Hacker News Reader

Comment by yyyk | Hacker News Reader

Didn't anyone look at the map? The drone strikes have nothing to do with the Houthis, they don't have the range. This is a purely Iranian operation with obvious motives - control oil supply from ME. This adventurism is going to lead into a huge war which will be bad for anyone in the region. Perhaps that can't be stopped now.

View on HN

From a WaPo story:

"U.N. investigators said the Houthis' new UAV-X drone, found in recent months during the Saudi-led coalition's war in Yemen, likely has a range of up to 1,500 kilometers (930 miles). That puts the far reaches of both Saudi Arabia and the UAE in range."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/saudi-tv-ch...

Well, if one believes their 'taking of responsibility', of course you believe they have the flight range, which means you assigned 'their' drones a flight range, which is then picked up to 'explain' it.

If you apply a more realistic standard (no actual evidence including footage, no way to guide it, no facilities in Yemen to even test it), it's obvious this is an operation by a state, and only Iran can fit the bill.

The UN investigator's range estimate is from May. https://www.apnews.com/18f9c169f398464ba53c19e3963d3fba

The UN 'investigator' never examined a model, but simply repeated news reports about the previous time the Houthis claimed an attack. That's exactly what I said:

* (A) believes the Houthi claims. * Ergo argues they have drone X. * People repeat they have drone X based on (A), despite the only actual source being the Houthis themselves.

"The drone, with a wingspan of 4.5 meters (14.7 feet), has a V-shaped tail fin. It’s powered by a rear-mounted engine and has been found with what appears to be extra fuel tanks welded it to, a U.N. panel of experts found. It carries a 18-kilogram (40-pound) warhead."

Yea, I read that. But where does the basis for those comes from? Other unverified claims by the Houthis themselves?

They are in power merely 4 years, no evidence of any tests in Yemen (so they developed this without testing at all?), all this time being involved in a war, barely any imports etc.

Sorry, but arguing they have these capabilities requires just a bit more proof.

The Houthi rebels and Iran are intimately connected; if Iran has the capability, that lends support to the idea that the Houthis could have carried out the attack, since the Houthis are extensively equipped, trained, funded, and otherwise supported by Iran.

So we go back to Iran either way. Except it's much easier for Iran to launch the attack from other parts of the world, and let the Houthis claim responsibility.

Note that it isn't even clear Iran has this range, the foiled attack on Israel suggested they don't, otherwise they'd have launched from further away.

> Note that it isn't even clear Iran has this range

The Houthi claim is that it was done with assistance from sympathizers in Saudi Arabia. That vastly reduces the required range, no matter whether it was the Houthis, Iran, or the Easter Bunny directing the attack.

Yes, I do think the actual range was far smaller. But smuggling drones, fuel and bombs across the desert is a massive operation too, probably beyond the Houthis either. IMHO, it's a direct Iranian operation from Iraq.

> The Houthi spokesman, Yahya Sarea, told al-Masirah TV, which is owned by the Houthi movement and is based in Beirut, that further attacks could be expected in the future.

> He said Saturday's attack was one of the biggest operations the Houthi forces had undertaken inside Saudi Arabia and was carried out in "co-operation with the honourable people inside the kingdom".

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49703143

Of course they'd take responsibility. That's awfully convenient. But it's not their doing.

Does it really matter if it was done by the (Iranian proxy) Houthi rebels with assistance from sympathizers in SA, by Iran with assistance from sympathizers in SA, or by Iran from Iran?

Well, half the thread here is about the Houthis allegedly defending themselves vs SA. If this is instead a direct Iranian attack on a different state, the story changes.

Once we understand better what happened, we'll know if and how to act in response.

> Well, half the thread here is about the Houthis allegedly defending themselves vs SA. If this is instead a direct Iranian attack on a different state, the story changes.

Not really; everyone who is paying any attention know that the civil war in Yemen is an Iran vs SA proxy war, and that the Houthi claim of responsibility is equivalent to notice of escalation of that war (with the implication that SA deescalating in Yemen is key to undoing the escalation.)

Whether the Houthis are actually operationally involved in the attack is immaterial to its significance.

My point is that the attack has little to do with Yemen, but has everything to do with Iranian designs. So talking about 'escalation in Yemen war' is meaningless (also, if Iran is the one escalating, maybe they're the ones that should undo it?).

If it portends civil war in SA, that'd be significant

Reply on news.ycombinator.com