>Britain’s military is preparing to launch a wave of air strikes against the Iranian-backed Houthis creating chaos in the Red Sea, raising the prospect of a significant spiralling of tensions in the region.
>Under the plans the UK would join with the US and possibly another European country to unleash a salvo of missiles against pre-planned targets, either in the sea or in Yemen itself, where the militants are based.
>A Whitehall source said the co-ordinated strikes could involve RAF warplanes for the first time or HMS Diamond, a Type 45 destroyer which successfully destroyed an attack drone with a Sea Viper missile in the Red Sea earlier this month.
>It is understood an unprecedented statement is expected to be released by the UK and the US in the coming hours which will warn the Houthis to stop attacking commercial vessels or face the military might of the West.
>Ahead of the statement, Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, said: “If the Houthis continue to threaten lives and trade, we will be forced to take the necessary and appropriate action.”
>The Whitehall source said the statement was a “last warning” and if the Houthis failed to stop the attacks, the response would likely be “limited” but “significant”. It is believed allies are currently trying to persuade other European countries to work with the US and the UK to stop the attacks amid fears there could be disastrous economic implications if shipping transiting through one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes continues to be disrupted.
>The source was unable to confirm which aircraft could be used in the retaliatory action under the plans, although the UK has Typhoons stationed at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, currently carrying out missions over Iraq and Syria. They are there to find any remnants of Isis, although The Times revealed this month that the mission has expanded to spy on Iranian-backed militia believed to be smuggling weapons into Lebanon.
>The Houthis, a rebel faction that controls much of Yemen and an ally of Hamas, have carried out a spate of attacks on commercial ships since the terror attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7. According to the Whitehall source, eight of the 20 ships attacked in the 30 days before Christmas were either UK-registered, had British citizens in their crew or carried goods for the UK.
>In response to the attacks, Washington launched a multinational force to protect vessels transiting the waterway, although allies are concerned the number of hostile actions are continuing to soar.
>Ministers are concerned that “the numbers [of attacks] are cranking up and the feeling is something needs to be done”, said the source, adding that insurance for shipping had gone up tenfold in December and journeys were being delayed which was disrupting supply lines.
>Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy commander, said if the Houthis wanted to they could hit “masses of ships” in the Red Sea, and the US-led force that has already been sent would need to be far larger to ensure commercial vessels passing through are protected. “Even then, it wouldn’t be guaranteed. If they went for it, we’d be overwhelmed,” he said.
>However, Sharpe said it was not in the Houthi’s interest to provoke a fight back from the US. “It is much better to keep it sub-threshold and slowly drain our resources,” he said.
>Details of the possible retaliatory strikes came as the US military said it shot down two anti-ship ballistic missiles fired toward a container ship by Houthi rebels. Hours later, four boats tried to attack the same ship but US forces opened fire, sinking three of the boats and killing several of the armed crews. A fourth boat escaped.
>The US military said the incident marked the 23rd attack from the Yemeni militia on international shipping since November 19. It is the most decisive action taken by the US since the militia claimed to have joined the war in Gaza in support of Hamas.
>According to Thomas Juneau, an assistant professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa whose research focuses on the Middle East, especially Iran and Yemen, the Houthis have both domestic and regional objectives in attacking maritime shipping in the Red Sea. Domestically, they want to mobilise strong pro-Palestinian feelings among the Yemeni population to “shore up their base”.
>Regionally, they want to send a strong message that they have emerged as a regional power and as a core player in the Iran-backed “axis of resistance”. “They want to signal support for Hamas and opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza”, he said. Their role in the region presents a “very serious problem”, he said.
>They probably assess that the US and its regional partners are keen to avoid an escalation of the war in Gaza into a major regional war, he said. “As a result, the Houthis probably calculate that they can afford to continue striking Israel with missiles and drones and to target shipping in the Red Sea at limited cost to themselves,” he said, adding that it was likely the Houthi efforts to disrupt maritime shipping in the Red Sea will continue.
>Their success so far will provide them with “significant leverage” over their adversaries for the foreseeable future, he said.
Despite what the article states, HMS Diamond is not equipped with land-attack missiles and will therefore not be striking Houthi targets.
