|
Is it not inconceivable that the US can bomb the Houthis caches of drones and missiles to the point where they can't meaningfully threaten Red Sea shipping at least for a while? I mean I think that's the US goal after all. But I wonder what exactly the plan is because I'm guessing Iran will just try to re-supply them and that's probably done by ships so will the US have to sink those ships too?
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 06:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
i say swears online posted:everyone gets mad at the houthis but when cloud, tifa and aeris threatened to chop off don corneo's penis in order to save sector 7 they were heroes Pretty sure nobody would be mad if the Houthis were just threatening to chop off Netanyahu or Biden's penises.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 06:33
|
|
|
saudi arabia calls for restraint aftter strikes on yemen lol, stupidest timeline
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 06:38
|
|
|
If Suez traffic does end up effectively shut down for a long enough period of time with no real negotiation progress, an Egyptian ground invasion of the coastal areas where you can easily shoot at passing ships doesn't seem impossible. It probably wouldn't draw much international condemnation, and there's an argument that it would be profitable for Egypt if the alternative is minimal canal traffic. Egypt's entire normal peacetime military budget is around $5b/year, and they normally get ~$10b/year in canal fees they'd be missing out on. You could also probably get a bunch of money/weapons from developed companies as long as you phrased it as a limited military action to protect canal traffic instead of a indefinite annexation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 06:50
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Is it not inconceivable that the US can bomb the Houthis caches of drones and missiles to the point where they can't meaningfully threaten Red Sea shipping at least for a while? I mean I think that's the US goal after all. But I wonder what exactly the plan is because I'm guessing Iran will just try to re-supply them and that's probably done by ships so will the US have to sink those ships too?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 07:07
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:If Suez traffic does end up effectively shut down for a long enough period of time with no real negotiation progress, an Egyptian ground invasion of the coastal areas where you can easily shoot at passing ships doesn't seem impossible. It probably wouldn't draw much international condemnation, and there's an argument that it would be profitable for Egypt if the alternative is minimal canal traffic. Egypt's entire normal peacetime military budget is around $5b/year, and they normally get ~$10b/year in canal fees they'd be missing out on. You could also probably get a bunch of money/weapons from developed companies as long as you phrased it as a limited military action to protect canal traffic instead of a indefinite annexation. Much more likely that the US just keeps bombing ballistic launch vehicles when it sees them. They’re big and probably fairly easy to spot, and Houthi-Iranian drones are probably good training target practice for fighters. Pirate speedboats will not be as large an issue compared to Somalia — the Yemeni coastline controlled by the Houthis is small and the Red Sea is much smaller and the shipping lanes far more confined, unlike Somalia where pirates were striking hundreds of miles offshore. Also impressive that anyone ITT still thinks the Houthis randomly attacking Pakistani and Turkish and Egyptian shipping has anything at all to do with support for Gaza. The kidnapped Filipino and E European crew of Galaxy Leader are still being held hostage, for the crime of working on a massive ship going between like, Greece and India, of which an Israeli guy owned a small part of the holding company.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 09:57
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Much more likely that the US just keeps bombing ballistic launch vehicles when it sees them. They’re big and probably fairly easy to spot, and Houthi-Iranian drones are probably good training target practice for fighters. Pirate speedboats will not be as large an issue compared to Somalia — the Yemeni coastline controlled by the Houthis is small and the Red Sea is much smaller and the shipping lanes far more confined, unlike Somalia where pirates were striking hundreds of miles offshore. Why do you bring up Turkish shipping? 701 Turkish vessels have shipped 2 million tons to Israel as Gaza is being bombed. Some of those are by companies tied to the Turkish president and his family.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 10:22
