US to relist Yemen's Houthis as specially designated global terrorists, AP sources say
apnews.com
The Biden administration is expected to soon announce plans to redesignate Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen as specially designated global terrorists, according to two people familiar with the White House decision and a U.S. official.
The move comes as the Houthis have launched dozens of attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea. The group says it has attacked the ships in response to Israel’s military operations in Gaza in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel.
The three people familiar with the decision were not authorized to comment and requested anonymity to discuss the matter ahead of the expected formal announcement.
You are viewing a single comment
Agreed!
Now do Israel too!
God, if only.
How dare they... checks notes... defend themselves!
Israel is so brave! Defending itself by stealing a country from the people it was promised to through a campaign of terrorism, and than squeezing down even harder on the oppressed people’s living in the tiny reserves given to them, where they get to live in constant fear of death by Israeli soldiers or missiles.
How dare they … checks facts … use terrorism, colonialism, and genocide to attack others.
Taking land to make distance from the people trying to murder them for 70 years. Making a massive security apparatus to protect themselves from the people trying to murder them for 70 years.
If Arab nationalists and Palestinians weren't trying to murder Jews, none of this would have happened, they seem addicted to it. This war could be over tomorrow if they released the hostages and surrendered, but clearly they prefer violence against Jews to peace.
If you want to know why they're in enclaves and why they don't have many freedoms, it's because of all the Jew murdering and refusal to pacify themselves. They want unreasonable unattainable goals, to destroy Israel and take all their land, and they are willing to employ violence until they get it, which means violence forever evidently.
Choosing violence when you can't win by violence is a bad idea.
Israel is the one who took land away and tried to murder people.
That land was promised to the Palestinians. Israel waged a terrorist campaign against Britain to steal it.
Israel started this, end of story.
It's okay to take away freedom from children because their grandparents and a neighbor fought against Israel
>If Arab nationalists and Palestinians weren't trying to murder Jews,
the problem isn't their jewishness, and i know this because israel has muslim, christian, and atheist governmental members.
the problem is their israeliness.
>Taking land to make distance from the people trying to murder them for 70 years
why do you think they are trying to murder them? did something happen 74 years ago?
Bombing Rafah Crossing in self defense?
Yes. They were attacking an underground tunnel that could have been used to supply Hamas, and they warned the Gazans operating the gate in advance.
By bombing and sniping civilians on the street?
I can't keep up with your moving goal posts, what incident are you referring to? Israel has been clear they will attack valid Hamas targets no matter where they are found, even when Hamas hides among civilians or uses ambulances and hospitals for their military purposes.
The bombing of Rafah Crossing and the Israel sniping of Palestinian medics in Gaza.
The Israelis have claimed that one in three Gazans killed during their invasion has been a member of Hamas. Never even mind how they came to that statistic, but that still leaves two in three Gazans who aren't valid Hamas targets that they admitted to knowingly slaughter.
I'm not seeing anything about gazan medics being sniped by IDF in this current conflict, Google isn't returning any results that match what you are describing, can you provide a credible source?
Given that the average urban combat that involves explosives has 90% civilian casualties the 61% civilian casualties that Israel reportedly caused is actually evidence that they are very selective with their targets, not indiscriminate. Going in to a well-prepared urban terrorist den without air support would have led to many IDF casualties and is therefore a non-starter.
The statistic that 90% of casualties in wars are civilians don't seem to be supported from what I can tell. It varies a lot but for example the civilian casualty ratio for WWII was like 67%. For the 2008 Gaza war the civilian casualty ratio was more like 74% (noncombatants) and 64% for the 2014 war (unless you only look at IDF sources, then it's more like 40%). I can't really get details on the 61%, are they counting all males 14+ as combatants? Even then it comes to 69% civilian casualties. I don't see how they got to 61%, which is still very high for modern conflicts as stated in the article you linked.
