Morch

Considering you obsessive efforts to flood topics with issues you want to talk about, and they whiny responses when this doesn't work out - I call BS. As for you deflection above - it's a deflection. It's not even quite what I actually said, but that's how you role. May I remind you the topic is about Yemen? And you still haven't addressed my point regarding the Foreign Policy article you linked.

It offers explanations, there can be others. It does not 'contradict' my assertion - it's not an either/or thing. The Saudis can have various motivations for their positions. And, evidently, you're dodging the main point I referred to. It's how you role.

I don't give two figs what you pretend things look to you. I do know that your style of 'debate' calls for constant injections of things that weren't said, weren't claimed and such made up characterizations as above. Already addressed your repeated, pointless 'questions'. There was no claim that there's a magic solution. There are no guarantees things would be resolved easily. That's just something you seem to imply or falsely expect. The point I was making, when telling you to take up your nonsense with the USA, is that the USA obviously does not see ongoing defensive posturing as a viable solution. You seem to think it is, but fail to generate much traction even on this forum.

@ozimoron Topic is Netanyahu rejects claims accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. What you post about is not it either.

The foreign affairs article is just a nothing piece. What it comes down to, after a long-winded review of things everyone knows is that the USA should find a solution for the Israel-Hamas war, then the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and then the situation with the Houthis may be resolved. That's not much of a plan, let alone a realistic or timely one.

I think there's still a bit of froth left. May want to take care of that.

Another one of your dishonest posts: 'hysterical'? There was none of that. Just something you made up and tossed in. That's how you role. As for the nonsense above - obviously, the USA does not see shooting down drones and intercepting missiles as much more than a short-term solution. Regarding your bogus 'news for you' - here are some other news, as in the Houthis were told to stop, and they ignore that. You seem to think that not doing anything about it is an option. I don't. The USA seems to think it's not much of an option either. Take it up with the USA.

@ozimoron All them but but but posts don't count?

@ozimoron An apt response to your pointless question.

Unhinged.

Sorry comrade, needed for the war effort in Ukraine.

How many would make you fuzzy and warm inside, knowing it's for the righteous fight?

The choice of which words are used as headlines, or what is quoted - these may also imply or serve and editorial stance. Different venues cover the same events in different ways. Nothing new. Saying that the Guardian is 'highly regarded' is neither here nor there. I'm not a right-winger and I can still acknowledge the bias. Obviously, you could say the same about Israeli media (never mind Arab or Palestinian sources). While not entirely on topic, ran into this bit: South Africa under-19 cricket captain stood down over anti-war protest fears https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/jan/12/south-africa-stand-down-under-19-cricket-captain-david-teeger-anti-war-protest-fears David Teeger: Axing of South Africa U19 cricket captain sparks antisemitism row https://www.bbc.com/sport/africa/67957459 South Africa strips Jewish U19 cricket skipper of captaincy, citing anti-Israel protests https://www.timesofisrael.com/south-africa-strips-jewish-u19-cricket-skipper-of-captaincy-citing-anti-israel-protests/ Note different sources downplay/highlight different aspects of story. On a personal note, even after spending some years in India, I still don't get the point of cricket.

Basically, you support terrorism, piracy, and disruption of world commerce to accommodate the agenda of a dodgy group - to service your wider political agenda. That's nice. I guess that you hold this position because you currently feel it doesn't directly effect you. Makes it easier to spew these kind of 'views'.

No, more of your usual games. You ask contrived, pointless, leading, loaded questions - then attack the answers. You do not offer anything, just ask others for answers and solutions. I did not 'insert' myself, this is a public forum. And I have already opined on your new loaded 'question' - maybe try reading instead of 'asking'.

@ozimoron Forum members who make antisemitic comments are labled as antisemitic.

@thaibeachlovers This was covered on these topics long ago. The USA concurred with Israel's analysis. You'd probably know that if you weren't dependent on AJ and having so many posters on 'ignore'.

There you go again.

No, you're intentionally posting things in a misleading manner. This is nothing new. Endangered how? Saudis care much about the Houthis now? MbS not being thrilled is not about his rule being 'endangered' - I guess that like everyone, he doesn't like the boat being rocked, but that holds for the Houthis' own actions. I don't see them not getting involved as implying what you push, no. Sitting on the sidelines whenever possible is quite normal. And if the USA does nothing, what does it make it look like? Again - you have no answers, at least not ones which you share - but somehow expect your own questions to be addressed and that others provide 'solutions'. Goes back to your questionable 'debate' style.

Israel stopping, or pausing, got no bearing on the 'Houthi problem'. Even if either was on the menu, then it's a fair bet the Houthis will just do the same whenever they wish, on which ever issue.

You've got a nasty habit of dishonestly implying other posters said things which are actually injected by you into the conversation. Who said it was 'counterproductive'? You? Certainly wasn't me. Out goes your first 'argument'. Commentators are a dime a dozen, and what does the Houthis' popularity got to do with anything? Neighboring countries aren't happy about things - yes, and? How does that effect things? Are they happy with maritime traffic disruption? Again, i did not say anything about 'actions the endanger the current regimes in the region', nor do I see how they are exactly 'endangered' - and obviously, 'good idea' is your own addition. Same goes for 'worth the risk'. Shooting drones is not a solution, and obviously the USA does not see it as such either.

That's one lazy arsed lame attempt at table turning. You can't address questions raised in response to your line of commentary, you do not have any better answer other than, but somehow expect others to engage in your petty games. I did not suggest that there is a magic solution. Doing nothing is not a better option. Same goes for appeasing the Houthis (even if that was possible). Sometimes there are no great options.

That would be accepting the Houthis taking international maritime traffic and trade hostage whenever they feel like. Great precedent.

Mobile doesn't imply impossible, just harder. Whether the strikes, in their current form, will deter the Houthis is doubtful, but then again - what are the options? Or was there any expectation things will start off with an all out assault? These things tend to follow a course. I'm not sure what you're suggesting or what your point is.

The latter.