this post was submitted on 07 May 2025
54 points (96.6% liked)

World News

35822 readers
482 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

claiming the Houthis, officially known as Ansar Allah, said they would "not be blowing up ships anymore."

Is there any confirmation from them, or is he making shit up again?

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 day ago

No more American ships. However, America was always off the target list as long as they stopped attacking. Ansarallah was clear about that from the start. So Trump gained no concessions.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 8 points 2 days ago (3 children)

He's making it up, and there have already been more attacks since he made the announcement.

[–] gradual 2 points 8 hours ago
[–] balsoft@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

Least surprising outcome

[–] Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I didn't hear anything before now about this issue and am not well informed at this moment. Some preliminary reading from a CNN article indicates that the Houthi leadership acknowledged the agreement praising it as a victory because it separates US support from Israel. I didn't immediately find anything regarding further attacks since the announcement but also I see that the agreement was specifically about halting the bombing campaign in exchange for the cessation of attacks on specifically American assets in the region, which I think would be why the Houthi leadership were quick to call this a victory. Are the attacks you're referring to on American assets?

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Jimmycrackcrack@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

Hmm but that article says that in both cases the jets were lost due to some embarrassing fuck ups that seemed to have nothing to with combat, with the first being literally dropping one in the ocean 🤦and this latest one being overshooting a landing and having to eject while the plane ran off the end of the carrier in to the sea.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Actually, they acknowledge in the first instance that the carrier was being attacked and was taking evasive maneuvers that caused the jet to become loose. The second one doesn't mention it explicitly. However, here's another article talking about casualties on the 7th https://theintercept.com/2025/05/07/navy-jet-truman-red-sea-yemen-houthis/