Ron Paul: "We Spent a Billion Dollars Fighting the Houthis…and Lost'
(ronpaulinstitute.org)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (84)
sorted by:
Any Navy vets care to weigh in on wtf is happening in the Red Sea?
Not Navy but Army.
It's cost effectiveness, combined with the fact that muslims don't care about their own lives.
It costs a tiny fraction to attack of what it costs to defend and counter attack. The Navy's battle doctrine assumes air superiority, but worse assumes infinite resources.
I'm not sure I buy this. "I'm willing to die to fight the outlander" is not the same as "I don't care if I live or die." Particularly when the Yemenese Houthis seem to be achieving their goals.
Make no mistake, I don't care about what are essentially 21st century privateers (Iranian letter of marque, as it where), but a Navy's job is not to go fight the other guy's navy. Navies exist to protect commerce. Why is a US carrier group unable to do this in the Red Sea?
I'm sure about it. I've seen them strap bomb loaded backpacks onto little kids, and then tell them if they go hug the Americans that we'll give them candy.
You can never convince me that they care about their own lives.
Besides that, the answer to your question is simple. Their armament can reach shipping in the straights, with incredible cost effectiveness. Even if you invent some kind of high tech thingedy thing that can somehow snipe their rocket infantry before they fire, they don't care. All you've done is kill Omar and maybe destroy one rocket. They have a million more rockets and a million more Omars.
Turns out globalism isn't economically viable.
It's "if I die, I can be replaced" writ large.
"Who cares if I lose one kid? I can make five more."