Or can they lead to another global wave of supply-chain disruptions, like the those we experienced during the pandemic?
There's lots of evidence that the pandemic's supply-chain disruptions triggered inflation, and we're still fighting it.
I'm not looking for predictions. I'm more interested in an informed assessment of the risks.
No evidence of this discrimination. That’s a big part of the problem.
The only reason to not consider it an act of war is to avoid recognizing their legitimacy as a governing force.
Sure. Then they hit a Norwegian tanker carrying biofuel to Italy [1]. Then another Norwegian ship [2].
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/cruise-missile-yem...
[2] https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/18/politics/uss-carney-red-sea/i...
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/cruise-missile-yem....
What you’ve got is independent militant groups firing off while a rear PR group tries to project control.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/ukmto-ambrey-repor...
Houthi spokesperson Yahya Sarea identified the vessels as the MSC Clara and Norwegian-owned Swan Atlantic, and said the attacks were carried out after their crews failed to respond to calls from the group.
If they suspect a ship is headed to Israel, they attack it, with military equipment they (most likely) got from Iran.
Right, which is a touch broader than “targeting Israeli ships.”
(It’s also convenient retcon. Where would I go next…paperwork wasn’t promptly provided? Paperwork appeared forged? We thought they were lying?)
What's the greater leap, them assuming that silence was unacceptable and therefore likely headed to Israel, or that they're taking random, unpredictable pot shots and their actual agenda isn't related to Israel at all?
The point is their behaviour isn’t predictable. Which means you can’t make a deal. (To say nothing of there being nobody to negotiate with, nor enforce the terms of a deal ex post facto.)
Put another way, nobody has a monopoly on violence on the Yemeni coast. Before we start discussing legalistic concepts like a treaty, someone needs to seize that monopoly.
Why do you think we moved a carrier strike group to the Strait of Hormuz before sailing it to Yemen [1]?
[1] https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2023/11/27/ike-carr...
We are threatening to shut the Strait. We sailed a CVN to Hormuz to telegraph two can tango.
> US is currently 5-10 years behind in weapons technology
Compared to Iran?!
We’re literally liquidating their newest air-defence systems with 90s-era kit in Ukraine.
> War with iran will be as historically significant as the sacking of rome on our own economy and global reputation
This is stupid. We could topple Tehran with de minimis force reduction from offshore. We might lose some ships, which would be a high cost, but nothing catastrophic.
The catastrophe would be the power vacuum that follows. Which is why nobody is threatening total war with Iran.
Great, we’ve devolved into generic ad hominem.
> the f35 launched late and still has kinks
Like every new platform, including our adversaries’. They are more than enough to SEAD Iran from BVR, even OTH. I would be shocked if more than a handful were lost in such a strike.
> we have no hypersonic weapons or defense against them
Usually war is hypothetical. In this case, we have modern Russian cruise missiles being shot down by decades-old Patriot batteries.
Hypersonics are largely a farce, but to the extent they’re being pursued, we have more programmes in development than Russia and China combined. And neither has demonstrated missile-defence piercing capability. (Even if they did, there aren’t enough to be a strategic issue.)
> wargames the US has held shows us losing
Yeah, if we try a ground invasion. Nobody suggested that. Nobody even suggested the decapitation I mooted. You’re multiple straw men deep.
American military supremacy is undisputed even by our adversaries. In a 1:1 conflict, we win. Not always, but certainly right now. We’re so overwhelmingly powerful it makes us arrogant, which leads to the very real risk of spreading ourselves thin. We probably can’t support a proxy war in Ukraine, Israel and Yemen while also fighting China around Taiwan. But engaging with any two of those alone? Mindblowingly easily.
> the rise of brics
Another vein of idiocy.
> regional war where we are being shot at from every direction
Welcome to the Middle East.
> the collapse of the currency
Let me guess, to be replaced by Bitcoin or a currency jointly managed by countries currently at war with one another.
They’ve also stated they’re targeting Israeli ships. There is no evidence any single person has control over their various armed groups.
The United States will enforce a ceasefire? Because that’s what this practically requires.
In reality, SC is voting on a “stripped-down draft resolution [that] calls for an increase in humanitarian aid but does not include a call for a cessation of hostilities, which had been unacceptable to the US” [1].
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/488f70b7-d6cc-458d-b90e-f89cdfd65...
Here’s a link to another index that tracks prices. Not sure if it’s a good one for this purpose — there are many others.
https://www.drewry.co.uk/supply-chain-advisors/world-contain...
Source: used to work in the policy space
They have a webinar about it. Ryan (@typesfast) has also been tweeting about it a bunch.
Reading between the lines, my take-away is:
Both shipping times and costs are rising.
It’s usually positively correlated. Longer shipping time means more demands for ships and there aren’t unlimited amount of ships.