Kids were killed but the chat leak was funny and that's what has been the people talk about instead.
Imagine being the poor family, who is stuck living in Yemen because they cannot afford to relocate, whose kid has died by Trump's bombing. Then all you see in the news about how they joked with emojis in chat killing your kid. "Oh your kid was killed in that emoji airstrike." Tell me why the fuck you would grow up anything but radicalized.
Houthis are the only international actor acting in open military opposition to the genocide in Gaza. They are doing their best to enforce a shipping blockade pending a cessation of Israeli war crimes. The US obviously wants the genocide to continue, as well as all shipping trade through the area.
Are you actually asking?
The Houthi's are an Iranian controlled terrorist organization that have been attacking commercial shipping in the Red Sea since November 2023.
The Houthis have sunk two vessels and killed four crew members, forcing a lot of shipping to Europe to be diverted around the South of Africa.
The US and allies have been fighting the Iranian-backed Houthis for over a decade, this is just a recent resurgence following the war in Israel.
They leveled a building to hit 1 target
For me at this point it's just a matter of surprise.
I expect the US to bomb everywhere that isn't Japan, North America, European Union, or Israel
Hell I'm shocked they aren't throwing bombs at Australia because Elon Musk sent a vaguely worded email that implied it.
The reason why I SEEM to care more about the phones than the bombs, is because "US bombing innocent people? Sounds like a Tuesday... but damn how did we elect someone so incompetent that I find out about the specifics?"
The Houthis, is a Zaydi Shia Islamist political and military organization that emerged from Yemen in the 1990s. It is predominantly made up of Zaydi Shias, with their namesake leadership being drawn largely from the Houthi tribe. The group has been a central player in Yemen's civil war, drawing widespread international condemnation for its human rights abuses, including targeting civilians and using child soldiers. The Houthis are backed by Iran. The Houthis emerged as an opposition movement to Yemen president Ali Abdullah Saleh, whom they accused of corruption and being backed by Saudi Arabia and the United States.
Political context courtesy of the Arab Center in Washington DC:
TL;DR: The Houthis are backed by Iran, in direct regional competition to Saudi Arabian (and subsequently US) interests, and the war in Yemen is a direct result of 10 years worth of failed intervention by the Saudis.
Excerpt:
Exactly a decade ago, Saudi Arabia announced the launch of a military intervention in Yemen, promising to lead a coalition of more than 10 nations—although some would later end their participation—against the Houthi armed group, officially known as Ansar Allah, that had taken over power from President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. Backed by the United States, Britain, and other Western states with arms and shared intelligence, on March 26, 2015, the Saudi coalition commenced airstrikes on Houthi-controlled areas, initiating a conflict that would drag on for years. Riyadh’s initial expectation of a swift, six-week military operation to defeat the Houthis became a prolonged and costly entanglement that has tested Saudi Arabia’s ability to impose its will on its neighbor and to force the Houthis to give up their control over a large part of Yemen. Intervention Inception
Saudi Arabia’s rationale for intervention shifted over time as the conflict unfolded. At the outset, it cast the intervention as a direct response to President Hadi’s urgent appeal to the Gulf states and their international allies that he conveyed in a letter to the UN Security Council in March 2015. Hadi called for states “to provide immediate support in every form and take the necessary measures, including military intervention, to protect Yemen and its people from the ongoing Houthi aggression.” The Saudis initially conceived of the intervention as a decisive effort to reinstate Yemen’s legitimate government in the capital Sanaa. As the situation progressed, Saudi Arabia reframed its objective as restoring Yemen’s political process within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, which in 2011-2012 facilitated the transfer of power from former President Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi.
The core rationale behind Saudi Arabia’s intervention, however, stemmed from its perception of the Houthis as an Iranian proxy on the kingdom’s border. Riyadh feared that Iran’s influence through the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests. The kingdom saw the Houthi takeover of Sanaa not just as a challenge to Yemen’s stability but as a potential game changer in the broader Middle East power dynamics. In this context, Saudi Arabia framed its military intervention as a necessary response to protect its own security and regional influence.
Riyadh feared that the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests.