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:If Suez traffic does end up effectively shut down for a long enough period of time with no real negotiation progress, an Egyptian ground invasion of the coastal areas where you can easily shoot at passing ships doesn't seem impossible. It probably wouldn't draw much international condemnation, and there's an argument that it would be profitable for Egypt if the alternative is minimal canal traffic. Egypt's entire normal peacetime military budget is around $5b/year, and they normally get ~$10b/year in canal fees they'd be missing out on. You could also probably get a bunch of money/weapons from developed companies as long as you phrased it as a limited military action to protect canal traffic instead of a indefinite annexation. i do not believe that the egyptians have the military capacity to run an occupation of yemen for any period of time. the sunni gulf coalition tried to do this under much more favourable geographic circumstances and with rather relaxed rules of engagement, leading to the deaths by starvation of many, many thousands of yemenis. i really don't believe that the egyptians are that much more competent Saladman posted:Also impressive that anyone ITT still thinks the Houthis randomly attacking Pakistani and Turkish and Egyptian shipping has anything at all to do with support for Gaza. please propose your alternative explanation which is so obviously superior that all official statements and rationales can be trivially discarded as misinformation
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 10:40
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:please propose your alternative explanation which is so obviously superior that all official statements and rationales can be trivially discarded as misinformation
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 11:30
|
|
|
There's not infinite pirates, nor speedboats, nor missiles, especially with the lion's share of Iranian production going to Russia. A targeted bombing campaign and naval patrols may not 100% stop attacks but they'd definitely drastically reduce the frequency and severity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 11:44
|
|
|
Governments/regimes lie all the time to appeal to the public. The US didn't invade Iraq to find WMDs/bring democracy, just because it said what it was doing. The most likely explanation is - just like all other situations where a small or regional power starts kicking up a local crisis (North Korea, Venezuela/Guyana, etc), that the Houthis are doing this because they want concessions. They spotted a weak link in the chain of global commerce and a way by which for a relatively low cost in men and materials, they can inflict disproportionate economic costs internationally, and do so in a manner that will be difficult for a distracted/declining US to militarily stop. As such, like most regional powers who kick up a fuss (although in this case they likely understand they will have to accept some US bombs and airstrikes for appearances sake), they hope the US will see the costs rising, and offer them a deal with concessions to reign in their attacks. Removing/lessening sanctions for one, access to transit tolls, etc. The claims that this is being done to stop the genocide is because it provides an effective fig leaf for their actions - it plays extremely well with their domestic and regional public and has people here and elsewhere handing it to them as principled resistance fighters, and rejecting the framing of them as opportunistic or pirates. Honestly, if the US didn't move an inch on Israel, but offered big enough direct concessions to them (sanctions removal, billions in aid, etc), I suspect the rhetoric would be quietly dropped. As for the motive of its Iranian backers/suppliers - they want to disrupt and destablise the region. They have other, more direct ways of hurting Israel, but don't. Iran's target isn't Israel - its their Arab rivals and the West. It seems weird how some people who are highly cynical in most other political areas become extremely credulous when it comes to certain topics/governments. I don't think its conscious double standards or anything, but more wishful thinking - enough people WANT someone to step in and stop the genocide in Gaza that when someone actually says they are, people latch onto it. I guess it comes down to whether you want to believe or not. I say this as I suspect this strategy will work - the US may be able to destroy various targets and degrade their ability to threaten shipping, but I doubt it will work in the long-term. The US won't want to commit forces indefinitely to this, and can't provide 100% security to all ships passing through, so after bombing them for a while, some kind of arrangement or understanding (even if its a backroom deal) may eventually be offered.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 12:49
|
|
|
MBS and the Saudis are the only ones benefitting from this. Plenty of innocent Yemeni civilans are going to suffer and its going to achieve nothing in regards to Gaza. Nevermind any severe external negative effects like what will happen to already desperately struggling poor people in Egypt with its budget blown up by losing canal fees.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 14:11
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Why do you bring up Turkish shipping? 701 Turkish vessels have shipped 2 million tons to Israel as Gaza is being bombed. Some of those are by companies tied to the Turkish president and his family. Because the Houthis are also attacking Turkish shipping. The first ship they attacked and kidnapped the crew of was sailing from Turkey to India, presumably carrying Turkish goods. The other big news ship that was attacked (St Nikolas) was carrying fuel from Basra to Turkey, although I misremembered, that one was attacked off Oman and probably by Iranians directly. VVV: polite of them to have attacked it after it already unloaded its cargo in Turkey, I guess. I’m surprised it would sail empty, but I don’t know anything about shipping. Saladman fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Jan 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 15:11
