Sinking ship hit by Houthi missile leaves 18-mile oil slick in Red Sea, US officials say | CNN Politics
www.cnn.com
A cargo ship that was struck by a Houthi ballistic missile on Monday has created an 18-mile long oil slick in the Red Sea as it continues to take on water, two US officials said Friday.

A cargo ship that was struck by a Houthi ballistic missile on Monday has created an 18-mile long oil slick in the Red Sea as it continues to take on water, two US officials said Friday.

The M/V Rubymar — a Belize-flagged, UK-registered, Lebanese-owned vessel — was carrying 41,000 tons of fertilizer when it was struck on Monday by one of two ballistic missiles fired from Houthi territory in Yemen.

US Central Command said the ship is currently anchored as it takes on water. “The Houthis continue to demonstrate disregard for the regional impact of their indiscriminate attacks, threatening the fishing industry, coastal communities, and imports of food supplies,” US Central Command said.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2·
    9 months ago

    I understand that sanctions can be effective but they must be appropriately targeted.

    You are very correct in that statement

    I had checked around 8 hit ships linked before and almost all all had ties to israel but those usually just come up if it receives big damage. The first Galaxy Leader was also told not to be linked to israel but was owned by israeli business man Rami Ungar.

    The two hit last week were supposedly Greece-based firm Star Bulk Carriers Corp. But that turned out to be a US-listed company And UK registered Rubymar of the current post took a massive hit but that was also a valid target.

    Strinda was also initially claimed as just going to italy but had a stop planned in israel right after. These are just a few examples were all initially claimed to have no links and subsequently actually had some.

    Because ships have such a massive web of shell companies it’s really difficult to find out who actually owns and operates them. I just checked another random one from your list called Clara and the Houthi’s claim they gave the ship a warning which it ignored but direct links are not shown.

    “The attack was launched after the two ships refused to obey orders of the Yemeni naval forces,” Saree added in a statement."

    As sad as it may be, it’s very common for nations to act in their own interest under the guise of doing something noble.

    Of course, everyone is just working in their own self-interest. This might be a great opportunity for the Houthi’s to “gain some rep” but the fact of the matter is they actually undertake action against israel’s Genocide by these costly disruptions. Though these ships you are linking are indeed concerning.

    • xorEnglish
      3·
      9 months ago

      So, are we now agreed that one can criticise the houthis without being a “supporter of genocide”?

      If so, I’ll take that apology now, please.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        9 months ago

        Yes I will apologize for that one, criticism on their targeting seems valid. Thank you for providing a list of evidence.

        I do still support the goal of turning the Genocide in Gaza into a financial problem for all the parties involved, but it does look like non-involved parties have been targeted.

        One caveat I still hold is that we often only hear of links to banned nations after major damage on a ship. But the burden of proof for that initially lies on the Houthi’s themselves. If Houthi’s don’t show how they believe a ship is linked to a banned nation, then they are not providing sufficient justification to attack it.