• fastandcurious@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        They are protecting their civilians or the ones they can benefit from, and killing others who are not, they are not doing this in good faith

      • iain@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        10 months ago

        Cargo ships can take a longer route, they don’t need to be there. The US values cargo over human lives.

        • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          The longer route costs an additional million dollars in diesel alone. Even if you don’t care about the enormous economic impact, the environmental impact alone is huge.

          • iain@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            10 months ago

            Oh okay, so we’re killing people over causing environmental damage? Let’s murder the CEO of Nestle, BP etc. They deserve it way more!

            • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              10 months ago

              You know that isn’t what I am saying.

              As far as I’m aware, there have been no reports whatsoever of non-military targets being hit in the strikes. Targeting the infrastructure being used by a non-state group to disrupt the most critical trade route on earth is absolutely proportionate.

              The CEOs of those companies should be prosecuted instead, however there is not appropriate legislation for environmental damage in the UK and US.

              • nekandro
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                10 months ago

                Just like how Israel “only targeted valid military targets,” right? Yeah…

                • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Well yeah, except with the key difference of it being true

                  If there were credible reports of civilian targets being hit then it would be very different

                  • nekandro
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Military targets like Sanaa’s international airport? To deter Ansarallah launching… Missiles and boats?

                    Either US CENTCOM is dumber than I thought, or it’s just a cover to continue the Saudi genocide of Yemen.

              • iain@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                10
                ·
                10 months ago

                You know that isn’t what I am saying.

                It is what you’re implying. Even in this very comment: you just assume that violence is appropriate for protecting a trade route, but we have to be very nice to CEOs of companies that destroy the environment and use slave labor. Please examine your own biases and see the consequences.

                • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  10 months ago

                  Nonono, you’ve decided on my behalf, based on pulling shit out of your ass, that I’m cool with companies doing environmental damage and slave labour.

                  If Amazon set up shop in Yemen and started blindly destroying and siezing ships in the red sea, they’d be getting bombed too.

                  Additionally, you’ve presented a false dichotomy - protecting trade in the red sea is not mutually exclusive with prosecuting corporations for climate crime.

                  • nekandro
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    Amazon isn’t at war with Israel. Ansarallah IS, and they’re perfectly within their rights to enforce a blockade.

                  • iain@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    10 months ago

                    I’m not saying you’re okay with it. I’m just pointing out that one offense justifies bombs and the other simply suing the boss (while admitting it doesn’t do anything). I’m simply proposing we bomb Nestle before Yemen. In Minecraft of course.