Originally Posted by
Big Pistons Forever
Your answer is the standard default response of the State Department and US Military. Maybe it is time to think differently. The Houthi's publicly stated enemy is the US and Israel. As long as Op Prosperity Guardian is an American op, and lets be clear the other countries assets, including Canada's are window dressing, the US is giving the Houthi's what they want, an enemy to shoot at. Every attack makes them stronger, every failure to degrade their combat capability ( hence my whack a mole comment) makes the US weaker.
No, that is a reasoning error on your part.
The problem you seem to be neglecting - by your own choices and biases - is that one cannot 'not respond" to the attacks in maritime shipping. You underestimate, based on what you have posted here, the aspect of "seen to be doing something" as seen by the politicians.
In the longer term, I am not sure about the "window dressing" bit you mentioned, given that the EU has chosen to get on board, but as of this writing I think that your assessment meets the 'good enough' standard.
So the question is, is this op enhancing or degrading the national security interests of the US ?
By itself, the answer is
mu. Attempting to assess it in isolation - when it is a part of a larger regional posture - is another reasoning error.
Your overtly dismissive attitude towards even contemplating doing anything else
You have offered
nothing, but that doesn't mean that I don't have other ideas.
You are the one who says "Do something different."
OK,
you spell it out, and oh by the way,
tie it into the regional effort.
Spit it out, man, What's your plan?
So far, your answer is "I'll sit here on my couch and criticise, that's my plan.,"
At the end of the day despite everything I said Op Prosperity Guardian may still be worth doing,
Maybe or maybe not. It may end up being little more than a game of whack a mole.
Where I think you and I do agree is that there is
a limit to what the military element of this can achieve.
By the way nobody serous talks about DIME anymore. Everyone uses the MIDFIELD model now
DIME is a useful analytical model, particularly for low grade discussions such as on an internet forum, but it's not the only one.
You said something weird here:
Supporting Israel is not an option
Uh, it's been a policy since about 1967. What that support looks like varies a bit.
, deterring Iran is not an option,
That's been a policy since about 1979. What that looks like varies a bit.
How about you do this: explain to me what you mean by
deterring Iran
I suspect that there's a bit more behind that thought that. Perhaps for the sake of brevity you didn't include it.