This is what the UN article is referring to which I don't understand why you think it shows that Israel is trying to reduce civilian deaths. What do you think Israel is counting as combatants? The numbers they claim only make sense if you think all males, including teen-age, are somehow combatants. Which makes no sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualty_ratio
https://gwern.net/doc/politics/2010-roberts.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Gaza_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Israeli_strikes_and_Palestinian_casualties_in_the_2014_Gaza_War
https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians
I found a few links of the IDF killing medics in 2023, plus some bonus articles
www.timesofisrael.com/after-damning-report-idf-says-it-is-probing-killing-of-gazan-medic-in-june/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/gaza-protests-latest-idf-condemned-edited-video-angel-of-mercy-medic-razan-al-najjar-a8389611.html
https://www.barrons.com/news/israel-denies-bombing-gaza-ambulance-killing-medics-41a3e09c
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/16/escape-from-al-shifa-how-a-gaza-medic-dodged-israeli-patrols-snipers
https://english.palinfo.com/news/2024/01/16/312909/
Literally yes. Israel doesn't have a right to defend itself from its occupied territories. Of course that's even assuming we can call what's going on now "self-defense", but even if it was this isn't a war between countries, so the idea that they have a right to defend themselves doesn't apply any more than the Germans had any right to defend themselves from the Warsaw uprising.
Jews weren't thrown into the Warsaw ghetto because they attacked peaceful German citizens unprovoked. I find your comparison distasteful.
i find your pearl clutching disingenuous.
It's so like you to go ad hominem
ad hominems are personal attacks and they are expressly prohibited on lemmy.world and c/news. if you think someone is violating the rules, you should report that.
"Unprovoked" uh... you understand Palestinians have suffered violence at the hands of Israel every day since at least 1948, right?
This conflict started before then, when Arab nationalists started murdering Jews for legally buying land nearby. They keep choosing violence and losing and their situation worsens, you'd think they'd learn by now.
In 1948 they declared war on Israel, their forces partook in ethnic cleansing and genocide against Jews in Jerusalem and the west bank, and they lost the war, losing territory. They have refused to pacify themselves since then.
Let's set aside the truth of that statement because it frankly doesn't matter. Palestinians have suffered ethnic cleansing, occupation and apartheid since 1949. Every one of these is an act of war that makes resistance, including using violence, perfectly legitimate.
How do you separate half the issue? How can you believe such simplification really describes the situation? If it did, we could have solved it long ago, but the reality is a lot more complex with too much history of atrocities in all directions. If we want to do something about it, we need to start by recognizing the whole problem
It describes the situation because no matter of Palestinian mob violence in Mandate Palestine justifies the Nakba. I could go on about how Arabs had no problem with pre-Zionism Aliyahs or actually look into it and see what the first instances of organized violence is, or explain how Zionist terrorists also attacked Arabs but like I said it doesn't matter.
Israel committed ethnic cleansing in 1949, and continues to do so today. There's just nothing in the scale of Mandate Palestine that could've justified that.
Even if it's legitimate, it's not viable, wars can't be won by outrage alone. Massacring raping and kidnapping civilians on the other side will not achieve their stated goals, but it will make life worse for Palestinians. Palestine needs to acknowledge the reality of their situation.
If they were to unconditionally surrender like Japan and Germany did, perhaps they would fare as well as those places do today. Violence will only lead to more violence.
No way. Germany and Japan are doing well today because the US wanted them to do well so they can be part of their bloc against the Soviet Union. Israel doesn't want Palestinians to do well; it wants to erase them from the map. That's what wanting to "settle" Palestine means.
Do you want to see what happens when Palestinians unconditionally surrender? Look at the West Bank. There's barely any resistance there, even after it intensified in the last few years. And the result? They're the victims of a slow-burn genocide.
Additional links
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2017/5/23/the-nakba-did-not-start-or-end-in-1948
https://ismi.emory.edu/documents/stein-publications/website%20docs%202011-2004/website%20docs%202000%20and%20earlier/JNF-Stein1984.pdf
https://www.972mag.com/mapping-the-palestinian-villages-erased-and-replaced-with-jewish-towns/
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sursock_Purchases
Israel was the state with plans for ethnic cleansing. And there is plenty of historians that disagree with your statement in light of released Israeli archives
https://imeu.org/article/plan-dalet
https://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The%20Debate%20About%201948.html
https://merip.org/1998/06/fifty-years-through-the-eyes-of-new-historians-in-israel/
Yeah, compare labor camps built by the Nazis for the extermination of Jews, where Jews were forcefully transited into, to a piece of land that was claimed and given to the Palestinians. This comparison is absurd.
