might actually be an achievement if it wasn't a defenseless cargo ship crewed by civilians.
Wake me up when they pick a fight with a vessel that can fight back... cowards
That's not the point of terrorism. You don't pick fights with those that can fight back. You do it to make others fear you. And the fact that a lot of ships are going around the horn of Africa instead of through the Red Sea means the their terrorism is working.
It's a legitimate military strategy to disrupt trade and supply.
I don't condone this by any means but "terrorism" is not a synonym for "violence we don't like".
This is terrorism, it's asymmetric warfare by a military that controls a territory the size of Ireland.
The west has been involved in bombing Yemen for years now.
We call it strikes against "terrorists" and "rebels" but if you live there it's just war.
It's worth noting that there are only 2 ways a war ends. A negotiated peace, or one side being wiped out. I'd rather we didn't wipe out a large part of a country. So I'd like us to skip straight to diplomatic talks.
Our first demand would likely be to de-escalate and cease violence.
The first demand from the Houthis would probably be to stop supplying Saudi Arabia with weapons to use against them. And also to cease violence.
Beyond that it gets complicated. Not a simplistic story of terrorists and bogeymen.
Houthis: No
now what?
The Houthis already make demands. No side of any conflict just says "no"
But by all means if they did say no to stopping violence when we stop bombing Yemen there is a time to fight back.
Unfortunately it's happened the opposite way around.
Yemen have asked the West and Saudi Arabia to stop bombing them and we've said "no". So the Houthis have started fighting back.
so according to your logic we're bombing them for literally no reason? Just coz...
"Felt cute, might bomb some houthis today"
Do you know why we've bombed innocent people in Yemen? We haven't just bombed Houthi rebels.
That definition makes Israel terrorists against the Palestinians, which is... Spot on, actually.
I really wish they'd stop referring to the Houthis as "rebels". Like, it is technically correct. They are rebelling against the globally recognized government in the country they live in. But it gives the impression that this is a rag tag group of dudes with a few AKs instead of the reality which is that they are decently funded military with a territory the size of Ireland under their control.
So if the term they use is correct but you don't like it, what would you like them to say?
Houthi militia, Houthi army, Houthi military...
You know, whatever.
They are called Ansar Allah. You're spot on about the rag tag look, though, and that's propaganda to make them seem illegitimate and hide the fact that they have widespread support in their country (which, incidentally, rose during the Saudi led and U.S. backed demolition of Yemen over the past 8 or so years). People who are paying attention will notice a discrepancy between words (rag tag Houthi rebels shoot rockets indiscriminately at passing ships) and actions (we need a 12 or however many country coalition to go after these guys and will probably end up continuing to bomb one of the poorest countries on the planet with the most advanced arsenal the world has ever seen).
I do like what another commenter said, though. Something along the lines of "let the Marshall Islands and Belize military go protect those ships, don't use our tax money to protect the property of tax evaders".
Was it really a British ship, or was it a ship running under Liberian or Lagos or whatever cheap flag, but owned by a British company?
If it ran under the British flag, then it would have been the British marines' job to defend it. OK.
If it ran under the Flag of Panama, Liberia, Lagos, or whatever, it would have been their responsibility.
None of the tax evasion flags countries have a ship there to defend what would be their duty to defend. Instead, we finance and endanger our military to protect tax evaders' ships.
This says it's under the Belize flag.
https://news.usni.org/2024/02/20/british-owned-cargo-ship-damaged-by-houthi-missiles-crew-evacuated
So it is high time Belize sends a proper response and defends ships running under their flag - it is their responsibility. That's what they get taxes or fees for from the ship owners.
"The private security firm Ambrey reported the British-registered, Lebanese-operated cargo ship had been on its way to Bulgaria after leaving Khorfakkan in the United Arab Emirates. "
This ship didn't have a damn thing to do with Israel.
I'm sure the assistant engineer had a smartphone with a bookmark to a webpage about something that was made by Israel. So there.
Hope they rain down hell on these motherfuckers
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.