US destroyer has ballistic missiles fired toward it, after responding to attack on commercial tanker - eviltoast

Two ballistic missiles were fired from Houthi rebel-controlled Yemen toward a US warship in the Gulf of Aden, after the US Navy responded to a distress call from a commercial tanker that had been seized by armed individuals, the US military said Sunday.

The tanker, identified as the Central Park, had been carrying a cargo of phosphoric acid when its crew called for help that “they were under attack from an unknown entity,” the US Central Command said in a statement.

The USS Mason, a guided-missile destroyer, and allied ships from a counter-piracy task force that operates in the Gulf of Aden and off the coast of Somalia responded to the call for help and “demanded release of the vessel” upon arrival, Central Command said.

“Subsequently, five armed individuals debarked the ship and attempted to flee via their small boat,” said the statement posted on social media platform X.

  • Madison420@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    1 year ago

    They are ballistic missiles, the fact that it’s in the title is the irrelevant part because people see “ballistic” and go ooo that must be bad when in reality a ballistic missile against a us destroyer is an insanely idiotic waste of money.

    • schmidtster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why would people think ballistic is bad? You seem to be the only one inferring that here.

      • ours@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s an important fact. These rebels are well known to be supplied by Iran, specifically with ballistic missiles which they have used before against Saudi targets.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve already explained this, I’m not responsible for anyone else’s reading comprehension bud.

        • schmidtster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You’ve explained incorrectly with your bias leading.

          Sensationalism isn’t just adding words, there must be intent there and you’re just assuming intent.

          You claim critical thinking and this and that, yet it only sounds like you had sensationalism arms your word of the day and are taking it at face value. Instead of understanding that intent also matters.

          Try some critical thinking of your own, and maybe some reading comprehension as well if you want to try and use that against others. Which is incredibly ironic considering you’ve proved that lack of yours by assuming all of this and missing the intent….

          • Madison420@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            I didn’t lead anyone anywhere bud.

            That’s quite literally sensationalism. Instead of houthi missile it’s houti make ballistic missile so the uneducated go “wait they have ballistic missiles” and read a story that is a nothing burger. It’s like the seventh time they’ve been attacked loitering in the area.

            Nope, you’re judging it based on people that actually read like most of us in world News. The average person is not smart, and lacks critical thinking and judging by how many people don’t get it they number may be a bit higher than I assumed. Yes intent matters, that’s why they added ballistic lol.

            No need, but you probably aught to rethink some things yourself.

            • schmidtster@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Yes… yes you did lead, your sensationalizing of the headline border on propaganda due to the bias you’ve presented….

              If they didn’t clarify ballistic, people would assume it was a much more sophisticated cruise missile. Sensationalism another way.

              Since the average person lacks critical thinking (like you here again) they would put ballistic missile to remove sensationalism and propaganda that can be built by bad actors (you again here), since now someone doesn’t need to do extra research or further reading to find, no they are safe since they aren’t intercontinental or smart cruise missiles.

              Thank god they told us they were dumb missiles.

              • Madison420@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You don’t see the problem with saying I’m sensationalizing something by pointing out sensationalism? Doesn’t make much sense does it?

                No they would assume it’s a missile, why do you assume it would mean cruise missile they’re not even the most common missile type direct fire guided are.

                Ballistic adds a reason to click, “wait houthis have ballistic missiles?” so they click and read. You still need to do extra research if you don’t know what a ballistic missile is, it’s never actually mentioned.

                Intermediate range missile is more accurate and less sensational.

                • schmidtster@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Projectile is very cromulent non-sensationalizing term, let’s use that. Oh wait, they were relaying communication and it would be unethical for them to relay different information.

                  Lots of avenues we could also go down, just give it up.

                  • Madison420@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    If you want to be tedious an arrow is technically a ballistic missile by some definitions, do you think they shot an arrow at a destroyer?