• CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    7 days ago

    Are you actually asking?

    The Houthi’s are an Iranian controlled terrorist organization that have been attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea since November 2023.

    The Houthis have sunk two vessels and killed four crew members, forcing a lot of shipping to Europe to be diverted around the South of Africa.

    The US and allies have been fighting the Iranian-backed Houthis for over a decade, this is just a recent resurgence following the war in Israel.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67614911.amp

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      7 days ago

      Sure bro.

      That justified blowing up the apartment building the target’s girlfriend lived in.

      Because it doesn’t just make more Houthis every time.

      • CodeInvasion@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        7 days ago

        I never said the attack itself was justified. I only answered the question.

        A more targeted strike was possible, and it’s reprehensible that one was not chosen.

        The target himself was a legal target even by the most strict interpretation of armed conflict international law.

      • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        7 days ago

        That may be true, but there is one consistent lesson we can learn from US history.

        Don’t. Touch. The. Boats.

    • Iceman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      Claiming that the Houtis are Iranian controlled is sheer missinformation.

    • FMT99@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      Yep and it’s much easier and cheaper just to send in a bunch of drones that end up killing a few hundred innocents than to send in special forces that find the target with precision. And that in turn would be a lot easier than to stop actively funding regional genocide and try to calm the situation down diplomatically.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      It’s to make us forget about the “group chat” (see how familiar and nice it sounds too, group chat). Damage control.

      Someone else can probably explain better than me why the “group chat” is not just a group chat but a massive abuse and illegal thing to do.

      • Wildfire0Straggler3@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        edit-2
        6 days ago

        The Federal Records Act was violated several times due to the disappearing messages feature of Signal they were utilizing for their plans. Jeff Goldberg took screenshots of the messages before they were automatically deleted when all Federal Records are legally required to be preserved for archiving and may not be destroyed except under specific parameters that they obviously did not follow.

        https://www.ed.gov/about/ed-overview/required-notices/federal-records-act

        Also, by using Signal, which is a secure end to end encrypted messenger, the vulnerability that is built into the desktop sync feature where messages aren’t locally encrypted can result in enemy and adversarial nation states collecting these messages due to them being stored on an infected device which can compromise the mission and risk lives.

        They could also have their accounts and subsequently their messages hacked with their information widely publicly available to hackers.

        https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/hegseth-waltz-gabbard-private-data-and-passwords-of-senior-u-s-security-officials-found-online-a-14221f90-e5c2-48e5-bc63-10b705521fb7

        • wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 days ago

          Firendly reminder that this was the real issue with buttery males/but her emails: that Hillary Clinton was using a private email server to circumvent these laws.

          And every other US government employee that knowingly emailed to or from that server is also complicit.

          Yet another legitimate problem tossed out with the bathwater because it got associated with the maga crowd. Very handy, that.

          • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            7 days ago

            Point of order. These laws were written because of Mrs. Clinton’s server. She wasn’t circumventing shit, because the law hadn’t caught up to technology, technically it still hasn’t, but that’s a whole other kettle of fish.

            The reason it got “forgotten” is that after they wasted years and tons of money trying to find something to charge her with, they came up empty handed, since it really was just a mistake.

            • Count042@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              7 days ago

              This is bullshit. I’m old enough to remember when the Bush administration setting up their own email servers to avoid these very same exact laws was a big issue for the Democratic Party.

              • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 days ago

                They updated the laws since then. The Clinton administration was the one that passed the laws that W Bush was flirting with breaking. As far as I remember, they also didn’t actually break the established law, they just got close enough that the Dems started screaming about their precious rules and norms.

                HWBush didn’t actually have much in the way of laws binding him, but his administration didn’t bother with the Internet. Whitehouse.com was a porn site until '97-'98

    • Count042@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      7 days ago

      The Houthis are a tribe. The majority (though not all) represented tribe within the government of Ansarrallah, a government that formed during and won the civil war when Saudi Arabia tried to steal Yemen.

      Calling them Houthis is racist and makes as much sense as calling Americans ‘Kennedys’

      They have not been attacking shipping. They have been enforcing a naval blockade of a country committing genocide, something that is a legal requirement under international law. When Israel was “abiding” (or abiding as much as Israel ever abides) during the peace treaty, Ansarrallah dropped their blockade. If this is about shipping, the easiest way to stop this would be to stop applying arms to a state engaged in ethnic cleansing.

      America has never been at war with Yemen. We got sucked into supplying Intel and support and weapons to Saudi Arabia under Obama because of all three weapons purchases from Saudi Arabia.

      Finally, Iran has done very little in support of Ansarallah, in comparison to other countries that are majority Shia.

      Calling Ansarrallah Iranian controlled is about as accurate as calling Israel American-Controlled. It’s just another racist way to try to justify the murder of civilians. You know, the unjustifiable except to fascists like the person I’m responding to.

      • TheFonz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 days ago

        How do we feel about the Houthis killing civilians on trade vessels not bound for Israel?

        • Count042@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          6 days ago

          I wouldn’t know, since a single tribe (a good amount whom aren’t members of the government) hasn’t done that.

          • TheFonz@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            Oh cool. OK, how do we feel about the armed combatants from Yemen repeatedly attacking civilian trade ships not connected to Israel?