- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
It is open to the majority, the only exception was Israel in response to the genocide, and then they add the US and the UK after their strikes against Yemen
That’s what they say, but they have targeted the ships of countries which are not involved in the conflict.
Any ship heading to Israeli ports is also involved in the conflict. They put a blockade on Israel which is fair and legitimate.
Not every ship is heading to Israeli ports.
Not every ship has been blocked either. Ansar Allah have the identification and destination ports data, they are very specific in who they target.
If you’re going to spread misinformation, at least research it properly.
Every ship attacked by Ansar Allah has ties to Israel, whether that be through the owner, the operator, the crew, or the cargo. For example, Maersk is, today, still accepting shipments to Israel and still maintains an office in Tel Aviv.
That’s not entirely true either though.
https://apnews.com/article/yemen-ship-attack-houthi-rebels-red-sea-946b40e6393af6216c0b6ef734311be9
It would appear that they have been about as careful in identifying ships to attack as Israel has been to avoid civilian casualties.
Al Asrah and Srinda both turned off AIS IIRC. There’s a reason you’re not supposed to turn off AIS: it implies that you’re trying to circumvent sanctions. Russian ships, for example, would turn off AIS and transfer oil to non-Russian ships.
This is what you claimed.
Every ship attacked by Ansar Allah has ties to Israel.
That claim is false. Providing weak excuses for just two incidents is inadequate.
Supporting the Palestinian’s right to self rule doesn’t require simping for the Houthies. The Houthies are not altruistic freedom fighters. They are the same exact kind of religious extremists that run Israel and Hamas. (And the Republican party in the US.)
We’ve seen reporting on this from Al Mayadeen and CNN. Does this article meaningfully contribute more information or a new perspective?