Houthis, Hamas, and Humanitarian Restraint

American Thinker ^ | 17 Jan, 2024 | William Hawkins

[MtnClimber]

The United States has claimed that the air strikes against Houthi military sites in Yemen are not related to the war in Gaza, and are not meant to escalate the regional confrontation with Iran. This should be seen as mere diplo-speak, because not every member of the 22-nation coalition put together by Washington to protect shipping in the Red Sea is on board with shifting from defensive to offensive operations (though most are). The Houthis are explicit in their declarations that they have been attacking both shipping and Israel in support of Hamas, who stated this round of war with its horrific and sadistic October 7 assault on Israeli civilians.

Immediately after the Hamas aggression, the Houthis mobilized their forces in Yemen to support Hamas against the Israeli counterattack into Gaza, Other Iran-backed militia groups across the region also went into action, hitting American bases over 130 times. But the Houthis are the best armed and most fanatical fighters in the Iran network outside of Hezb’allah in Lebanon. They are the Shiite minority in Sunni Yemen, which opened a civil war for control of the country in 2014 when they captured the capital, Sana’a City. This is vital to remember when Iran asserts that the U.S.-UK strikes were "a clear violation of Yemen's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and a breach of international laws” or when protesters outside the White House claim we attacked Yemen. The Houthis are not Yemen (the legitimate government has moved its flag to Aden), they are a rebel group that controls about a third of the country, which unfortunately includes the Red Sea coast.

China made the connection: “The skewed stance of the US in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict has led to the conflict becoming protracted and caused spillovers.”

[MtnClimber]

A really good article about details not found in MSM news stories.

[MtnClimber]

Restraint is the current term used by progressives seeking a “less military-oriented policy” on our part, but not on the part of enemies who see restraint as a form of weakness inviting attack -- and attack they have. Yemen is thus a test case for policy failure based on unrealistic hopes that irresponsibly breed wider conflicts. Lessons of history are thus confirmed. Thank you Pedo Joe.

[Conservat1]

Start with guilty UN on all of the above .

[whitney69]

The whole first paragraph is such a lie that it makes the article nothing more than media spin. And in my humble opinion it all has to do with the destruction of the Jewish nation. And the list of adjoining terrorist groups continues to grow now with what started out as Hamas has grown to hezbollah and the houthis both backed by Iran. And they were empowered when they were given back their cash and control by Obama (with a little extra).

Look for the aggression not to slow, but to speed up with possible adjoining of groups from ISIS, (Iraq and Syria), and Palestine to name a few. This has been a fear in the middle east since 1948 with Israel and for centuries before that with the attacks on Jewish estblishments.

wy69

[sauropod]

Bkmk

[ClearCase_guy]

The world would have less violence if the strong people had less restraint.