Houthis Declare Beginning New Chapter In Conflict With Saudi Arabia, Say Royal Palaces, Oil And Military Facilities Within Range Of Their Missiles

Donate

Houthis Declare Beginning New Chapter In Conflict With Saudi Arabia, Say Royal Palaces, Oil And Military Facilities Within Range Of Their Missiles

Illustrative image

Yemen’s Houthi movement said that the December 19 missile attack on Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh marked the beginning of a new chapter in its conflict with Saudi Arabia.

In a statement delivered via Houthi-run Al-Masirah television channel, Houthi spokesman Mohammed Abdussalam said that the Houthis fired a Burkan-2 ballistic missile at the Al-Yamama Palace in Riyadh. Abdussalam added that Saudi royal palaces as well as oil and gas production and military facilities are within the range of Houthi missiles.

The Burkan-2 ballistic missile has an estimated range of 800 km. The Al-Yamama Palace is the official residence and office of Saudi King Salman. The palace is located in the western suburbs of Riyadh.

The situation in Yemen has recently escalated as the Saudi-led coalition and Saudi-backed forces are now pushing towards the strategic Yemen port city of Hudaydah from the southern direction. If Saudi-led forces are able to capture the city, they will be able to tighten the blockade on the Houthi-held area of Yemen.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • andy l

    Turn that palace to dust!

  • Serious

    Give weapons to Houthis to defend. I don’t understand how Hezboillah, Houthis and Syria can defend without weapons. Give them massive et brand new weapons.

    • World_Eye

      Well man that’s the problem the only regional player that supports then is Iran no one else gives a fuck about then in arming, the US is with Saudi Wahhabists and who will give them wpns to whom are you referring when you just say give them weapons are you just a small kid or something do you understand the conflict there or ?

      • Serious

        Why Russia doesn’t give them weapons ?
        Why Russia doesn’t get involved in Yemen conflict supporting Houthis and weakening USA allies like USA is doing in Syria ?

        Because Pussin is playing with USA.

        • grok

          Because the russians are not in a hurry to give the insane yanqui Militarists the pretext for starting WWIII in earnest.

          Speaking of infantile thinking, here.

          • Serious

            Always the same excuse.

          • grok

            Not serious, obviously.

        • Jeff Lewin

          Russia mostly favors secular powers. They have had positive relations with Syrian Baathists and leftist Kurds for decades.

          Russia maintained relations with late Yemeni President Saleh, but never had any inclination to open relations with the Houthis.

          The Russian Aerospace Forces need to maintain sufficient numbers in w. Russia in order to counter NATO pressures, and a deployment to the Red Sea theater would weaken RuAF strength in their home territory.

          • grok

            Remember that the russians basically (and rightly) only intend to fight _defensive_ wars… And Suria/Syria _was_ a defensive war for them — in the strategic, Global sense; as will be any _other_ wars against the NATO Imperialists and/or their proxy dogs, in the Middle East.

            Point being: the russians do not require an overt _offensive_ capability; and thus do not ‘require’ any (much higher) level of attack firepower — as do the always-aggressor NATO regimes. And neither do the chinese; so, any intention to ‘go on the offensive’ during some hypothetical long, drawn out WWIII scenario, would simply require these hitherto ‘defensive’ regimes to ‘tool up’ over the course of any such protracted war of attrition…

            I wonder which side would prevail (not).

          • Jeff Lewin

            2/From 2012-2014, Medvedev fumbled the ball to the imperialists once in Libya, and once in Syria.

            Russia has had a long relationship with Kurds, and has avoided escalating tensions between Syria and PYG Kurds in power in e. Syria.

            I salute the Syrians for reclaimeing much of its territory.

            Both sides suffered critical losses. The formidable military force that Syrians pitted against the Zionists under the late Pres. Hafez Al-Assad has been diminished to about 35% of its 2010 manpower, if that. The partition of the Government zone and E. zone

            While Russia has its reasons for discouraging a confrontation between the YPG and the Syrian military, the de facto partition of Syria leaves Coalition+Zionist-aligned Kurds in control of two important pro-government e. Syrian cities, critical transportation routes, profitable fossil fuel resources, and the E. Euphrates Valley.

            Syria does not possess the means to counter Coalition aviation propping up the Kurds.

            Without a significant military advantage on the Government side, a major escalation would equate to the likely-unacceptable sacrifices of two eastern cities surrounded by the YPG.

            So, the present status quo equates to a critical economic setback for Syria, which will lose significant amounts of territory, tax revenues, resources, and a large segment of its population if Kurds hold on to power in the east. The existing scenario will significantly weaken Syria militarily and economically.

            The Russians have mostly kept their Syrian operation rather modest, with around 50 tactical aircraft, plus a brief deployment of about 67 carrier-based fighters.

            Notwithstanding their old relationship with the Kurds, the Russians’ current diplomacy with them, and with the US-led Coalition, does not guarantee any advantages for the joint resistance (previously, in 1948, Russia also had positive relations with the zionist entity, which worked entirely to the advantage of the zionists).

