US/ UK set for military action in Yemen

[Whu]

In light of recent attacks on goods ships by the Iranian backed Houthis,(in solidarity of the people of Gaza), US and UK look set to bomb the Houthi held parts of Yemen.

What is everyone’s thoughts and fears about this?

For me, I wish we would be campaigning for a ceasefire in Gaza rather than this. Also, I think it sets the way for wider war with Iran.

Labour supported the strikes against the Houthi targets, it would have gone through parliament.

I don't think we just have to accept the status quo in terms of aid, no. We should be air dropping more in. You don't seem to understand that it's already happened?

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/french-jordanian-airforces-drop-medical-aid-gaza-elysee-2024-01-05/

So again, why shouldn't aid be dropped?

As for the 6th October point, you haven't helped yourself with this argument. The escalation started in November, whereas Israel began in Gaza in early to mid October. Ie, there was a whole month of Palestinian civilians being killed before the Houthis started shooting missiles at civilian vessels. So if that's your view, the fact that they did nothing for the first few weeks tells us this isn't as simple as them doing this because of Israel's actions in Gaza. This means it's a logic fail to imagine more aid will stop the Red Sea attacks.

It's important you're clear that what we're talking about here is ways to get in aid and whether it's a good idea (it's not) to act on the basis that the Houthis will stop the attacks if a particular quantity of aid enters Gaza. You will not wriggle out of the silly things you've said on either of those points by telling the person who's pointing out how wrong you are that they need to find a way to resolve the whole situation.

In terms of Hezbollah, obviously 100k civilians displaced is disgusting behaviour, but it stops very far short of what they've done in the past. If you think they could do more, but haven't, there's a reason for that. And the rest of the Arab world have done sod all. So again, how would showing them that the Houthis are full of shit affect anything?

One thing that boiled my piss on the news last night was 'Call Me Dave' being introduced as Lord Cameron like he's some kind of statesman when we all know he's the lightweight who gave us Brexit and then ran away.

Fuck yes, he should still be in his shed.

Obviously everyone who's paying any attention knows this would've had Parliamentary support, but I think this coming from a government who are so far past their sell by date does create a potential legitimacy issue. There are people who've been complaining about this happening with an unelected PM, and while in our parliamentary system no PM is directly elected, it does have an effect that barely anyone had even heard of Sunak at the last GE. I prefer military action to have Parliamentary approval on principle anyway, but also in practical terms it might be better for Sunak to seek it. Obviously he wouldn't be able to phrase it in that way!

Doubtless is, so whats your solution?

Exactly what the US/UK is doing now.

Given that Brexit was sold partly because we didn't want unelected people making our decisions for us...who elected Cameron, or Zac Goldsmith or Lebedev, or Charlotte Owen? I could go on....

This is the difficulty with an unelected peer having such a major role. It's unremarkable for the Cabinet to contain someone who's in the Lords, but Foreign Sec is something else.

So my understanding is the stopping of shipments are for Israel but then again Israel has been denying this for Palestinians for decades. Ok, in their defence it's to stop Hamas ok yes whatever but the shipments are private companies to put pressure for a ceasefire. The Us will stick a sphere up there arse if Israel tells them to but what about the UK? Why the fuck are we getting involved between whether private companies are going into Israel or not. Haven't we got involved in unnecessary conflicts in the past because the US has told us to putting us into danger and for what, shipments ffs especially when the whole world has voted to ceasefire and a only handful voting abstain because they are tied to the US not because its right. Is the whole world so fucking blind and wrong that the only country in this world is so right and righteous is the US? Fml. I'm absolutely disgusted at our unelected gov and lord.

It's not just about ships to Israel no. Vessels that have nothing to do with Israel have been attacked, and most of Israel's port traffic is on the Mediterranean rather than their one Red Sea port anyway. It is, however, going to have some impact on us in the UK because some of the traffic that comes through the Red Sea is things we need.

Which isn't to say this is definitely the right course of action strategically. Completely valid to question that. But don't believe that nonsense about this only being to stop ships that are involved with Israel. Most of the shipping traversing the Red Sea goes through the Suez Canal in Egypt rather than stopping in Eilat.

