“Are You a Boy, or Are You a Girl?”

In which WOOF’s editor in chief, Old Bugler, expresses his up-to-the-minute-if-frustratingly-excursive views on nothing but 100% guaranteed genuine news, mostly in the annoyingly officious third-person, as befits his station!   

---

If you are as old, or nearly as old, as your humble editor–and granted, few are–you may recall a rock tune from the mid-sixties by a lesser known combo called The Barbarians. They scored a minor hit querying: “Are you a boy, or are you a girl?” The succeeding line, if memory serves, was,“If you’re not a girl, then you come from Liverpool!” It was funny in 1965 because it lampooned a sizable subset of American society that gloried in blaring the titular interrogative at any passing lad sporting hair past the tips of his ears. If you were so assailed in that era, you may recall that none of the assailing dullards seemed able to conceive any wittier insult, and seemed uniformly convinced that screaming “are you a boy or are you a girl?”constituted the ultimate squelch.

But whether you were a screaming dullard, or the recipient of the dullards’ taunts, you recognized the question was (albeit insultingly) binary. In other words you had only two available responses (or you could resist responding altogether, or you could break the issuer’s jaw)… No one in the Barbarians thought to include any alternatives, nor would it have occurred to recipients of the query to explain they were, in fact, “questioning” or “non-binary.” Nobody would have understood such gobbledygook, whereas nowadays we pretend to.

Then as now, however, with occasional hermaphroditic exceptions, all babies came in two varieties, which is to say “boys” and “girls.” It was easy to tell, because boys had penises and girls had vaginas. In fact, the same holds true nowadays. And, however briefly, babies are assigned one of two genders in the hospital, or yes, even by enlightened midwives, because the issuers of birth certificates are either unwoke, or, more probably, sensible of the insufficient space on birth certificates to accommodate whichever clusters of the 82 (currently available) ‘genders’ may appeal to woke moms and dads, dads and dads, or moms and moms. But yes, your editor has already committed an unpardonable sin–he has just confused gender with sex. Oops!

Oops!

Have you noticed how important such nice distinctions seem to liberal pundits? They relish imposing them at moments selected to disconcert the naive; usually college students eager to confuse paradox with profundity. These pedagogic slicksters bask in the stir their counter-intuitive assertions provoke:

“Rape,” the woke professor assures his dumbstruck students,”is not about sex!” Similarly, “the Civil War was not about slavery!” And of course–I admit the ‘error’–“Gender is not about sex–” an arguable lexicographic point rendered moot by repeated draggings (no pun intended) through the muck of  contemporary academe.  A few of us recall a day in which college professors contributed their insights to refining usage notes in dictionaries.  More recently America’s educators seem content to loaf about their faculty lounges confecting nonsense terms that inflate their various unhinged lexicons. Stuffing dictionaries (and students) with such evanescent gibberish is a full-blown professorial fad.

Descriptivism villainously distorts the meaning of language [see previous editorial rant] while constructivism appears to legitimate the resultant havoc. But in this case, to lock down the meaning of our terms, let us return to an epoch antecedent to liberal contamination.  Let’s consult Meriam Webster’s 1913 dictionary.  In 1913, Webster insensitively defined gender as “Sex, male or female.” Additionally, it can imply “a classification of nouns, primarily according to sex; and secondarily to some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.” [Italics added.] The entry seems uncannily prescient.

Webster\s dictionary in its uncannily prescient avatar…

As to sex? Webster’s in 1913 defined it as “Sex, n. 1. The distinguishing peculiarity of male or female in both animals and plants; the physical difference between male and female; the assemblage of properties or qualities by which male is distinguished from female.” Of course, in 1913, nobody knew any better.

“Out there…”

Paula Leech, evidently a girl.

Descriptivists are busy improving these definitions, or rather, deconstructing them into radical insipidity. A representative example is offered by no less an authority than Paula Leech, LMFT, and AASECT-certified sex therapist. Paula writes, “Thankfully, [sic] it’s 2022, and many of the terms surrounding gender are becoming more widely recognized in our society. The language we have around [gender identity] is rapidly expanding to accommodate for [sic] the wide variety of gender identities and expressions out there.” Out there? No wonder Leech believes 2022 is so thankful–it has shaken the stodgy encumbrances of binary neanderthalism and reached the heady apogee of constructive wokeness.