            While Russia has not shown any interest in deploying its Aerospace Forces in sufficient numbers to counter the Coalition air power backing up the Kurds, howeveronly practical means of achieving any state parity, or any decisive military advantage, over the Kurdish+Coalition alliance. NATO’s pressure on Russia’s western border would add to the difficulties of such an operation, however, without such military assistance, Syria faces a greater risk of permanently losing the Kurdish-zone, with its population and its resources.

            To my thinking, Syria’s decades of loyalty as a Russian ally would suffice to justify such a commitment of RuAF in sufficient numbers to counter the Kurdish+Coalition alliance. Besides, Syria’s resistance to imperialist intrigues and aggression has benefited Russia, and many Middle Eastern peoples also, for decades.

            The Kremlin has good reasons to expect that a strong and prosperous Syrian ally will continue to yield military, economic, and political advantages for Russia…

          • grok

            The russians clearly deploy only the resources they feel they _need_ to deploy. No more. They don’t have the resources to waste on their Military, the way the NATO shits still do. They must therefore remain more judicious in their plans.

            As for Medvedev: he is essentially a Neoliberal asset of Western Imperialism. Only the relative, continuing political weakness of the russian oligarchy overall has him still out of prison or off the gallows, AFAIC.

          • Jeff Lewin

            All sides in Europe know that European NATO members’ advantages in industry would pose a critical threat to Russia in any protracted war.

            In such a scenario, Russia’s most effective option would be to advance into Western Europe, and the Russian military maintains the hardware to carry out such an operation.

          • grok

            Shame that you forgot to factor-in the likes of the chinese and other NATO-hostile regimes… AND the VERY real possibility of proletarian revolution inside each and every pseudo-democratic NATO police-state.

            But then — I bet you give short shrift to any of that sort of guff, eh..?

        • Jeff Lewin

          3/Considered from another vantage, a weapon that one is unwilling to use becomes useless weapon. If the Russians are unwilling to make a greater commitment to their Syrian ally now, in their time of need, and while Russia has the means, then, if Russians happen to need a Middle Eastern ally at some future stage, a weakened Syria might not be able to provide the help and support that Russia needs.

          Given all of these considerations, I am persuaded that Russia’s most advantageous course at this stage would be to counter the Coalition aviation with a greater deployment of RuAF deployment to the Middle East, whereby the joint resistance will be able to exert greater pressure upon the imperialists and their Kurdish allies.

          If such a deployment would compromise the strength of the RuAF in w. Russia, then the Russians should accept Chinese President Xi’s ongoing proposal of a military alliance. Russian ground forces could learn to coordinate with Chinese aviation, while Chinese aircraft would be able to strengthen the RuAF deployment in w. Russia.

      • Serious

        I always said that Iran was the real resistant.

      • Jeff Lewin

        Realistically, no allies will be able to get through the blockade around Yemen.

        • grok

          That would depend on how much of a state of war the saudis and iranis are in.

    • Garga

      They would be fine if they had an air defence system against daily bombings. Alas.
      Although more urgent than weapons for them is probably food and medicine, which won’t reach Yemen because of the blockade.

  • Garga

    Do Saudi palaces consider as civilian targets? :))
    Nikki the witch will be busy showing un-dented and undamaged metal tubes to the crowd!

    OK, I need to ask this so it becomes clear at least for myself, because of a repetitive argument. I’d appreciate if anybody can share their info.

    As you read in this article, Ansar-allah’s (Houthis) spokesperson in an interview with Houthi outlet announced firing a missile on a Saudi palace. (A known person with a name from the group or army says something about it directly in their own media)

    Do you have info on Houthis or Yemen army targeting, hitting or declare their intention/ accept responsibility of attacking/hitting civilian targets? I don’t mean unnamed source, like in case of King Khalid airport in Riyadh (which AFAIK neither Houthis nor Yemen army named this airport. An unnamed person said the missile hit it’s target). The closest I found was their announcement of targeting UAE’s unfinished nuclear power plant.
    Thank you in advance.

    • Graeme Rymill

      lol

    • BL

      Houthis never target civilians targets.

      • Graeme Rymill

        Oh yes they do…. here is a report from SABA Net, a pro-Houthi site in Yemen:

        “Urgent: Ballistic missile hits king Khalid International Airport in Riyadh
        [04/November/2017]

        SANAA, Nov 4 (Saba) – The missile force of the army and popular forces
        fired on Saturday night a long-range ballistic missile Borkan H2 on king
        Khalid International Airport in Riyadh.

        An official at the missile force told Saba that the ballistic missile hit the target accurately.”

        [ https://www.sabanews.net/en/news478527.htm ]

        Garga actually found this link a month ago and posted it. He claims that this report from SABA “is not very clear about who fired the missile.” It seems crystal clear to me!

        • BL

          They hit the runway where there was not a single individual around. Houthis don’t target civilians.