Your understanding has been informed by incorrect propaganda. The Houthis are attacking ships that have nothing to do with Israel.

Your understanding is also biased just like the BBC and CNN have been portraying. I suggest you widen your horizon a bit.

Haven’t rtft but found this very useful in terms of action and what US (and U.K.) plus others might do to not escalate but degrade capability

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/securing-red-sea-how-can-houthi-maritime-strikes-be-countered

Perhaps you should read about which ships the Houthi have been attacking? Widen your horizon to take in some actual facts?

On this, Yep 100%

I m not replying to the post you quoted me in earlier, i'm not really into that level of condescension or insults.

If you were actually able to back up any of your points, you would. It says a lot that you've decided on this approach once it was pointed out that aid has already been air dropped...

@TrashedSofa Err i have, its just that you reply calling me names etc or apply standards to me, that you don't apply to yourself!

That that aid was dropped with co op of the IDF... which is what i said earlier would have to happen (for an air drop) and it went to a very specific IDF controlled field hospital.

Can you link to the mass dropping of food to the general pop?

No, because IDF have said they don't want aid going to Hamas, so as you said to me, we have to deal with the situation as it is, not what we wish it to be.

So long as Israel is flying constant bombing missions over Gaza, wont happen.

The pp has linked to an excellent article on the pros & cons of military strikes against the Houthis.

As i said, completely agree on your previous post on accountability....

I didn't say there'd been mass dropping of aid to the general population, though, I said I wanted there to be more. You can't say we have to deal with the situation as it is and then ignore the fact that the situation as it is has already allowed air dropped aid.

And as we're back on, what impact would the Arab world seeing that the Houthis are full of shit have? There must have been a reason you thought that was important enough to mention, but you still haven't given it.

The article about pros and cons doesn't make any of the arguments you've tried here, funnily enough. I'm absolutely open to the idea that the strikes aren't the best strategic choice, but that's quite different from saying we can just give more aid and hope that puts the Houthis back in their box. That would be the opposite of a strategic approach.

He was elected - by his constituents.
The Prime Minister is not elected as such. He or she is the leader of the majority party forming the government.
I have no time for Sunak but it is incorrect, and a misunderstanding of UK politics to call him "unelected".

Same just seeing some of these posts is enough

We both agree more aid is required, an air drop wont work unless Israel allows one, they wont, nor will they allow more trucks in.

I believe they still wont allow in fuel, so v hard for hospitals to function.

I think attacking the Houthis should be a last resort NOT that it should never happen & trying to get more aid into Gaza should be the priority, if that also stops attacks on shipping, whats not to like?

Surely its better than risking further escalation? (and i have never said "just give more aid")

I think some people are confused between the American system of electing a candidate and our own system of electing a political party

Maybe a lot of posters don't live in Britain or something. Else like many of things this is down to bad education. I am not sure which to be honest.

If global trade is significantly interrupted it'll cost us all. I don't want to get involved but this is self defence.

She says "our", so got to be in UK. It's just a fundamental misunderstanding, but it's used so often and I have no idea why such a basic thing is misunderstood! There's certainly a democratic deficit in the UK.

I don’t think pp realise how dire a second energy price shock would be directly after the last just calmed a bit. It’s hardly a mystery. We just went though one

But as you've not provided any evidence that Israel categorically won't allow further aid drops by air, that still doesn't tell us why it shouldn't happen.

And no, not surely, because the Houthis backing down if we give more aid to Gaza and there being no ongoing piracy risk isn't a realistic possibility. So it would be foolish to make any policy decisions on that basis. More aid to Gaza is desirable in itself, but it's not going to stop the Houthis attacking civilian shipping. There actually were some attacks even before the recent war. The problem is that not doing anything meaningful to address this problem is dangerous in itself. If it weren't for that, I might agree with you.

Ultimately, there's no strategic response to this that doesn't risk further escalation. Anything other than ignoring the attacks does that.