Jackie Golob, MS, writes, “Gender is a term that relates to how we feel about ourselves, the way we choose to express our gender through makeup, dresses, high heels, athletic shorts, sneakers, and more.” (So, in other words, gender is how we express our gender.)

Oh boy, it’s a continuum…

Golob, MS (And Ms, of course)–also a girl.

But Golob insists gender identity is more than a mere social construct, it is also “a continuum. Our society has convinced us that there are just two options for gender identity, ‘male’ ‘female,’ based on biological sex. But in reality, there’s more fluidity!” See? Fluidity. Now your college students can feel haughtily superior as they condescend to inform you that gender isn’t about sex, but rather, “how we feel about ourselves” (because), “In reality, there’s more fluidity!” Tuition, by the way, is sky high, but worth it if your students learn to recognize reality.

Marching to La-la Land…

But none of what Goleb and Leech are blithering about has any association with reality. Almost the entire literature of gender re-identification is pure fantasy, or as Meriam Webster sentiently suggested back in 1913,”some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.”

By now the properly programmed liberal will be furious with your humble editor, assuming him homophobic (properly meaning afraid of sameness but relegated lately to what Joseph Sobran called “hive speak,”or what we currently call political correctness. In this sense it connotes one who is hatefully predisposed toward homosexuals.  But this screed is not about homosexuality–not a bit of it. Rather, it protests the Liberal Order’s substitution of fantasy for biology, its abandonment of lexical precision in pursuit of that fantasy, and its casual ransacking of psychology en route to La-la Land.

The world according to Jesse…

Your editor shall now quote liberally (as it were) from an article by Jesse Belinsky that appeared on the website The Verge, Aug 8, 2022. In fairness to Jesse, who seems like a well intentioned bloke (or blokette), we’ll first explain that The Verge is a tech blog, thus Jesse’s article is understandably suffused with thoughts on social media and on-line realms. That said, Jesse also embodies the perfect conflation of fantasy and self-imagery that liberalism celebrates, although in Jesse’s case it is greatly accelerated by the Internet…which Jesse praises as a first-rate accelerant.

Jesse Belinsky, as he prefers to be represented.

Jesse writes that he attends a “fairly liberal high school,” and affirms having “come out as Gay,” but his insecurities remain troublesome because “in real life, I’m a tall, slightly chubby, pubescent boy with the acne and self-esteem to match.” It seems significant that “real life” is mentioned only in this context, and is otherwise sloughed off as unacceptably burdensome. 

Not all school counselors are judgey!

A good school counselor or qualified psychologist might guide Jesse to accept the physical realities of the here-and-now while tackling deficits he realistically desires to modify (e.g., his weight, social anxiety, and acne). If he wishes to embrace his sexual preferences and transvestism, therapy may help him there, too–but Jesse seeks release online. Online he is meeting up with his “pals,” and he is determined to dress appropriately. “I want to show off my sense of style,” Jesse writes, “so I spend a solid amount of time trying on different skirts, dresses, and accessories in order to find the cutest look.” But Jesse assays these fittings on his computer. The dresses and shoes aren’t fitted to his physical body, “but rather, on my villager in the world of Animal Crossing: New Leaf for the Nintendo 3DS.” We don’t know what that means exactly, as we last played a video game when Pong was all the rage, but obviously, Jesse can flaunt his transvestism ‘virtually,’ while concealing his body dysmorphia behind his monitor.

It’s a blessing… 

Jesse admits he would face embarrassment and ridicule if he dressed as a female in public,” but online he can “be whoever I want to be — within the confines of New Leaf’s binary gender system, skinny player models, and light skin tones, that is.” Well, no fantasy is perfect. Jesse concurs. “It’s not perfect by any means, but New Leaf is the first game…that lets male villagers wear feminine clothing and vice versa. So, for people like me…it’s a blessing.”

Is there a Shrink in the hut?

Time for your estrogen booster!

There may not be any villagers in New Leaf’s game who practice psychology, (nor apparently any staffers at Jesse’s “fairly liberal high school”) but if such a clinician appears he might recognize transvestism as one of eight paraphilias (sexual deviancies) somewhat bashfully detailed in the 5th edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM-5).

If Jesse wished to discuss his transvestism with a professional he might discover that sexually-arousing fantasies entailing cross dressing are not uncommon in his age range–that homosexuals, bisexuals, and heterosexuals present with transvestism, that the symptoms often remit over time, often do not, and that the fundamental dangers are primarily to the transvestite–for obvious reasons.  Jesse might find ways to reduce or refocus his behaviors, or simply learn to function more comfortably within his diagnostic envelope.

