Q: Are the airstrikes in Yemen working?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, when you say “working,” are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes.
Sometimes “working” means forcing them to crawl back into their hole and hatch a new plan.
And do you intend to deal with the fallout of their new plan the same way, creating more new plans from them? Or is there an end goal?
Typical blood thirsty, racist and uneducated American thinking. Color me surprised.
What a stupid and incorrect response.
A self referential comment?
And is that working? It sounds like their old plan is still running.
The Houthis are not new at this. They have been the target of literally thousands of airstrikes by Saudi Arabia, but have continued to operate.
The US is not new at this either. It has decades of experience loosing to much less technically capable forces fighting on their home turf. If history is anything to go by, this is simply not a fight the US military (or any modern military for that matter) is capable of winning.
They’ve apparently been gaining ground since the coup but I don’t think that’s the case as of the past couple of weeks. Either way anything they’ve won has been through violence and intimidation and not the consent of the people. The people voted and rejected Houthis bullshit twice, elections in which many Houthis refused to participate.
I sure hope somebody forces Americans to crawl back into their hole one day.
What ever happened to talking and reaching an agreement and asking for favors and scratching each other back… like now we resort to uncivilized behavior by attacking the poorest countries.
Anything for the israel zionist overlords.
Years of Saudi air strikes with US weapons systems ended in a victory for the Houthis. Not to mention causing one of the worst humanitarian situations of the 21st century.
WTF does the US think it’s gonna do other than escalate the situation (and continue the next record breaking humanitarian crisis)?
The US is just making sure the humanitarian crisis in Yemen ISN’T the worst humanitarian situation of the 21st century.
I stand with Yemen and the Yemeni government, the only terrorists are the US and Israeli militaries and whoever aids them.
I stand with anyone doing their part to pressure the US and Israel in ending their genocide. ❤️
If you stand with the Yemeni government then you want the Houthis gone.
Can you even find Yemen on a map.
- Ansar Allah are the legitimate government of Yemen. Anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional.
- Not only can I find it, I live directly to the north of it (Saudi Arabia). عاش اليمن الشقيق.
Being excited about things doesn’t make them real. You’ll understand that after the tenth or twentieth disappointment.
Yemen has already won, the US has been fighting it since 2004, all that’s left is for the US to understand it lost. Though I predict its crazy politicians will keep repeating their mistakes expecting a different outcome.
American soldiers definitely lose. Civilians definitely lose. Americans and their military industrial complex have definitely been treating the middle East as a training ground for 2+ decades.
Your tears help US Deep State and their genocidal fantasies. Please continue crying.
The recent US and UK actions can be taken as examples on how to cure the symptom while making the disease worse
Here’s an idea:
The Houthi’s can just not launch missiles at ships
And the US could just stop funding Netanyahu’s war in Gaza.
Good idea! Here’s another: UK and US stop interferring in middle east (FYI the palestine problem was worsened by magnitudes by the UK mandate)
Yeah let’s just set back and let be bunch of theocratic authoritarians hell bent on developing nuclear weapons and cleansing the middle east of Christians and Jews.
I have a better idea. How about we isolate them into little spots of desert nobody cares about and if they poke their heads out and threaten their neighbors, we bomb the shit out of them until they figure out that they are the baddies, while the rest of the world moves forward without them?
Maybe you’re right. Maybe we should just say a bunch of inch deep non sequitors and nonsense like “fyi the Palestine problem was worsened by the west.” That will totally not result in another world war and tens of millions of dead, tens of millions of refugees, and the worst humanitarian crisis in the history of the planet. And let’s do it all in the name of humanitarianism!
How about no.
Removed by mod
I agree, let them just kill each other with reckless abandon
They will, just as soon as those ships stop violating their blockade. You will note that many ships pass through Yemeni waters without issue because they are abiding by the rules, as dictates by maritime law and international law. Why are you defending the criminals?
The ships they’re firing upon are passing through in accordance with maritime and international law. Their justification is that the ships are Israeli affiliated, but those ships are still sailing in recognized international waters.
Oh shit! International law?? Man, I bet everyone totally respects stuff like that-- especially the very very moral nations like the US and Israel.
No, they aren’t, because a blockade has been announced and the ships are violating the blockade.
You can’t just “announce” a blockade and make it your territorial waters. You can absolutely create a blockade if you choose to, but it is a recognized act of war. There’s a separate conversation to whether that is a just action or not, tied in with the war in Israel/Palestine. But that doesn’t change the fact that a blockade in itself is an act of war.
Sorry, are you saying it’s not in the territorial waters of Yemen?
The Bab-el-Mandeb Strait - which the UN has stated is a strait to which transit passage applies. Yemen is a signatory country to the UN convention on the law of the sea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bab-el-Mandeb
Transit Passage https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part3.htm#:~:text=and hydrographical characteristics.-,2.,or an exclusive economic zone.