We cannot continue to allow Iranian proxies to disrupt global trade and dictate international affairs
This move was entirely predictable, although we don’t have that much offensive capability in the region
If Bibi hadn’t put the telescope up to his sqinted eye in September, this wouldn’t be escalating.
I’d love to hear what special ops are going to to hunt people down
Thank god! I was worried for a second that the us wouldn’t drag us into another pointless forever war in the middle east. God bless lockheed martin and raytheon for another great lobbying effort. Glad my taxes are going on this useless shit instead of something sensible like fixing this broken country.
There have been several dozen rocket and pirate attacks on ships by Houthi forces since November.
How many attacks should they be allowed before we attack back?
Their internal struggle is not my concern, their religious freedom or struggle with Saudi do not concern me either. The safety of my family who work on merchant shipping vessels in international waters is my concern and commercial vessels should not be attacked without a response.
This has all the hallmarks of an expanding conflict which is bad for everyone. What are the alternatives?
America, fuck yeah!
Comin’ again to save the motherfuckin’ day, yeah
America, fuck Yeah!
Freedom is the only way, yeah
Terrorists, your game is through
‘Cause now you have ta answer to
America, fuck yeah!
So lick my butt and suck on my balls
America, fuck yeah!
Whatcha’ gonna do when we come for you now
It’s the dream that we all share
It’s the hope for tomorrow
(Fuck Yeah!)
why can they secure the red sea yet can’t secure the channel?
The Houthi rebels? Sounds like a firm for a soccer team? Why are we helping the uk fight its own policing issues. Seems stupid.
Kind of ignores that the UK was backing a destructive war on Yemen for years, via Saudi Arabia, which actually helped the Houthis capitalise on the destruction and expand their control in the North (before the war they were much, much smaller). And now they’re a clear geopolitical player in the Red Sea.
Apart from this blowback, backing of Israel’s war on Gaza is giving the faction a pretext to attack (mostly Israeli-linked) cargo in the Red Sea. Perhaps it’s a good time to rethink UK foreign policy, and hopefully be less of a US stooge.
Excellent news. Britain should, along with its allies, continue to protect global shipping (the Red Sea) and the national sovereignty of smaller nations (Guyana). It is an easy way to garner some respect among the international community and also make a tangible difference to the everyday British person at the same time.
Infact we should be putting far more emphasis on the amount and quality of our military spending with the changing global security climate. Our military is far too small at the moment.
Anyway, sad to see the usual suspects jumping all over this as if it’s Iraq 2.0, as if every military engagement/conflict can be looked at through that ridiculous and outdated context.
ITT: A hell of a lot of tankies and or pro-terrorist accounts. With quite predictable username formats.
So we end up playing another round of middle-east whac-a-mole cos our so called “ally” in Israel doesn’t want to stop the butchery or decrease the tempo.
Great. Sucked into more conflict by short selling incompetents like Benji.
And Israel is calling it a war, yeah sure it’s a war guys. Just like WW2. >.>
While its good that something is belong done, why does it have to be the US and UK which has to solve the worlds problems all the time? We will only be blamed for the fallout. The countries which are effected should all be involved.
[removed]
another stupid middle east adventure.
“this time it’ll be really really really different”. ok then
Doing the Saudi’s bidding yet again. Got to keep BAE/HK shareholders onside.
Im very surprised anyone on here supports this clear escalation. US foreign policy in the Middle East has been a disaster, and why should we follow along supporting it, sending young men off to their deaths again for nothing. We look pretty pathetic IMO.
The Houthis asked for food and medicine to be allowed into Gaza, something a desperate civilian population needs. Is this a bad thing?
Saudi Arabia dropped countless bombs in Yemen and it only made a bad situation worse. Dropping more bombs probably won’t solve the problem. We should be apologising for the Iraq war and calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. Instead we follow along, it’s an embarrassment and failure of foreign policy, meddling in the Middle East has ruined their economies and because we live in a global world if you cared about the economy you would not support this.
The only winner here are the arms dealers, expect terror attacks in the UK if this goes ahead.
