I wonder if treating the Houthis as Iranian agents and retaliating against Iranian assets directly would be more effective than playing whack-a-mole against these missile launchers without addressing the source of the problem. I assume Biden’s advisors are wondering the same thing, but it’s hard to know where the line between deterrence and escalation is…
Iran has enemies. Many of them are even worse than the Iranians, but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat, just like Iran is doing with the Houthis…
Houthis have been getting bombed by Saudi Arabia for I don’t know how many years. If any one thinks that airstrikes will stop their operations then I have a bridge to sell them.
I don’t think it’s technically correct to say that the US armed ISIS; ISIS seized weapons that the US provided to Iraq.
Israel does a pretty good job of opposing Iran, and we can be confident that weapons provided to Israel aren’t going to be used against the US. I think it’s likely that the Houthis are acting up now not because they’re provoked by Israel but because Israel is preoccupied with something else.
As for Saddam Hussein… He did a very good job of opposing Iran. The threat of eight years of war and hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers dead would be a very effective stick if we still had access to it. It’s ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it’s worse for US interests than Saddam was.
A lot of the people that now sympathize with ISIS are people that the US and other Western countries propped up in various ways to help fight the Soviets.
The Houthis were friendly with the Soviets. The Soviets were friendly with the imamate.
I wonder if treating the Houthis as Iranian agents and retaliating against Iranian assets directly would be more effective than playing whack-a-mole against these missile launchers without addressing the source of the problem. I assume Biden’s advisors are wondering the same thing, but it’s hard to know where the line between deterrence and escalation is…
Iran has enemies. Many of them are even worse than the Iranians, but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat, just like Iran is doing with the Houthis…
Houthis have been getting bombed by Saudi Arabia for I don’t know how many years. If any one thinks that airstrikes will stop their operations then I have a bridge to sell them.
Raytheon be like: “If you think airstrikes will stop the houthis I got a bomb to sell you”
Hmm. I wonder if anyone has tried that yet?
Sympathetic guys armed by the US to fuck with Iran include Saddam Hussein, ISIS and Israel.
Doesn’t that list also include Iran?
I don’t think it’s technically correct to say that the US armed ISIS; ISIS seized weapons that the US provided to Iraq.
Israel does a pretty good job of opposing Iran, and we can be confident that weapons provided to Israel aren’t going to be used against the US. I think it’s likely that the Houthis are acting up now not because they’re provoked by Israel but because Israel is preoccupied with something else.
As for Saddam Hussein… He did a very good job of opposing Iran. The threat of eight years of war and hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers dead would be a very effective stick if we still had access to it. It’s ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it’s worse for US interests than Saddam was.
A lot of the people that now sympathize with ISIS are people that the US and other Western countries propped up in various ways to help fight the Soviets.
The Houthis were friendly with the Soviets. The Soviets were friendly with the imamate.
Nailed it! (Aside from thinking it’s ironic)
We? Who is ‘we’?