Specifically, article 38 states:
~~Right of transit passage
-
In straits referred to in article 37, all ships and aircraft enjoy the right of transit passage, which shall not be impeded; except that, if the strait is formed by an island of a State bordering the strait and its mainland, transit passage shall not apply if there exists seaward of the island a route through the high seas or through an exclusive economic zone of similar convenience with respect to navigational and hydrographical characteristics.
-
Transit passage means the exercise in accordance with this Part of the freedom of navigation and overflight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit of the strait between one part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone and another part of the high seas or an exclusive economic zone. However, the requirement of continuous and expeditious transit does not preclude passage through the strait for the purpose of entering, leaving or returning from a State bordering the strait, subject to the conditions of entry to that State.
-
Any activity which is not an exercise of the right of transit passage through a strait remains subject to the other applicable provisions of this Convention.~~*
-
Hey, the navy needs to keep their button pushing skills sharp /s
Ansar Allah are acting in accordance to international laws and treaties and are trying to stop the genocide in Gaza.
Lol🤔
Here’s an idea, countries involved in genocide can just not sail ships through Yemeni waters.
US is a terrorist state, plain and simple.
Every attack strenghten the houthis.
But every attacks also creates shareholder value.
I wonder if treating the Houthis as Iranian agents and retaliating against Iranian assets directly would be more effective than playing whack-a-mole against these missile launchers without addressing the source of the problem. I assume Biden’s advisors are wondering the same thing, but it’s hard to know where the line between deterrence and escalation is…
Iran has enemies. Many of them are even worse than the Iranians, but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat, just like Iran is doing with the Houthis…
Houthis have been getting bombed by Saudi Arabia for I don’t know how many years. If any one thinks that airstrikes will stop their operations then I have a bridge to sell them.
Raytheon be like: “If you think airstrikes will stop the houthis I got a bomb to sell you”
but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat
Hmm. I wonder if anyone has tried that yet?
Sympathetic guys armed by the US to fuck with Iran include Saddam Hussein, ISIS and Israel.
Doesn’t that list also include Iran?
I don’t think it’s technically correct to say that the US armed ISIS; ISIS seized weapons that the US provided to Iraq.
Israel does a pretty good job of opposing Iran, and we can be confident that weapons provided to Israel aren’t going to be used against the US. I think it’s likely that the Houthis are acting up now not because they’re provoked by Israel but because Israel is preoccupied with something else.
As for Saddam Hussein… He did a very good job of opposing Iran. The threat of eight years of war and hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers dead would be a very effective stick if we still had access to it. It’s ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it’s worse for US interests than Saddam was.
A lot of the people that now sympathize with ISIS are people that the US and other Western countries propped up in various ways to help fight the Soviets.
The Houthis were friendly with the Soviets. The Soviets were friendly with the imamate.
a very effective stick if we still had access to it
We? Who is ‘we’?
This needs to be said. USA needs to be done towards the same things that USA did to Japan in 1945. It needs to happen once, and they will never dare to step a military foot outside their borders ever again.
The nuclear attack on Japan wasn’t intended to defeat them - they were already essentially defeated, just trying to find a more favorable way to lose. The nuclear attack’s purpose was to intimidate the USSR, as a power flex. The reason nuclear weapons are a deterrent isn’t because a couple of nukes hitting your country is a problem - that’s just a minor inconvenience when it comes to war. The reason nuclear weapons are a deterrent is because the countries that do have them have a lot of them, and can destroy not just a couple important cities, but cover your entire country in radioactive waste.
Not only will your “plan” not achieve its goal, but it will also hurt hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of civilians. I know it’s popular to associate a people with a government, and that’s not completely baseless, but - and I can’t believe I have to say this - that’s absolutely no reason to launch a nuclear attack. That’s just genocidal nonsense. There’s a reason countries at war don’t kill civilians, and it’s not “good will”.
So do you think the nukes did not kill people in Japan, or set them back a few decades? The purpose of such a neutraliser should be to stop USA from ever doing what they keep doing overseas – genocide and economic/psychological enslavement.
Do you actually think America wouldn’t go absolutely ape trying to find who nuked them? Do you not remember 911 when the whole country collectively lost it’s mind?
You realise the whole world has well prepared nuclear armed countries at this point, unlike back then? USA always tends to calculate optimally the most amount of enemy damage while taking the least amount. If USA attempts to attack others, they will get wiped off earth very easily without a speck of dust remaining. Even North Korea would be enough theoretically.
The thing is, the non-Anglo world is tired of NATO terrorism/colonialism going on for centuries, and will probably explode at some point in the very near future. And the alternative hegemony and systems are pretty much in place with BRICS+ being much more powerful than G7/NATO powers, demonstrably with all the NATO weaponry failures in Ukraine.
