Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
TN

Pepe Escobar: “How The Houthis Overturned The Chessboard”

Recommended Posts

Current news regarding Saudi Arabia and the oil production attack…

 

This is a good read.

  September 19, 2019 – Zero Hedge

Pepe Escobar: “How The Houthis Overturned The Chessboard”

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-how-houthis-overturned-chessboard

 

Wikipedia states…

Hybrid warfare is a military strategy which employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy, lawfare and foreign electoral intervention.

Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tom Nolan said:

Current news regarding Saudi Arabia and the oil production attack…

 

 

 

This is a good read.

 

  September 19, 2019 – Zero Hedge

 

Pepe Escobar: “How The Houthis Overturned The Chessboard”

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-how-houthis-overturned-chessboard

 

 

 

Wikipedia states…

 

Hybrid warfare is a military strategy which employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy, lawfare and foreign electoral intervention.

 

Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly.

 

US intel insists that 17 drones and cruise missiles were launched in combination from southern Iran. In theory, Patriot radar would have picked that up and knocked the drones/missiles from the sky. So far, absolutely no record of this trajectory has been revealed. Military experts generally agree that the radar on the Patriot missile is good, but its success rate is “disputed” – to say the least. What’s important, once again, is that the Houthis do have advanced offensive missiles. And their pinpoint accuracy at Abqaiq was uncanny.

It goes against the grain that the systems in place in KSA couldn't see a swarm of 17 flying machines, but Iran managed to take out a single US drone at near impossible 30,000ft.

Something isn't right with this charade...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Patriot's range is quite reduced for a low altitude penetration system. It was really designed for knocking down aircraft, and turned out to be good enough for hitting some ballistic warheads.

But if you don't know it's coming, by the time you see it, it's too late. And it is a failure of multiple warning systems if they were crossing from the north. From the west, why guard again your own empty desert. These aren't crude Scuds on a ballistic trajectory with a ten minute warning to impact. And I don't know if they even have a couple of batteries of Patriots around Abqaiq, though my guess the PO to order some in on the way.

They should do the US southern border thing and put a couple of look down F-18 doppler radars on tethered balloons. Then they'll get a hit on the low flying stuff with some warning. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, James Regan said:

What’s important, once again, is that the Houthis do have advanced offensive missiles. And their pinpoint accuracy at Abqaiq was uncanny.

I rather doubt those were developed in-house.  My guess is that North Korea developed the missiles.  I recall at one point the US Navy had intercepted some freighter of North Korea's off the coast of Yemen with a boat load of missiles on there, goes back a few years, and since the Yemeni Government of the day had paid for them, the Navy Commander was instructed to release the ship and let it pass.  Now, my guess is that those missiles become the blueprint for whatever was developed for their internal production. 

Were other missiles imported from Iran?   Probably.  There seems to be at least a similarity outwardly to an Iranian missile. Is the Iranian stuff designed for this type of work?  I dunno.  But the Korean versions surely were. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, James Regan said:

US intel insists that 17 drones and cruise missiles were launched in combination from southern Iran. In theory, Patriot radar would have picked that up and knocked the drones/missiles from the sky. So far, absolutely no record of this trajectory has been revealed. Military experts generally agree that the radar on the Patriot missile is good, but its success rate is “disputed” – to say the least. What’s important, once again, is that the Houthis do have advanced offensive missiles. And their pinpoint accuracy at Abqaiq was uncanny.

It goes against the grain that the systems in place in KSA couldn't see a swarm of 17 flying machines, but Iran managed to take out a single US drone at near impossible 30,000ft.

Something isn't right with this charade...

With radar there's something called "clutter". Near the ground there's tons of clutter but at 30,000' not so much. There's a reason they repurposed all those obsolete B-52 bombers from gliding along at 40,000' and gave them terrain guidance navigation to fly in below 600'. I've watched them on manouevers and it's pretty impressive for that much plane to fly that low to the ground. 

Meanwhile Captain Powers was quite surprised a SAM could reach up and touch him at 80,000'. And that was in the early 60's

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

15 hours ago, Tom Nolan said:

Current news regarding Saudi Arabia and the oil production attack…

 

 

 

This is a good read.

 

  September 19, 2019 – Zero Hedge

 

Pepe Escobar: “How The Houthis Overturned The Chessboard”

 

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/escobar-how-houthis-overturned-chessboard

 

 

 

Wikipedia states…

 

Hybrid warfare is a military strategy which employs political warfare and blends conventional warfare, irregular warfare and cyberwarfare with other influencing methods, such as fake news, diplomacy, lawfare and foreign electoral intervention.

 

Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is war between belligerents whose relative military power differs significantly, or whose strategy or tactics differ significantly.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/u-s-deploy-military-forces-saudi-arabia-after-drone-attacks-n1057216 U.S. Military to deploy to Saudi Arabia. Image: SAUDI-US-IRAN-ENERGY-PROBE

Edited by ronwagn
addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

U.S. Military to deploy to Saudi Arabia. 

