What would WW3 look like?

[PhilC]

Most people reading this thread probably already know this, but just in case...

A reasonable historical parallel for current relationships between majority Sunni and majority Shia Muslim states is the relations between European Protestant and Catholic states in the 1600's and 1700's. A few of them worked together, but mostly they existed somewhere between hostility and active warfare. In the modern day, most of the warfare is by armed proxy groups (Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, and these folks, who were news to me).

Thats a bit of a simplification of European history. There were both catholic and protestant states within the Holy Roman Empire and each tolerated the other.
During that period of European history the priority was to maintain the balance of power in Europe. The Bourbon and Hapsburg monarchs each tried to claim additional kingdoms as dynasties rose and fell, and successful claims would create one dominant state. Alliances formed and fell between Prussia, Britain, Spain, France, Austria and (orthodox) Russia together with Sweden, Piedmont, Swiss Federation and other smaller states. At one point the Ottoman Empire was involved in alliances with Christian states. These wars sometimes spilled over into India and the Americas. Religious issues were far less important than the pragmatic issues of trade and maintaining the balance of power.
In todays middle east we have an Iranian theocracy which sees itself as the descendants of the cultured Persian Empire. They look down on the Arabs, who they see as grubby desert tradesmen. The unresolved Palestinian issue gives focus for each of these groups and their national agendas.
Iran’s agenda is to become the regional superpower. It plays the religious card very skilfully by using the fundamentalist Revolutionary Guard to project its influence in a number of countries. I don’t see the Sunni states as having a religious agenda. They seem more concerned with containing Iran.

 

[teepot]

I just saw a report. It was posted an hour ago. The Navy bombed three anti-ship missiles in Yemen that were aimed at the Southern Red Sea and were ready to fire.

 

[jderimig]

Info on recent attack on US base in Iraq starting to leak out. Report that 15+ Patriot missiles were fired but some got through. This attack was BIG. BALLISTIC missiles may have been involved. What will be the response by the US other than the feckless? Put 2 and 2 together.

 

[boatgeek]

Info on recent attack on US base in Iraq starting to leak out. Report that 15+ Patriot missiles were fired but some got through. This attack was BIG. BALLISTIC missiles may have been involved. What will be the response by the US other than the feckless? Put 2 and 2 together.View attachment 625197

Was the attack on the base launched from within Iraq or Iran? I’m not disputing that the missiles came from Iran, just want to know the launch point.

 

[jderimig]

Was the attack on the base launched from within Iraq or Iran? I’m not disputing that the missiles came from Iran, just want to know the launch point.

That has not been determined. First reports suggest from Iraq. No official word.

 

[Dotini]

Info on recent attack on US base in Iraq starting to leak out. Report that 15+ Patriot missiles were fired but some got through. This attack was BIG. BALLISTIC missiles may have been involved. What will be the response by the US other than the feckless? Put 2 and 2 together.View attachment 625197

The attack on the Al-Asad airbase in Anbar is considered as serious as any since Oct 7 (though there have been few reported injuries) probably being in retaliation for the Israeli strike on Damascus, killing 4 Iranian IRGC. Is this a sign of wider conflict between Israel and Iranian proxies?

 

[boatgeek]

That has not been determined. First reports suggest from Iraq. No official word.

Hopefully the Iranians were not so foolish as to launch from their own territory.

 

[jderimig]

Hopefully the Iranians were not so foolish as to launch from their own territory.

What would be the distinction?

 

[jderimig]

The attack on the Al-Asad airbase in Anbar is considered as serious as any since Oct 7 (though there have been few reported injuries) probably being in retaliation for the Israeli strike on Damascus, killing 4 Iranian IRGC. Is this a sign of wider conflict between Israel and Iranian proxies?

If that is the scenario then it would show that the Iranian backed side is more fearful of Israel than the US. "Israel attacked our friends, lets retaliate by trying to kill American's. That's lower risk. " Sad.

 

[boatgeek]

What would be the distinction?

If there’s a fig leaf deniability about where the missiles came from, we don’t bomb Iran and continue a wider war that Iran started.

[edit] We will bomb the launch site. If that’s in Iraq, then we can call it good then. If that’s in Iran, then things are worse.

 

[Dotini]

If that is the scenario then it would show that the Iranian backed side is more fearful of Israel than the US. "Israel attacked our friends, lets retaliate by trying to kill American's. That's lower risk. " Sad.