The village shrink had best make haste, however, because as God is our witness, Jesse’s paraphilia will vanish from the always-trend-conscious DSM‘s next edition–following in the wake of such prior ejectees as homosexuality, ego-dystonic homosexuality, and sexual perversion, all flushed down the editorial memory hole.

The Search for Jesse’s Gender Identity…

Predictably, the computer simulations are soon insufficient to assuage Jesse’s yearnings. “I’m starting to wear skirts,” he writes….”I’m at the beginning of the process of figuring out my gender identity” and though still riven with incertitude, he is making progress. “[I] pierced my septum and my ears; and …recently began painting my nails. However, I still can’t bring myself to wear dresses or try earrings that are larger than studs…” 

A fashionista forever!

Jesse next praises Discord (the web platform, not the pejorative noun) exclaiming, “With the higher-resolution screen, brighter colors, and better graphics, the styles I choose…can really pop…and instead of asking me if I’m a boy or a girl …New Horizons asks me what my sense of style is…My friends and I can hop on Discord...I can now post screenshots of my villager on social media to say, “Hey! Check out my bangin’ style!”

But Jesse remains pessimistic owing to “the wave of transphobic fearmongering passing through the United States right now,” insisting his predilections make  computerized meeting places “more necessary than ever.” [More than ever? Seriously?] “I hope that queer youth are able to continue to use these digital playgrounds as a safe and fun space to play with gender…I’ll never be able to resist the life of an Animal Crossing fashionista.”

 Transphobia sweeps through the United States…

WOOF supports everyone’s right to dress stylishly.

We hope no one supposes this editorial an attack on Jesse. whose libertarian right to dress in feminine attire (‘bangin” or otherwise), we are predisposed  to defend. Jesse also retains the 1st amendment right to deem himself an occupant of any whimsically-excogitated “gender category” he likes– but not the right to make rational Americans pretend it’s real. That’s a bridge too far–a ‘right’ invented by the liberal establishment. Discerning Americans are well advised to oppose such flapdoodle.

It pains your editor to disappoint Jesse, but he needn’t bother himself further about his true gender identity. In skirts or out of skirts, you’re male Jesse. Even if you ultimately succumb to surgical mutilation to more persuasively disguise the fact, (as is your adult right), you will still be a male, however brutally amended. The Left will help you play dress-up and urge you to pretend otherwise–but it’s not so.

              Say, was that Ze with Zir? Are HU certan?

Seizing upon zany, nonsensical nonce terms to decorate one’s “gender identity” is really just another kind of transvestism. And eventually, probably after playing with numerous gender flavors, Jesse will opt for whichever current phrase strikes him as the sheikest –the most nearly perfect touch that gives his putative identity the most appealing glow. But he’ll still be a guy.

(READ MORE!)

2024–the Year of Living Dangerously!

Nietzsche was the first to formally advocate living dangerously as a kind of  modus vivendi, but our title phrase owes itself to a quote from Indonesian President Sukarno who coined it during the 1965 coup that saw him ousted by the 30 September Movement.  The phrase is also the title of a novel about that era by Christopher Koch that became a 1984 movie starring Mel Gibson. But that’s not important now.  

What’s important now, rather obviously, is the new year of 2024, and the unfortunate fact that more Americans are facing more potential danger than at any point since the Cuban missile crisis, though for a far more varied set of reasons.  And the multiplicity of threats merely amplifies the level of danger.   

She may not look it, but she’s terrified.

Even Kamala Harris is terrified of 2024. During an appearance with that highly-rated klatch of distaff hysterics who regularly populate ABC’s The View, she advised the current assemblage of sororal ditzes that “we should all be scared as heck” about the possibility of Donald Trump returning to the White House. The aforementioned ditzes chorused simpatico alarm. Obviously what truly terrifies our Vice President (and indefatigable border czar), is the fact that fewer and fewer Americans are “scared as heck” of Donald Trump, while rapidly growing segments of the voting public report dissatisfaction with the fact that after just three harrowing years, Joseph Robinette Biden has done more to discomfit this Republic than Carter, Clinton, and Obama combined, and all without his mental faculties in play.

The nincompoop himself.

