|
Darth Walrus posted:https://x.com/akbarsahmed/status/1745951279933780200?s=46&t=ARI_L-v32Oind1-d9B3a3Q I don't see what's confusing about this. One Biden administration official believes the Saudis are capable of pressuring both the Israelis and the Palestinians into making concessions in a direction the US wants. A couple other officials disagree, and are blatantly leaking their complaints and objections to the press.
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
Darth Walrus posted:https://x.com/akbarsahmed/status/1745951279933780200?s=46&t=ARI_L-v32Oind1-d9B3a3Q He’s the biggest warmongerer in the administration after Biden and Blinken.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:25
|
|
|
knox_harrington posted:Houthis attacking random It's not random. There's a very specific reason. Would you like it explained to you? (it's Israeli linked ships to cripple their already crumbling war economy so they are forced to stop committing genocide)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:28
|
|
|
BARONS CYBER SKULL posted:It's not random. There's a very specific reason. Would you like it explained to you? (it's Israeli linked ships to cripple their already crumbling war economy so they are forced to stop committing genocide) There's no proof of this, if you could provide some sort of documentation that the near decade of ship attacks are all on Israeli linked ships it would help.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:35
|
|
|
it's been heavily insinuated and outright stated a few times in this thread that the Houthis have consistently practiced piracy for years (?), and that their naval actions recently have not been attempts to help force international hands to stop the genocide of Palestinians, but merely a cover for the opportunistic self-serving piracy that they want to do and have been doing anyway. So, I went to look up Houthi piracy over the years and this is what I found: - A rocket attack on a Saudi oil tanker in 2018, minor damage, no injuries. - A rocket attack on a Turkish bulk food vessel out of a Saudi port in 2018. Unclear if the Houthis were to blame, UE NAVFOR said "Non-state Yemeni actors", so I'm assuming. Hull damage, no injuries. - One Saudi and two South Korean vessels in 2019. All were released, the Houthi movement releasing both South Korean vessels after confirming they were Korean and not Saudi, the vessels, crew, and drilling rig returned to SK. No damage, no injuries. - A Saudi cargo ship allegedly ferrying medical supplies, in 2022. Saudi Arabia says it was civilian field hospital supplies, Houthi rep says they seized weapons and other military materiel. As opposed to random acts of opportunistic piracy, it looks like the Houthis have only made any serious moves against Saudi vessels, for what should be obvious reasons. Moreover, far from being obligate pirates, the Yemenis are overwhelmingly harmed by piracy, mostly Somali in origin, on their fishing industry. The Saudis have also captured Yemeni fishing vessels and their crew, and the Saudi blockades of Yemeni waters have harmed Yemen's fishing industry to the tune of around $12 billion. Maybe there's different info out there. I don't speak Arabic so I don't have access to those sources. If you understand the attacks on Saudi vessels as having an actual political impetus (regardless of if you agree with those actions), the Houthis are responsible for -- as far as I can tell -- exactly zero acts of "random" or "opportunistic" piracy. To say they're even engaging in piracy is to stretch the definition of that word beyond its breaking point. Nothing of what the Houthis have done in the strait seems random or opportunistic. Houthis aside, Yemenis seem to be overwhelmingly the victim of opportunistic piracy. e: what timing! I will say there are absolutely additional events, but to the best of my understanding they were attacks on military vessels, not on civilian ships. PostNouveau posted:The Houthis have yet to kill anyone attacking a commercial ship? I'm not sure the Houthis have even injured anyone on a commercial ship, at least in any source I could find from before October of last year. Pentecoastal Elites fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:39
|
|
|
The Houthis have yet to kill anyone attacking a commercial ship?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:41
|
|
|
An urban area of two-million people is being starved, dehydrated, and brutally massacred, and 90% of this thread is worried about making clear that Houthis are no angels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:42
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:The Houthis have yet to kill anyone attacking a commercial ship? Everything up until that is fine, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 02:56
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:Everything up until that is fine, apparently. Have they injured anyone?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:09
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:it's been heavily insinuated and outright stated a few times in this thread that the Houthis have consistently practiced piracy for years (?), and that their naval actions recently have not been attempts to help force international hands to stop the genocide of Palestinians, but merely a cover for the opportunistic self-serving piracy that they want to do and have been doing anyway. So, I went to look up Houthi piracy over the years and this is what I found: Here's one from 2014 that came up in the USCE thread: https://thearabweekly.com/tensions-...6-0-gaNycGzNDWU
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:17
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Here's one from 2014 that came up in the USCE thread: https://thearabweekly.com/tensions-...6-0-gaNycGzNDWU Did you post the wrong one? This is the 2022 cargo ship I mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:20
