• gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    11 months ago

    Defending Israel’s right to commit genocide. I wonder if they plan to do genocide in Yemen again.

  • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Since when is Israel part of NATO?

    I tried to find something but I could not find any attacks on NATO assets. They were just attacking Israeli interests, which are currently committing a genocide in Gaza. Not to mention war crimes.

    Worth noting that the USA gave 0 shits when the Saudi’s were killing the Yemeni people, for years. Here in Canada we sold the Saudis weapons which they eventually used against Yemen. It was a big deal here. Our conservatives broke the deal and our Liberals delivered on it. Both have blood on their hands.

    • intelshillOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m absolutely disgusted by the behaviour of the Canadian government wrt Yemen, and again wrt Gaza.

      I just really don’t understand why we’re so keen to do whatever our southern overlords ask of us.

      We even gave up Bombardier’s crown jewel because of US bullshit.

      • FriendBesto@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Because we literally depend on the USA for a number of things. In some ways, we are the USA’s removed. In some cases that is terrible but in some ways we do benefit. For example: Thanks to the USA’s outrageous warmongering due to their desire to keep their hegemony, we get to spend a lot less on our military. That money affords out current political system, socialist programs and social nets. The USA will help defend us because it is in their benefit to do so, both geopolitically and just geographically. We also need them on many economic levels, since they are our biggest trading partner.

        Sadly, reality can be very multifaceted. Both for the good and the bad. But the old saying that when the USA sneezes Canada catches a cold, applies here.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    11 months ago

    Everyone knows that attacking someone that is illegally blocking the transfer of your goods is antisemitic and the Houthis now have the right to defend themselves.

    Is America literally Hamas???

  • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    If there was a real Goku with a genkidama, he would throw it at USA and end atleast 80% of the world’s problems.

  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Well they did start shooting missiles at passing ships. Can’t say they didn’t expect anyone to shoot back or that those ships attacked them first

  • nekandro@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    46
    ·
    11 months ago

    A US operation halfway around the planet where no civilian casualties have taken place.

    Defense.

    • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      No civilian causalities…because we’ve been shooting down all the missiles. The Houthis have been firing off rockets, drones, and missiles pretty indiscriminately at passing cargo boats, some of which do have US nationals aboard. If the US and allies hadn’t been there, there’s a good chance there’d be a half dozen cargo ships at the bottom of the Red Sea, and then there would be civilian causalities.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        They also fired directly at US warships preceding this attack.

        • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          11 months ago

          Hmm. I wonder why they’d fire on a hostile fleet that sailed halfway around the world and that had basically already declared war on them. Particularly when said fleet previously implemented a blockade that caused a famine, which killed hundreds of thousands, mostly children.

          • TWeaK@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            How had the ship “basically declared war on them”? Why is the ship there?

            If you fire on someone with a big gun, it should be no surprise when they fire back.

              • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                The brackets broke the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yemeni_civil_war_(2014–present)

                Edit actually it was that you missed off the last bracket, I think.

                In any case, the Yemen civil war is hardly just between two parties, it’s a tangled web of proxies. There are actually many allies who are technically fighting against one another through their proxies.

            • Count042@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              11 months ago

              We blockaded their only port that supplies food for the winning side of their defensive war against Saudi Arabia, causing a massive famine and even Cholera to spread killing a fuck ton of civilians.

              This is why our threats don’t work. It’s hard to threaten a population that you’ve already tried to genocide who then went on to win their war.

              • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Saudi Arabia blockaded them, the US joined in but then left relatively early on.

            • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              11 months ago

              Do you think the US hadn’t already planned to do airstrikes on Yemen? Ansarallah already knew what they were up to. The ships are there to punish Yemen for daring to oppose the genocide in Israel, which they clearly can relate to, having been genocided by the US and Saudis just recently.

              Ansarallah clearly stated they would stop if there was a ceasefire in Gaza, and they attacked ships going to Israeli ports. But I guess if they try to blockade Israel, and take seriously their (and every state’s) duty under international law to stop genocide, that’s bad, but if the US blockades Yemen causing a genocidal famine, that’s just dandy?

              • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                The US plans for a lot of situations, as does any competent military. Are you trying to say that the US intended to make these strikes all along, rather than in retaliation for strikes against them?

                The ships are there to protect trade. Up until now, they have been focused on shooting down missiles and preventing attacks on trade ships. They’re also there to bring a bigger gun to protect Israel if anyone wants to jump into war with them. There is an element of bullshit to this, as the US is basically allowing Israel to commit genocide, but at the same time the US is supposed to protect its allies.

