Experts believe western allies most likely to target coastal sites in attempt to halt spate of Houthi attacks in Red Sea

Britain and the US are poised to launch strikes against Houthi military targets in Yemen, as the leader of the rebel group promises to respond to any assault with fresh attacks on shipping in the Red Sea.

Western defence sources indicated preparations were intensifying on Thursday in response to a Houthi attack of 21 missiles and drones aimed at US and UK warships on Tuesday night, although its scale and timing remain secret.

Asked about potential US strikes against the Houthis in Yemen, the national security spokesperson, John Kirby, said: “I’m not going to telegraph our punches one way or another here. We’re gonna do what we have to do, to counter and defeat these threats that the Houthis keep throwing up on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.”

Archive

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      11 months ago

      I would be very interested in the opinion of the person who disagreed with you. Are there people here who are pro Houthis blowing up and and hijacking civilian shipping?

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
        6·
        11 months ago

        Yes, because this is an attempt to pressure the West into actually doing something about Gaza instead of defending them at the UN.

      • Meh@lemy.lol
        3·
        11 months ago

        Yes. All the losers at .ml who take Houthi statements at face value. But if they had a clue they wouldn’t be tankies in the first place.

    • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
      6·
      11 months ago

      Loiter munitions. Have them hang out endlessly circling until those fuckers set something up, then BOOM!

      No more assholes.

        • GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.socialEnglish
          13·
          11 months ago

          What do you suggest? They keep firing missiles at civilian cargo ships. If you continually use lethal force, you can expect the same in return.

          • Evia@lemmy.world
            2·
            11 months ago

            Non-violent resolutions before resorting to ‘send in the drones’, at the very least

            • GiuseppeAndTheYeti@midwest.socialEnglish
              10·
              11 months ago

              They won’t negotiate. Not in good faith at least. They’re part of the Axis of Resistance funded by Iran and their ideology is directly opposed to Western culture. The negotiation would be, “Let us rape and abuse women and keep them from getting an education. Also homosexuality is forbidden and you will be executed by the state if you’re caught. In return we’ll not shoot missiles at innocent civilians for awhile. Then when we perceive western influence spreading into our culture we’ll resume lobbing rockets at civilians.”

  • nicetriangle@kbin.social
    6·
    11 months ago

    This was mega predictable. I think the Houthis thing was mainly a play to distract the US/Nato countries further and spread resources thinner.

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    4·
    11 months ago

    I’d be willing to bet they (US and UK navies) let the previous attacks get so close just so they could gather intel on the launch sites. Houthis are fucked, should have kept those missiles and drones pointed inland.

  • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
    3·
    11 months ago

    These attacks would stop if the US stopped supporting the genocide in Gaza.

    The official position of Ansarallah is that they’re disrupting shipping to Israel because of the responsibility to protect, and as a result this has disrupted all shipping. Rather than diplomacy the Biden admin is choosing to waste more money in another pointless war that will only stretch resources further and get more people killed.

    harm: reduced

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      11 months ago

      Yemen is attacking civilian ships that are neither originating nor destined for Israel. How would some third party supporting or not supporting a war in Palestine help?

      • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
        1·
        11 months ago

        Israel has been bombing Gaza for 3 months now, disrupting trade with whatever means they have necessary is within the Responsibility to Protect.

        It may be disruptive, but that’s the point, it has demanded a resolution from the US (Israels primary backers) in extremely short order unless they want to have their own suez moment.

        • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          11 months ago

          disrupting trade with whatever means they have necessary is within the Responsibility to Protect.

          It may be disruptive, but that’s the point

          Guy breaks into your house, blowing part of it up in the process, threatens your life, and steals your stuff. He says ‘I have a responsibility to protect the people of Gaza, I have to be as disruptive as possible’. Does it matter that you also want to protect the people of Gaza? The Yemen militans blowing up and hijacking random ships certainly don’t think so, but I have a strong feeling you wouldn’t be too plussed about the idea when it is your life being threatened and your stuff being stolen despite you being an uninvolved (and sympathetic) party.

          Should the police and everyone you talk to about it respond with ‘No, the assailant is in the right. The assailant has the responsibility to protect the people of Gaza and be as disruptive as possible, even to go as far as blow up, threaten the lives of, and steal the stuff of completely uninvolved third parties such as yourself’.

          • Diva (she/her)@lemmy.ml
            1·
            11 months ago

            Guy breaks into your house, blowing part of it up in the process, threatens your life, and steals your stuff.

            A bit dramatic considering this is happening in Yemen’s territorial waters, we are the ones breaking into their house and wrecking the place.

            It’s also what the occupation is doing in Palestine.

            Try not to sound so personally attacked while we attack people in their homes.