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Have they injured anyone? I really don't think this is a useful question regarding Ansar Allah* missile and drone attacks. Unless you think they have the ability to reliably ensure that they damage ships with explosives without inflicting injury or death, which I'm not sure anybody does, there are only two possible conclusions. One is that they're deliberately not hitting ships, in which case there is no actual threat and also there would not be the occasional struck ship. The other is that they're just lucky, in which case the argument isn't very solid at all, because one of the missiles they are randomly hucking at essentially random ships could kill sailors tomorrow. If you give a poo poo about that possibility, you probably shouldn't be arguing for "what if they keep being lucky" as a justification. * that's the right org name, no? I find the arguments that calling them "the Houthis" is derogatory reasonably solid but it's not like I pay much attention to Yemen under normal circumstances
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:29
|
|
|
piracy attacks from boats are another critter and if they have policies to prevent fatalities there that's very good, but also profitable piracy that predates the Israeli invasion is a bit embarrassing for the more pro-AA voices, so there's some discordance there
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:31
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Have they injured anyone? Not certain - I haven't looked at all the reporting. We do know they've deprived the liberties of civilians on those ships by kidnapping them, which seems to be regularly ignored in this thread. Is the implication to your questions so long as there's nobody hurt, we can keep letting them fire rockets at ships? Do you understand why it's a bad idea to fire rockets at ships, and take their crew hostage? Can we agree that it's a bad idea to do so? Pentecoastal Elites posted:
It's a bad look when you say rocket attacks against a Turkish vessel - and the kidnapping of South Korean sailors - were not "serious moves", when by your own description they've launched strikingly similar attacks on Saudi vessels. ASIC v Danny Bro fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:33
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:Not certain - I haven't looked at all the reporting. tbh I'd much rather have a solid and successful policy of "we will seize your ship and hold your crew in safety until our demands that you cannot plausibly satisfy are satisfied" than random bomb-throwing. Historically, piracy has also led to a particular response, for excellent global economy reasons, and it *is* pretty rude to the generally exploited and uninvolved sailors to kidnap them for X amount of time. E: missed the citations for crew releases. That's a plus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:39
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:piracy attacks from boats are another critter and if they have policies to prevent fatalities there that's very good, but also profitable piracy that predates the Israeli invasion is a bit embarrassing for the more pro-AA voices, so there's some discordance there Could you please post some examples of profitable Houthi piracy that predates the israeli invasion? ASIC v Danny Bro posted:Do you understand why it's a bad idea to fire rockets at ships, and take their crew hostage? Can we agree that it's a bad idea to do so? As has been explained multiple times, the interdiction of these ships and detainment of their crew is in service of ending a genocide. I can't agree that it's a bad idea to do that, in fact it seems like its the only thing that has really drawn any sort of real attention from the "global rules-based order". It's a shame that the crew can't go home, but, again, they are operating under the responsibility to protect and that's a pretty minor inconvenience considering, you know, a literal ongoing genocide of a captive population. If you know of something that would be more effective I'd be interested to hear about it. As for the older instances of "piracy": The Turkish vessel is murky -- maybe it's translation difficulties but it looks like it was a Turkish ship that was transporting Saudi food, to or from Saudi Arabia I'm not sure. During that period the Houthis were diverting ships from Saudi ports without attacking so it may have been a case where they weren't able to divert them beforehand? Again, hard to tell. Maybe you can find a better source? The South Korean ships were assumed to be Saudi vessels by the Houthis, and were transporting a drilling rig for Saudi use. The Houthis captured all three vessels, and released the SK ships once they were confirmed to be Korean. In all of these cases the targets were Saudi or Saudi-aligned vessels. Considering the conflict I think it shows some pretty considerable restraint on the part of the Houthis that these were the only "civilian" vessels targeted, and that no one was hurt.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:48
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:I really don't think this is a useful question regarding Ansar Allah* missile and drone attacks. Unless you think they have the ability to reliably ensure that they damage ships with explosives without inflicting injury or death, which I'm not sure anybody does, there are only two possible conclusions. One is that they're deliberately not hitting ships, in which case there is no actual threat and also there would not be the occasional struck ship. The other is that they're just lucky, in which case the argument isn't very solid at all, because one of the missiles they are randomly hucking at essentially random ships could kill sailors tomorrow. If you give a poo poo about that possibility, you probably shouldn't be arguing for "what if they keep being lucky" as a justification. I have absolutely no idea what kind of missiles, warheads, targeting systems or anything else are being employed. Since you've been able to drill this down to those two possible conclusions, could you describe the weapons systems being employed and the envelopes they're employed from?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:50
|
|
|
