Glad the US is at work here. I have lots of shipments that are moving from the Red Sea and instead around the Horn of Africa due to the conflict via Maersk. It's adding about 2-3 weeks at least on maybe 10% of supplies we receive. Maybe we need a new reason code on their orders (War). Geez.
If those targeting plans etc were not already put together before this last week, someone wasn't doing their job. And, imo, the game changed when the Houthi's directly targeted US military vessels. While I appreciate the optics that a coalition brings, the US military should not be hamstrung by politics when they are attacked. If Iran launches an attack and hits a US naval vessel, should we go seeking permission from other countries to end Iranian ability to attack? Would they have to assemble targeting info or is it already available?
You have to consider your overall strategic goals and what actions advance them. I’m sure we already had targeting plans, although they likely got more refined with greater intelligence, and precision is important for the success of strategic goals. But there are a lot of considerations. You have to think moves ahead like chess. If you just want to blow up something from your attackers to strike back, not much needed. If you want to advance US strategic aims, that takes planning across multiple fronts, only some of them military.
Genocide and mass displacement, acceptable. Delayed shipping, hell no. Send in the air force! We know what America's priorities are.
This is the kind of thing that could lead to troops on the ground. 4-7 million metric tons of goods usually flow through there daily. It’s down to like 2-3 million now. This will raise prices everywhere. Substantially. That’s the kind of thing that gets US troops on the ground.
Possibly. Trying to avoid. Everyone should read the Rogway piece linked above to the extent they are thinking on this point
Just to be clear - I'm not saying we should - just saying if this shipping route continues to be interfered with - troops on the ground become more and more likely.
Understood, and agree. Its hard to know what to do. Hamas' October 7 butchery and the Israeli devastation and depopulation of Gaza has really undermined the US position in so many ways and done a lot damage to our standing
If I were advising the President on this, I would tell him putting in troops would not do much that can’t be accomplished with air and naval forces. Plus, whatever benefits you got would be like taking a drink. The effect would pass, and you would just need more and more to keep the effect going. But that isn’t even my primary concern. Putting troops in where Iran can get at them is precisely what Iran wants. Why give it to them? As I led with, if you can do what you need to do by bombing, why exceed that? We don’t need to stop every rocket or missile the Houthis want to fire at shipping. We just have to deliver enough punishment that it’s not worth the effort.
Pentagon in particular likely terrified about putting troops on the ground anywhere. The glory days are no more. And I don’t consider that a bad thing.
Very preliminary, but IRGC appears to launching missiles that have struck at least near the US consulate in Iraq
