The Biden administration is expected to announce plans to redesignate Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen as specially designated global terrorists.

The Biden administration is expected to soon announce plans to redesignate Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen as specially designated global terrorists, according to two people familiar with the White House decision and a U.S. official.

The move comes as the Houthis have launched dozens of attacks on commercial vessels in the Red Sea. The group says it has attacked the ships in response to Israel’s military operations in Gaza in the aftermath of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

The three people familiar with the decision were not authorized to comment and requested anonymity to discuss the matter ahead of the expected formal announcement.

    • Deceptichum@kbin.social
      113·
      10 months ago

      Israel is so brave! Defending itself by stealing a country from the people it was promised to through a campaign of terrorism, and than squeezing down even harder on the oppressed people’s living in the tiny reserves given to them, where they get to live in constant fear of death by Israeli soldiers or missiles.

      How dare they … checks facts … use terrorism, colonialism, and genocide to attack others.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        29·
        10 months ago

        Taking land to make distance from the people trying to murder them for 70 years. Making a massive security apparatus to protect themselves from the people trying to murder them for 70 years.

        If Arab nationalists and Palestinians weren’t trying to murder Jews, none of this would have happened, they seem addicted to it. This war could be over tomorrow if they released the hostages and surrendered, but clearly they prefer violence against Jews to peace.

        If you want to know why they’re in enclaves and why they don’t have many freedoms, it’s because of all the Jew, murdering and refusal to pacify themselves. They want unreasonable unattainable goals, to destroy Israel and take all their land, and they are willing to employ violence until they get it, which means violence forever evidently.

        Choosing violence when you can’t win by violence is a bad idea.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
      104·
      10 months ago

      Literally yes. Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself from its occupied territories. Of course that’s even assuming we can call what’s going on now “self-defense”, but even if it was this isn’t a war between countries, so the idea that they have a right to defend themselves doesn’t apply any more than the Germans had any right to defend themselves from the Warsaw uprising.

      • DarkGamer@kbin.social
        39·
        10 months ago

        Jews weren’t thrown into the Warsaw ghetto because they attacked peaceful German citizens unprovoked. I find your comparison distasteful.

            • Sybil@lemmy.world
              63·
              10 months ago

              ad hominems are personal attacks and they are expressly prohibited on lemmy.world and c/news. if you think someone is violating the rules, you should report that.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
          84·
          10 months ago

          Jews weren’t thrown into the Warsaw ghetto because they attacked peaceful German citizens unprovoked.

          “Unprovoked” uh… you understand Palestinians have suffered violence at the hands of Israel every day since at least 1948, right?

          • DarkGamer@kbin.social
            39·
            10 months ago

            This conflict started before then, when Arab nationalists started murdering Jews for legally buying land nearby. They keep choosing violence and losing and their situation worsens, you’d think they’d learn by now.

            In 1948 they declared war on Israel, their forces partook in ethnic cleansing and genocide against Jews in Jerusalem and the west bank, and they lost the war, losing territory. They have refused to pacify themselves since then.

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
              84·
              10 months ago

              Let’s set aside the truth of that statement because it frankly doesn’t matter. Palestinians have suffered ethnic cleansing, occupation and apartheid since 1949. Every one of these is an act of war that makes resistance, including using violence, perfectly legitimate.

              • AA5B@lemmy.world
                43·
                10 months ago

                How do you separate half the issue? How can you believe such simplification really describes the situation? If it did, we could have solved it long ago, but the reality is a lot more complex with too much history of atrocities in all directions. If we want to do something about it, we need to start by recognizing the whole problem

                • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
                  12·
                  10 months ago

                  How can you believe such simplification really describes the situation?

                  It describes the situation because no matter of Palestinian mob violence in Mandate Palestine justifies the Nakba. I could go on about how Arabs had no problem with pre-Zionism Aliyahs or actually look into it and see what the first instances of organized violence is, or explain how Zionist terrorists also attacked Arabs but like I said it doesn’t matter.

                  Israel committed ethnic cleansing in 1949, and continues to do so today. There’s just nothing in the scale of Mandate Palestine that could’ve justified that.

              • DarkGamer@kbin.social
                25·
                10 months ago

                Even if it’s legitimate, it’s not viable, wars can’t be won by outrage alone. Massacring raping and kidnapping civilians on the other side will not achieve their stated goals, but it will make life worse for Palestinians. Palestine needs to acknowledge the reality of their situation.

                If they were to unconditionally surrender like Japan and Germany did, perhaps they would fare as well as those places do today. Violence will only lead to more violence.

                • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
                  23·
                  10 months ago

                  If they were to unconditionally surrender like Japan and Germany did, perhaps they would fare as well as those places do today.

                  No way. Germany and Japan are doing well today because the US wanted them to do well so they can be part of their bloc against the Soviet Union. Israel doesn’t want Palestinians to do well; it wants to erase them from the map. That’s what wanting to “settle” Palestine means.

                  Do you want to see what happens when Palestinians unconditionally surrender? Look at the West Bank. There’s barely any resistance there, even after it intensified in the last few years. And the result? They’re the victims of a slow-burn genocide.

            • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
              12·
              10 months ago

              The Zionist approach during the Mandate was to buy land from the big landlords and evict the tenants. The government hoped that a mass transfer of the tenants from Palestine could be organized, preferably as part of a general solution to the situation, but was prepared, in the short term, to put up with small evictions here and there. When the ‘mass transfer’ happened, in 1948, it affected Palestinians from almost all walks of life. In the meantime tenants were losing their land without any compensation or work elsewhere.26 The easiest course for the Zionists was to buy land from the most a-national of the notables, the absentee landlords, who during the Mandate owned more than 20 per cent of private land.27 The largest landowner in Palestine was Abdul Rahman Pasha, who lived in Damascus and owned 200,000 dunams (the richest of the local notables, such as the Husaynis in Jerusalem, owned just 50,000 dunams).

              • A History of Modern Palestine Page 146, Ilan Pappe

              Additional links

              https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2017/5/23/the-nakba-did-not-start-or-end-in-1948

              https://ismi.emory.edu/documents/stein-publications/website docs 2011-2004/website docs 2000 and earlier/JNF-Stein1984.pdf

              https://www.972mag.com/mapping-the-palestinian-villages-erased-and-replaced-with-jewish-towns/

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sursock_Purchases

              Israel was the state with plans for ethnic cleansing. And there is plenty of historians that disagree with your statement in light of released Israeli archives

              https://imeu.org/article/plan-dalet

              https://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005/The Debate About 1948.html

              https://merip.org/1998/06/fifty-years-through-the-eyes-of-new-historians-in-israel/

      • idoubledo@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        412·
        10 months ago

        Israel doesn’t have a right to defend itself from its occupied territories

        1. Why do you think a sovereign state doesn’t have a right to defend its citizens? Oh let me guess - you’re a “from the river to the sea” kind of “humanitarian”.
        2. Gaza is not occupied since 2005, for the purpose of handing it over thousands of Israeli’s were forcefully expelled from the region (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza#Description_of_the_plan), not a single Israeli remained in Gaza (unless you count hostages).

        the idea that they have a right to defend themselves doesn’t apply any more than the Germans had any right to defend themselves from the Warsaw uprising

        Yeah, compare labor camps built by the Nazis for the extermination of Jews, where Jews were forcefully transited into, to a piece of land that was claimed and given to the Palestinians. This comparison is absurd.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      85·
      10 months ago

      DID YOU KNOW

      It is possible to defend one’s country without killing 1% of a region’s civilian population in less than half a year?