Stringent posted:I have absolutely no idea what kind of missiles, warheads, targeting systems or anything else are being employed. Since you've been able to drill this down to those two possible conclusions, could you describe the weapons systems being employed and the envelopes they're employed from? not especially; if they can consistently figure out where crewmembers are and are dropping missiles / bombs in such a way as to neither sink the ship nor kill them then I'm wrong and their missile / drone doctrine is good and worth pursuing this is not my first rodeo on the morality of drone attacks, I think the US with its much better tech needs to err on the side of extreme conservatism re civilian casualties and doesn’t seem to, and if AA have worked it out that would be nice to know
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:55
|
|
|
Again, I don't know anything about the weapon systems, but one thing I've read about in a couple different places is that merchant vessels operate with very, very small crews. Like one of those big container ships will only have about 20 crew members. So that's probably going to be a big factor in avoiding human casualties when hitting these ships.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:03
|
|
|
To me, there are at least three separate questions here: 1) Are the USA and its allies justified, morally speaking, in their actions? No. 2) Are the Houthis good? Probably not, but I understand the sympathy for what they're doing. It's probably "legal" but it's going to cause some issues. 3) Are the USA and its allies justified under international law? It's fuckin' murky, because even if a country has a legal right to wage war (as the Houthis do as the de facto, if not de jure, leadership of Yemen), it's also permissible to respond to such acts of war. Either way, it's a loving argument about how many angels can dance on the head of a loving pin, while there's a genocide going on in Gaza. Keep your eyes on the prize, there's a big test of international law and the legitimacy of the international rules-based order going on right now and the USA's bullshit in Yemen can be dealt with in the order it arrived in the queue. The people who need our entire focus right now, are South Africa, Israel and the ICJ. We can't get distracted with some other bullshit, because the outcome of this case and the response to it will determine the moral legitimacy and future of international politics. It can't really be overstated. If some sailors die, if some Yemeni civilians die, it's a tragedy, but it pales in comparison to the importance of everything else that is going on right now, because we aren't talking about a few people dying, we're dealing with a fuckin' orchestrated genocide and the response of the international community to such.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:11
|
|
|
PE: saw your post, can't immediately look things up and the my knowledge of pre-2023 Houthi piracy is secondhand recollection anyway, consider my implication of historical piracy withdrawn unless I provide evidence otherwise. I still maintain that if they loot cargo or ransom ships during the current blockade that is both understandable and not a "we are acting exclusively out of solidarity" look 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:17
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:tbh I'd much rather have a solid and successful policy of "we will seize your ship and hold your crew in safety until our demands that you cannot plausibly satisfy are satisfied" than random bomb-throwing. Historically, piracy has also led to a particular response, for excellent global economy reasons, and it *is* pretty rude to the generally exploited and uninvolved sailors to kidnap them for X amount of time. I just don't accept that kidnapping is an acceptable action or policy, and struggle to understand how people - some in this thread - could find it acceptable or defensible. It requires us to place an incredible amount of trust into an organisation that is responsible for incredible brutality against their own people. Pentecoastal Elites posted:Could you please post some examples of profitable Houthi piracy that predates the israeli invasion? This is what I'm referring to. Attacking and capturing vessels does not show restraint. What would have been better is if they didn't launch any attacks against any vessel, at all. These are aggressive actions taken against civilians, which have been responded to appropriately. Let's be clear: -the actions of the Houthi's are not in service of ending a genocide; -the sailors have been kidnapped, not detained; -the Houthi's are not acting under a responsibility to protect. They are not the government of Yemen, they are deemed a terrorist organisation by their government (rightfully so), and because of their actions are being considered re-designated as a terrorist group by the White House. Something that would be more effective would be to: -stop launching attacks on civilian ships; -stop targetting their own civilians in war crimes; -stop the kidnap, false imprisonment, execution, use as human shields of their own civilians; -stop utilising child soldiers; You're putting a lot of trust in a brutal, horrible organisation to uphold the rule of law. PT6A posted:
2. The Houthi's are not good, by any metric. ASIC v Danny Bro fucked around with this message at 04:23 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:19
|
|
|
I already pointed out in this thread (with a source) that Israel has kidnapped nearly 3 times as many Palestinians than Ansar Allah has kidnapped civilians, which everyone just ignored, so I absolutely do not believe anyone arguing about it is doing so in good faith. It's purely a smokescreen to avoid talking about the genocide Israel is engaging in. Unless their argument is that they would support the bombing of Israel as a legitimate act of war in response to Israel's documented acts of kidnapping Palestinian civilians, in which case I suppose I don't really disagree with them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:22
|
|
|