But far scarier than the nincompoop himself is the marvelously diverse yet homogeneously destructive band of termites surrounding him. Whether one considers the dark, soulless eyes of Alejandro Mayorkas riveted on members of congress while he lies to them unabashedly, or the studiedly uncandid Christopher Wray playing verbal paddy cake as he twists and swivels to dissemble the FBI’s depth of corruption, or the pusillanimous babbling of such Pentagonian stalwarts as fidgety John Kirby, or our part-time Secretary of Defense, Lloyd Austin, it becomes swiftly apparent that 2024 presages horrors aplenty beyond Joe Biden’s latest manifestations of dementia.

John Kirby: The Washington Post called him “a commanding presence in the Biden situation room.” Maybe they grade on the curve.

Al Qaida is back, having established training centers in ten of Afghanistan’s provinces following Biden’s chaotic evacuation.  And despite pouring nearly two-hundred billion American dollars into the Ukrainian effort, ostensibly to oust the invading Russians, Ukraine is nowhere nearer that objective– and by most informed accounts appears to be losing ground. Yet the only available option, according to Biden and his defense gurus, is the expenditure of additional billions–all with no accounting as to where the funds go, nor any audit demonstrating how they are spent. It would require a particularly sanguine analyst to deny, at this point, that substantial skimmings from those billions are enriching Zelensky, a select group of Ukrainian plutocrats, and, yes, of course, Joe Biden, as “the Big Guy.”

The Ukrainians peace movement remains somewhat unorganized.

Give peace a chance?

WTF?

WOOF continues (despite considerable criticism from fellow conservatives) to root for a Ukrainian victory over Putin’s neo-Stalinist legions, but even given the embarrassing underperformance of the Russian military, such a victory seems unachievable. What seems far more plausible is the Bidens’ likely goal of propping up the eroding Ukrainian cash-cow long enough to dump the entire dumpster blaze into Trump’s lap come November, milking it meanwhile for maximum profit.  Singularly absent from the administration’s incessant clamorings on the topic is the notion of a negotiated peace. The idea might appeal to a frustrated Putin, whose generals promised him a decisive victory within three weeks–two years ago. It seems the firmest aversion to a peaceful settlement emanates from Washington, where a cessation of hostilities is evidently regarded as unthinkable, while forcing precisely such a settlement on Israel, where Biden has barely invested a dime,  seems oddly imperative. 

If only Biden knew a brilliant negotiator.

Again, WOOF would much prefer to see Putin’s military hurled back by the plucky Ukrainians but, uncountable billions later, this is no longer a plausible outcome, and the best hope for checking Russian aggression is a negotiated settlement while there are still some plucky Ukrainians left to negotiate. Such an outcome, however, would require the services of a master negotiator, and so far the Biden administration has not enlisted any such expert.  

Putin is currently soothing his bruised Napoleon complex by preparing to orbit nuclear powered satellites–weapons intended to attack other satellites (meaning ours) while “Little Rocket Man” (aka Kim Jong Un) has returned to his former habit of lobbing nuke-capable missiles in various directions, notably Japan’s. This proceeds as the United States sells Israel out to the jackals at the United Nations, and the Democrats blame House Republicans for the result.

The enemy within…

And then there’re still all these people…

Meanwhile, a greater danger for Americans than any variation on the Ukrainian outcome, exits even now in the continental United States. By modest estimates, the Biden administration has already facilitated the illegal entry of at least ten-million foreigners since its defacto removal of any semblance of border security.  Even DHS admits recently losing track of 177,000 individuals, and these among the minority who were duly processed.  Fox News reported that “Chinese nationals are crossing the U.S.-Mexico border into the U.S. in unprecedented numbers this year, with the first few months of FY 2023 already eclipsing the total for 2022.”

While the Washington Post and the New York Times busied themselves ranting that concerns about this undocumented floodtide symbolized “right-wing paranoia,” retired Yuma Border Patrol chief Chris Clem remarked, “What you’re seeing…is military-age, single, adult males. We just had about eight Syrian nationals come across. There’s people from all over the world showing up here.”

It is frequently claimed by leftist pols that the disproportionate numbers of (particularly) Chinese males are merely escaping communist oppression on the totalitarian mainland, but that’s hardly credible as they arrive by the thousandfold. Red China is a slave state, like all Communist despotisms, and while the occasional freedom-seeker finds a means of escape, the fantasy that such escapees are arriving at our southern border in divisional strength and are coincidentally males of military age. is preposterous. That most are arriving with the full knowledge and cooperation of the CCP seems obvious. These cadres combined with similarly suspect entrants from middle-eastern countries are cause less for concern than outright alarm, yet our border continue disgorging unidentifiable legions.