The following is from the pages of Antiwar.com, paleo conservative Libertarians:

CENTCOM says a 'number' of US personnel are being examined for traumatic brain injuries, and one Iraqi soldier was woundedby Dave DeCamp January 21, 2024 at 1:37 pm ET Categories NewsTags Iraq, Syria

US troops were injured in a heavy missile and rocket attack on the Ain al-Asad airbase on Saturday as US forces continue to come under attack due to President Biden’s support for Israel’s slaughter in Gaza.

According to US Central Command, “multiple ballistic missiles and rockets” were launched at the base, and most were intercepted while some impacted the base. CENTCOM said a “number” of US personnel were being examined for traumatic brain injuries, and one Iraqi soldier was wounded in the attack.
CENTCOM blamed the attack on “Iranian-backed militants,” referring to Iraq’s Shia militias. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq, an umbrella group of Shia militias, took credit for the missile and rocket fire, according to Al Mayadeen.

According to the Pentagon, US bases in Iraq and Syria have come under attack 140 times since mid-October. The US has launched several rounds of airstrikes in both countries in response, including a drone strike in Baghdad that killed a deputy commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF), a coalition of Iraqi militias that’s part of Iraq’s security forces.

The Iraqi government of Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani has strongly condemned the US strikes as a violation of sovereignty and is calling for an end to the presence of the US-led international coalition in Iraq, known as Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR).

OIR is in Iraq in the name of fighting ISIS, although the US presence is more about pushing back against Iran’s influence. Al-Sudani has said Iraq’s security forces can handle the ISIS remnants that are left in the country.

------------------------------------------------------------

My Comment:
The way I read this and other sources, the attack likely came from Iraqi government supported Shia militia.

 

[Bravo52]

"continue to come under attack due to President Biden’s support for Israel’s slaughter in Gaza." The fact that someone actually wrote those words demonstrates just how stupid so-called journalist can be. US troops have been under continued attack in Iraq since the Iraqi war started 20 yrs ago. This is nothing more than sensationalism to sell clicks. The only credible statement that could be made is the "frequency of attacks on US troops in Iraq and Syria has increased since September 2023." The truth is even some in the MSM get it right unlike the toads (no offense to tanker aircrews) at "antiwar.com".

 

[boatgeek]

If that is the scenario then it would show that the Iranian backed side is more fearful of Israel than the US. "Israel attacked our friends, lets retaliate by trying to kill American's. That's lower risk. " Sad.

To be fair, Israel has been totally willing to use things like bombs and remote-controlled machine guns to assassinate Iran's nuclear scientists. We don't tend to use those sorts of tactics, which I think is a good thing.

If there’s a fig leaf deniability about where the missiles came from, we don’t bomb Iran and continue a wider war that Iran started.

[edit] We will bomb the launch site. If that’s in Iraq, then we can call it good then. If that’s in Iran, then things are worse.

Thinking about this more, our agreement with Iraq may have some rules about when and with what Iraqi approval we can respond to attacks on our soldiers. If those rules prove too restrictive, that points to us leaving Iraq sooner rather than later.

 

[teepot]

The US and the UK hit Yemen again today. This the 8th strike. 8 targets were hit. They include an underground facility, missile sites and radar sites.

 

[boatgeek]

Apparently it takes a while to get permission to run airstrikes in Iraq.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/us-...-iran-backed-militias-iraq/story?id=106609312

 

[teepot]

I just saw that we hit two sites in Yemen tonight. Two missile launchers were destroyed that were aimed at the Southern Red Sea and were ready to fire. We also hit three facilities in Iraq where an Iranian controlled militia was.

 

[Dotini]

Persuasive expert analysis of current shipping dilemmas:



My puny comments:

- Historically, attacks on shipping supposedly caused the US to become involved in WWI and the French to invade Algeria in response to Barbary piracy.

- The current shipping lane problems cannot be alleviated without a deal more time, money and risk.

- It could be a lot safer and quicker to address the root cause of the Houthi attacks by putting a timely end to the war in Gaza and the gathering storm relentlessly pulling in other nations of the region (and globe) into escalating warfare, risk and expense.

 

[teepot]

I watch, What's going on with shipping every time a new video comes out. I started watching it when the Houthi started attacking ships.

 

[boatgeek]

Apologies for no link (I can dig one up later if desired), but a fascinating item came out today/yesterday. Apparently, the US warned Iran that ISIS-K was planning on staging a terrorist attack, what was eventually the double bombing from a few weeks ago. That was under a general policy that we should alert other nations to head off terrorist attacks.