There are almost no posters in this thread that think Israel is doing the right thing by kidnapping Palestinians for arbitrary reasons for arbitrary amounts of time, so as usual, it is the points of dispute that get discussed. hell, I seem to recall that the "should Hamas have taken hostages" dispute was settled quite rapidly at "eh, probably not but trading unjustly taken Israeli civilians for unjustly taken Palestinian civilians was understandable"
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:27
|
|
|
Google Jeb Bush posted:There are almost no posters in this thread that think Israel is doing the right thing by kidnapping Palestinians for arbitrary reasons for arbitrary amounts of time, so as usual, it is the points of dispute that get discussed. When I first opened an account back in the early 2010s, I never expected to see people on this forum to be okay with groups taking hostages and the brutality that unfolded during it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:38
|
|
|
I wonder how many people Israel will kill tomorrow?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:48
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:1. The USA and their allies are justified in bombing Houthi targets, after they were repeatedly warned to cease any future attacks. This was voted on at the UN, 11-0, with four nations abstaining. 1) The USA could equally have stopped the attacks by, at the very least negotiating with the Houthis and stopping their military support of Israel -- such support is itself unjustifiable. 2) They are belligerents fighting for a specific cause, they are no worse than anyone who engages in violence for a just cause when it could be reasonably avoided, and as I've already stated in point (1) above, they are not the only ones who could've sought a peaceful end to this situation. You can argue the merits of absolute pacifism, or speak against war in general, but I don't think it's fair to say that some specific sorts of just war are particularly unacceptable. You are upset that the consequences of a war, up to and including potential violence against yourself, are possible. That's completely understandable. That's the point of military action. They mean to prevent you from doing your job, they want to put you and your co-workers under direct threat of kidnapping and death until such time as their demands are reasonably met, and they want to force the hand of the people signing your paycheque. They want to force people to the bargaining table. They want to make you so scared that they will harm you, that you refuse to do the job you're told to do. It's not an accident, it's their intention, and they aren't completely wrong to do it (again, unless you subscribe to the idea that absolute pacifism is the only moral choice).
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:51
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:-the actions of the Houthi's are not in service of ending a genocide; Ok, could you walk me through this one? Because the Houthi media statements have been quite vehement in their demand for the end of the genocide in Gaza. To the point that after the most recent airstrikes they released a statement saying (heavy paraphrasing here) they're glad they're being bombed, and have been ashamed that while the people of Gaza are being bombed they aren't. So that makes my question, if their only interest is in kidnapping and piracy, why the anti-genocide rhetoric? Why announce a position on Gaza at all? To whitewash their real goal of piracy? Everyone the ships belong to are pro-Israel or Saudi, aren't they? I just don't see any information that supports that claim, so I guess if you've got some more information about Houthi internal politics I'd really be curious to hear it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 04:57
|
|
|
When I first joined these forums shortly after 9/11, I fully expected posters to ignore the daily mass killings of civilians and eventually a genocide by US and allies while constantly harping on the arguable badness of any small act of resistance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:05
|
|
|
PT6A posted:1) The USA could equally have stopped the attacks by, at the very least negotiating with the Houthis and stopping their military support of Israel -- such support is itself unjustifiable. Once again this had been happening for a decade, why do you believe they are suddenly doing this to fight Israel? Why do these genociders get believed despite all evidence for the contrary.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:09
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:I just don't accept that kidnapping is an acceptable action or policy, and struggle to understand how people - some in this thread - could find it acceptable or defensible. To be clear my point is not that "the Houthis are angels", but that they are acting against the genocide of Palestinians. You seem to be trying to make the point because they are "bad" or are deemed a terrorist organization by the same people who are ignoring or abetting the genocide that they cannot possibly be doing something in the service of Palestine. Even, it seems, cynically! I do not think a more effective way of forcing international action on the genocide of Palestinians is for the Houthis to mind their own business. I don't think that because the Houthis are trying to disrupt trade in order to put some kind of pressure on the international community about Gaza the United States is justified in dropping bombs on them. If you have any evidence that the Houthis are doing this randomly or opportunistically, or that they have a history of random opportunistic piracy please post it here. "The Houthis are bad therefore everything they do is bad and can never be good for any reason" is not a very compelling argument. socialsecurity posted:Once again this had been happening for a decade, why do you believe they are suddenly doing this to fight Israel? Why do these genociders get believed despite all evidence for the contrary. Could you please post any evidence of the Houthis engaging in random or opportunistic piracy?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:12
|
|
|
