• Nobody@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    They got a pass for taking pot shots at Israel, because that’s an internal regional conflict. Shooting at civilian trade ships in one of the most important shipping lanes on the planet is a completely different thing. We’re not watching gas prices skyrocket, a resurgent Russia, a global economic downturn, etc. just because some religious fanatics are throwing a temper tantrum.

    The Houthis were warned repeatedly to cut that shit out, and they didn’t listen. These are the consequences.

    • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Ansar Allah have said explicitly that they are attempting to enforce a Naval blockade in the Red Sea against Israel. They have also stated that they believe under international law they are obligated to do whatever they can to prevent genocide.

      I don’t see any reason why they can’t be negotiated with. Calling them “religious fanatics” that are “throwing a temper tantrum” is just a silly way to dismiss non violent solutions to the conflict.

      Biden’s decision to threaten and subsequently bomb them is just plain arrogant belligerence. The US backed campaign to bomb and starve out the Houthis didn’t work previously so why does Biden think it’ll work now?

      • Nobody@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Firstly, the Houthi flag includes the words, “Death to America.” These are not rational actors. They are fanatic jihadis and all attempts to reason with them have failed. Acting like the Houthis are the same as a regular nation state is borderline intellectually dishonest.

        If they have a problem with Israel, keep firing at Israel. If they want a problem with the rest of the world, keep firing at our CIVILIAN ships. Firing at those ships is an act of war, and it was going to provoke a response.

        Biden waited a very long time to act, which emboldened Iran to take an oil tanker. That move virtually guaranteed a response, and it’s good that the response was limited to Yemen. Biden is playing the cards he’s been dealt, and he’s playing them reasonably.

        Also, it should be mentioned that the Houthis themselves said the casualties were ~5 dead and 6 wounded. Warming was given far in advance so they could evacuate and minimize casualties. If Biden had wanted to play dirtier, he could have. A deliberate decision was made to minimize civilian casualties. If the positions were reversed, the Houthis would nuke Tel Aviv, DC, and every other major city in both the US and Israel.

        • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Marg bar amrika

          You’re more mad about the treats getting delayed than the genocide our government is enabling.

  • n2burns@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Can someone explain to me how this is “A Breach of Yemeni Sovereignty”? It seems like these actions are supported by the internationally recognized government in Yemen. (I’m not asking about the validity of these actions, or the horrendous effects of them; just the sovereignty question)

    Also, is this the interviewee? It appears she is a language and literacy assistant professor who happens to be Yemeni American, not an expert on the Yemen war, international law, or anything else relevant to these events.

    • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      The internationally recognized government does not have control over the populated regions of the country. It’s a farce to pretend they represent the Yemeni people.

      • n2burns@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s not really an answer to my question. “Control” does not get you sovereignty, and neither does “representing the people”. It comes down to governance and international recognition. Mexican cartels control large areas of the country, but no one is arguing they have sovereignty. Similarly, there are many repressive regimes in the world that do not represent their people, but they maintain their sovereignty.

        • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The issue is that the sovereignty of nation states is a somewhat nonsensical idea that has little to no solid philosophical backing. Nations aren’t living things and shouldn’t have rights in the same way people have. They are imaginary constructs, and the consequences of this are inevitable debates over what is or is not a nation. But there is no clear dividing line or definition—and in this ambiguity, powerful nations are free to recognize or ignore nations as they choose.

          • n2burns@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            That doesn’t answer my question either. I wasn’t the one who brought up sovereignty, it was the article. It seems to ridiculous to say, this is “A Breach of Yemeni Sovereignty” but no one seems to able to assert the Houthis have sovereignty to start with.

          • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            None of which matters as the Houthis committed Acts of War and were idiots not to accept this would be the response when flat out told it would be.

          • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            I look at it more like this.

            If you treat the Houthis as a non-sovereign entity, they can be attacked freely under international law by the international community as pirates.

            If you treat the Houthis as a sovereign entity, they can be attacked under international law by affected nations as the attacks can be interpreted as an act of war.

            So it doesn’t really matter if they are sovereign or not.

            • n2burns@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              It matters because if the Houthis are a non-sovereign entity, then POTUS can order an attack under prior congressional approvals. However, if they are a Sovereign State, then attacking them would be an act of war, requiring congressional approval.

              • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                If the issue is with American law instead of international law, then you need to use the American list of recognized sovereign nations. Does the USA recognize the Houthis as leading a sovereign nation?

        • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Your analogy falls flat because while powerful cartels are rarely looking to supplant state control. Instead they seek state complicity which is a different thing altogether.

          Ansar Allah on the other hand has set up its own governance structures. As I said, most of the populated regions of Yemen are governed under these structures. That’s despite a US backed campaign to bomb and starve them out over most of the last decade.

          If the US doesn’t want to recognize the sovereignty of the Ansar Allah led Yemeni government then the US concept of sovereignty is effectively meaningless.

          • n2burns@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Your analogy falls flat because while powerful cartels are rarely looking to supplant state control. Instead they seek state complicity which is a different thing altogether.