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Because the Houthis are also attacking Turkish shipping. https://www.tradewindsnews.com/casualties/ray-car-carriers-ship-reported-hijacked-in-red-sea/2-1-1557261 quote:Ray Car Carriers is registered in the Isle of Man and is owned by Israel’s Abraham “Rami” Ungar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Iran wants to be a giant pain in the rear end without directly risking their navy getting sunk again this is an explanation which only serves to further complicate the motivations here without accounting for any of the observations in question for this to be plausible you would have to demonstrate that iran is directly controlling the houthis to the degree where they themselves have no effective agency and also you have to show why iran would want to do this, which self-evidently has nothing to do with the ongoing war in gaza
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2024 18:16
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:this is an explanation which only serves to further complicate the motivations here without accounting for any of the observations in question Can you demonstrate that the discount taliban actually have any interest in what's happening in Gaza, other than claiming they do
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:15
|
|
|
surely the houthis being used as a pawn in a proxy conflict between iran and egypt passes Occam's Razor here instead, something which they do not claim, which makes it truer
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:18
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Can you demonstrate that the discount taliban actually have any interest in what's happening in Gaza, other than claiming they do I'm curious too, since they've been attacking shipping in the area since 2015 or so, even using mines.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:19
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Can you demonstrate that the discount taliban actually have any interest in what's happening in Gaza, other than claiming they do there's usually some (though admittedly often rather peripheral) connection between the ships they target and israel, there's a strong current of palestinian solidarity in yemenese politics (and indeed in arab politics writ large) and the palestinian cause is important to the legitimacy of revolutionary islamic organisations more generally also i think that when someone says "i am doing x for y reason, specifically, if you want me to stop doing x you have to give me y" it makes thinking that there is some connection between x and y reasonable unless there's a compelling and specific reason to believe otherwise, rather than the other way around V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 00:26 on Jan 13, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:22
|
|
|
for instance, when the americans say that they're bombing yemen to try to stop the attacks on red sea shipping, i think that they would in fact stop bombing yemen if there were credible noises made by the houthis that they would stop attacking red sea shipping but i'm admittedly very naive in this way, it may be more intuitive to assume that this is all due to taiwanese-jordanian rivalries with the americans acting as a proxy
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 00:25
|
|
|
I think that most likely the Houthi leadership's motivation is multifaceted and a combination of: - Genuine sympathy for people in Gaza. I think they probably view Palestinian civilians as 'on their team' as far as human tribalism goes and do care that they're being killed - Some solidarity with Hamas as a fellow revolutionary Islamic theocratic group. I think the Houthi's would be less sympathetic if Fatah was still in charge of Gaza, and more sympathetic if Hamas were Shia instead of Sunni (and also if Hamas hadn't endorsed Saudi attacks against the Houthis back in 2015) - Attacking ships and saying it's about Gaza is domestically popular in Yemen and shores up their local support. It doesn't really matter that the claims about ships being linked to Israel don't actually hold up to scrutiny. - Hijacking ships and taking the cargo is profitable and a way to reward their supporters. The ships themselves and the crews can be ransomed off later for more profit - Attacking the ships gives them international prestige (not in the "People like us" sense, in the "We are an important group and major nations have to care about what we think/do" sense). That also feeds back into domestic support because people like feeling their country/government is important - It's also probably an ego boost for the leaders making the decisions - Retaliatory airstrikes also probably help Houthi leadership's domestic support, so that isn't much of a real political cost. The things weighing against it are stuff like: - Moral opposition to injuring/killing/kidnapping ship crews (Filipinos/Chinese/Indian/Eastern Europeans mostly) and stealing/destroying stuff owned by big international companies. I don't think the Houthi's care very much about that. - Using up weapon stockpiles or having them destroyed by airstrikes - Low level Houthi soldiers killed in failed attacks or airstrikes - Risk of airstrikes actually killing you personally or people you know - Risk of someone actually doing a ground invasion There's a lot of reasons why they'd want to keep attacking, and not very strong ones why they'd stop.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 03:25
