- Iran is helping the Houthis try to secure Russian anti-ship missiles, Reuters reported.
- These could improve their attacks on ships in the Red Sea and threaten US warships, an expert said.
- Two officials said Houthis met Russians twice in Tehran this year, and more meetings are coming.
Iran is helping the Houthi rebels try to secure Russian anti-ship missiles, Reuters reported, citing three Western and regional sources.
Two regional officials aware of the talks said the Houthis and Russians have met at least twice this year in Tehran, where discussions to supply the missiles were underway.
They added that more meetings are expected in the coming weeks.
Because the ships attacked don’t match the specifications they’ve given. Jesus Christ.
I’m sorry that you think “doing what they can” to stop an ongoing genocide by attacking civilians, which is what they’re doing even if they were ALL Israeli ships, is contributing to stopping a genocide. I hope you get help.
Your source above 403’s and is specifically a (Liberal, to be sure) Zionist source.
The few times I’ve seen US media claim that the ships didn’t match, they did match to Israeli ownership, one step removed.
Why are you so certain of something that is literally part of the debate that you don’t understand why others disagree with you?
You’re like a quantum anti-genocidal person. You post against it, but no one fighting the genocide is perfect enough for you to the point that you readily believe the people committing genocide as sources against the people actually trying to fight the genocide.
In that vein, It is strange to me that you advocate against one of the two MOST EFFECTIVE actions taken against Israel to date: The blockade that has done immense financial pain to Israel and bankrupted one of their ports.
And I’m sure any source I provided would have similar excuses you’d trot out, because the fact of the matter is that you just don’t want to believe the “A Curse Upon The Jews” folks who’ve been running a brutal and oppressive regime in their own country might not be great people, despite being anti-West.
Is this like the incident where the terminally online tried to claim that one member of a board of directors of a shipping company being Israeli was the justification for attacking a ship that was not heading to, owned by, under the flag of, or manned by Israelis?
What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?
I’m sorry for not being an enlightened anti-imperialist like you. I guess intentionally targeting civilians is just bad to me or something, I must be some kind of shitlib.
Get help. We’re done here.
I’ll ignore the typo where you imply I wouldn’t want to believe Ansarallah, as I get what you meant. Still probably worth an edit, though.
Secondly, yes, the Yemeni government is 100% a brutal and oppressive regime. I am absolutely not saying they’re not. They are.
Are they also doing something that is a recognized form of war throughout history (A blockade), that is also acceptable under current laws of war (What do you think happens to a civilian ship that tries to run a blockade) that is also one of the most damaging things Israel has suffered in the war against the Palestinians?
It means you’re like someone against segregation in the south, but who also didn’t support Dr Martin Luther King, because he was antisemitic/homophobic, Malcolm X because he was a too icky and didn’t condemn violence, the Freedom riders because they broke the law. And to justify all of this, you use newspapers articles exclusively from the south.
We may be done, but you’re the one who needs to get help. You don’t get to be against genocide if you’re also against EVERYTHING anyone does to fight it, especially when it is effective.
You still haven’t provided even a single source of this. The Haaretz article doesn’t count (Not because it is Haaretz, though that should be enough) but because it isn’t even a source FOR ANYTHING. IT 403’s. It’s a dead fucking link
Learning to read would be a good start.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Deg7VrpHbM
I’d ask for you to come back once you’re capable of honesty, but honestly, I wouldn’t want to speak to someone like you again. I mean, simping for the murder of civilians to do absolutely nothing of value, because the murderous oppressive group says it’s definitely to stop genocide, despite not even meeting their own criteria? That’s some deeply immoral stuff. That’s not the kind of thing you look back on sheepishly, it’s reflective of deeply broken values. Not the kind of people I’d sit at a table with. 9 Nazis and all.
You’re right, I did misread that, but it still isn’t true. Ansarallah are not a non-oppressive government.
As for the link, I’m not sure what the fuck is going on, but it isn’t live for all people. It 403’s for me with multiple browsers from multiple ip addresses.
I wouldn’t want to speak to someone that explicitly lies to back a genocide.
I have never said the murder of civilians is okay. I do not believe it. You seem to be perfectly fine with the murder of Palestinians, even using articles from the country committing genocide to justify being against the people trying to do something against it.
Enforcing a blockade is an acceptable act of war that is not considered the murder of civilians. If a boat runs a blockade, how does the country enforcing the blockade enforce it?
Do you think it was wrong for the USN to enforce a blockade against the southern traitor states? Was that deeply immoral even though it was a major component of the end of slavery?
You are a shitlib that is against genocide, not because it is wrong, but because it makes you feel icky. As does all of the effective measures against it, so you are against them, too. Ickiness isn’t a good measure of morality.