46
WSJ report alleges potential Russian arms transfer to Yemen
(english.almayadeen.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
46 points (97.9% liked)
World News
2315 readers
137 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Considering Russia's meek response to the west for their involvement in Ukraine so far I wasn't really thinking they would do this, despite them saying they would, but I guess I might have been wrong them.
Now what rests to see is what, if anything, was really sent there as I doubt they need AKs or ballistic missiles. So if such a transfer is as a response to the US them we might be seeing such things as:
Anti-ship missiles (from slow things to things that can take down US navy ships)
Cruise missiles (perhaps to attack the colonist entity directly and doing more damage than their last attack)
Anti-air (the Yemenis have taken down a couple drones but they could use better gear for dealling with fighters)
Ballistic missiles (if they want to have deniability of their use because the Yemenis already have some)
Drones (because drones are never enough)
Anything else that could be useful in their situation?
There's not much reason for Russia to escalate directly since the status quo favors them already. However, arming proxies is a perfect response that can result in severe consequences for NATO without directly escalating the current crisis. I imagine US military is going to be a lot more hesitant continuing pumping Ukraine full of weapons if this could result in their assets being attacked in West Asia and Africa.
While I agree with the overall idead of this statement, the US and its vassals seem to want to escalate very much even if Russia does nothing so I'm not sure if Russia not escalating is the best plan. It may be but it might not.
I'd say this report by western media is already part of their escalation against any acts of Russian support to their advesaries by trying to get the population on board with whatever way they choose to escalate.
My reasoning is that if you're winning you want to keep the situation stable. Russian strategy is very straight forward, they're grinding out the AFU and all the western equipment along with it. They know that they have higher industrial capacity and can keep this going longer. Meanwhile, the economic war is also playing out in Russian favor.
The very reason the west is trying to escalate is because they see that they're losing, and they're forced to try new things. However, escalation also brings the risk of unpredictability with it. The west doesn't know when and how Russia will respond to them, so they're kept guessing whether their latest round of escalations might backfire in some unexpected way.
The western media is whinging about Russia sending weapons to western adversaries, but I don't expect that they'd be able to sell a direct conflict with Russia this way. And that's really the only card the west has left to play at this point.
Part of the reason why the us wants to escalated the crisis so much is that it would be bad for Russia. Right now the war situation is manageable for Russia, but with escalation, it could get out of control. This is exactly why Russian leaders have been hesitant to escalate.
For years now, pumping Ukraine full of weapons has been resulting in African countries getting pumped full of weapons. I cannot say for sure that certain African revolutionary movements are getting them, but western forces and their proxies aren't buying off the black market. The US seems to making just about every possible miscalculation and I'm not sure they even have the self awareness to hesitate.
Russia providing something like Iskanders to Yemen would be qualitatively different from things that float around on the black market.
Oh, absolutely. I just question the western military hubris that keeps backing itself into a corner where the only option they're willing to consider is increasing escalation.
It's pretty funny to watch honestly.
Is NATO currently using fighters in Yemen?
It seems the US is/was using carrier and land based F/A-18s for the bombings and submarines for cruise missiles but I'm not sure about the exact extent or equipment usage of their attacks.
Thanks!