British and US ships being harbored by the Greek host of the operation is a direct counter action to the Houthi efforts to pressure Israel to permanent ceasefire via pressuring its allies with economic repercussions.

As for the sole ship pointed in this article, it is not a Russian ship per the article. It is a Marshall Islands owned ship, under Liberian flag, operating by and for the profit of a Greek company, carrying Russian oil to China.

The only negative effect this has for the Houthi/Iran side is that their allies’ commerce has also been disrupted. It is not even a negative effect if you count the pressure this applies on their allies Russia and China to separate their commerce from Greek companies.

Politics is nuanced, this pressure can also backfire, but I seriously doubt either Russia or China would lessen ties over a changeable middleman. On the other hand, Greek companies will feel more pressure from the loss of cut from the Asian trade pie more, and will pressure their government to lessen their involvement in backing Israel in this matter.

To the people downvoting the above comment: Houthis declaring US and UK ships open to attack as retaliation to the drone strikes in Yemen, then also extending this to the ships operated by the latest coalition against blocking the Red Sea sea traffic against Israeli profits is a would have been a no-brainer when you consider attacks on allies of belligerent countries are viable when it comes to Russian-Ukrainian war or any non-western supported war.

Houthis have been waging these attacks against with the aim of pressuring the allies of Israel, the decades long genocide committing apartheid, rogue and terrorist state, away from supporting its latest and most intense war crimes. They have been accomplishing this pretty well, and this is just an economic pressure akin to embargoes the western hemisphere applies to whoever they don’t like at that moment. There will be literal and figurative friendly fires, attacks on bystanders, and unintended consequences to some extent, of course, but as per the wikipedia compilation, mostly the countries, companies and ships that keep trading with Israel despite their extensive war crimes are affected from the Houthi attacks, while the rest are pretty much operating unhindered.

These fuckers have been surpassing the SS forces in by taking utmost joy in killing defenseless children as point blank. What more can they do at this point?

37 hours in among the waves and half of that under the sun while the other half is in darkness, probably awake all that time?

She must be both physically and mentally scarred for life.

There’s nothing to be afraid of.

Busta!

Thanks, this solution worked for me.

Edit: What the hell, I’m trying to reply to a parent comment below.

deleted by creator

Such as?

So many memorable childhood games. Much bonding over Jackal and fighting (or trying to start a fight) in Ice Hockey. Nice solo gaming with awesome music on Gun.smoke and Balloon Fight.

I’m glad emulators exist and work out of the box, so I could keep playing these games without any hassle on my computer even if the hardware has become hard to find.

The catch is in the title. Google will not back a law that will otherwise completely block them, instead of just making things different for them.

Google will comply with the law, but we all know they will do so in the most minimal ways or find loops to exploit it, even.

It is also an honorable course of action. Developer gets paid for their work, you use quality service with convenience.

It is an action to emphasize the piracy is illegal and they will hunt you down for it using state resources, not matter the sentence.

This guy will be on their shitlist at least for a decade now. The next sentence would be times worse. But the best effect of this is that you sentence one guy, no matter how light the sentence is, then 1000 teens are afraid of ever thinking of piracy. Surely some of them will say “lol look at the joke of a sentence, so keep on pirating” but a lot won’t.

What’s better yet, a lot of those afraid teenagers will internalize piracy as both illegal and immoral.

I think the more “valued” or preferred part of an insult is rather its phonetic or expressive aspect rather than the semantic one. Of course the semantic parts plays a role, as well, but the need to use stressed syllables to express oneself, or simply vent out the emotion, far surpasses the need to utter a semantically-accurate syllable or word to badmouth someone or something.

See here from Monty Python and the Holy Grail

It is a beautiful insult that can vent out the emotions, or can be used for fun among friends etc. that uses no semantics to insult people, but uses very mouthful words to stress and some unfocused (as in not targeting any types of people) pragmatics, like insulting someone by insulting their parents, and insulting them as such making them out to be not something they are (was an x, smelt).

So, whatever semantically gender-neutral alternative you are looking for, consider to have a very strong expressive aspect to it that sticks to tongue.