Even though the bombing smelled of ISIS before they took responsibility, I was a little surprised that Iran didn't make any noise about it being the fault of Israel/the US. And that's apparently why--we told them it was on the way and it wasn't us.

 

[Dotini]

ABC news reports that despite some missile barrages by the US Navy on the Houthis, somehow the rebels have managed to set a UK tanker ablaze in the Gulf of Aden, the crew reportedly abandoning the ship.

 

[boatgeek]

I'm really having trouble suppressing schadenfreude about the tanker that was hit by a Houthi missile in the Red Sea yesterday. It was carrying a load of Russian naphtha. So the Iran-backed militia's just did a bunch of damage to Iran-allied shipping. Spicy.

https://gcaptain.com/fire-out-on-marlin-luanda-after-houthi-missile-strike/
The fire is now out and the crew are safe, so I feel slightly better about the schadenfreude. The fire was apparently burning in a cargo tank. The fact that the fire is now out likely means that all of the cargo in that tank burned off. Tankers do not usually have fire extinguishing systems in cargo tanks. This size ship would have an inert gas system that keeps the air space between the top of the cargo and the top of the tank (aka ullage) filled with an inert gas (typically CO2). The inert gas system wouldn't have enough capacity to extinguish a fire--it's there to maintain an inert atmosphere. The fact that no neighboring tanks caught fire likely means that the inert gas system was working properly.

 

[teepot]

There is an Elephant in the room that isn't being talked about much. About the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the You Tube channel called What is going on with shipping. And that's the Iranian spy ship that has been in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. On his video today he showed where the Iranian ship was and where the Marlin Luanda was and another ship was. The Marlin Luanda and the other ship were in close proximity to each other. The Iranian ship was moving at less than 2 knots. As the two cargo ships entered the Gulf of Aden it picked up speed and headed toward them. Shortly after that the missile hit the Marlin Luanda. Then the Iranian ship slowed to less than 2 knots again. The man that the site belongs to [Sal Mercogliono] has brought up the Iranian spy ship before. When it was in the Red Sea every ship entering or leaving had to go past it. It is obviously giving the Houthi targeting information. The missile hit a UK company owned ship and not the other ship. The fact that it had Russian Naphtha on board might not have been known. I doubt the Russians would care because they had already been paid. I don't know what, but I think something has to be done about that ship. Maybe just jam it's communications. I'd prefer that it suffered a explosion in it's engine room and sank. Something like a limpet mine would do. I haven't seen anything about it from either the US or the UK. The Iranians keep saying we don't control the Houthi and that they are acting on their own. As everyone else knows that is a lie.

 

[Dotini]

There is an Elephant in the room that isn't being talked about much. About the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the You Tube channel called What is going on with shipping. And that's the Iranian spy ship that has been in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. On his video today he showed where the Iranian ship was and where the Marlin Luanda was and another ship was. The Marlin Luanda and the other ship were in close proximity to each other. The Iranian ship was moving at less than 2 knots. As the two cargo ships entered the Gulf of Aden it picked up speed and headed toward them. Shortly after that the missile hit the Marlin Luanda. Then the Iranian ship slowed to less than 2 knots again. The man that the site belongs to [Sal Mercogliono] has brought up the Iranian spy ship before. When it was in the Red Sea every ship entering or leaving had to go past it. It is obviously giving the Houthi targeting information. The missile hit a UK company owned ship and not the other ship. The fact that it had Russian Naphtha on board might not have been known. I doubt the Russians would care because they had already been paid. I don't know what, but I think something has to be done about that ship. Maybe just jam it's communications. I'd prefer that it suffered a explosion in it's engine room and sank. Something like a limpet mine would do. I haven't seen anything about it from either the US or the UK. The Iranians keep saying we don't control the Houthi and that they are acting on their own. As everyone else knows that is a lie.

Good questions, teepot.

I recall when Israel deliberately attacked the USS Liberty (killing 34 US persons) in the 1967 war, nothing much was said or done about it. But the mythical 1964 Tonkin Gulf incident was enough to justify escalation of the Vietnam war. And of course the sinking of several battleships in Pearl Harbor was reason sufficient for Congress to declare war on Germany as well as Japan. So my guess is that the decision to go to war - a world war of nuclear powers - in our case is decided by the President on geo-political/strategic as well as tactical grounds. Perhaps he is listening to his reelection committee and economists more closely than his general staff and State Department? At what point does serving God and Justice certainly and clearly justify WWIII? Are we there yet? Does Congress still retain the constitutional authority to declare war?

