• Ross_audio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s a legitimate military strategy to disrupt trade and supply.

    I don’t condone this by any means but “terrorism” is not a synonym for “violence we don’t like”.

    This is terrorism, it’s asymmetric warfare by a military that controls a territory the size of Ireland.

    The west has been involved in bombing Yemen for years now.

    We call it strikes against “terrorists” and “rebels” but if you live there it’s just war.

    It’s worth noting that there are only 2 ways a war ends. A negotiated peace, or one side being wiped out. I’d rather we didn’t wipe out a large part of a country. So I’d like us to skip straight to diplomatic talks.

    Our first demand would likely be to de-escalate and cease violence.

    The first demand from the Houthis would probably be to stop supplying Saudi Arabia with weapons to use against them. And also to cease violence.

    Beyond that it gets complicated. Not a simplistic story of terrorists and bogeymen.

      • Ross_audio@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The Houthis already make demands. No side of any conflict just says “no”

        But by all means if they did say no to stopping violence when we stop bombing Yemen there is a time to fight back.

        Unfortunately it’s happened the opposite way around.

        Yemen have asked the West and Saudi Arabia to stop bombing them and we’ve said “no”. So the Houthis have started fighting back.

        • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          so according to your logic we’re bombing them for literally no reason? Just coz…

          “Felt cute, might bomb some houthis today”