 It would be wonderful to be wrong about this, but it seems inevitable that at some point a switch will be thrown in Beijing, or Tehran, and trained, fanatical terrorists will be activated throughout our country. Whether the architects of this potentiality will pull the trigger before Biden’s re-election effort, or in the wake of its likely failure, remains conjecturable–but its inevitability is difficult to challenge. One way or another it will play an important role in the year of living dangerously.

Dire straits…

But we may not have to await internal attack from terrorists–the entire planet is a tinder box. Taiwan, as we have previously mentioned, is in mortal danger from the massive slave state to its immediate northeast otherwise known as Red China. Particularly in the wake of elections that ran contrary to, and in defiance of, China’s expressed wishes–and  despite extensive bribery, coercion, and voter fraud masterminded by Xi Jinping and his cronies on the mainland, Taiwan rejected a massive communist effort to co-opt its democracy and and voted instead to resist Maoist infiltration in all its guises.  Neither Xi nor Biden’s circle of Marxian statists  anticipated so resounding a repudiation of the CCP’s agenda.  Precisely what sort of response the Chinese Communist Party may be preparing could contribute violently to this year’s events.

Jet-setters to the rescue!

An unidentified Davos attendant has an idea.

Next we must consider those fun loving cutups at Davos, who assault our environment by employing vast fleets of pollution-gushing jets to convene annually at the posh Swiss ski resort and surrounding village. Presumptuously styling themselves the World Economic Forum, they invariably gorge on gourmet cuisine and expensive wines whilst hobnobbing with their fellow elitists and pausing occasionally to treat those of us who didn’t receive invitations to their loftiest thoughts and predictions.  Lately they are focused on persuading the majority of earth’s inhabitants that the environment will be saved if we eat bugs instead of beef and harness wind and solar power in service of our real-world energy needs. This would simply present as high camp, if the poltroons ensconced in our media and the administration recognized its risibility–but instead, they uncritically echo the ludicrosities issued from Davos, imagining that the rest of us will do likewise.

Don’t inhale!

For the most part, we can ignore the pundits of Davos.  By the time they next convene, and regardless of what statements they see fit to issue at the time, earth will be no closer to climatological salvation (or havoc) than it is presently, and earthlings no less inclined to munch hamburgers or  pump gasoline.  But this doesn’t mean we can ignore every prediction issued by the globalist gourmets at WEL. In some respects they have established a worrisome level of accuracy.

Their confident prediction that a highly lethal infection would sweep through earth’s population coming just prior to the onset of the Wuhan Virus was uncanny, leading a handful of troglodytic conspiracy theorists (including us) to wonder aloud whether the prediction, as well as the state-empowering reactions, weren’t a trifle too uncanny.  But such concerns pale in comparison to this year’s prediction from Davos of: “disease X.”

WHO?

On January 17th no less an authority than Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the World Health Organization, lectured Davos attendees on “Preparing for Disease X.” Apparently, this hypothetical disease may have the unpleasant attribute of proving approximately 100-percent lethal, thus requiring truly draconic strictures in preparation for its arrival, to say nothing of the universal government response requisite to managing its devastating effects once it (hypothetically) manifests itself. 

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus makes another psychic prediction.

How can Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus officialize such exact predictions of an as-yet-to-eventuate pandemic? WOOF cannot pretend to know with certainty, but the implications are enough to cause us to advise readers: Don’t inhale! At least not during this year of living dangerously.

Making Iran Deadly Again…

Let’s take this moment–why not?–to expand our concerns about nuclear warfare beyond the mere possibility that Putin may do something jiggy, or that Kim Jung Un may nuke himself in the foot, and focus instead on some full-blown, grade “A” homicidal maniacs–the Iranian leadership. Confronted with the mullahs’ outspoken and unequivocal lust to develop their own nuclear weapon with which to expunge Israel, the Biden administration has responded by showering Tehran with every extra few billion it can lay hands on. Meanwhile Washington has ensured that all restrictions on Iranian trade and finance be removed so that their nuclear program can advance unhindered. According to Reuters, Iran will have produced fissile material sufficient to make its first bomb by the time you read this.  We realize, CNN, MSNBC, and the “legacy” networks have not deemed this news so vital as to bother viewers with it, nor preempted their dogged rationalizations of, say, Judge Engoron’s grinning buffoonery, or the burlesque surrounding Fani Willis, long enough to mention it. We suggest skeptical readers seek verification by checking the Reuters source here.

