• iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I mean stop touching the damn boats. People be touching US boats like 4 times in history and it always turns out bad.

    The Imperial Japanese Navy sank 8 US boats and we dropped the Sun on them. Twice.

    • fastandcurious@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      That’s the problem, you touch a US boat and you get bombed, the US fucks an entire region over and they face no consequence

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      10 months ago

      America has been supplying Saudi with weapons to attack the Houthis with for many years.

      The Houthis didn’t lose.

      Why are people so mad that someone is actually standing up for human rights? The demands of the Houthis are very reasonable.

      • splicerslicer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        “standing up for human rights”

        Meanwhile, on the Houthis flags: “death to Israel, death to America, Jews are a curse upon the land”

        You, a joke of a person who needs to look in the mirror and laugh at yourself: “very reasonable people”

        • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          We’re talking about their actions at this very moment. Not them as an organization.

          If Kim Jong Un decided to block to Red Sea to support Palestinine instead of the Houthis it would be just as morally correct. If America did it too.

          It’s about getting water, food and medicine to little children who are getting their legs amputated without anesthetics as if it’s a SAW movie.

    • HorseRabbit@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      10 months ago

      The Houthis are blocking Israeli ports in response to genocide.

      Why were US ships going to the ports of a country actively committing genocide?

      The US is now bombing a sovereign nation to stop trade sanctions on a genocide.

      • splicerslicer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        They’re attacking commercial shipping vessels passing through the suez canal that have nothing to do with Israel or Palestine or the US. If you knew how how to read or think you’d already know this.

      • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        You don’t get to seal off a critical global shipping route just because you happen to be living next to it and don’t like where some of the cargo is going. This isn’t like the bosphorous, even a recognized Yemeni government wouldn’t have control over who can transit the strait unless they invaded Djibouti

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        Why were US ships going to

        They weren’t. While you may disagree with US Navy hanging out in the area, they’re in international waters and not trying to go to Israel. You could argue that attacking US ships proves the blockade story is a farce

    • iain@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      10 months ago

      The US is willing to kill untold number of people because otherwise the cheap shirts made by children in Bangladesh will arrive slightly late. I do hope for this evil empire to fucking die already.

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

        For Bangladesh it’s probably faster to go east to get to the US. The majority of ships going through the Suez Canal are trading with Europe.

      • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        10 months ago

        No civilians died in the first strikes, and I’m not aware of any sources claiming any civilian deaths in these strikes either, which is probably to be expected given that they were against a military air base.

        • iain@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 months ago

          Would you change your mind if Houthi soldiers died? What is civilians would die?

          • BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m not going to feel particularly bad about people with the slogan “Death to America, death to Israel, a curse on the Jews” being killed in combat in a retaliatory military strike.

    • Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      10 months ago

      Looked at a non paywall source, it was the US advising ships to avoid the area for the next couple days because they plan on doing more strikes and don’t want other ships caught in the crossfire

        • fastandcurious@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          10 months ago

          They are protecting their civilians or the ones they can benefit from, and killing others who are not, they are not doing this in good faith

        • iain@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          10 months ago

          Cargo ships can take a longer route, they don’t need to be there. The US values cargo over human lives.

          • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            10 months ago

            The longer route costs an additional million dollars in diesel alone. Even if you don’t care about the enormous economic impact, the environmental impact alone is huge.

            • iain@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              10 months ago

              Oh okay, so we’re killing people over causing environmental damage? Let’s murder the CEO of Nestle, BP etc. They deserve it way more!

              • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                10 months ago

                You know that isn’t what I am saying.

                As far as I’m aware, there have been no reports whatsoever of non-military targets being hit in the strikes. Targeting the infrastructure being used by a non-state group to disrupt the most critical trade route on earth is absolutely proportionate.

                The CEOs of those companies should be prosecuted instead, however there is not appropriate legislation for environmental damage in the UK and US.

                • nekandro@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Just like how Israel “only targeted valid military targets,” right? Yeah…

                • iain@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  10
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  You know that isn’t what I am saying.

                  It is what you’re implying. Even in this very comment: you just assume that violence is appropriate for protecting a trade route, but we have to be very nice to CEOs of companies that destroy the environment and use slave labor. Please examine your own biases and see the consequences.