Stringent posted:Ok, could you walk me through this one? Because the Houthi media statements have been quite vehement in their demand for the end of the genocide in Gaza. To the point that after the most recent airstrikes they released a statement saying (heavy paraphrasing here) they're glad they're being bombed, and have been ashamed that while the people of Gaza are being bombed they aren't. I find it incredibly difficult to take at face value an org - whose flag contains "Death to Israel, A curse upon the Jews" - when they make claims about Israel or Jews. Probably not the answer you're looking for, but I just can't. 386-SX 25Mhz VGA posted:constantly harping on the arguable badness of any small act of resistance. lol. lmao, even.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:15
|
|
|
Doesn’t the US Navy and Coast Guard interdict vessels and confiscate/sell poo poo like literally all the time?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:16
|
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:Did you post the wrong one? This is the 2022 cargo ship I mentioned. Yes I did, my bad. I was trying to post this one: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/11/us/politics/us-houthi-missile-strikes.html It's an article from this year but mentions that the US attacked Houthis in 2106 after they had attacked military and civilian ships. Not 2014. Mia culpa, I was phone posting and not reading things as closely as I should have. So it's some evidence of Houthis attacking ships before 2018, but it's incredibly light on details. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 06:03 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:17
|
|
|
I know this is going to sound glib, but I genuinely think it's the truth: We're so desensitized by our own governments' selfish nihilism that we can't fathom another nation's leaders having anything approaching integrity or morals. They wrote the closest thing to "gently caress Israel" into their flag without just writing "gently caress Israel", I think we can trust their word on this. The annoying thing is that whatever exists within Yemen's heart of hearts doesn't matter. The impact of their actions doesn't become greater if they truly feel it deep within themselves. It's just meaningless chatter to lampshade a country doing more than ourselves to stop a genocide. Crab Bucket thought. Neurolimal fucked around with this message at 05:21 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:18
|
|
|
386-SX 25Mhz VGA posted:Doesn’t the US Navy and Coast Guard interdict vessels and confiscate/sell poo poo like literally all the time? my understanding is 1) AA has not been operating its, ahem, coast guard activities within strictly Yemeni territorial waters 2) transiting ships are exempt unless otherwise noted but yes there might be a plausible argument for some ships to be legally boarded getting struck with explosive munitions is an untraditional coast guard response though E: I also happen to take an extremely broad view of what represents a state-adjacent actor but in this case I think "AA is basically a state actor" aligns with the general consensus Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 05:26 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:20
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:Yes I did, my bad. I was trying to post this one: Can you point out where you see that in the article? I don't see that or any mention of 2016. Neurolimal posted:I know this is going to sound glib, but I genuinely think it's the truth: We're so desensitized by our own governments' selfish nihilism that we can't fathom another nation's leaders having anything approaching integrity or morals. I think this is true. It isn't "The Houthis are the singular shining point of pure angelic righteous justice in a world of darkness" but "even the loving Houthis have this poo poo figured out"
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:23
|
|
|
ASIC v Danny Bro posted:I find it incredibly difficult to take at face value an org - whose flag contains "Death to Israel, A curse upon the Jews" - when they make claims about Israel or Jews. Probably not the answer you're looking for, but I just can't. You find it incredibly difficult to take at face value an organization whose flag contains "Death to Israel, A curse upon the Jews" is attacking Israeli shipping as an act of solidarity with the Palestinians? I'm not looking for any specific answer, just something I can understand, and I don't understand that answer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:27
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Once again this had been happening for a decade, why do you believe they are suddenly doing this to fight Israel? Why do these genociders get believed despite all evidence for the contrary. If this has indeed been happening for a decade, then why is it that specifically now ships are diverting round the Cape of Good Hope, and why is it specifically now that the US is launching direct military action against the Houthis rather than relying on a proxy? it doesn't make common sense. EDIT: And I should like to say: I don't support what they're doing. I think it's ultimately a poor choice if for no other reason than it's convinced people to bomb them and it's accomplished gently caress all in achieving their desired outcome. What they're doing is an act of war, the response is an act of war (also justified), and I think we need altogether less war. But I don't think for a moment what they're doing is a illegitimate act of war. PT6A fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 05:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:10 |
|
|
Pentecoastal Elites posted:Can you point out where you see that in the article? I don't see that or any mention of 2016. It's the last paragraph NYT posted:Thursday night’s strikes were the biggest U.S. attack against the Houthis in nearly a decade. In 2016, the United States struck three Houthi missile sites with Tomahawk cruise missiles after the Houthis fired on Navy and commercial vessels. The Houthis’ attacks stopped afterward.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 06:05
|
|