• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    So when you meant no impact you were thinking of in the way that if they can still shoot missiles that means there has been no impact?

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Right, I’m saying the strikes are not achieving a change in behavior or capability. So, there is no impact in terms of what Yemen is doing whether US carries strikes out or not.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I guess I thought you meant the strikes were having no impact as in genuinely zero impact

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Missile firing infrastructure and capability is sorta the target. Luckily first civilian death was just yesterday and so far I think that’s the only one.

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              If missile firing infrastructure is the target, then it’s pretty clear that US is not capable of doing any meaningful damage to this infrastructure. Again, the original point was that US is unable to achieve its stated goals while Yemen is.

              • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, I just misunderstood it as a more literal “no impact” than what you were saying.