this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2024
112 points (95.2% liked)

World News

32285 readers
1 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
all 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] PanArab@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Solidarity with the people of Yemen. I would rather share the burden than just watch. I predict many share my feelings and some might act on it.

Viva la resistance

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago

✊✊✊ Stand together with Ansar Allah

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 11 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

There is no way this will end well. Mainstream news coverage is already unhinged.

Acts like this typically take Congressional approval. There is no emergency here, this is defending shipping lines. This is illegal.

[–] schmi713@kbin.social 17 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I certainly agree that this won't help the situation in the middle east and will probably inflame already tense relations.

That being said, Biden followed domestic laws to a T in this situation. The War Powers Act gives him the ability to do operations like this so long as congress was notified and consulted (they were according to CNN - Though I would like to see it stated from a better source). It would only require further congressional approval if US assets are still there carrying out these acts 60-Days after the inital notification.

The coalition repeatedly warned the Houthi's that patience was running thin here. While this situation is horrible in its own right, I don't know what everyone expects when a group gets between multiple countries' and their money...

[–] nekandro@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

The only thing the Houthis got between was multiple countries and their trade with Israel. The fact that they would rather support a genocide than make money...

[–] Diva@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Biden criticized Trump after the assassination of Soleimani 4 years ago, for the exact same thing.

"Donald Trump does not have the authority to take us into a war with Iran without Congressional approval. A president should never take this nation to war without the informed consent of the American people." -Joe Biden 1/6/2020

This is the US explicitly siding with Israel re: the genocide in Gaza, it's a major escalation.

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Biden's a hypocrite, this is nothing new. He had both houses under control and still failed to legislate federal protections for trans people.

[–] regul@lemm.ee 9 points 2 years ago

the last time the US "declared war" was 1942

[–] yo_scottie_oh@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

There is no emergency here, this is defending shipping lines.

ehh, not just any shipping lines, though

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

OIL shipping lines o7

[–] Aurix@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Depends whether this is a limited operation or a beginning of another war. Because that will shatter the already worldwide fragile state.

[–] Krono@lemmy.today -3 points 2 years ago (2 children)

One of the main guarantees of the US-led world order is that the Straight of Hormuz will stay open for commerce. The fact that the Houthis can shut it down is a huge blow to US hegemony.

In the modern age of drone warfare, US aircraft carriers are a liability. Sure, we can send in the USS Medical Bankruptcy carrier strike group and launch a few million dollar missiles, but the blockade stays in place.

There seems to be only two options to stop this blockade: End the genocide, or invade Yemen in a war against the Houthis. Genocide Joe can't afford to start a middle east war in an election year, so this tit-for-tat will continue into the near future.

[–] cabillaud@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

It's spelled 'Strait of Hormuz', not 'Straight of Hormuz'... And the situation takes place in the Red Sea, not the strait, just saying

[–] intelshill@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 years ago

US aircraft carriers were a liability the moment the nuclear weapon was invented. The only pure-military target that can justify a nuclear strike is a carrier, and a carrier is such a weapon that it might legitimately not trigger MAD protocols.