this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
55 points (100.0% liked)

chat

8175 readers
495 users here now

Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.

As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.

Thank you and happy chatting!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Its what you would excpect the rah rah rah, bombs away type rhetoric. But some interesting comments can be found around the web. You can find them yourself. ;)

top 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 45 points 9 months ago

Eh. That is debatable, the Iranians give weapons to their allies in the region, we give weapons to their enemies in the region.

We arm Israel, they arm Palestine.

We arm Saudi Arabia, they arm the Houthi's.

We arm the Kurds and Anti Syrian Forces, they arm Syrian Forces.

We arm Ukraine, they arm Russia

This has been a long standing part of their constitution ever since the Iran Iraq war that killed off 33% of their young men, and over 500,000 people with weapons and funding that we gave to Iraq specifically to overturn the Iranian Regime as payback for retaliation against the U.S. orchestrated coup on Iran.

They've made it very clear that anyone the U.S. gives weapons to, they will give weapons to the other side. So we can't just act surprised when we stride into the theater of a country that we deeply wronged and deeply hates us for what we did and co tinue to do, give weapons out like candy and discover someone else is doing the same thing.

We can call Soleimani a terrorist, but he's only doing the same thing we are doing, we just hear about what they are doing as bad, and what we are doing as good— but there is no difference.

We could engage in a treaty with Iran— They stop, we stop— but that wouldn't be profitable. So here we are, continuing to escalate.

Hey, a not completely braindead take in that thread!

[–] [email protected] 44 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (5 children)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Military/comments/1aft47l/houthi_cruise_missile_comes_within_a_mile_of_a_us/

https://www.reddit.com/r/navy/comments/1afqrts/a_cruise_missile_launched_by_the_houthis_into_the/

Also with a missile that slow, that’s probably two misses with an SM-2. Depth of fire and all that.

With as long as some of these destroyers have been on station, I imagine they have to be running low on SM-2s by now.

90~ missiles on a destroyer. This is where I think the breaking point will be for Operation Amazon Prime. They can't effectively resupply these ships and they're burning expensive missiles on cheap drones/less advanced missiles. At some point the Houthis are going to get a lucky strike when stocks are depleted or the US will be forced to exhaust more ships it can't maintain/staff/train.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Lmao, the amount of comments the mods removed for OPSEC reasons at the bottom of that thread on the Navy subreddit, are the big wet sailor boys and girls really that stupid?

[–] [email protected] 32 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Two words: warthunder forums

[–] [email protected] 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

New headline for 2028: how the addition of modern ships to war thunder lead to a sinking of a US destroyer in the South China Sea. Video games banned in all NATO countries.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Man multipolarity is going to come at gun point if nothing else. If you can’t enforce shipping lanes and regional powers have to that’s the end of the hegemon. It will be interesting to see if the the US continues to not even attempt a diplomatic solution in Palestine if they’re forced out because the occupation becomes untenable or if we somehow do war communism again to be~~at~~ the Nazis. iirc I read that it would currently take two years production time to fully restock the navy with missiles at current rates let alone the cost to do so

[–] [email protected] 13 points 9 months ago

I read that it would currently take two years production time to fully restock the navy with missiles at current rates let alone the cost to do so

"But don't worry Taiwan, we totes have your back. Pinky promise."

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

yea this is why "targeted" in those battle reports is as significant as "hit", just in a different way

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children)

90~ missiles on a destroyer. This is where I think the breaking point will be for Operation Amazon Prime. They can't effectively resupply these ships and they're burning expensive missiles on cheap drones/less advanced missiles. At some point the Houthis are going to get a lucky strike when stocks are depleted or the US will be forced to exhaust more ships it can't maintain/staff/train.

I've been saying this since the start. These ships have to make port to resupply, there is no aerial or naval resupply method during operation.

The limits of the US navy are its ammunition capacity. If you exhaust the on-board stocks, you have effectively defeated it.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

The naval equivalent of carrying a .44 and no extra rounds

[–] [email protected] 14 points 9 months ago (2 children)

It's effectively like deploying a squad. In most troop to troop combat if you can pin down the enemy and exhaust their supplies you can defeat the opponent by way of making them use up all their ammunition, effectively rendering them unable to fight back. At that point they effectively have to either retreat or surrender. The difference with a front line though is that you can have supply lines keeping them operating.

The same applies to these ships, except there's no resupplying them while in operation, so you don't have a frontline+supply lines scenario, you just have to exhaust them to cause their withdrawal.

I'm not sure where they would resupply... Maybe Cyprus or Malta is a viable place? Malta has a US base while Cyprus has a UK base. I think it's reasonably likely they would use C130s to transport missiles to one of these bases for resupply.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

That C130 pilot has the opportunity to do something really funny and also morally upright

[–] [email protected] 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Don't they have a base at Djibouti?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

Djibouti

Yes but there's no way they are making these ships stationary targets so close to Yemen.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago

It seems like "A ship's a fool to fight a fort" still rings true if we understand "fort" to be various missile installations on land.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

Reddit links were detected in your comment. Here are links to the same locations on Teddit and Libreddit, which are Reddit frontends that protect your privacy.

Link 1:

Link 2:

[–] [email protected] 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

They are scared, and rightfully so. Their comrades in the Navy were mere seconds away from being obliterated.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

one of those "they have to be lucky once, we have to be lucky every time" moments

[–] [email protected] 28 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (3 children)

Yeah, and the Houthis are clearly learning how to bypass the air defence systems of the US Navy. The fact that the anti ship cruise missile got within CIWS range means that it avoided all the interceptor missiles from the ship. The attacks on US ships are getting more sophisticated, and will continue to do so. It's only a matter of time before there's a successful strike against a US ship, unless something changes. The US is going to have to respond somehow.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Who would win, a US Navy ship with dozens of the "most advanced" interceptors and CIWS, or a couple Iranian copies of Chinese copies of Soviet 1960s anti ship missiles.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

clearly learning how to bypass the air defence systems of the US Navy

And they've done that in a matter of weeks.

The houthis are going to hit a US ship. It's a matter of time.

EDIT: Read the rest of the comment and it says same thing, lol. sorry

[–] [email protected] 21 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago (1 children)

POV you were sent home by the ansarallah:

[–] [email protected] 16 points 9 months ago

Sleeping with the fishes (not in a sexual way volcel-kamala )

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Can't wait for the reaction when they take a hit then

[–] [email protected] 18 points 9 months ago

live happybadger reaction: pizza-dance

[–] [email protected] 22 points 9 months ago

They didn't sign up thinking they'd be in any real danger

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago