• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I wonder if treating the Houthis as Iranian agents and retaliating against Iranian assets directly would be more effective than playing whack-a-mole against these missile launchers without addressing the source of the problem. I assume Biden’s advisors are wondering the same thing, but it’s hard to know where the line between deterrence and escalation is…

    Iran has enemies. Many of them are even worse than the Iranians, but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat, just like Iran is doing with the Houthis…

    • gnuhaut@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      but maybe the thing to do is to find some sympathetic group, arm them, and let them take the heat

      Hmm. I wonder if anyone has tried that yet?

      Sympathetic guys armed by the US to fuck with Iran include Saddam Hussein, ISIS and Israel.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think it’s technically correct to say that the US armed ISIS; ISIS seized weapons that the US provided to Iraq.

        Israel does a pretty good job of opposing Iran, and we can be confident that weapons provided to Israel aren’t going to be used against the US. I think it’s likely that the Houthis are acting up now not because they’re provoked by Israel but because Israel is preoccupied with something else.

        As for Saddam Hussein… He did a very good job of opposing Iran. The threat of eight years of war and hundreds of thousands of Iranian soldiers dead would be a very effective stick if we still had access to it. It’s ironic that the weak, pro-Iran government that is the result of US intervention in Iraq seems like it’s worse for US interests than Saddam was.

      • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Actually they can’t, they have a legal obligation under the UN Convention on Genocide to take extra-territorial actions in order to stop or prevent genocide. They are acting within international law. The ships going to Israel despite the active genocide are violating international law and complicit in the genocide themselves.

  • dan42O@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    What ever happened to talking and reaching an agreement and asking for favors and scratching each other back… like now we resort to uncivilized behavior by attacking the poorest countries.

    • CybranM@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t think there’s much negotiating with a terrorist organization indiscriminately attacking international shipping

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        The only terrorist organization here is the “coalition” that the burger empire scraped together. Yemen is interdicting shipping from countries supporting a literal genocide through their sovereign waters. Meanwhile, the terrorists from US and UK are bombing Yemen for this.