4 ms·

If you want to say that the USN is struggling to keep up with rapid changes in warfare I think you'd be correct. We have a navy built to fight the Cold War and

If you want to say that the USN is struggling to keep up with rapid changes in warfare I think you'd be correct. We have a navy built to fight the Cold War and 21st century warfare is a looooot different. Cheap and effective missiles and drones are the new reality. And everybody knows the playbook for success against the US: a "regular" military will always struggle against irregular mobile forces that can melt back in to the general population. However. They've successfully shot down hundreds of Houthi drones and missiles with 100% success. In that context, a single friendly fire incident (with no casualties) is regrettable but overall performance has been exemplary. US Navy considers fighting the Houthis It's disingenuous at best to frame it this way. The Houthis are funded by Iran, something of a near-peer in terms of capability (if not size) that has a pretty robust arms connection to Russia which is, well, Russia.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>If you want to say that the USN is struggling to keep up with rapid changes in warfare I think you'd be correct. That's certainly part of it, though I will also say the same for the US military overall. >They've successfully shot down hundreds of Houthi drones and missiles with 100% success. The problem is wars aren't won with politeness and pleasantries, they are won by whoever has the guts to destroy and murder first. The US Navy (and US military overall) aren't fighting to kill, so they might win battles (claim victory over drones and missiles) but they won't win the war. If we aren't going in to win the war we should not start or join any in the first place. The friendly fire incident is really a coup de grace after the aforementioned self-admissions that the Navy considers the pressure they are under as bad as WW2 if not worse. I am appalled as a US taxpayer at their underperformance and subsequent unacceptable failure, regardless whether that is because they can't (no resources) or won't (rules of engagement and politics prohibit them).
- quesera 2y ago
  The US is not at war with the Houthis, or with Iran. The US is maintaining a level of conflict, with the intent of not allowing escalation. You might have a point that the US is politically hesitant to fully engage, should the time come. But that time has not come. It's better for everyone in the world, if the US acts as hall monitor and gets a few paper airplanes thrown at them from around a corner. If and when the US chooses to exterminate the threat, the global repercussions will be enormous. Sacrificing lots of expensive equipment and some red-blooded American kids is the price you pay to avoid global disaster. It's a terrible trade, but it's the burden of being the biggest kid in school, which we enjoy for unrelated reasons.
- bingkaa 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - nozzlegear 2y ago
    The US military isn't fighting in Gaza at all, you're just being inflammatory.
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  The military follows the orders of the president. They aren't fighting to kill or destroy the Houthis because that, apparently, isn't Biden's goal. Biden's presidency has been almost dovish in its approach to conflicts, which has been highlighted in Bob Woodward's excellent book War. This is the guy who argued vehemently (though unsuccessfully) against the troop buildup in Afghanistan when Obama was president. His administration has always focused on diplomacy and limited engagement — as we've seen with his approach to arming Ukraine — so it shouldn't come as any surprise that he doesn't want to invade Yemen and eradicate the Houthis.
- JohnBooty 2y ago
  wars aren't won with politeness and pleasantries, they are won by whoever has the guts to destroy and murder first The conflict with the Houthis isn't "war", unless we broadly define all armed conflict as "war." It's ridiculous to reduce this to a "guts" issue. Biden and Trump won't be manning the front lines, so guts on their part doesn't play into it. (Or maybe we should just do the ultimate, most gutsy thing ever by your logic and start nuking multiple countries) War on the Houthis would require invading Yemen which, in the understatement of the century, would have some pretty serious and wide-ranging consequences. It would also likely play into Iran and/or Russia's hands as this would distract the US from other matters and likely galvanize Middle Eastern opposition to the US. To say nothing of the money spent and lives lost. I have not heard voices from either side of the aisle feeling that this would be remotely worth the cost.

Dalewyn 2y ago

>If you want to say that the USN is struggling to keep up with rapid changes in warfare I think you'd be correct. That's certainly part of it, though I will also say the same for the US military overall. >They've successfully shot down hundreds of Houthi drones and missiles with 100% success. The problem is wars aren't won with politeness and pleasantries, they are won by whoever has the guts to destroy and murder first. The US Navy (and US military overall) aren't fighting to kill, so they might win battles (claim victory over drones and missiles) but they won't win the war. If we aren't going in to win the war we should not start or join any in the first place. The friendly fire incident is really a coup de grace after the aforementioned self-admissions that the Navy considers the pressure they are under as bad as WW2 if not worse. I am appalled as a US taxpayer at their underperformance and subsequent unacceptable failure, regardless whether that is because they can't (no resources) or won't (rules of engagement and politics prohibit them).

quesera 2y ago
The US is not at war with the Houthis, or with Iran. The US is maintaining a level of conflict, with the intent of not allowing escalation. You might have a point that the US is politically hesitant to fully engage, should the time come. But that time has not come. It's better for everyone in the world, if the US acts as hall monitor and gets a few paper airplanes thrown at them from around a corner. If and when the US chooses to exterminate the threat, the global repercussions will be enormous. Sacrificing lots of expensive equipment and some red-blooded American kids is the price you pay to avoid global disaster. It's a terrible trade, but it's the burden of being the biggest kid in school, which we enjoy for unrelated reasons.
bingkaa 2y ago
[flagged]
- nozzlegear 2y ago
  The US military isn't fighting in Gaza at all, you're just being inflammatory.
nozzlegear 2y ago
The military follows the orders of the president. They aren't fighting to kill or destroy the Houthis because that, apparently, isn't Biden's goal. Biden's presidency has been almost dovish in its approach to conflicts, which has been highlighted in Bob Woodward's excellent book War. This is the guy who argued vehemently (though unsuccessfully) against the troop buildup in Afghanistan when Obama was president. His administration has always focused on diplomacy and limited engagement — as we've seen with his approach to arming Ukraine — so it shouldn't come as any surprise that he doesn't want to invade Yemen and eradicate the Houthis.
JohnBooty 2y ago
wars aren't won with politeness and pleasantries, they are won by whoever has the guts to destroy and murder first The conflict with the Houthis isn't "war", unless we broadly define all armed conflict as "war." It's ridiculous to reduce this to a "guts" issue. Biden and Trump won't be manning the front lines, so guts on their part doesn't play into it. (Or maybe we should just do the ultimate, most gutsy thing ever by your logic and start nuking multiple countries) War on the Houthis would require invading Yemen which, in the understatement of the century, would have some pretty serious and wide-ranging consequences. It would also likely play into Iran and/or Russia's hands as this would distract the US from other matters and likely galvanize Middle Eastern opposition to the US. To say nothing of the money spent and lives lost. I have not heard voices from either side of the aisle feeling that this would be remotely worth the cost.