Pentagon Press Secretary Ryder said that the missiles and drones appeared to be heading north and may have been bound for Israel.
It looks like it’s all orchestrated by Iran. Hezbollah, under Iran control, Hamas and Yemeni rebels. Hamas shooting at Israel in a way that they clearly knew would necessitate a massive response. What I’m wondering is what they gain from this. Perhaps solidarity from other powers in the Middle East, causing hatred of Israel? I’m also wondering if this is all covering action for China to tie down the US while China attempts to take Taiwan. We might be living through what in the future textbooks will be under the heading of factors leading up to.
I’m guessing it’s as simple as goading Israel to overreact, which blows apart a main US geopolitical goal of normalizing relations between Israel and the Arab states.
This is also a way to help out their new best friend Russia by pulling attention from Ukraine. It Russia takes Ukraine it will gain a lot of power, money, and military technology. With how much Iran is helping Russia now you know Iran will get a nice cut.
They are preventing the Saudis from reestablishing diplomatic ties with Israel for one thing.
I think its a plan to over extend America. They are designed to fight two wars against major powers alone and win both - but I doubt they can do that with assets tied up in middle east, massive political division and civil unrest at home. Also wouldn’t be surprised if this is seeing what assets can be taken out with a first strike - those carriers aren’t as safe that close to land as you would think.
Edit: Korea also kicking off - similar theatre to China/Taiwan but another player in the mix
The size of these conflicts are tiny. The US military can fight two MAJOR conflicts simultaneously. By comparison, the Ukraine and the Middle East barely count as one. Many people don’t understand the size of the US military and it’s ability to project power. It would take two massive wars the size of WWII to overextend the US currently. If something like that were to happen, NATO would obviously be stepping in, adding a massive backing to an already massive military.
The only military in the world that could even begin to deplete the USAs ability to respond indefinitely would be China and that is super questionable (Especially in light of the laughable showing from the Russian military, there’s serious question as to what kind of paper tiger China is at this point. There’s no question they are going to be more formidable than the Russian military, but there’s a lot of speculation that it won’t be by much. They have too much corruption and grift, the same as the Russian military, just not quite as extensive). They don’t have the material, supply, and logistic to fight a sustained and protracted battle with the US. The US, being effectively an isolated country, has the largest Navy in the the world and is literally built around a logistics chain that requires absolutely NO land transport. The US can have a full logistical chain anywhere in the world, all feeding back from the US mainland if necessary and sustain that indefinitely.
They significantly doubt the US military if they think they’ll stretch it too thin with that.
At a surface level - yes. Best thing the can do is take out two of the 12(??) Supercarriers that US holds. But doing so would make America more cautious with them, hold them out at longer ranges and show the vulnerability - not to mention other countries hesitation of letting vulnerable nuclear reactors Traverse their waters, or the American publics hesitation to put their peoples lives at risk in someone else’s war. Follow on then with the slowing of arms to Ukraine, loss of support to Japan, South Korea, Philippines and that cluster in the Middle East and other powers do start to rise.
What are you talking about? You’re entire scenario is based off someone(?) having enough coordinated firepower to sink not one, but two US carrier battle groups and then the US leaving them alone long enough for “powers to rise”? That isn’t realistic in this time period.
If anyone in the world attacked and sunk a single US carrier on purpose, one of two things immediately happen: A. That country is invaded with hellfire and massive destruction, or (in the case it was a super power who did it) B. World War 3.
BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT
I feel like social media is to blame for some of this radicalism both here and abroad I am sure the middle eastern language posts on twitter are moderated wink
Really? Like this exact same shit hasn’t been going on for nearly a 100 years (actually longer, depending on how you define it) at this point? Long before “social media.”
It’s religion. This goes on because of religion. Idiots believing their magic, imaginary friend in the sky is “more righter” than the other magic, imaginary friend in the sky. Idiots killing idiots in the end.
The dumb thing is- theologically- it’s technically the same magic imaginary friend in the sky. Just depends how many levels of extensed universe lore you wanna take as canon
Only one can be right, but everyone can be wrong.
I’d argue this only makes it worse. All people develop their religious beliefs over time and these two groups are basically just killing each other because their specific cultures delineated and had different sequels.