If anyone remembers, Bin Laden justification to strake US (allegedly, lets not open that can of worms here) was to remove Americans from the Holly Land after 1st Iraq war. 

What could possibly go wrong... 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, DanilKa said:

If anyone remembers, Bin Laden justification to strake US (allegedly, lets not open that can of worms here) was to remove Americans from the Holly Land after 1st Iraq war. 

What could possibly go wrong... 

Not just bin laden but mujahadeen , but the Russians pulled out. And so on....

Edited by James Regan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

8 hours ago, DanilKa said:

If anyone remembers, Bin Laden justification to strake US (allegedly, lets not open that can of worms here) was to remove Americans from the Holly Land after 1st Iraq war. 

What could possibly go wrong... 

Britain had to justify to the parliament why we should go into Afghanistan and it wasn't WMDs (as in Iraq) well it was kind of, any guesses?

Edited by James Regan
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, James Regan said:

Britain had to justify to the parliament why we should go into Afghanistan and it wasn't WMDs (as in Iraq) well it was kind of, any guesses?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1590827.stm a WMD for sure......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Meanwhile Captain Powers was quite surprised a SAM could reach up and touch him at 80,000'. And that was in the early 60's

Eisenhower considered authorizing the overfly of the USSR one of the most difficult of his presidency because it was a an overt act of war. He proposed to Khrushchev a reciprocal agreement and when Khrushchev declined shook his head, saying he had to know so we would overfly anyway. Then unfortunately it was politically impossible to act on what he learned, and the arms began in earnest. And mostly through drones, the US still commits acts of war on a regularly basis. If you don't think it's an act of war, see what the response would be to an Iranian, or Russian, drone flying over the country. We confuse what we can do, with what is widely acceptable as right. Prior to Nixon meeting Mao overflights of China were suspended. That is really ancient history, but the principles and concerns are valid today. Someone got lucky and shot down a stealth fighter over Bosnia or some such in the 90s. Given enough opportunities, loses will be happen. 

Back to Powers, before authorizing Eisenhower was assured a U2 couldn't be shot down. And if hit, the pilot couldn't survive, and if he somehow survived, military pilots were trained with suicide pills. Unfortunately Powers was a civilian, not quite so willing to self-inflict. And flying above 80,000 feet takes specialized fuel, and U2s have a tendency to flame out occasionally. You can air start, but not until you are down in much thicker atmosphere. Many believe that's how they got Powers, descending for an air start and below 40,000.

The information we have access to is very limited. I don't believe Fox and CNN are out to screw us, more just boosting ratings and clicks, but the info they are fed, too often its they are fed. And trying to get raw source from KSA, not much chance of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, John Foote said:

Eisenhower considered authorizing the overfly of the USSR one of the most difficult of his presidency because it was a an overt act of war. He proposed to Khrushchev a reciprocal agreement and when Khrushchev declined shook his head, saying he had to know so we would overfly anyway. Then unfortunately it was politically impossible to act on what he learned, and the arms began in earnest. And mostly through drones, the US still commits acts of war on a regularly basis. If you don't think it's an act of war, see what the response would be to an Iranian, or Russian, drone flying over the country. We confuse what we can do, with what is widely acceptable as right. Prior to Nixon meeting Mao overflights of China were suspended. That is really ancient history, but the principles and concerns are valid today. Someone got lucky and shot down a stealth fighter over Bosnia or some such in the 90s. Given enough opportunities, loses will be happen. 

Back to Powers, before authorizing Eisenhower was assured a U2 couldn't be shot down. And if hit, the pilot couldn't survive, and if he somehow survived, military pilots were trained with suicide pills. Unfortunately Powers was a civilian, not quite so willing to self-inflict. And flying above 80,000 feet takes specialized fuel, and U2s have a tendency to flame out occasionally. You can air start, but not until you are down in much thicker atmosphere. Many believe that's how they got Powers, descending for an air start and below 40,000.

The information we have access to is very limited. I don't believe Fox and CNN are out to screw us, more just boosting ratings and clicks, but the info they are fed, too often its they are fed. And trying to get raw source from KSA, not much chance of that. 

Not positive about all that. A friend of mine was a U2 pilot and we've talked about Powers a lot. This article goes into good detail especially considering the times. For instance the "suicide" was voluntary, mainly to save the pilot from torture. 

I also had a friend who flew B-52 and they also believed they were too high for SAM's. He told me about telephone pole sized missiles going by his cockpit and wondering if this was it. That was in Vietnam. The Russians are rightly proud of their missile systems Link here

That's why Putin jokingly said the Saudis should buy his system (although it's not for export).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0