sherpa

So are you opining that if they attack, the Houthis are gonna meet the blowfish? Sorry. I'll slap myself.

Yemen, the Houthis, have announced a blockade of ships heading to Israel. They say they will attack ships entering the Red Sea destined for Israel. Not only is this international waters, and clearly a violation, but they don't have any way to determine where ship's ultimate destination is. Could make for some interesting responses.

Let's not worry about things that have zero chance of happening.

It was a grossly one sided resolution. I wonder why people even bother reporting the stuff the UN Security Council does anymore. Totally useless.

That stuff can't be transported on an airplane, even in checked baggage.

For the third time, this is the lie you have posted, readily accessible in this thread: "You told me so. That you thought the Iraq war was a good idea?" That never happened. That is your screwed up, nonsense, imaginary claim. You get on here, and you make judgements about people's patriotism, honesty, ethical values. cowardice and a host of other horsecrap, and you you can't even accurately remember what was said. You burden people with correcting your nonsense. Why don't you just shut up and process what people actually say? "

You really are a tough individual to respond to. Not because your points are valid or true, but because it takes time to sort out your misstatements; your scrambled, nonsense claims. The "lie" I am accusing you of is your statement that I ever thought the invasion was a "good idea." That never happened. I had well thought out reasons why I didn't think it was a "good idea," as executed. I didn't post those, as nobody asked. What I did post is a rebuttal to your claims about Bush rushing into war. I posted the actual facts about going through Congress and the UN. Both authorized force. In the case of the US Congress, who approved it overwhelmingly, they were presented the exact same intel that the President was, came to the same conclusion, and voted accordingly, Biden and Clinton being major supporters. The Dems, running away from that matter of Congressional record action, is the same as the claimed ignorance of Nancy Pelosi not knowing of "enhanced interrogation techniques." Both situations are after the fact denials of factual data. I also posted an assertion that something was going to happen because the existing situation was not sustainable. The US was enforcing no fly zones. That situation had become a massive burden and could not continue, especially since Iraq had started firing SAMS against them. Whatever your imagination conjures up is not my concern. It would simply help if you didn't post those imaginary claims here, as they are untrue.

No. Wrong again. What you claimed was that I thought it was "a good idea." Your words. That is completely false, and never happened. Get that? Your claim is a lie.

You can "think" whatever you want. I never advocated for that war. You and I have had discussions about the false claims you made about the Bush Admin in leading up to it, but I never, ever advocated for it. I had very good reasons for not thinking it was a good idea, and those reasons informed my view. You are wrong again, and you once again state some false claim about some poster on this board./ You have no shame and no integrity.

Show it. Another of the lies that exist in the slurry of falsehoods swimming around in your head. Let me save you some time, though few things site related make me happier than thinking you are going through the search function trying to find nonexistent data. Short answer. Didn't happen. You whiff again.

I await his answer to my question. A question based on his claim.

You have made another accusation. Do you have anything to support this?

Evidently, 12,000 yesterday alone. Just an absolute disaster.

Too early to tell, But if the US Carney was attacked, as has been reported, the Iranian led Houthi group and Yemen may suffer a response for attacking international shipping operations.

That was destruction. Go Hoos.

Ya. I do. I wonder where any Arab leadership is regarding this, survival mode or not. Blaming Israel for the Palestinian problem is not credible. Real estate can be worked out with honest parties. Real estate with one party launching rockets at point blank cannot. No political entity, no matter how motivated for peace, is going to tolerate the actions coming out of the Gaza from Hamas.

I get what you're saying. But.....What you have never said or commented on when i have brought this up, is where is Arab leadership seeking a solution? The world never hears that. Where are the proposals? All they ever do is equip, arm, train and fund aggressors, indoctrinate their youth in hate, and prolong this issue. The rest of the world, including the Israelis are ready. Their is a vacuum in the Arab world, except for the gross aggressiveness of Iran.