|
|
|
There's also the prospect that if this blockade is successful it gets them a seat at the table. Something they've been denied by the international community, despite as of long being the de-factor rulers of a majority of the parts of Yemen that matter. There's a number of economic and political interests that could theoretically be met by the west, without souring relations with Iran, if only someone was willing to negotiate with them. As long as they can credibly disrupt shipping, they have a lot of leverage.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 12:32
|
|
|
Saladman posted:Because the Houthis are also attacking Turkish shipping. Shipping is very complicated. The Houthis are probably attacking the ships based on Iranian intelligence. On November 19, 2023, the Galaxy Leader was in ballast on a journey from Körfez, Turkey to Pipavav, India when it was hijacked by the Houthis in the Red Sea near the Yemeni port city of Hodeida.[7][8][9] The ship's registered owner is Galaxy Maritime Ltd., a company registered in the Isle of Man, and its flag state is the Bahamas; at the time of its seizure, the ship was chartered by the Japanese shipping company Nippon Yūsen K.K.[9][10] Galaxy Maritime Ltd. is owned by Ray Car Carriers, co-owned by Israeli businessman Abraham Ungar.[10] Abraham "Rami" Ungar (Hebrew: רמי אונגר, born 12 October 1946)[1] is an Israeli shipping businessman. He graduated from Tel Aviv University with a degree in law in 1971, and the following year, he founded Ray Car, Ltd.[1] As such he is the partial owner of the vehicle carrier Galaxy Leader, which was hijacked by Houthi militants in the Red Sea on November 19, 2023, during the 2023 Israel-Hamas war.[2][3] A shipping and construction magnate, he was listed by Haaretz in 2019 as one of the 20 richest men in Israel.[4] Forbes Israel put his net worth at USD 3.25 billion in its 2022 list of 100 richest Israelis.[5]
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 13:09
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:There's also the prospect that if this blockade is successful it gets them a seat at the table. Something they've been denied by the international community, despite as of long being the de-factor rulers of a majority of the parts of Yemen that matter. There's a number of economic and political interests that could theoretically be met by the west, without souring relations with Iran, if only someone was willing to negotiate with them. Yeah. This holds true whether you believe they're doing it because they are brotherly comrades who just want to stop a genocide, or because they are opportunists who want to extract concessions and are using Gaza as political cover and/or PR for their cause, or somewhere else along the spectrum of these two ends. They don't have much power/voice and this is one of the few levers they can pull on that inflicts disproportionate economic pain and gets them international attention and potential concessions. What particular concessions you think they ultimately want (stopping genocide in Gaza, or economic/political ones) can't really be decisively proven either way at this point, which is why it keeps going round in circles in this and other threads. At this point your answer depends on what you want to believe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 13:55
|
|
|
Re: why ISIS attacks Iran and not the US. I've generally seen the difference in strategy of ISIS and Al Qaeda explained as focusing on the "near enemy" versus the "far enemy". https://www.brookings.edu/articles/isis-vs-al-qaeda-jihadisms-global-civil-war/
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 17:38
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Can you demonstrate that the discount taliban actually have any interest in what's happening in Gaza, other than claiming they do You insult them and they've thrown every invader out on their rear end. Do not underestimate them, the United States obviously has until now allowed vital shipping lanes to fall victim to them. The Biden administration has expanded this Gaza conflict, a terrible decision for the region.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 17:46
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:You insult them and they've thrown every invader out on their rear end. Do not underestimate them, the United States obviously has until now allowed vital shipping lanes to fall victim to them. The Biden administration has expanded this Gaza conflict, a terrible decision for the region. Why should I care for their success, they're not communists, hopefully they're deposed. All other sentiments on the situation are pure campism.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2024 19:04
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:You insult them and they've thrown every invader out on their rear end. Do not underestimate them, the United States obviously has until now allowed vital shipping lanes to fall victim to them. The Biden administration has expanded this Gaza conflict, a terrible decision for the region. I will call batshit crazy fundamentalist denizens of the loony bin whatever I drat well want to, thanks. Calling them what they are is not the same as underestimating them. And frankly, I don't think any nation, in any era would look kindly upon some random group of fanatics lobbing missiles at passing ships, regardless of the stated reason.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 00:07