          • Graeme Rymill

            You don’t waste a missile on a runway. They are too hard to hit (too narrow) and even if you got lucky the end result is just a hole in the ground. That hole could be filled and re-surfaced in 24 hours. A scud missile has a 450 metre Circular Error probability. That means the missile has a 50% probability of hitting within a circle with a 450 metre radius with the centre of the circle the intended aiming point. That is a circle nearly a kilometre in diameter. There is therefore a 50 % chance it hits outside that circle. It could have landed anywhere including a passenger terminal. That nobody was killed was just good luck on the Saudis’ part; bad luck for the Houthis.

          • BL

            They have obtained highly accurate missile technology from Iran. The attack on the runway was meant to send a message, it wasn’t meant to cause damage, otherwise they would have launched several hundred missiles instead of just one. The point was to let the Saudis know that the Houthis possess accurate missile technology with the ability hit anywhere in Saudi.

          • Graeme Rymill

            First you say Houthis “never target civilian targets”. Then you say that they do target civilian targets but they deliberately miss. What do you make of the statement below from an Irani web site?

            “Yemen’s Houthi Ansarullah movement, which aids the country’s army in
            its fight against Saudi Arabia’s deadly military campaign, has threatened to launch more missile attacks on ports and airports in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in retaliation for the massacre of thousands of Yemenis.

            ‘All airports, ports, border crossings and areas of any importance to Saudi Arabia and the UAE will be a direct target of our weapons, which is a legitimate right,’ the Houthi political office said in a statement on Tuesday.”
            [ http://www.presstv.com/Deta… ]

            Will these future hits on civilian targets all be deliberate misses too??!! Admit it BL – the Houthis aren’t as pure as the driven snow as you like to make out.

          • BL

            Now you’re just wasting my time with semantic games. My idea of “civilian targets” is any target that involves the intentional killing of civilians, your idea of “civilian targets” is any building or location is that used by civilians. My statement was based on my definition of “civilian targets”. You’re most likely not going to change your mind anyway so I think it’s best if we just end the conversation here.

          • Graeme Rymill

            Semantics? lol… you wouldn’t know semantics if they jumped up and bit you on the arse!

            Guest what? If you target buildings or locations known to be used by civilians, such as ports and civilian airports, you will sooner or later kill civilians. This is intentional killing of civilians no matter what bullshit definitions you make up.

    • christianblood

      Very well-said! Thanks!

    • Graeme Rymill

      Funnily enough I do……

      BEIRUT, LEBANON (11:15 P.M.) – A spokesperson for the Ansar Allah-allied Yemeni Armed Forces confirmed that a ballistic missile aimed at the King Khalid international airport in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, was launched by the army, Saturday.

      The missile was reportedly intercepted by Saudi authorities and did not cause any major damage, although a large explosion was heard forcing the airport to be evacuated.

      “Our Yemeni forces succeeded in launching a missile, a Borkan H2 long distance missile, at the King Khalid international airport in north eastern Riyadh which was in response to the massacres committed by the US-Saudi coalition in Yemen. This comes in order to even out power between the coalition and Yemen, who have been attempting to fight more than one country in the past three years,” explained the Houthi spokesperson, Colonel Aziz Rashed, who was speaking from Sana’a.

      https://mobile.almasdarnews.com/article/exclusive-yemeni-army-spokesperson-confirms-long-range-missile-intercepted-saudi-arabia/

      There could well be more such attacks on civilian airports:

      “Yemen’s Houthi Ansarullah movement, which aids the country’s army in its fight against Saudi Arabia’s deadly military campaign, has threatened to launch more missile attacks on ports and airports in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in retaliation for the massacre of thousands of Yemenis.

      ‘All airports, ports, border crossings and areas of any importance to Saudi Arabia and the UAE will be a direct target of our weapons, which is a legitimate right,’ the Houthi political office said in a statement on Tuesday.”

  • Serious

    And all the hypocrites Sunnis crying “save the rhoyingas” “Save Aleppo” but they never say a damn word about Yemenis that are muslims.

    That’s exactly why sunnis are shit and loosers.

  • chris chuba

    If the Houthis were able to drop missiles at a sustained pace on Saudi targets at this range, the Saudis will be forced to negotiate a serious ceasefire and withdrawal from Yemen. This shows the strategic value of ballistic missiles and undermines the Neocon screamers who claim that they are only for nuclear warheads.

    I hope they can actually make these missiles rather than re-purpose / use what they purchased before the war.

    • Jeff Lewin

      Actually, the Saudis have been shooting down most of their missiles.

      Houthis need to pick out less-well-defended targets.

  • Floyd Hazzard

    They can’t keep firing single rockets and be serious so I think they are just playing to their domestic audience, because the way to beat anti-missile batteries is to fire swarming salvos. Some will sneak through. So, yeah…this is not about intimidation or going to the next level, it is just propaganda.

    • grok

      It’s not merely a propaganda exercise, if the missiles start doing extensive damage to saudi infrastructure.

      The question is: do they have enough of them.

  • Jeff Lewin

    Why not look for targets where Al-Saud does not have air defenses in place?

  • Tom Tom

    Oh, SHUT UP and LAUNCH already. The world will be a better place when the House of Saud is dead and gone.