            Okay, what about IS? Did they have Sovereignty?

            If the US doesn’t want to recognize the sovereignty of the Ansar Allah led Yemeni government then the US concept of sovereignty is effectively meaningless.

            If you/anyone else thinks sovereignty is meaningless, that’s fine but it’s not what I asked about. My original question was how this is “A breach of sovereignty”? You don’t seem to be arguing why it is a breach of sovereignty.

            • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              Again that’s a terrible analogy. ISIS was an international insurgency that went so far as to explicitly reject the very concept of modern day nation states. Of course they didn’t deserve to be treated as a sovereign power.

              Conversely Ansar Allah is a domestic organization. It’s commonly referred to as the Houthi movement because it has many leaders who are Houthis, a Yemeni tribe. They rose to power after the previous Yemeni government faced a crisis of legitimacy during the Arab spring.

            • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m not? The US is using an incoherent notion of sovereignty that just so happens to align with their geopolitical interests. Sorry if that’s a hard truth for you to accept.

    • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      these actions are supported by the internationally recognized government in Yemen.

      Do you mean the US attacks are supported by tye Yemen government? Do you have a source for that handy?

      And great investigation into the interviewee, that kind of critical thinking is extremely important.

    • naturalgasbad@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is the same “international recognition” that doesn’t consider Taiwan to be a legitimate government?

      International recognition isn’t worth shit. Ansarallah has de facto control over the vast majority of Yemen’s territory. Just as the ROC is the government of Taiwan, Ansarallah is the government of Yemen.

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Ansar Allah movement controls the territory where 80% of Yemeni population lives and enjoys mass public support. The fact that burger empire and its vassals refuse to recognize sovereignty and right to self determination of other nations just further exposes the moral bankruptcy of the west.

    • bamboo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      This one was though. The US is bombing Yemen for daring to oppose US hegemony in the region. The US could have just not bombed them.

      • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        false. The were bombed for being stupid and attacking commercial interests of better equipped militaries.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think you misunderstand. People are responsible for their own actions, broadly speaking. The only people at fault for the US dropping bombs on Yemen are the people who chose to do so, and every military member “just following orders” beneath them who actually executed it.

          • TigrisMorte@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            The responsible parties acted responsibly by blowing the hell out of the irrational idiots. So, yup 100% responsible for keeping the shipping lanes safe. Glad you understand. Now go explain it to the idiots and such totally expectable results may be avoided.

    • intelshill@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Almost like the US has a hard on for the Middle East. Coinciding with the end of the Cold War.

      I wonder why…

  • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Israel: bombs and invades Palestine Palestine fighting back is wrong.

    Yemen: bombs ships serving Israel America fighting back is... right?

    I feel bad for American voters. The last time military action was taken without congressional approval it led to a 20 year war resulting in a million dead Iraqis and the Taliban government back in power in Afghanistan (among other completely preventable atrocities, like this).

    The hypnotism of American exceptionalism is requiring an almost lethal dose of ignorance to continue to work.

    • possibly a cat@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Yemen hasn’t bombed any commerce vessels. They did launch a few missiles and drones in the vicinity of US military vessels that were interfering with their enforcement, although they didn’t hit anything.

      Yemen did reportedly hit aircraft during the first bombing run. In the event those produced any casualties, their air defenses will have drawn more blood in one night than 2 months of their maritime patrols (1 > 0).

      • intelshill@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Two USN sailors reportedly went “missing” off the coast of Somalia (which, coincidentally, is also off the coast of Yemen).

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Who is arguing that Israel fighting back is wrong? Almost everyone recognizes that Israel has the right to self defense, but most people who think that also believes their response is at least disproportionate.

      • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Who is arguing that Israel fighting back is wrong?

        Most of the world thinks that. They would also take issue with you characterizing what Israel is doing as “fighting back” and “self defense”. Self-defense is when you steal land, ethnically cleanse the inhabitants, force them into a small area, then besiege them there for decades, and then blow the whole place up. You know, because some of them dared take up arms and broke out. Self-defense.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          would also take issue with you characterizing what Israel is doing as “fighting back” and “self defense”.

          Literally in the next sentence I make it obvious I don’t believe this is the case. And this is upvoted. Amazing how irrational people can be.

        • S_204@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          What a wild distortion of history here. You seem to be completely ignoring the many times the Arab Nations have attacked Israel, and lost. You’re also ignoring the land Israel has returned when peace agreements have been made or their various attempts to negotiate peace based on the borders established when the mandate was lifted.

          I guess the fact that numerous neighbors of theirs have spent decades calling for the death of Jews and acting on it doesn’t really mean much in the grand scheme of things when it comes to a country defending itself…

          You also seem to have overlooked the nearly 1 million Jews who had their homes stolen and were forced out of their countries of residents in the 40s and 50s when they were told to go to Israel where they belong. Let’s not let history or facts get in the way of a good oppressor narrative.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Holy shit you’re actually arguing that rampaging over a border and killing civilians at random is not attacking someone.

          Ya sound as dumb as the people trying to argue that Israel has the right to do what they are doing right now.

    • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Palestine: bombs, invades and terrorizes Israel, Israel fighting back is right.

      Yemen: bombs ships serving the whole world, American-lead coalition fighting back is right.

      ftfy

      • Krause [he/him]@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Yemen: bombs ships serving the whole world

        Only ships that are zionist-owned and/or bound for Israel are targeted, Russian and Chinese ships for example are going through normally.

          • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Saree also identified the first vessel as the Unity Explorer, which is owned by a British firm that includes Dan David Ungar, who lives in Israel, as one of its officers. The Number 9 is linked to Bernhard Schulte Shipmanagement. Managers for the two vessels could not be immediately reached for comment.

            Israeli media identified Ungar as being the son of Israeli shipping billionaire Abraham “Rami” Ungar.

            https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/u-s-navy-destroyer-and-multiple-commercial-ships-attacked-in-the-red-sea-pentagon-says

            However, ownership details in public shipping databases associated the ship’s owners with Ray Car Carriers, which was founded by Abraham “Rami” Ungar, who is known as one of the richest men in Israel.

            https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/yemens-houthi-rebels-hijack-israeli-linked-ship-in-the-red-sea-take-crew-hostage

            Just from a quick search. Where did you get your info from? Or did you think that all Barbados flagged ships are owned by people that live full time in Barbados?

            • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              So the ships aren’t linked to Israel but companies that own the ships have Israeli citizens somewhere in their higher structure? Or are in some nebulous and unspecified way linked to Israeli citizens? Like neither of those sources even tried to claim the ships even did business in Israel.

              What’s next? Shaking hands with a Israeli will get you attacked by pirates?

              • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                Instead of using all the logical fallacies you do to avoid learning something that violates your bias, just be intellectualy honest and say “I believe Israel is above the law and they need to be protected at all costs. No other lives are as valuable as Israeli lives” cuz bruh, Yemen attacking a ship owned by the firm of Israel’s richest person is a long shot from

                What’s next? Shaking hands with a Israeli will get you attacked by pirates?

                and you know this. Quit playing yourself. Who are you fighting for, anyway?

                • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  If you read your own source that ship wasn’t owned by that Israeli guy, it’s affiliated with him somehow according to the houthies but I can’t find any connection to the guy when looking around online.

                  The first source just straight up said it wasn’t an Israeli ship but a British one but one officer was Israeli.

                  I’m not sure what fallacies you are talking about but I think Israel should absolutely be sanctioned and pressured however possible to stop their genocide. The houthies are only doing piracy on random ship and doing nothing to stop Israel, just using the distraction to justify piracy.

        • zephyreks@lemmy.mlM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          If you’re going to make a low-effort comment asking someone to read, at least make an effort to cite something for them to read.

  • citizen@normalcity.life
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    “Yemen has been targeted by U.S. military action and bombings over the last four American presidencies — of George W. Bush, Barack Obama, Donald Trump, now Joe Biden.”

    Red and blue are the same party, stop voting for them.

    • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Red wants my friends dead, I have little choice but to ensure blue wins the presidency while I work for local change. Not voting is not an option.

      • citizen@normalcity.life
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Both red and blue wants people in the middle east dead. Instead of picking a group of dead people over another what about voting for someone that isn’t a fucking murderer?

        • _NoName_@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I’m not going to morally grandstand, I’m going to look out for the people I care about. You wanna throw your vote away to make a point, be my guest.

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    It should be a no-brainer to support the continuation of cheap and efficient global trade regardless of your politics. Houthis should have kept their missiles on land if they didn’t want the US navy showing up

    • intelshill@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      It should be a no-brainer to not fund and ship weapons to a state committing a genocide, and yet here we are.

      • S_204@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        At the end of this next year, there will be more Palestinians on this planet than there were last year. That’s the reality of the situation. We’re about to have the world’s first genocide where the population grew… The people of Gaza are a large portion of Palestinians, they have genocidal leadership who are clearly intent on attacking their neighbors until they’re all dead. They’ve said so recently, yet it’s not really working out for them it appears.

        Gazans should join their brothers in Jordan, they’ll be better off under a kingdom that doesn’t want them than they are in the democratic society they’ve built for themselves. They don’t really seem capable of self government given they are overwhelmingly in support of their current ‘leaders’ who openly say they are not responsible for the well being of the citizens.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        How many of the attacked cargo ships were transporting weapons? And what, cargo ships transporting Russian oil are just fair game for NATO to blow up now because they’re funding genocide?

        • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          yes, but the Russians have nukes so actually no. If you have nukes you basically get to do what you want and the other great powers don’t get to attack you. If you don’t have nukes you don’t get that privilege

          • Truck_kun@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Hundreds to thousands of nukes, mostly yes. one to tens of, not so much. People don’t want nukes to be used, but having a supply of 20 nukes or so would not get the world to let you do whatever you wanted.

            And at a certain point, even the hundreds to thousands may still lead to war, if pressing too hard.

    • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      “No brainer” is exactly how I would describe a person who think this is a good idea.