 

[jderimig]

There is an Elephant in the room that isn't being talked about much. About the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the You Tube channel called What is going on with shipping. And that's the Iranian spy ship that has been in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. On his video today he showed where the Iranian ship was and where the Marlin Luanda was and another ship was. The Marlin Luanda and the other ship were in close proximity to each other. The Iranian ship was moving at less than 2 knots. As the two cargo ships entered the Gulf of Aden it picked up speed and headed toward them. Shortly after that the missile hit the Marlin Luanda. Then the Iranian ship slowed to less than 2 knots again. The man that the site belongs to [Sal Mercogliono] has brought up the Iranian spy ship before. When it was in the Red Sea every ship entering or leaving had to go past it. It is obviously giving the Houthi targeting information. The missile hit a UK company owned ship and not the other ship. The fact that it had Russian Naphtha on board might not have been known. I doubt the Russians would care because they had already been paid. I don't know what, but I think something has to be done about that ship. Maybe just jam it's communications. I'd prefer that it suffered a explosion in it's engine room and sank. Something like a limpet mine would do. I haven't seen anything about it from either the US or the UK. The Iranians keep saying we don't control the Houthi and that they are acting on their own. As everyone else knows that is a lie.

Sharing of intelligence information is probably very far from a red-line in the rules of the current world order. Attacking a military asset for facilitating such would be and be a serious ripple in the force.

The Iranians are very smart. The last thing they want is direct military conflict with the US or Israel because they know how that will turn out. Which is why they haven't enriched U235 to weapons grade yet even though they are probably 2-3 days away from that if they wanted to,

 

[boatgeek]

There is an Elephant in the room that isn't being talked about much. About the only place I've seen it mentioned is on the You Tube channel called What is going on with shipping. And that's the Iranian spy ship that has been in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden. On his video today he showed where the Iranian ship was and where the Marlin Luanda was and another ship was. The Marlin Luanda and the other ship were in close proximity to each other. The Iranian ship was moving at less than 2 knots. As the two cargo ships entered the Gulf of Aden it picked up speed and headed toward them. Shortly after that the missile hit the Marlin Luanda. Then the Iranian ship slowed to less than 2 knots again. The man that the site belongs to [Sal Mercogliono] has brought up the Iranian spy ship before. When it was in the Red Sea every ship entering or leaving had to go past it. It is obviously giving the Houthi targeting information. The missile hit a UK company owned ship and not the other ship. The fact that it had Russian Naphtha on board might not have been known. I doubt the Russians would care because they had already been paid. I don't know what, but I think something has to be done about that ship. Maybe just jam it's communications. I'd prefer that it suffered a explosion in it's engine room and sank. Something like a limpet mine would do. I haven't seen anything about it from either the US or the UK. The Iranians keep saying we don't control the Houthi and that they are acting on their own. As everyone else knows that is a lie.

If you sink the Iranian intelligence ship, Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz. And all sorts of havoc ensues as a substantial part of the world's oil supply is blockaded. The world of guided missiles/drones has changed enough that it would be very hard to whack-a-mole the missile launchers.

 

[Dotini]

Now we receive grim news 3 US soldiers killed and 34 wounded in a drone attack on a base in Jordan.




Another source informs us the Commander in Chief may reduce critical munitions supplied to Israel. Go figure.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/rcna136035

 

[teepot]

If you sink the Iranian intelligence ship, Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz. And all sorts of havoc ensues as a substantial part of the world's oil supply is blockaded. The world of guided missiles/drones has changed enough that it would be very hard to whack-a-mole the missile launchers.

I know. But I can dream.

 

[teepot]

Sharing of intelligence information is probably very far from a red-line in the rules of the current world order. Attacking a military asset for facilitating such would be and be a serious ripple in the force.

The Iranians are very smart. The last thing they want is direct military conflict with the US or Israel because they know how that will turn out. Which is why they haven't enriched U235 to weapons grade yet even though they are probably 2-3 days away from that if they wanted to,

Yes, I know.

 

[jderimig]

If you sink the Iranian intelligence ship, Iran closes the Straits of Hormuz. And all sorts of havoc ensues as a substantial part of the world's oil supply is blockaded. The world of guided missiles/drones has changed enough that it would be very hard to whack-a-mole the missile launchers.

The probability of that ship being at the bottom of the Red Sea has gone up a bit. Iran won't block the SOH, they know it would be the end of them if they did, even China will pile on.