Kids were killed but the chat leak was funny and that’s what has been the people talk about instead.
Imagine being the poor family, who is stuck living in Yemen because they cannot afford to relocate, whose kid has died by Trump’s bombing. Then all you see in the news about how they joked with emojis in chat killing your kid. “Oh your kid was killed in that emoji airstrike.” Tell me why the fuck you would grow up anything but radicalized.
That’s because anyone who has been paying attention to geopolitics over the last two years knows why the US is bombing Yemen…
Both are really serious problems in their own right, one’s just a little closer to home
For me at this point it’s just a matter of surprise.
I expect the US to bomb everywhere that isn’t Japan, North America, European Union, or Israel
Hell I’m shocked they aren’t throwing bombs at Australia because Elon Musk sent a vaguely worded email that implied it.
The reason why I SEEM to care more about the phones than the bombs, is because “US bombing innocent people? Sounds like a Tuesday… but damn how did we elect someone so incompetent that I find out about the specifics?”
Political context courtesy of the Arab Center in Washington DC:
TL;DR: The Houthis are backed by Iran, in direct regional competition to Saudi Arabian (and subsequently US) interests, and the war in Yemen is a direct result of 10 years worth of failed intervention by the Saudis.
Excerpt:
Exactly a decade ago, Saudi Arabia announced the launch of a military intervention in Yemen, promising to lead a coalition of more than 10 nations—although some would later end their participation—against the Houthi armed group, officially known as Ansar Allah, that had taken over power from President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. Backed by the United States, Britain, and other Western states with arms and shared intelligence, on March 26, 2015, the Saudi coalition commenced airstrikes on Houthi-controlled areas, initiating a conflict that would drag on for years. Riyadh’s initial expectation of a swift, six-week military operation to defeat the Houthis became a prolonged and costly entanglement that has tested Saudi Arabia’s ability to impose its will on its neighbor and to force the Houthis to give up their control over a large part of Yemen. Intervention Inception
Saudi Arabia’s rationale for intervention shifted over time as the conflict unfolded. At the outset, it cast the intervention as a direct response to President Hadi’s urgent appeal to the Gulf states and their international allies that he conveyed in a letter to the UN Security Council in March 2015. Hadi called for states “to provide immediate support in every form and take the necessary measures, including military intervention, to protect Yemen and its people from the ongoing Houthi aggression.” The Saudis initially conceived of the intervention as a decisive effort to reinstate Yemen’s legitimate government in the capital Sanaa. As the situation progressed, Saudi Arabia reframed its objective as restoring Yemen’s political process within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, which in 2011-2012 facilitated the transfer of power from former President Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi.
The core rationale behind Saudi Arabia’s intervention, however, stemmed from its perception of the Houthis as an Iranian proxy on the kingdom’s border. Riyadh feared that Iran’s influence through the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests. The kingdom saw the Houthi takeover of Sanaa not just as a challenge to Yemen’s stability but as a potential game changer in the broader Middle East power dynamics. In this context, Saudi Arabia framed its military intervention as a necessary response to protect its own security and regional influence.
Riyadh feared that the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests.
But while Saudi Arabia believed Iran to be the principal force behind the Houthi takeover, the extent of Iranian influence over the group at the time was, in fact, relatively limited. Although the Houthis depended on Iranian military and logistical support, particularly for weaponry and strategic advice, they were not fully under Iran’s control. Iran, while capable of advising the Houthis on strategic and policy matters, lacked the leverage to dictate their actions. Rather, local factors such as longstanding tribal rivalries in Yemen, the Houthis’ longtime opposition to the central government, and their pursuit of greater political power, were more influential in shaping the Houthis’ behavior. The Houthi alliances with former President Saleh and certain factions of the Yemeni military also played a crucial role in the group’s rise. In other words, Iran’s influence was significant, but it was not all-encompassing, as the Houthis had their own political and strategic goals. Nonetheless, Riyadh persisted in portraying the Houthis as a tool of Iranian expansionism. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabia’s prolonged antagonism may have ultimately strengthened Iran’s influence, as it pushed the Houthi armed group to deepen its reliance on Iranian military and logistical support.