Assassination prep…

Die, Orange Man, die!

As circumstances have already sufficed to make obvious, 2024 is also a year of living dangerously for the front-running Republican candidate. But daily manifestations of runaway “lawfare” in the hands of such judicial ninnyhammers as Jack Smith, are less terrifying than the willful exertions of the mainstream media to avoid noticing. None of this is exactly new, but the media’s sudden obsession with framing this election year in regicidal  imagery is a recent addition.

Last year, Edward Watts published his widely praised history of the fall of Rome,  Mortal Republic, and took pains to instruct Americans that the collapse of Rome “offers a chilling lesson to modern Americans.” As the New York Times recently reminded its remaining readers: “Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar has always been about more than killing Julius Caesar.” Last March, the website Fabius Maximus, published a ditty headlined “America isn’t falling like the Roman Empire. It’s worse.” As if by way of chorusing the sentiment, New York magazine offered up the self-infatuated Andrew Sullivan whose essay claimed “our Founding Fathers were particularly concerned with Rome’s fall from republic to autocracy.”

   (READ MORE)

Houthi and the Blowhards: Plinking at the Red Sea Pirates!

In case you missed the memo, there was a civil war in Yemen a while ago. A Zaydi Shiite movement called the Houthi began fighting Yemen’s Sunni-majority government in 2004.  In 2014 the Houthis took over Yemen’s capital, Sanaa. By 2016 they solidified control over most of northern Yemen, which would not have been possible without a constant flow of money and sophisticated arms from their staunch supporter, Iran, and Iran’s puppet grotesquerie, Hezbollah. As further evidence of this support, both Iran and Hezbollah routinely deny providing it. Also, Saudi Arabia has presented such incontrovertible evidence of Iranian arms transfers that even the United States has grudgingly acknowledged Iranian involvement, even as the Biden administration hastens to provide Iran with billions’ of additional dollars to enable their shenanigans.

Sheer insanity.

True, the sheer insanity of showering billions on Tehran’s mad mullahs while Iran continues to oppose American interests (often violently) throughout the Middle East and elsewhere, might occasion a critical review from WOOF– except that the invidious anti-Americanism of Joe Biden’s foreign and domestic policies is by now so widely manifest, even liberals are taking notice, (albeit bemusedly), and our voice would merely constitute an addition to the choir.  

Houthi drones, cheaper by the dozen, good for blowing up anybody in the neighborhood.

The inevitable Houthi spokesman–is he really a Red Beret?

But the Houthi rebels attracted our particular attention by going out of their way to stand out –a feat they’ve accomplished by bombarding Red Sea shipping and locations in Israel with explosive drones and rockets.  The rebels’ ostensible casus belli is given as solidarity with the oppressed peoples of Gaza, on which account they seek to punish the “oppressors”–namely Israel and approximately anyone else who sails into range. That Israel is responding to one of the profoundest genocidal  atrocities in recent history is dismissed on the absurd basis that Jews cannot be oppressed because they are white–a risible adaptation of Marxist dogma that was addlepate before its reduction to genetic gobbledygook, and is absolutely lunatic in its current manifestation.  But only American college students and CNN anchors are truly expected to internalize such taradiddle–the Houthi are merely terrorist renegades of the common antisemitic stripe, who enjoy blowing stuff up. 

No need for complicated distinctions, just check the oppressed/oppressor ratio with your university professors and you’ll know who to root for!

Lloyd Austin, thundering.

With that brand of shallow bravado typical of Biden’s hirelings, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin  (prior to falling somewhat-mysteriously ill and more or less disappearing for the weekend) thundered “these reckless Houthi attacks are a serious international problem… and they demand a firm international response.” Evidently, that response was supposed to mean that in addition to American Naval vessels shooting down as many Houthi drones and rockets  as possible until  their shipboard ordinance required resupply, our destroyers would theoretically be joined by forces from  the United Kingdom, Bahrain, Canada, France, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Seychelles and Spain.  This, Austin assured us,  would constitute “Operation Prosperity Guardian” a multinational mission in the Red Sea during which warships from the above-mentioned nations would theoretically assist us by shooting down as many Houthi drones and rockets as possible until  their shipboard ordinance also required resupply. 