First, I really appreciate and respect your participation and heart felt viewpoints. You seem sincere, and most important to me, apolitical. You express yourself with sincerity and honesty. The 1948 war was the result of a stupid solution from a war tired world feeling guilty from an exposure of the genocide they had caused, (Germany), or didn't notice or acknowledge. Smart solutions almost never result from these situations, and didn't in this situation. What I've noticed over the years of this horrible issue is the complete lack of any interest in a solution that is reasonable from the Arab world, who has killed and ejected Palestinians from their borders over and over. Reasonable proposals have been suggested. Always rejected. So.... Cold as it may seem, my view is formed by hearing what was done on Oct. 7, actions that I have never imagined, and I fully support Israel's goal of completely eliminating Hamas, and going from there.

The Six Day War was not started by Israel, though they were the first offensive action. Nobody, anywhere, ever has denied that the joint Arab forces were within hours of attacking. I don't know of "UN rules," but countries can certainly gain land from winning wars, and they can and should ensure their survivability by buffering from known attackers. Israel, nor any other country, has the ability to defend against modern weaponry on it's border, and with those belligerents being funded, trained and supplied by others, (Iran), using their country as a launching point for their own war, they have no option other than to do what they do. I feel a great deal of sympathy for the Palestinians. What I despise, is Iran using them as surrogates, and the rest of the Arab world expelling and killing Palestinians in the hundreds of thousands, and blaming the Palestinian problem on Israel, all the while refusing to provide or support a negotiated settlement.

You are suggesting a hypothetical that I don't think directly applies. Israel defeated multi Arab nation attacks, and in doing so, acquired the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, Sinai and parts of Southern Lebanon. It gave up Southern Lebanon and the Sinai. They could have taken Damascus and Cairo were it not for forced ceasefires. When you start a war you suffer the consequences. To answer your hypothetical, if the US was "invaded" as Israel was, I would expect the same response. The US would react the way Israel did. Beat back the invasion and do what we could to ensure it didn't happen again, all the while pursuing an agreeable end of the issue, which they have and has always been rejected.

No. If I understand what you are suggesting, it is inaccurate. Netanyahu and others may well be held accountable for the Shin Bet failure to see this coming, but not for the hideous, subhuman actions of Hamas. He certainly isn't "responsible," to use your wor, for that. The only people who are are Hamas, and others who funded and helped train and plan that disgusting action. Not the Israeli gov. Not the settlers. Not the innocent murder victims.

The Israelis take their time, but his gov will be blamed and gone. Same thing happened with Golda Meir after Yom Kippur in 73. The best course is to allow Netanyahu and the in place gov and military to handle this. They are capable. Internal politics can be dealt with later.

Judging and critiquing a nation's response to a report of an intel object is a fool's errand. Same happened after 9-11. People who read this stuff have no idea what is reported every day. No idea of the credibility of the sources, and no idea of plans or processes to deal with it. I'm certain the hammer will fall on the Israeli folks who misjudged this, but this is not the time. The lesson is that those who commit these atrocities are responsible. Not the ones who guessed wrong. Really goofy for a US citizen to ever think that he could possibly know what Israel deals with every day on many fronts, but that what message boards provide.

Sure. A military deployment is supposed to last until a certain time. If extended, it disrupts the personal and family plans of those involved. This group is typically mid level enlisted who are still highly employable in the economy, and mid level officers who are always recruited by US industry at greater salary. Babies are born with a missing parent. People make serious, family plans based on presumed deployments, and count on those plans. A month is not a big deal. Three months is, and retention rates among those two critical groups suffer immensely, as history has proven. The Navy needs to get the Ford group home, or do something they have never done, which is to embark on a rapid replacement of those folks while still underway, which would not work that well re operational capability. It is a big issue.

Just a thought. I found out today that Eisenhower is in the Persian Gulf. Putting a carrier task force in the Persian Gulf is a lot different than operating east of the Strait of Hormuz, in the northern Indian Ocean. For a carrier, it's like fighting in a phone booth, when the other option gives you just as much offensive capability. Very limited response times and constant alert status requirements. This is a very dangerous operating area vis a vis Iran, and tells me one of two things: The US is challenging Iran to make a first move, fully confident that it will lead to a repeated destruction of the Iranian Navy, as happened in Operation Preying Mantis, or: The US believes that Iran will never support a Hamas/Hezbollah operation that would trigger US direct involvement against Iran. I think Iran will continue to use pin-prick surrogate operations, but is de facto, backing down. As an aside, Ford needs to be relieved and get those folks home, or there will be a very undesirable price paid.