US destroyer has ballistic missiles fired toward it, after responding to attack on commercial tanker
Two ballistic missiles were fired from Houthi rebel-controlled Yemen toward a US warship in the Gulf of Aden, after the US Navy responded to a distress call from a commercial tanker that had been seized by armed individuals, the US military said Sunday.
The tanker, identified as the Central Park, had been carrying a cargo of phosphoric acid when its crew called for help that “they were under attack from an unknown entity,” the US Central Command said in a statement.
The USS Mason, a guided-missile destroyer, and allied ships from a counter-piracy task force that operates in the Gulf of Aden and off the coast of Somalia responded to the call for help and “demanded release of the vessel” upon arrival, Central Command said.
“Subsequently, five armed individuals debarked the ship and attempted to flee via their small boat,” said the statement posted on social media platform X.
Take your complaint up with US Central Command, they're the ones who described them as "ballistic missiles". It's not sensationalizing to use the phrase your sources use, they'd be criticized for bad reporting if they just said "missiles"
They are ballistic missiles, the fact that it's in the title is the irrelevant part because people see "ballistic" and go ooo that must be bad when in reality a ballistic missile against a us destroyer is an insanely idiotic waste of money.
Why would people think ballistic is bad? You seem to be the only one inferring that here.
It's an important fact. These rebels are well known to be supplied by Iran, specifically with ballistic missiles which they have used before against Saudi targets.
And they would be supplying them with missiles if we remove the distinction.
What’s your point?
In a military incident, what ordnance is used matters.
Yes so saying ballistic instead of just missile is an important distinction.
I've already explained this, I'm not responsible for anyone else's reading comprehension bud.
You’ve explained incorrectly with your bias leading.
Sensationalism isn’t just adding words, there must be intent there and you’re just assuming intent.
You claim critical thinking and this and that, yet it only sounds like you had sensationalism arms your word of the day and are taking it at face value. Instead of understanding that intent also matters.
Try some critical thinking of your own, and maybe some reading comprehension as well if you want to try and use that against others. Which is incredibly ironic considering you’ve proved that lack of yours by assuming all of this and missing the intent….
I didn't lead anyone anywhere bud.
That's quite literally sensationalism. Instead of houthi missile it's houti make ballistic missile so the uneducated go "wait they have ballistic missiles" and read a story that is a nothing burger. It's like the seventh time they've been attacked loitering in the area.
Nope, you're judging it based on people that actually read like most of us in world News. The average person is not smart, and lacks critical thinking and judging by how many people don't get it they number may be a bit higher than I assumed. Yes intent matters, that's why they added ballistic lol.
No need, but you probably aught to rethink some things yourself.
Yes… yes you did lead, your sensationalizing of the headline border on propaganda due to the bias you’ve presented….
If they didn’t clarify ballistic, people would assume it was a much more sophisticated cruise missile. Sensationalism another way.
Since the average person lacks critical thinking (like you here again) they would put ballistic missile to remove sensationalism and propaganda that can be built by bad actors (you again here), since now someone doesn’t need to do extra research or further reading to find, no they are safe since they aren’t intercontinental or smart cruise missiles.
Thank god they told us they were dumb missiles.
You don't see the problem with saying I'm sensationalizing something by pointing out sensationalism? Doesn't make much sense does it?
No they would assume it's a missile, why do you assume it would mean cruise missile they're not even the most common missile type direct fire guided are.
Ballistic adds a reason to click, "wait houthis have ballistic missiles?" so they click and read. You still need to do extra research if you don't know what a ballistic missile is, it's never actually mentioned.
Intermediate range missile is more accurate and less sensational.
Projectile is very cromulent non-sensationalizing term, let’s use that. Oh wait, they were relaying communication and it would be unethical for them to relay different information.
Lots of avenues we could also go down, just give it up.
If you want to be tedious an arrow is technically a ballistic missile by some definitions, do you think they shot an arrow at a destroyer?
Which is why it’s important to say ballistic missile! Thank you!
Not at all, your argument makes no sense.
Sensationalism applies to removed words too, I’m sorry you can’t seem to comprehend this. Goodbye