DID YOU KNOW
It is possible to defend one's country without killing 1% of a region's civilian population in less than half a year?
Where's your outrage at 600K dead Syrians @PugJesus@kbin.social? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Syrian_civil_war#:~:text=Estimates%20of%20the%20total%20number,613%2C407%20as%20of%20March%202023.
Oh wait, can't blame Israel for it, nm.
I wasn't outraged at 600k dead Syrians? News to me.
When Trump pulled our support for the Kurds, it felt like a blow to the gut.
Trump was tight with Erdoğan (who was, incidentally, tight with Putin) so of course he backed his buddy over some upstart insurgents without the money to fly to DC and jerk him off.
But Al-Assad is also tight with Putin, which makes Trump's siding with Israel (which is also heavily dependent on Russia for net new immigrants and so a tentative ally) against Syria somewhat peculiar. That is, until you note that Iran is involved, and exists as its own pole within the Middle East that's more allied with China than Russia and hostile to Saudi Arabia, which is loosely allied with Turkey and Russia, but which has been on bad terms with Iran for decades.
So... uh... its complicated?
for this, we can literally blame the media. when they are silent about the syrian attacks and give israel 24h coverage, of course more people are going to have opinions on the subject the news is covering.
Uh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Israel_conflict_during_the_Syrian_civil_war
What a pathetic comment.
Did you know that reprisals for unprovoked attacks don't have to be symmetrical and that doesn't make it any less defensive?
Did you know that reprisal attacks on civilian populations and collective punishment are fucking war crimes? This isn't news; it's been well-established since the end of WW fucking 1.
But hey, continue calling Israel's war crimes 'defensive' and maybe you'll convince yourself of the holy necessity of genocide.
These attacks are against Hamas, the once-elected government of Gaza who has widespread support there, not civilian populations.
Yes yes keep crying wolf until the word genocide is meaningless.
@DarkGamer
It's not about Hamas. Without Hamas, there still would be a forced displacment and killing of civilian who stayed in Gaza, like there were before Hamas.
@PugJesus @MicroWave @gedaliyah
The blockade in its current form is because of Hamas, there was a far less restrictive blockade before they were elected. Without Hamas there is no October 7th, which means no war and no airstrikes.
It's possible that they just would have chosen a different terrorist group dedicated to genocide of Jews to back though, as they have historically. It's hard to know what lies on the path not traveled.
seems pretty obvious that there was a blockade before october 7, so it's not possible that october 7 was the start of anything.
The blockade was put in place when Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza to maintain Israel's safety, and a more restrictive one implemented when Hamas was elected. Turns out it was a pretty good idea to have security at this border and to deny them resources with which they can attack Israel. October 7th was proof that it was insufficient, and it represents a start to this war and to the bombing. Gaza fared quite better before this unprovoked attack.
a blockade is an act of war.
Indeed it can be, a blockade against Israel caused the 6-day war. The difference is, Hamas' cannot win, they can just poke the bear.
so Israel started this long before Oct 7
lmao
Yeah, we get it, you don't think Palestinians are human beings.
You keep trying to put words into my mouth, maybe focus on positions I actually hold?
Is this like when a cop bursts into your house and shoots your wife, your kid, and your dog, because they thought they smelled weed?
Because smoking weed, a victimless and harmless act, is comparable to violent hordes murdering and raping hundreds of your people? What a terrible analogy.
I've got a stack of 1950s-era literature arguing that it isn't.
Why would you describe the IDF like this? Are you anti-Semitic?
Doubling down on your terrible analogy I see.
The idf does no such thing and you know it. Being a Hamas apologist isn't a good look.
A Palestinian female freed from Israeli detention said more than 15 fellow Palestinian women were raped by Israeli interrogators to force them to confess to charges leveled against them and collaborate with the Israeli intelligence.
Not a credible source: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/council-on-american-islamic-relations-cair/
Okay, enjoy yourself.
Didn't make it past the banner on the top huh?
believe women
What women? This is a biased website with low credibility supposedly sharing an anonymous account from another website as though it were factual. There isn't even a name associated with these claims. More like, "believe Hamas." I'll believe it when there's evidence presented from a credible source. There's a lot of anti-Israeli disinformation floating around and this is a known source of it.
would that you were always so incredulous.