Your basic drone swarms.

The obvious benefit of international assistance (besides that it sounds good to say) is budgetary, as the astronomical costs incurred by shooting at relatively cheap Houthi drones with massively expensive missiles and other highly sophisticated weaponry will theoretically be shared by the cooperating navies.  The other obvious benefit is tactical. The more warships on station, the more defensive measures are deployable.  This could be particularly important if the Houthi switch to “swarm attacks” employing mass numbers of drones in single assaults. Conversely, such attacks increase the chances that some drones may find a target, seriously damaging a naval ship or commercial vessel.  And one obvious drawback to increasing the number of military hulls patrolling the Res Sea is that doing so simultaneously multiplies the number of available targets.

A Norwegian-flagged tanker is struck by a Houthi missile.

A stark example…

This is especially worrisome because the Houthi increasingly attack with anti-ship missiles in addition to drones, making the danger to shipping even more serious.  This also presents an increased hazard to military vessels clustering in the vicinity. Readers with long memories may recall that in 1987 the USS Stark, an American Perry Class frigate patrolling the Persian Gulf, was  struck by two Exocet missiles fired by an Iraqi jet.  Fortunately, only the second missile exploded, but the Stark was severely damaged and 37 crew members were killed. The stricken frigate was  towed to Bahrain, and subsequently to Florida, for prolonged repairs. 

The USS Stark following the explosion of an Exocet missile that flew under her radar in 1987.

An Ardleigh Burke-class destroyer–probably not “the last ship.”

The Ardleigh Burke-class destroyers currently cruising the Red Sea employ shipboard defenses of a more sophisticated nature than those aboard the Stark in 1987, but the chance of a lucky hit are not inconsiderable, besides which, the ships sent by other nations are not necessarily as technologically sophisticated as our own. The sinking or severe damaging of an American, British, or affiliated warship in the Red Sea would obviously mean a tragic loss of life and materiel so grave  that the Biden administration might be moved to call the offense “unacceptable” before accepting it, or perhaps, even  react to it by bombing an unoccupied  ammo dump or its strategic equivalent. So far, however, the Houthi have proved unable to lay a glove on the U.S. Navy.  The Ardleigh Burke-class destroyer Carney alone has busied itself for weeks downing one-way drones meant to explode on contact with the Carney or other ships in the region.

USS Carney has shot down record numbers of drones and missiles, but the Houthi keep making more.

Despite such prodigious feats of sharpshooting, Houthi drone-and-rocket assaults continue to plague Red-Sea shipping. So much so that major container-ship companies are re-routing their cargo carriers around the Horn of Africa.  The obvious problem with the safer route is that the detour takes more time, consumes more fuel, and leads to higher costs.  Meanwhile, every indication is that drone attacks are surging over the Red Sea, even as parts of Israel continue to be targeted by rockets.  In fact, Houthi aggressions even go so far as to include helicopter assaults during which at least one commercial vessel has been boarded and seized.

Appealing to the Houthis…

The Houthi diplomatic corps.

The Houthis  claim to have limited boarding operations to Israeli ships only, but Israel points out that no such boardings of its vessels have occurred. On the other hand, Japan confirmed in November  that Houthis had boarded an seized the Nippon Yusen-operated  Galaxy Leader.  Japanese spokesmen told Reuters that Japan was “appealing to the Houthis while seeking the help of Saudi, Omani, and Iranian authorities to work toward the swift release of the vessel and its crew.”  Notwithstanding, the ship remains captive, and the crew hostage.  The Houthis remain adamant that “All ships belonging to the Israeli enemy or that deal with it will become legitimate targets.” Be that as it may, no member of the captured crew is Israeli, and the Galaxy Leader was bound for India after departing Turkey.  

Houthi “commandos” attaching the Galaxy Leader.

Prosperity marches on…

Detour!

Over one hundred container ships and other commercial vessels have opted to round the Horn of Africa rather than risk Houthi wrath in the Red Sea.  Shipping lines like MSC and Hapag-Lloyd, have endured recurrent bombardments from the Houthi, declaring in late December that they would cease transiting the Red Sea entirely. Lines such as CMA CGM, and Maersk, ordered their vessels to avoid troubled waters until otherwise notified. Evergreen and OOCL announced the suspension of all cargo shipping to and from Israel until further notice.  A cynic might conclude that Operation Prosperity Guardian is not prospering, nor are its protectees feeling well guarded.