Bush and Obama did it too. Historically, it’s been a targeted killing thing against Al-Qaeda (or so they have said), with whatever government they have, giving their blessing. If other sites are correct, Trump did it more, but it’s kinda hard to pick nits there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Yemen
That’s why a lot people are more upset over the lack of operational security than the action itself. They’re not conducting themselves in a way that keeps our country safe, They skirting monitoring and can’t even get that right.
There was no civil war in Yemen when GWB was in office. We attacked Al Qaeda in Yemen after Al Qaeda attacked the USS Cole in 2000. This is unrelated to any current conflict
The Yemeni civil war starts under Obama. The Houthis instigate the civil war.
Biden too, a year ago, which liberals seem very quick to forget:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/11/politics/read-biden-statement-airstrikes-houthis-yemen/index.html
Which was due to them attacking innocent cargo ships
They’re brown and poor and our country is deep in the arms trade.
I mean, Houthis have been striking passing civilian ships with missiles and kidnapped people. Not terribly concerned they got shot back tbh.
opens a post with question in the title that is lamenting that news don’t give any real answers and focus just on “trump bad” story.
all top comments are just “trump bad” and “all bad government” and has to scroll deep down to find an actual answer to the question posted.
leaves understanding much better why news don’t focus on context and give just emotional side stories.
Removed by mod
They’re not exactly bastions of freedom-fighting rebels against tyranny, they are a dark-age group of bigots and legitimate threats to worldwide infrastructure by attacking shipping lanes. Shipping lanes keep food and medicine moving around the world, it’s not just about the USA, most developed nations are supportive of responding to the Houthis with force.
edit: The situation with the Houthis is more about Iran and US than it is about Gaza/israel, PLEASE I beg of you to read up on the timeline and history before trying to argue with me and understand that the world is more nuanced than you want it to be, and in fact I challenge you to read up on this story and its history and NOT be disappointed on some level. There is no “good guy” in this, everyone is shit. Also I am turning off inbox replies so I don’t have to argue with reactionaries. Save your energy.
They stopped the blockade when there was a ceasefire in Gaza, then they started it up again when the ceasefire ended.
They are doing whatever they can to stop a “a dark-age group of bigots” (israel) from continuing it’s genocidal actions
My friend, that was between US and Iran and had NOTHING to do with Gaza, the Houthis were proxy players and as a result were treated like pawns. Seriously, read up on events and understand that what we’re told is never the truth.
Then why did the blockade stop and start at the same time ceasefire started and ended
Also: iran also wants the genocide to end
The real “dark-age bigots” are the people who don’t want to end the genocide
Read up on the “blockade” and Houthis’ history and you will see a performative stunt funded by Iran and Houthis willing to do anything to get international attention.
NONE of them care about the genocide, if you believe they do, you’ve fallen for the whole pile of bullshit. There is a naive desire to seek out allies in the face of a horrific situation, but there are no allies. (I mean, unless all Americans decided to work together and marched on washington demanding action and removal of our current so-called administration, but we can’t even get our own progressive side to stop arguing about if the Houthis are “bad or good” so I don’t have much hope that anyone is going to do more than bitch at each other on the internet while people continue to die needlessly for no other reason than humans are too easily swayed by emotional appeals one way or another.)
If you translate any of this as anti-semitism you are a moron who belongs on Trump’s cabinet.
Then WHY did the blockade stop and start at the same time ceasefire started and ended.
Doing anything you can to bring international attention to a genocide is not only a good thing, it is every country’s duty under international law
Because Iran was paying them. Please read the actual story. I cannot be a current events professor here, repeating the same shit doesn’t change the story, Houthis are not your heros.
This mf spittin.
Then why did the blockade stop and start at the same time ceasefire started and ended
LITERALLY specifically to fool low-information people like you.
Source?
Oh, honey
US and Iran and had NOTHING to do with Gaza
Iran is US enemy only because it objects to Israel policies.