19 comments
>Britain’s military is preparing to launch a wave of air strikes against the Iranian-backed Houthis creating chaos in the Red Sea, raising the prospect of a significant spiralling of tensions in the region.
>Under the plans the UK would join with the US and possibly another European country to unleash a salvo of missiles against pre-planned targets, either in the sea or in Yemen itself, where the militants are based.
>A Whitehall source said the co-ordinated strikes could involve RAF warplanes for the first time or HMS Diamond, a Type 45 destroyer which successfully destroyed an attack drone with a Sea Viper missile in the Red Sea earlier this month.
>It is understood an unprecedented statement is expected to be released by the UK and the US in the coming hours which will warn the Houthis to stop attacking commercial vessels or face the military might of the West.
>Ahead of the statement, Grant Shapps, the defence secretary, said: “If the Houthis continue to threaten lives and trade, we will be forced to take the necessary and appropriate action.”
>The Whitehall source said the statement was a “last warning” and if the Houthis failed to stop the attacks, the response would likely be “limited” but “significant”. It is believed allies are currently trying to persuade other European countries to work with the US and the UK to stop the attacks amid fears there could be disastrous economic implications if shipping transiting through one of the world’s most important maritime trade routes continues to be disrupted.
>The source was unable to confirm which aircraft could be used in the retaliatory action under the plans, although the UK has Typhoons stationed at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, currently carrying out missions over Iraq and Syria. They are there to find any remnants of Isis, although The Times revealed this month that the mission has expanded to spy on Iranian-backed militia believed to be smuggling weapons into Lebanon.
>The Houthis, a rebel faction that controls much of Yemen and an ally of Hamas, have carried out a spate of attacks on commercial ships since the terror attack by Hamas on Israel on October 7. According to the Whitehall source, eight of the 20 ships attacked in the 30 days before Christmas were either UK-registered, had British citizens in their crew or carried goods for the UK.
>In response to the attacks, Washington launched a multinational force to protect vessels transiting the waterway, although allies are concerned the number of hostile actions are continuing to soar.
>Ministers are concerned that “the numbers [of attacks] are cranking up and the feeling is something needs to be done”, said the source, adding that insurance for shipping had gone up tenfold in December and journeys were being delayed which was disrupting supply lines.
>Tom Sharpe, a former Royal Navy commander, said if the Houthis wanted to they could hit “masses of ships” in the Red Sea, and the US-led force that has already been sent would need to be far larger to ensure commercial vessels passing through are protected. “Even then, it wouldn’t be guaranteed. If they went for it, we’d be overwhelmed,” he said.
>However, Sharpe said it was not in the Houthi’s interest to provoke a fight back from the US. “It is much better to keep it sub-threshold and slowly drain our resources,” he said.
>Details of the possible retaliatory strikes came as the US military said it shot down two anti-ship ballistic missiles fired toward a container ship by Houthi rebels. Hours later, four boats tried to attack the same ship but US forces opened fire, sinking three of the boats and killing several of the armed crews. A fourth boat escaped.
>The US military said the incident marked the 23rd attack from the Yemeni militia on international shipping since November 19. It is the most decisive action taken by the US since the militia claimed to have joined the war in Gaza in support of Hamas.
>According to Thomas Juneau, an assistant professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Ottawa whose research focuses on the Middle East, especially Iran and Yemen, the Houthis have both domestic and regional objectives in attacking maritime shipping in the Red Sea. Domestically, they want to mobilise strong pro-Palestinian feelings among the Yemeni population to “shore up their base”.
>Regionally, they want to send a strong message that they have emerged as a regional power and as a core player in the Iran-backed “axis of resistance”. “They want to signal support for Hamas and opposition to Israel’s war in Gaza”, he said. Their role in the region presents a “very serious problem”, he said.
>They probably assess that the US and its regional partners are keen to avoid an escalation of the war in Gaza into a major regional war, he said. “As a result, the Houthis probably calculate that they can afford to continue striking Israel with missiles and drones and to target shipping in the Red Sea at limited cost to themselves,” he said, adding that it was likely the Houthi efforts to disrupt maritime shipping in the Red Sea will continue.
>Their success so far will provide them with “significant leverage” over their adversaries for the foreseeable future, he said.
