circuscritic

You mean the first three paragraphs describing a few ads on Twitter for weapons?

Followed by the BBC, quoting other British "NGO" organizations, trying to rally people to support additional actions against a group that Britain currently engaged in military actions against? Yes, I read that as well.

The article reads like two separate articles pasted together by a moron. The only connective tissue between the Twitter ads, and the Houthis, was that the weapons traders lived an area controlled by them. News flash, the Houthis control a majority of the country.

So again, in a country that has had an active civil war since 2014, it's not surprising that people are selling weapons anywhere and everywhere, online, and off.

Why are you assuming that there is a state of law and order to any degree, outside of maybe the capital..?

Are you aware that we're talking about Yemen...?

Notice that Wikipedia page for their civil war doesn't currently have an end date i.e. it's still active...

It's not like Twitter is providing up support for these transactions, I'm saying it's not surprising they exist on a public forum like Twitter for a country that's ravaged by a decade war and famine.

Just like how kids in the United States sell drugs on Twitter or Instagram.

So no, Twitter is not automatically liable just because people are abusing the platform. I'm not saying it can't get there, just that it's not that simple.

Regardless, I wasn't saying anything about the legality of it for Twitter.

Your reading comprehension is so absurdly bad, that I got to believe you're either trolling, insane, or on a lot of Adderall. I'm out lol.

I'm having a hard time finding where I said that I wanted to live under Houthi rule, or when I denied their status as militant Islamists.

Can you please scroll up to my other comments and point those out for me? Thanks in advance.

Oh, and just a reminder to anyone who actually made it this far into this idiotic rabbit hole, my original comment was that it is entirely unsurprising that Yemeni civilians are buying arms to wherever they can, be it Twitter or a local marketplace, due to the past decade of conflict, years long aerial bombing campaign, and famine.

I can't tell if you're a troll, or actually insane. But I guess those don't have to be mutually exclusive.

I didn't denounce anyone, even among the groups and actors I mentioned. I simply gave a very brief look at situation. You're mad that I didn't provide a complete and detailed analysis, which is irrelevant to my point about civilians bearing arms.

Not for nothing, but your politics are pretty clear, and if it was relevant at ALL to this subject, I'd happily engage. But it's not, so stop yelling into the wind to distract from the fact that your comments are clearly about your disdain of the Yemini people.

No, we're acknowledging that countries wrecked by civil war and intermittent famines going back a decade, aren't known for their ability to police domestic issues fairly, on time, or even at all. I'd be more interested to know what percent of the households are NOT armed.

For the record, I said nothing about any government, or political groups/militias. They're armed primarily by their proxy sponsor, I'm talking about retail arms sale to civilians, bandits, normies, and scared parents alike.

Unless you think IRCG is arming the Houthis via Twitter.

This is bordering on clickbait, because of course weapons are being sold in some form or fashion at most forums or marketplace in Yemen.

It's a country that has been wrecked by civil war and years of a genocidal air campaign by the Saudis, and now intermittent targeted strikes by American and British naval forces.

I would be shocked if most of those people aren't also selling those openly at their local Bazaar or market.

Sounds like it'll be family friendly game shows and Christian reality TV.

Honestly, that might actually be a profitable model they could make work, if they don't fuck the infrastructure up, or allow cousin Billy to expose himself to female contestants on 3 different reality shows they're producing.

Are you really using all of human history as a timeframe to say that currency is a relatively recent phenomenon?

Again, I'm not anti-cryptocurrency, but it's not really a currency anymore than any other commodity in a commodity exchange, or a barter market.

And I don't care if it's livestock, or Bitcoin, I'm not accepting either as payment if I sell my home, or car. Not because of principles, but because I don't know how to convert livestock into cash, and I can't risk the Bitcoin payment halving in value before I can convert it to cash.

And who was talking extremes? I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the claims that crypto is the replacement for, or salvation from, our current economic system, or the delusion that currency backed by a nation is somehow just as ephemeral as Bitcoin, or ERC20 rug pulls.

You said Bitcoin was designed to free us from the tyranny of big capital, but it's been entirely co-opted by the same boogeyman. So regardless of the intentionality behind the project, it's now just another speculative asset.

Except, unlike gold or futures contracts, there's no tangible real world asset, but there is a hell of a real cost.

Printing currency isn't destroying the planet....the current economic system is doing that, which is the same economic system that birthed crypto.

Governments issuing currency goes back to a time long before our current consumption at all cost economic system was a thing.

lol

Forever? No, of course not.

But paper currency is backed by a nation state, so I'm betting it'll be around a bit longer then a purely digital asset without the backing of a nation, and driven entirely by speculation.

I'm not even anti-crypto. It was novel idea when it was actually used entirely as a currency, but that hasn't been true for quite some time.