Comments by "David Himmelsbach" (@davidhimmelsbach557) on "Shipping and the Red Sea (Attacks on Tankers) || Peter Zeihan" video.

  1. 3
  2. 3
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7.  @TheAmrthe2nd  The IDF did have naval vessels impacted., and presumably even fishing vessels. (Which never get any press during the Big News) And, of course, ANY naval blockade has been deemed a legit belligerent cause for war going back centuries. Israel, for propaganda purposes, wanted this aspect brought out, front and center, in as much as the IDF had struck Egypt, Syria and Jordan first with air strikes and land warfare. The REAL reason the IDF moved first is because her spies had spilled the beans: the Arabs were colluding to attack -- yet again -- same as 1948. This aspect could not be publicly admitted as it would expose its spy networks. So for years and years, the Israelis never admitted that they had advance knowledge that their opponents were conspiring against them. They were dithering over the last details -- as the Arabs all wanted war -- but did not really trust each other all that much. Thinking like Napoleon, the IDF moved first, to make sure that the Arabs could not coordinate their armies, their air forces. It gets more complex because the IDF was also playing radio games with the Arabs. See: the USS Liberty -- and just how far they'd go and how desperate the IDF was. The Liberty 'stunt' almost triggered WWIII -- which, somehow, is always omitted by pop historians. Instead, they point to 1962 -- which was no where as perilous. In 1967, the USN had atomic bombs on their way to attack the Soviet fleet... with afterburners on! They were turned around only at the last second -- shades of "Fail Safe' -- the movie. All of this was held secret for years and years. You just never read of it in the popular press.
    1
  8. 1
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17. 1