but not because they knew the target was a USN ship but if that were the case why were other attacks made? Or did the Houthis fire the missiles in the knowledge that the target was a USN ship and that it was a legitimate target because of all the assistance provided to the U.S. to the enemies of the Houthis? Logically the Houthis have nothing to gain by drawing the U.S. in or did they calculate that an attack on a USN ship would lead to U.S. retaliation in the form of missile attacks [which wouldn't cause much damage anyway to the ability of the Houthis to continue their fight] but the U.S. wouldn't go further than that?
1. Assuming the Houthis weren't the ones who fired the missiles; who did and who has to gain and how by dragging the U.S. into the conflict?
2. Assuming the U.S. is seeking a casus belli to enter the conflict, what does it have to gain; given that it has to deal with the Syrian issue, has to keep a close watch on what China does in the Asia Pacific and has concerns over Russia in Europe.
One theory is that the missiles were indeed fired by the Houthis but not because they knew the target was a USN ship but if that were the case why were other attacks made? Or did the Houthis fire the missiles in the knowledge that the target was a USN ship and that it was a legitimate target because of all the assistance provided to the U.S. to the enemies of the Houthis? Logically the Houthis have nothing to gain by drawing the U.S. in or did they calculate that an attack on a USN ship would lead to U.S. retaliation in the form of missile attacks [which wouldn't cause much damage anyway to the ability of the Houthis to continue their fight] but the U.S. wouldn't go further than that?
Or the Saudi campaign in Yemen got too much negative publicity in western media, so Houthis firing at US ships redefines them as bad guys in public eyes. Three cruise missiles cost less than a successful PR campaign.
An article on the use of Storm Shadow by the Saudis. There's also mention of BL-755s being used.
UK-Supplied Precision Weapons Prove Popular in Saudi-Led Yemen Campaign
Interesting to speculate what the end game is for the Saudis. Given that they've clearly failed to achieve their objectives how do the disengage without a loss of face to Iran? How long more are they willing to continue? Also remains to be seen if the mounting losses suffered by the Saudis leads to discontent at home and even a possible rift withing the leadership. Apparently, things aren't going too well for the Saudis at home.
[For The First Time, Saudi Arabia Is Being Attacked By Both Sunni And Shia Leaders]
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...wahhabism-chechenya-robert-fisk-a7322716.html
[Saudi Arabia Cannot Pay Its Workers Or Bills - Yet Continues To Fund A War In Yemen]
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ontinues-to-fund-a-war-in-yemen-a7232466.html
[The West Should Help Saudi Arabia Limit Its War In Yemen, And End The Conflict]
http://www.economist.com/news/leade...ttention-forgotten-war-west-should-help-saudi
UK-Supplied Precision Weapons Prove Popular in Saudi-Led Yemen Campaign
Interesting to speculate what the end game is for the Saudis. Given that they've clearly failed to achieve their objectives how do the disengage without a loss of face to Iran? How long more are they willing to continue? Also remains to be seen if the mounting losses suffered by the Saudis leads to discontent at home and even a possible rift withing the leadership. Apparently, things aren't going too well for the Saudis at home.
[For The First Time, Saudi Arabia Is Being Attacked By Both Sunni And Shia Leaders]
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...wahhabism-chechenya-robert-fisk-a7322716.html
[Saudi Arabia Cannot Pay Its Workers Or Bills - Yet Continues To Fund A War In Yemen]
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ontinues-to-fund-a-war-in-yemen-a7232466.html
[The West Should Help Saudi Arabia Limit Its War In Yemen, And End The Conflict]
http://www.economist.com/news/leade...ttention-forgotten-war-west-should-help-saudi
Apparently the Saudis couldn't, since the radar sites were still active, and the Houthis were using AShMs against the Saudi-led coalition. Of course one might argue that the Saudis prefer bombing civilian food and water facilities, and funeral processions.
The US tried hard for years not to get more involved into the Yemen debacle. And now they stage a Tonkin 2.0 just to hit some radar sites? As if the Saudis couldn't JDAM any fixed installations all by themselves.
But anyway. To be honest, I know fairly little of the US policy towards the Saudi Yemen adventure. You say they tried hard. What exactly did that entail? What made it hard for them not to get involved.
Anyways, I also don't think the Gulf of Tonkin 2.0 theory is terribly likely. It's far more likely that the Houthis didn't realize it was a US warship, and once they did, decided to deny involvement.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Can you imagine the Saudis covering your 6! What a clusterphuck of an ally.:help
On paper the RSAF's Tornado/ALARM and F-15/ALARM combination would enable it to deal with radars but off course having a paper capability and the actual capability to do something can be 2 profoundly different things.
Something I'm curious about. When one buys a complete coastal surface missile system, does the package also normally include a ESM? Without an ESM what other possible ways would the crew have to positively ID their target?
Something I'm curious about. When one buys a complete coastal surface missile system, does the package also normally include a ESM? Without an ESM what other possible ways would the crew have to positively ID their target?
Sounds plausible but why were there follow on attacks? Logically, once the Houthis discovered that the target of the first attack was a USN ship, they would have refrained from further attacks to avoid the Americans retaliating or worse, stepping up the level of support provided to Saudi Arabia.