                Most of the ships that have been targeted by the Houthis were not going to Israeli ports and have no affiliation with Israel. When they have claimed there was some affiliation, it’s really obtuse and far fetched - like one guy in a parent company that has no real involvement with the ship or its cargo.

                I don’t know the specifics of the US’ previous blockade or the famine in Yemen. If you can point me to some information on that I’d appreciate it, right now my searches are drowned out in coverage of the latest events. However, the whole conflict in Yemen is a mess of proxy parties fighting on behalf of others, it’s a tangled web with no good parties - as usual, the only ones really winning are the people selling weapons.

                • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  8
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The US plans for a lot of situations, as does any competent military. Are you trying to say that the US intended to make these strikes all along, rather than in retaliation for strikes against them?

                  Yes, obviously.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_Yemen

                  The blockade has contributed to the current famine in Yemen, which the United Nations said may become the deadliest famine in decades. The World Health Organization announced in 2017, that the number of suspected persons with cholera in Yemen reached approximately 500,000 people. In 2018, Save the Children estimated that 85,000 children have died due to starvation in the three years prior.

                  The U.S. has supported the Arab coalition’s intervention in the war, and the United States Navy actively participated in the naval blockade at the beginning of the intervention. In mid-2015, Washington increased its logistical and intelligence support to Saudi Arabia by creating a joint coordination planning cell with the Saudi military to help manage the war.

          • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            11 months ago

            If a ship is in international waters, it has every right to be there, regardless of nationalities involved.

              • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yes it does. Ships of any nation have a right to transit international waters.

                When Iranian ships (or ships of any nation, really) engage in acts of privacy, then they open themselves up to the consequences, whatever those may be.

                • Count042@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  The US has been seizing non-Iranian ships in international waters that it claims are carrying Iranian oil. It has been doing this long before the current unpleasantness.

                  The country engaging in the act of piracy is the US.

                  Also, the Bab Al-Mandreb straight is the territorial waters of Yemen, Eritrea and Djibouti. It is not international waters.

              • Womble@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yes they do. I presume from your stance you are in favour of the US seizing or sinking Iranian ships when they are in waters the US controls just like the Houthis are attempting to do?

              • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Yes it does. Look up the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, if you’re not being purposefully obtuse.

                And as much as we may not like it, with the way US laws currently are, there is nothing illegal about USN vessels being in the Red Sea

                • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I’m not talking about US law. Who gives a fuck about US law? The ships are there to attack Ansarallah, so they have it coming.

      • davel [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        They’d only have been at the bottom of the sea if they’d tried to run the blockade despite ample warning.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          11 months ago

          What right do they have to form a blockade across international waters?

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              12
              ·
              11 months ago

              Targeting trade ships - particularly ships that aren’t going to and have no involvement with Israel - does nothing to stop genocide in Gaza.

              • Count042@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                The fact the the US freaked out about this and spent the money it did trying and somewhat failing to stop it says otherwise.

                It’s pretty clear that Ansarallah are specifically targeting ships going to Israel, too. They also stopped during the short cease fire.

                There is a simple cheap way too end this that doesn’t include trying to kill people we’ve already tried to genocide from 2015 to … I can’t remember when Ansarallah won.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  It’s pretty clear that Ansarallah are specifically targeting ships going to Israel, too.

                  It isn’t. Only 5 ships targeted out of over 20 actually had anything to do with Israel. With various others, they basically find one Israeli national working for a parent company of the one that owns the vessel, and then claim that means it’s Israeli.

                  There is a simple cheap way too end this that doesn’t include trying to kill people we’ve already tried to genocide from 2015 to …

                  Saudi Arabia blockaded Yemen. The US joined in from 2015 to 2016, then left, SA kept it up all on their own after that. Claiming that the US genocided them is a massive, disingenuous stretch.

                  Your claim is basically the same as saying that Iran took over Yemen and started the civil war, not the Houthis.

                • TWeaK@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  They’re not though. The vast majority of the ships they’ve targeted have no connection to Israel whatsoever.

      • intelshillOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        11 months ago

        Ansarallah already showed the world what a boarding operation would look like.

        The crew is safe and being treated as appropriate by Islamic law.

        • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yeah that doesn’t make hijacking a boat and taking the crew hostage okay by any stretch of the imagination