Despite what the article states, HMS Diamond is not equipped with land-attack missiles and will therefore not be striking Houthi targets.
We cannot continue to allow Iranian proxies to disrupt global trade and dictate international affairs
This move was entirely predictable, although we don’t have that much offensive capability in the region
If Bibi hadn’t put the telescope up to his sqinted eye in September, this wouldn’t be escalating.
I’d love to hear what special ops are going to to hunt people down
Thank god! I was worried for a second that the us wouldn’t drag us into another pointless forever war in the middle east. God bless lockheed martin and raytheon for another great lobbying effort. Glad my taxes are going on this useless shit instead of something sensible like fixing this broken country.
There have been several dozen rocket and pirate attacks on ships by Houthi forces since November.
How many attacks should they be allowed before we attack back?
Their internal struggle is not my concern, their religious freedom or struggle with Saudi do not concern me either. The safety of my family who work on merchant shipping vessels in international waters is my concern and commercial vessels should not be attacked without a response.
This has all the hallmarks of an expanding conflict which is bad for everyone. What are the alternatives?
America, fuck yeah!
Comin’ again to save the motherfuckin’ day, yeah
America, fuck Yeah!
Freedom is the only way, yeah
Terrorists, your game is through
‘Cause now you have ta answer to
America, fuck yeah!
So lick my butt and suck on my balls
America, fuck yeah!
Whatcha’ gonna do when we come for you now
It’s the dream that we all share
It’s the hope for tomorrow
(Fuck Yeah!)
why can they secure the red sea yet can’t secure the channel?
The Houthi rebels? Sounds like a firm for a soccer team? Why are we helping the uk fight its own policing issues. Seems stupid.
Kind of ignores that the UK was backing a destructive war on Yemen for years, via Saudi Arabia, which actually helped the Houthis capitalise on the destruction and expand their control in the North (before the war they were much, much smaller). And now they’re a clear geopolitical player in the Red Sea.
Apart from this blowback, backing of Israel’s war on Gaza is giving the faction a pretext to attack (mostly Israeli-linked) cargo in the Red Sea. Perhaps it’s a good time to rethink UK foreign policy, and hopefully be less of a US stooge.
Excellent news. Britain should, along with its allies, continue to protect global shipping (the Red Sea) and the national sovereignty of smaller nations (Guyana). It is an easy way to garner some respect among the international community and also make a tangible difference to the everyday British person at the same time.
Infact we should be putting far more emphasis on the amount and quality of our military spending with the changing global security climate. Our military is far too small at the moment.
Anyway, sad to see the usual suspects jumping all over this as if it’s Iraq 2.0, as if every military engagement/conflict can be looked at through that ridiculous and outdated context.
ITT: A hell of a lot of tankies and or pro-terrorist accounts. With quite predictable username formats.
So we end up playing another round of middle-east whac-a-mole cos our so called “ally” in Israel doesn’t want to stop the butchery or decrease the tempo.
Great. Sucked into more conflict by short selling incompetents like Benji.
And Israel is calling it a war, yeah sure it’s a war guys. Just like WW2. >.>
While its good that something is belong done, why does it have to be the US and UK which has to solve the worlds problems all the time? We will only be blamed for the fallout. The countries which are effected should all be involved.
[removed]
another stupid middle east adventure.
“this time it’ll be really really really different”. ok then
Doing the Saudi’s bidding yet again. Got to keep BAE/HK shareholders onside.
Im very surprised anyone on here supports this clear escalation. US foreign policy in the Middle East has been a disaster, and why should we follow along supporting it, sending young men off to their deaths again for nothing. We look pretty pathetic IMO.
The Houthis asked for food and medicine to be allowed into Gaza, something a desperate civilian population needs. Is this a bad thing?
Saudi Arabia dropped countless bombs in Yemen and it only made a bad situation worse. Dropping more bombs probably won’t solve the problem. We should be apologising for the Iraq war and calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. Instead we follow along, it’s an embarrassment and failure of foreign policy, meddling in the Middle East has ruined their economies and because we live in a global world if you cared about the economy you would not support this.
The only winner here are the arms dealers, expect terror attacks in the UK if this goes ahead.