That’s not really true. The US staged a coup in Iran in the 50’s to take their oil and give power to the shah, and during the Iranian revolution, Carter allowed the same shah to take refuge in the US (against the advice of foreign policy advisors like Kissinger). This outraged the Iranians who assumed that the US was preparing to reinstall him in another coup, leading them to seize the US embassy and take hostages, causing a breakdown of relations. The US went on to support Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war. Israel is a major factor, but there’s a lot of bad blood besides that, mostly because of the CIA’s actions (which were motivated by oil).
Yeah the reason Iran hates us is we killed there democracy and overthrew there very popular president. Because of Communist Allegations which weren’t true in the slightest.
100%.
Iran had no problem with America, it only had a problem with Britain, since they had been exploiting them as a colonial power. Truman actually forbid the CIA from doing what it wanted because he understood it to be a democratic, anti-colonial struggle. But the CIA and Eisenhower just had to wait for him to leave office, and Eisenhower came in not really understanding the situation and with both the CIA and Churchill asking him to sign off on it. It ended up being a bargaining chip, the US would overthrow Mossadegh to protect BP’s profits, and in exchange the UK would join NATO and support the Korean War. The Iranians got completely fucked over, just for trying to get out from under the thumb of colonial exploitation and reassert control over their own resources (and they weren’t the only ones). Part of the reason the coup succeeded was because Mossadegh trusted the US, and they exploited that trust to stab him in the back.
And nowadays, Americans are not only completely ignorant of that history, but even have the audacity to say things like “Islam is incompatible with democracy.” Like, motherfucker, you are incompatible with democracy.
The current US-Iran relationship is independent of that history. It is PNAC neocon origins, and pure Israel designed policy. History has little to do with the sanctions and axis of hate towards Iran, and it is disingenuous to suggest that Iran’s resistance is based on long irrelevant issues.
Chill. I don’t disagree with you that the current tensions are heavily impacted by the conflict with Israel, but I’m just supplying additional context that relations have also been bad for decades, for reasons not directly related to that. There’s nothing “disingenuous” to providing historical context, and just because tensions currently are related to something else doesn’t mean that history is irrelevant or that supplying context is “disingenuous.” You don’t get to just declare things to be “independent of history,” that’s not how anything works. If Iran was neutral on Israel, the bad blood would not just disappear overnight.
I’m on your side here, I’m just trying to be accurate about things.
I promise you, there is a lot more between the US and Iran than Israel.
Iran is US enemy only because it objects to Israel policies.
My god the lack of historical awareness in this generation is going to give me an aneurism. I deeply hate you all. Get better.
https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-relations-iran-1953-2023
Edit: don’t bother replying with your nonsense, just read and learn more. I already blocked you and like, half the people here who have learning disabilities.
The disingenous harrassment on this issue is that “The US must continue to hate Iran because of their successful coup on the Shah, and Iran never congratulated the US for the favour”. Hate against Iran today, since 1999/2001, is pure and simple, part of service to Israel agenda.
Removed by mod
I know they have done horrible things and continue to do bad things but if the US would stop propping up all the other bad guys then this situation would resolve itself. We keep sticking our nose in that business and it will never bring about a resolution. The US hasn’t won a single war since WWII. They didn’t defeat the north Koreans the Vietnamize or the Taliban. They didn’t win the domestic ‘War on drugs’ They won’t win their war on freedom of body choice either. The truth is the US is losing and only ones winning are our enemies. Especially the ones we are helping.
Wow crazy how they just attack shipping lanes for no reason other than that they’re bigots, also crazy how their attacks just randomly happen to correspond with Israeli violence towards Palestinians and primarily target Israeli shipping. Almost as if they’re rational actors acting in retaliation - but no, they’re just crazy bigots doing terrorism for no reason other than “they hate us for our freedoms.”
It’s wild what a childish picture of the world people have.
I am against Israel’s government also, but “anyone who attacks israel is my friend” is an even more childish picture, I am providing realistic nuance, not mindless hugboxes ineffectual armchair political strategists. You don’t HAVE to have a black-and-white picture of the world, I promise it’s okay to NOT take a side about some issues.
I promise it’s okay to NOT take a side about some issues.
Is that what you think you’re doing? Not taking a side by justifying one side bombing the other?