Kayla Bartsch is a William F. Buckley Fellow in Political Journalism. She must be okay.

National Review, in its glory days, was rarely accused of naïveté–yet in her review of the current Red Sea debacle, NR‘s Kayla Bartsch seems to conclude unironically that  “Although the U.S. has announced Operation Prosperity Guardian, it is unclear when the new security initiative will come into effect. No U.S. military response has yet taken place in the region.” In one respect, she’s not wrong. In another important respect, she’s missed the subtleties of Joe Biden’s military genius.  Biden’s “security initiative” is already in effect–it just lacks initiative, and provides too little security.

Oops.

The massive allied response in the Red Sea.

When the Biden administration decided that an international response was the answer to the Red Sea problem, it grandly announced that 20 countries had rushed to support the mission.  When pressed for details, however, the administration could only list 12 countries interested in participating, of which Spain and Italy were already backpedaling.  It seems that President Biden lacks that hortatory flare necessary to steel the spines of our recalcitrant “allies,” especially with European electorates polling indifferently on the subject of Israel.  

VDAM Cooper–the man in command.

But even if everyone cooperates, the result will be a lot more warships from a lot more countries shooting down Houthi missiles and rockets with varying degrees of success. This leaves unaltered the essential problem with Biden’s idea of a “security initiative–”  namely, that it lacks any decisive clout. Currently only five warships (from France, the United Kingdom, and the United States) are participating in the operation.  Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, who heads the 5th Fleet, admits that despite efforts to stymie the Houthi’s aggressions, the problem is undiminished.  As the AP reports, “Yemen’s Houthi rebels show no signs of ending their reckless attacks on commercial ships.” But are the attacks really reckless? So far, they’ve cost the aggressors nothing except some bargain-rate, remote-controlled weaponry. 

Shoot the archer!

Time to shoot the archer!

In a blinding moment of independent analysis and applied insight, CNN recently quoted an expert to the effect that “Given a choice and capability, it is always cheaper to take out the archers than to intercept the arrows.” Or, as  Alessio Patalano, professor of war and strategy at King’s College in London, sagely observed: “There is another course of action which is striking at the source. This would shift the emphasis from intercepting the capabilities once they’re in the air to strike them at the source to prevent their use in the first place.” Remarkably, no one in the Biden administrations seems capable of figuring this out.  In fact Biden has explained that reacting more strongly to Houthi provocations runs the risk of widening the war,” which the Houthi seem to be managing unassisted, to the detriment of international trade.  Tim Lenderking, the U.S. special envoy for Yemen, has volunteered his hope that the “Houthis will choose the path of peace.” Obviously, Biden, Austin, Blinken and Lenderking are living in a fantasy world.  They are the blowhards in this equation, except that they lack the moral conviction even to blow particularly hard.

Tim Lenderking–looking for that path to peace.

Our bases in the vicinity have endured (to date) over 120 rocket and drone attacks. Our navy vessels are warding off similar assaults on a continuing basis.  Commercial ships come routinely under fire and are dealing with increased efforts at boarding them. More recently the Houthis have been using speedboats in attempts to board container ships. In a heterodox display of genuine initiative, one of our naval helicopters opened fire on a few of them and may actually have killed a few Houthis. In response, the Iranians sent a warship of their own into the contested battlespace, driving oil prices further skyward..

Iranian warship enters the Red Sea. Oil prices soar.

Call us warmongers….

We need to ignore this implicit threat and destroy the capacity of the Houthi to wage piracy on the high seas.  Fighting piracy has been a duty of the United States Navy since the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, and it ought to survive the imbecilities and panderings of Joseph Robinette Biden. Call us warmongers, but no less decisive response will resolve this issue in our favor or Israel’s, or secure the safety of Dead Sea shipping.

Same Shia, different day!

The task is well within our military capability and need not even require the deployment of the United States Marines, although they remain regionally available if circumstances should demand their inclusion.  Two aircraft carrier groups are within striking distance of the Houthi and could readily demolish their drone-and -missile capabilities if so ordered, but readers who deem our ruminations incendiary needn’t concern themselves much. The Biden administration remains surreally obsequious to Iran, maddeningly ambivalent toward Israel, and essentially harmless to the Houthi. Unless something fundamental changes in Washington, our warships will continue to shoot at arrows, the Houthi will continue to inflict maritime terror, and our leaders will continue to be blowhards.

Fighting piracy since 1800.