|
|
|
Tigey posted:Yeah. This holds true whether you believe they're doing it because they are brotherly comrades who just want to stop a genocide, or because they are opportunists who want to extract concessions and are using Gaza as political cover and/or PR for their cause, or somewhere else along the spectrum of these two ends. my position is that this spectrum of postures is functionally the same posture. if the organisation's political base and backing is premised on it supporting palestine - and as far as i can tell it is at least in part - then it doesn't matter if the politburo members in their hearts care about palestine at all. in practice, the organisation is sincerely pro-palestine. if the americans brought israel to heel, i think that the houthis would bang their chests and claim at least partial credit regardless of their actual assessment of the situation, and cease their blockade. whether this is because they sincerely believe in this stuff or because they've lost their political cover is not really relevant imo. they have tied their attacks on shipping explicitly to palestine, so it would be a hard sell to back down without some movement on the palestinian issue. if they get their stated demand, it's hard to keep provoking the americans for no obvious reason. this is similar to any other organisation exerting power. what i'm objecting to is the idea that it's somehow childish or naive to believe that the houthis' activities are meaningfully connected to what's going on in palestine.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 01:20
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:my position is that this spectrum of postures is functionally the same posture. if the organisation's political base and backing is premised on it supporting palestine - and as far as i can tell it is at least in part - then it doesn't matter if the politburo members in their hearts care about palestine at all. in practice, the organisation is sincerely pro-palestine. if the americans brought israel to heel, i think that the houthis would bang their chests and claim at least partial credit regardless of their actual assessment of the situation, and cease their blockade. whether this is because they sincerely believe in this stuff or because they've lost their political cover is not really relevant imo. they have tied their attacks on shipping explicitly to palestine, so it would be a hard sell to back down without some movement on the palestinian issue. if they get their stated demand, it's hard to keep provoking the americans for no obvious reason. this is similar to any other organisation exerting power. Their "political base" is that they have the most guns with which to threaten the population into submission.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 01:27
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Their "political base" is that they have the most guns with which to threaten the population into submission. Guns need people to fire them. reignonyourparade fucked around with this message at 01:41 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 01:38
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Guns need people to fire them. They like child soldiers for that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 07:04
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:You insult them and they've thrown every invader out on their rear end. Do not underestimate them, the United States obviously has until now allowed vital shipping lanes to fall victim to them. The Biden administration has expanded this Gaza conflict, a terrible decision for the region. There was a time in mid 2018, when it looked like Saudi bombs and UAE hired guns* were going to take the Houthi's only port worth talking about. They got real close to pulling it off too. Without that port, there would be almost no Iranian supplies coming in. Without Iranian supplies from the sea, it would have been rather bleak for the Houthis. But then the US and many other international countries took offense with the Saudi strategy of smashing one of the very few modern ports in a country utterly dependent on imports for food and water, and forced them to not blow up every building in the city in brutal urban combat. And so thenSaudi coalition withdrew from the city, and the UAE, pissed that the United States forced them to pull back, decided not to send any more foot soldiers to help out the Saudis. Seriously, the Huthis were slowly and steadily losing coastal territory all throughout 2017 and 2018, until the US and American allies told the Saudis to stop blowing up vital civilian infrastructure. *The UAE troops are important because Saudi ground forces cannot win at anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 08:27
|
|
|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:Their "political base" is that they have the most guns with which to threaten the population into submission. insurgent movements, even with foreign support, do not tend to be able to drive out a serious attempt at occupation without a pretty strong mass political appeal to some constituency
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 13:00