No, I’m saying the reality is more nuanced than you or I know, and if you’re out cheering every time a Houthi sinks a shipping vessel you’re as dumb as the right. The situation is complicated and not as cartoonishly simple as most people in this post are making it out to be. Don’t view this as “good guys and bad guys” or you will be another mindless drone complicite in the agendas of powerful assholes.
No, I’m not doing back and forth about it. Have a good one.
They’re attacking ships in international waters, killing sailors.
They’re not the good guys.
To add, this particular region isn’t a country as that term is understood by anyone. It is lawless, unincorporated territory without anyone in charge.
It’s finders keepers. First country who can bring law and order to the territory gets to keep it, and the Republic of Yemen, has proved either unwilling and incapable.
To be clear, it would be fine if the people in this territory wanted to live like it’s the year 600 and kept to themselves, but that’s not what they want. They want to be part of a new Islamic caliphate and rule the entire world.
Not gonna happen ✅.
There’s a handful of very vocal posters on here that are just cooked. They think that anyone fighting the US is automatically the good guy, and life just isn’t that simple.
They think that anyone fighting the US is automatically the good guy, and life just isn’t that simple.
Actually, it kinda is. For the same reason the US, the UK, and the USSR were all allies during WWII, and were all “the good guys” in that conflict, despite having drastically different ideologies. Because the other side was committing a major genocide, and had to be stopped above all else.
The genocide must be stopped, and neither US political party is willing to offer us a chance to vote against it. Therefore, it can only be stopped through military force, and we don’t really have the luxury of waiting for some faction to suddenly emerge out of thin air that has the strength to fight and win while also being perfectly aligned ideologically. The very least we can do is offer our verbal support to the anti-genocide side, regardless of their reasons.
But if I’m wrong, then enlighten me. How exactly do you envision stopping the genocide?
The allies fought together in WWII because the axis attacked them. The genocide not only had nothing to do with it, war decisions were explicitly made to leave intact the concentration camp system (for example not bombing railroads that took people to the camps) because any whiff of supporting Jews would have damaged political support for the war. The people in the camps were only freed at the very end of the war.
The allies were the same countries that crippled Germany’s economy after WWI, leaving its society vulnerable to the demagogery of Hitler. I don’t believe they can be black-and-white described as “the good guys”.
Yeah, that’s the point. Many of the countries who were part of the Allies were doing it for their own interests, as world-dominating colonial powers. But whatever their motivations, they’re still correctly regarded as “the good guys” because the other side was the fucking Nazis. Likewise, Ansar Allah and similar groups may have their own motivations, their own problems, their own sins, but the other side is committing genocide.
And the reason that literally every single conflict from Korea to Vietnam to Iraq and so on is justified by comparing it to WWII is that virtually everyone was and is on the same page about it, for different reasons. Yeah the leadership was motivated more by maintaining power, but that doesn’t mean that everyone fighting at the time or that everyone looking back on it supported/supports the Allies on the same motivation.
Once Israel and the US have been defeated and the genocide has stopped, then sure, let’s look at Ansar Allah’s position on gay rights or whatever. Until then they are some of the only ones doing anything to keep Israel in check, and we desperately need someone to do that, because again, the genocide must stop.
Removed by mod
Exactly what nazis would say if asked about why they tried to exterminate the jews.
Good god you’re broken beyond repair.
Except my solution is not to exterminate Israel. Fighting genocide by supporting a different group of genocidal maniacs is lunacy. Hamas is bad. Israel is bad. I can’t even say who is worse, morally. Israel just happens to have greater capacity for inflicting their evil right now.
Sometimes, there are no good guys.
You didn’t answer the question. The genocide must stop, how do you envision stopping it? If you denounce every actual, practical solution without offering any other option, then how is your position meaningfully different from just outright supporting it?
That same line about how “they’d be even worse than us if they ever got power,” has been used by virtually every colonialist project on earth. It’s wild to watch an old school, 1800’s style colonial project playing out in 2025 and to see all the same rhetoric being used, it’s like getting in a time machine.
I don’t have an answer. I just know supporting Islamists is not the answer.
