this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
1546 points (95.3% liked)

Microblog Memes

7291 readers
3595 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 5) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Kids were killed but the chat leak was funny and that's what has been the people talk about instead.

Imagine being the poor family, who is stuck living in Yemen because they cannot afford to relocate, whose kid has died by Trump's bombing. Then all you see in the news about how they joked with emojis in chat killing your kid. "Oh your kid was killed in that emoji airstrike." Tell me why the fuck you would grow up anything but radicalized.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Bush and Obama did it too. Historically, it's been a targeted killing thing against Al-Qaeda (or so they have said), with whatever government they have, giving their blessing. If other sites are correct, Trump did it more, but it's kinda hard to pick nits there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Yemen

That's why a lot people are more upset over the lack of operational security than the action itself. They're not conducting themselves in a way that keeps our country safe, They skirting monitoring and can't even get that right.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago (32 children)

Both are really serious problems in their own right, one's just a little closer to home

load more comments (32 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (8 children)

Political context courtesy of the Arab Center in Washington DC:


TL;DR: The Houthis are backed by Iran, in direct regional competition to Saudi Arabian (and subsequently US) interests, and the war in Yemen is a direct result of 10 years worth of failed intervention by the Saudis.


Excerpt:

Exactly a decade ago, Saudi Arabia announced the launch of a military intervention in Yemen, promising to lead a coalition of more than 10 nations—although some would later end their participation—against the Houthi armed group, officially known as Ansar Allah, that had taken over power from President Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi. Backed by the United States, Britain, and other Western states with arms and shared intelligence, on March 26, 2015, the Saudi coalition commenced airstrikes on Houthi-controlled areas, initiating a conflict that would drag on for years. Riyadh’s initial expectation of a swift, six-week military operation to defeat the Houthis became a prolonged and costly entanglement that has tested Saudi Arabia’s ability to impose its will on its neighbor and to force the Houthis to give up their control over a large part of Yemen. Intervention Inception

Saudi Arabia’s rationale for intervention shifted over time as the conflict unfolded. At the outset, it cast the intervention as a direct response to President Hadi’s urgent appeal to the Gulf states and their international allies that he conveyed in a letter to the UN Security Council in March 2015. Hadi called for states “to provide immediate support in every form and take the necessary measures, including military intervention, to protect Yemen and its people from the ongoing Houthi aggression.” The Saudis initially conceived of the intervention as a decisive effort to reinstate Yemen’s legitimate government in the capital Sanaa. As the situation progressed, Saudi Arabia reframed its objective as restoring Yemen’s political process within the framework of the Gulf Cooperation Council Initiative, which in 2011-2012 facilitated the transfer of power from former President Ali Abdullah Saleh to Hadi.

The core rationale behind Saudi Arabia’s intervention, however, stemmed from its perception of the Houthis as an Iranian proxy on the kingdom’s border. Riyadh feared that Iran’s influence through the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests. The kingdom saw the Houthi takeover of Sanaa not just as a challenge to Yemen’s stability but as a potential game changer in the broader Middle East power dynamics. In this context, Saudi Arabia framed its military intervention as a necessary response to protect its own security and regional influence.

Riyadh feared that the Houthis posed a direct threat to the kingdom’s regional dominance and interests.

But while Saudi Arabia believed Iran to be the principal force behind the Houthi takeover, the extent of Iranian influence over the group at the time was, in fact, relatively limited. Although the Houthis depended on Iranian military and logistical support, particularly for weaponry and strategic advice, they were not fully under Iran’s control. Iran, while capable of advising the Houthis on strategic and policy matters, lacked the leverage to dictate their actions. Rather, local factors such as longstanding tribal rivalries in Yemen, the Houthis’ longtime opposition to the central government, and their pursuit of greater political power, were more influential in shaping the Houthis’ behavior. The Houthi alliances with former President Saleh and certain factions of the Yemeni military also played a crucial role in the group’s rise. In other words, Iran’s influence was significant, but it was not all-encompassing, as the Houthis had their own political and strategic goals. Nonetheless, Riyadh persisted in portraying the Houthis as a tool of Iranian expansionism. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabia’s prolonged antagonism may have ultimately strengthened Iran’s influence, as it pushed the Houthi armed group to deepen its reliance on Iranian military and logistical support.


load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago (57 children)

Because it is controlled by the Houthis, Islamist terrorists threatening global trade, overthrowing a quasi-friendly government and REINSTITUTING SLAVERY.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

The United States government just sold over 200 people, without trial, into slavery in El Salvador. And the US explicitly allows slavery as part of its own prison system. The US has a large number of legal slaves.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

I don't think people understand just how fucking MASSIVE that bullshit is. Any credibility that the US had in human rights is long gone.

What turn is doing is what the original filibusters did prior to the civil war. Basically considering chattel slavery such an important part of their 'liberty' ideal that they wanted to spread it to places where slavery had been abolished. Like the carribbean and Central America.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago (5 children)

They overthrew Gaddafi when he was the only thing preventing slavery from returning, and the allies of the West now have open slave markets in Libya.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (55 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The bombing is worse, but using signal instead of official communication channels is still really fucking serious. They want to plan and commit war crimes and avoid any responsibility for it by trying to keep it from ever getting under public scrutiny.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I've heard it called Operation Amazon Prime, which is pretty hilarious. But only like 10% of global trade even goes by this area, even less of you're just considered direct US trade. Combine that with the context from that Signal chat and it's clear they bombed Yemen just because Trump wants to.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (8 children)

"only" 10%? 10% is pretty significant

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The MAGA movement have no care about what the administration does, especially when it comes to non-americans in a country literally none of them coudl identify on a map. But if you show them "look how poorly this bombing was planned and carried out" then maybe they will listen.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago

One way to look at it: Yemen's current conflict is a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Put it another way, it's their Vietnam

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (34 children)

Because the houthis are raiding merchant ships

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Who are the ships supplying? And why are they firing on them? What's the stated reason for the blockade?

The answers to these questions demonstrate why the Signal story is so important.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (33 replies)
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago

They leveled a building to hit 1 target

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›