But while Saudi Arabia believed Iran to be the principal force behind the Houthi takeover, the extent of Iranian influence over the group at the time was, in fact, relatively limited. Although the Houthis depended on Iranian military and logistical support, particularly for weaponry and strategic advice, they were not fully under Iran’s control. Iran, while capable of advising the Houthis on strategic and policy matters, lacked the leverage to dictate their actions. Rather, local factors such as longstanding tribal rivalries in Yemen, the Houthis’ longtime opposition to the central government, and their pursuit of greater political power, were more influential in shaping the Houthis’ behavior. The Houthi alliances with former President Saleh and certain factions of the Yemeni military also played a crucial role in the group’s rise. In other words, Iran’s influence was significant, but it was not all-encompassing, as the Houthis had their own political and strategic goals. Nonetheless, Riyadh persisted in portraying the Houthis as a tool of Iranian expansionism. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabia’s prolonged antagonism may have ultimately strengthened Iran’s influence, as it pushed the Houthi armed group to deepen its reliance on Iranian military and logistical support.
They're brown and poor and our country is deep in the arms trade.
The Signal chat "leak" was 100% arranged and intentional. Every person in that group was typing full copy-edited paragraphs like they were on reddit, not a chat room. They added one of the most conservative and compliant voices in the "liberal" press and somehow nobody in that small group noticed. And then he left to break the story as soon as he could instead of remaining a fly on the wall as long as possible like any real journalist worth their salt would.
Nah man, this was a little stage play to make this cabinet look like tough guys carefully making hard choices. To soften any public backlash against them bombing civilian buildings to rubble without congress even declaring war. I wouldn't trust a damn thing that Jeff Goldberg pens.
And to be honest? If I'm right, this is maybe the most competent op that the Trump II admin has pulled off so far.
Bush and Obama did it too. Historically, it's been a targeted killing thing against Al-Qaeda (or so they have said), with whatever government they have, giving their blessing. If other sites are correct, Trump did it more, but it's kinda hard to pick nits there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Yemen
That's why a lot people are more upset over the lack of operational security than the action itself. They're not conducting themselves in a way that keeps our country safe, They skirting monitoring and can't even get that right.
opens a post with question in the title that is lamenting that news don't give any real answers and focus just on "trump bad" story.
all top comments are just "trump bad" and "all bad government" and has to scroll deep down to find an actual answer to the question posted.
leaves understanding much better why news don't focus on context and give just emotional side stories.
Because they couldn't fight back
This is why the leak because people are talking about it which can be covered up and denied by the shitlords and not the actual attack, which is unjustifiable.
And people continue to think these people are "idiots" and "incompetent" for all these things that they do. All of this is carefully orchestrated and planned to fool the average person. Don't fall for it. We're dealing with serious, horribly evil people with a dangerous agenda to rule the world.
One way to look at it: Yemen's current conflict is a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Put it another way, it's their Vietnam
The Yemen people aren’t white so they don’t care
To open a sea route or something
Because frankly, the leak is more shocking than the bombing. I have no knowledge of any regime throughout history that has done anything close to that level of incompetence.
While i work in the office, they play Military RTS for a living. This is so cool. Good for them.
Saudi Arabia has been bombing Yemen for years
Because they can
Calm down. Americans only recently learned where Palestine was. The grey mush they call a brain can only handle so much.
The same reason they are funding genocide in Palestine and the same reason Russia is invading Ukraine, control over oil fields and oil transport routes.
It's exhausting to keep track of everything that is wrong about this.
One could say that the group chat that shouldn't be (absolutely everything should be over official channels) has a lot to do with why bombing the poorest countries on Earth is a constant.
Hopefully this leadership is so incompetent that their stupidity like this gives some Ws to countries like Yemen. And by Ws I mean some of our terrorist in the sky dropping bombs instead drop into the ocean themselves. Kerplunk!
for the headlines. don't you remember the daily headlines. ran out of inflamatory bs.
lib priorities
Those chat logs show that we're only bombing them because of the Suez canal. That is ridiculous.
That kind of opsec violation makes being a US soldier so dangerous it’s stupid to every person with a brain who could possibly serve here.
The bad karma for bombing people who attacked one of our warships is nothing (because it’s fair if not brutal) compared to putting every single service member here in danger.
Peace, democracy, and freedom.
Because they can. That's it. That's the only reason.