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:insurgent movements, even with foreign support, do not tend to be able to drive out a serious attempt at occupation without a pretty strong mass political appeal to some constituency Seems highly dependent on the amount of support they receive and the amount of resources their opponents invest. Having 100% popular support isn't going to amount to anything if you have no weapons and you don't need popular support at all if you have lots of weapons and the will to use them without restraint against any civilian opposition.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 15:53
|
|
|
the guerilla must move amongst the people like a fish through the sea
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 21:37
|
|
|
Owling Howl posted:Seems highly dependent on the amount of support they receive and the amount of resources their opponents invest. Having 100% popular support isn't going to amount to anything if you have no weapons and you don't need popular support at all if you have lots of weapons and the will to use them without restraint against any civilian opposition. war, as the man said, is the continuation of politics by other means. a political movement necessitates a constituency. it is not possible to fight a war against determined, technologically superior opposition purely off terror. a lot of people have to be willing to die for victory, and if you can only threaten them with death, that is not likely to motivate them. even obviously nihilistic and brutal organisations like IS had constituencies upon which they depended. in the particular case of the houthis, they also have documented indications of popular support, e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JUHgCXt0XY and several other pictures and videos of fairly large pro-palestinian demonstrations. it really should not be difficult to accept that getting people to kill and die is a matter of politics and that even groups which one does not like or consider legitimate have political agendas which they will try to push and a home audience whose interests they want to be seen to represent. these vague insinuations of a hidden - but never explicated or taken seriously - agenda are one step above "they hate us for our freedom"-style rhetoric. in practice, they simply serve to obstruct the discussion of the issue at hand. if you want to assume that the houthis are some kind of insane gang of murderers who operate simply through all-consuming violence, that is also something that you have to argue and document, because it's not how these things normally work. simply asserting it and then behaving as though it is obviously true and the people who disagree are the naive fools is asinine. V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 21:49 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 21:45
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:also i think that when someone says "i am doing x for y reason, specifically, if you want me to stop doing x you have to give me y" it makes thinking that there is some connection between x and y reasonable unless there's a compelling and specific reason to believe otherwise, rather than the other way around
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 22:21
|
|
|
true.spoon posted:You were literally the poster who argued that "the HK protests are primarily about housing" (I remember this because I thought it to be a bonkers claim and normally I find your takes thoughtful). I am sure you can somehow square this with the post above but your approach to deciphering political motivation from statements and actions is obvioisly less straightforward than you pretend here. this is wildly off-topic, but ok: my reasoning at the time was that the driver behind the HK protests was the unsustainable cost of living in hong kong. the aims of the movement were as they articulated them. i do not think that simple principled interest in the conflict in gaza on an intellectual level is what is driving the radicalism of the houthi movement - that is in my opinion the difficulty of living in much of yemen under the regime of foreign interference. the heuristic here is a base-superstructure relationship: material concerns motivate people to organise somehow around whatever structures are present in their society, and the logic of those structures finds political expression in organised parties, protest movements or militia groups. if one suggested that a good way of pacifying the houthis would be to make life in yemen easier, i would agree with this. i don't recall that i've ever meant to suggest that the political leadership of the hong kong protest movement were not serious about their demands, or that concessions to those demands wouldn't have been accepted by that movement. e. i obviously don't recall my wording about this stuff on an internet forum many years after the fact, so this may not have been clear from my posts at the time, but i do recall my thinking around the time echoing with this stuff V. Illych L. fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Jan 14, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2024 22:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Pretty sure nobody would be mad if the Houthis were just threatening to chop off Netanyahu or Biden's penises. That is kinda the angle. The houthis are terrible people who may have instigated pogroms against civilians themselves, but even the worst people can have a sensible notion - even if it's just to whitewash their own regime. Why people get upset with folks backing up the houthis are, hopefully, only because the houthis suck - destroying supply and trade with Israel is an understandable reaction to their ongoing genocide.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 08:02
|
|