We don’t owe you an answer to that question.
til fighting against a genocide doesn’t make someone a good guy
we have to be respectful i guessIf you still believe in slavery, treating women as property and making it illegal for them to have an education etc, then you’re not the good guy.
Awful people do occasionally end up on the right side of an issue.
Child marriage is still legal in 38 states, you people kidnap students for having an opinion.
Your rapist president is dismantling your department of education and slavery is still legal as per your constitution.
You guys have killed millions and destroyed dozens of countries in the span of 50 years for economic gains, you have torture camps and trans aren’t even recognized anymore.
stop with all this righteousness… maybe if the US stopped meddling in other countries things would change.
The US would still have chattel slavery if the slaves never resisted their chains. Women would still be the property of their husbands and not be allowed to vote or work if they did not fight for their rights. There is nothing about western “values” that made these things happen, they were not granted upon us by our holy and just rulers or even decided on by the masses in a vacuum. They were hard fought through decades of collective struggle and civil war.
It would be a lot easier for the people of Yemen to do the same if they were allowed to experience the same peace as is experienced in the west, and their efforts weren’t constantly thwarted by imperialist powers.
you describe a decent chunk of the usa and its leaders if you just change “education” to “abortion” (although that’s probably not far either), so it’s kind of a not good guy doing a good thing vs a not good guy fighting the not good guy for the bad guy
They are attacking Norwegian boats. The majority of the boats they are attacking aren’t even from the USA or going to the USA…
They have not been operating with honesty for some ships but as someone else pointed out, the majority had ties to the US and Israel. They’ve also been very clear about why they do this. I’m not saying they are admirable, but they are not that wrong.
I don’t think it’s bad to admit that they are generally doing something good while also committing bad mistakes.
JD Vance was just quoted saying 90% of the traffic was headed to Europe. I’m sure he’s exaggerating as much as you. Not too long ago the United States had good sounds intelligence so…. Idk not my business anyway. Don’t fuck with civilian vessels. Hit real military targets and get hit back with military assets. All I see is a bunch of fucking terrorist and terrorist supporters to be honest.
I can see why you think I might be exaggerating but at some point I checked the wikipedia page listing Houthi attacks on ships and spent a good amount of time checking each one more carefully.
Also false. The majority of boats when the US blockade was active had direct ties to the countries on the blockade list.
Notable example True Confidence was owned by US Oaktree Capital until it was sold right before passing through the Red Sea. https://www.ft.com/content/7968438c-ec7c-424d-aaed-42d99e2a51a7
Isn’t that a bit… Islamophobic and colonialist? You’re also making a lot of assumptions about Yemen here.
Removed by mod
If I was a sailor, I simply wouldn’t work for a ship associated with Israel.
They’re not attacking Chinese ships, they’re not attacking Turkish ships, they’re not attacking South African ships.
Removed by mod
That is where they are but not where they came from. If we didn’t bomb and kill every person who opposes us and prop up the governments who kill and torture them then perhaps they wouldn’t be attacking others. Millions of americans in the coming years are going to finally figure out what the rest knows. When the government treats people like criminals many will become criminal. Don’t kid yourself about the brown part. If they were white there would be more talking.
Why are they doing it?
Saudi Arabia has been bombing Yemen for years
lots of warmongers trying to whitewash US and israeli war crimes in there.
Interesting thread.
It’s exhausting to keep track of everything that is wrong about this.
Because frankly, the leak is more shocking than the bombing. I have no knowledge of any regime throughout history that has done anything close to that level of incompetence.
The Signal chat “leak” was 100% arranged and intentional. Every person in that group was typing full copy-edited paragraphs like they were on reddit, not a chat room. They added one of the most conservative and compliant voices in the “liberal” press and somehow nobody in that small group noticed. And then he left to break the story as soon as he could instead of remaining a fly on the wall as long as possible like any real journalist worth their salt would.
Nah man, this was a little stage play to make this cabinet look like tough guys carefully making hard choices. To soften any public backlash against them bombing civilian buildings to rubble without congress even declaring war. I wouldn’t trust a damn thing that Jeff Goldberg pens.
And to be honest? If I’m right, this is maybe the most competent op that the Trump II admin has pulled off so far.
