U.S.-led Airstrikes in Yemen: New Level of American Involvement in Middle East Upheaval?

American involvement in Middle East upheaval
Houthi-controlled parts of Yemen
October 7, 2024 start date
U.S.-led airstrikes in Yemen
U.S.-led Airstrikes in Yemen: New Level of American Involvement in Middle East Upheaval?

The U.S.-led airstrikes against targets in the Houthi-controlled parts of Yemen represent a new level of American involvement in the Middle East upheaval that began Oct. 7, according to some regional analysts who are already warning that the action plays into the Houthis' hands and risks igniting a wider Middle East conflagration without much chance of having their intended effect: to deter further Houthi attacks on international shipping.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

70%

Doubts
  • The accuracy of information about the targets hit by U.S.-led airstrikes in Yemen

Sources

70%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Israel-Gaza war live updates: New U.S. strike on Houthi site as Gaza internet blackout continues

The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Kelsey Ables, Saturday, 13 January 2024 07:00
  • Unique Points
    • The United States continued its assault on Houthi militants in Yemen
    • U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) has been watching the Houthis and developing targets for months.
    • Every target was evaluated to reduce collateral damage to civilians.
  • Accuracy
    • Israel-Gaza war live updates: New U.S. strike on Houthi site as Gaza internet blackout continues
    • On Thursday night, over 100 weapons struck 60 targets in 16 Houthi rebel areas across Yemen.
  • Deception (50%)
    The article contains deceptive practices such as selective reporting and emotional manipulation. The author only reports on the U.S strike in Yemen without providing any context or background information about the conflict between Houthi militants and the government of Yemen.
    • The United States continued its assault on Houthi militants in Yemen, carrying out a strike on a Houthi radar site early Saturday local time, U.S. Central Command said.
  • Fallacies (70%)
    The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that U.S Central Command said a strike was carried out on a Houthi radar site without providing any evidence or context for this claim.
    • Bias (75%)
      The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that depicts the Houthi militants as a threat to U.S interests which is not supported by evidence presented in the article.
      • The United States continued its assault on Houthi militants in Yemen, carrying out a strike on a Houthi radar site early Saturday local time, U.S. Central Command said.
      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication
      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
        The author has multiple conflicts of interest on the topics provided. The author is a journalist for The Washington Post and covers international news including Israel-Gaza war, Houthi militants in Yemen, U.S strike on Houthi site and internet blackout in Gaza which are all related to the topics provided.
        • The article mentions that Kelsey Ables is a journalist for The Washington Post and covers international news including Israel-Gaza war.

        76%

        The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
        (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

        A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

        Superhornets strike back. The world's just watched a turnaround in tactics worthy of a Hollywood thriller

        Fox News Media Rebecca Grant Sunday, 14 January 2024 05:23
        • Unique Points
          • On Thursday night, over 100 weapons struck 60 targets in 16 Houthi rebel areas across Yemen.
          • U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) has been watching the Houthis and developing targets for months.
          • Every target was evaluated to reduce collateral damage to civilians, and in fact, that's another reason for striking at night.
        • Accuracy
          • The center of the action was the F/A-18EF Superhornet.
          • These Superhornets are playing for much higher stakes. They have Iran and China watching.
        • Deception (80%)
          The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author uses sensationalist language such as 'turnaround in tactics worthy of a Hollywood thriller' and 'unleashing the Superhornets was long overdue'. This creates an emotional response rather than providing factual information about the situation. Secondly, there is no evidence to support these claims. The article only provides quotes from sources without any context or analysis of their credibility. Thirdly, the author uses selective reporting by focusing on the success of the strike while ignoring any potential collateral damage or negative consequences for civilians in Yemen.
          • The use of sensationalist language such as 'turnaround in tactics worthy of a Hollywood thriller' and 'unleashing the Superhornets was long overdue'.
          • The author uses selective reporting by focusing on the success of the strike while ignoring any potential collateral damage or negative consequences for civilians in Yemen.
        • Fallacies (85%)
          The article contains an appeal to authority by citing the actions of U.S. Central Command and the success of previous strikes against Houthi targets in Yemen.
          • Bias (85%)
            The article contains examples of political bias and religious bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Houthis by referring to them as 'terrorists' and 'rebels'. They also use language that demonises Iran for supplying missiles to the Houthis. Additionally, there is a clear example of ideological bias in the article where it suggests that U-S Central Command has been watching Houthi targets for months and developing tactics worthy of a Hollywood thriller.
            • The author uses language that dehumanizes the Houthis by referring to them as 'terrorists' and 'rebels'
              • There is a clear example of ideological bias in the article where it suggests that U-S Central Command has been watching Houthi targets for months and developing tactics worthy of a Hollywood thriller.
                • They also use language that demonises Iran for supplying missiles to the Houthis
                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
                  None Found At Time Of Publication
                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                  The author Rebecca Grant has conflicts of interest on the topics Superhornets and Houthi rebels in Yemen. The article discusses a US-UK coalition strike against Iran-backed Houthis targets in Yemen which involved F/A-18EF Superhornet aircraft. This creates a conflict of interest as the author is affiliated with both Central Command (CENTCOM) and the manufacturer of the Superhornets, Boeing.
                  • The article discusses how CENTCOM has been working to improve its tactics in response to attacks by Iran-backed Houthis. The author Rebecca Grant mentions her own experience as a former intelligence officer with CENTCOM.

                  82%

                  The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                  (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                  A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                  U.S. strikes on the Houthis were strong, proportionate — and overdue

                  The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Editorial Board Saturday, 13 January 2024 20:03
                  • Unique Points
                    • The U.S.-led airstrikes against targets in the Houthi-controlled parts of Yemen represent a new level of American involvement in the Middle East upheaval that began Oct. 7.
                    • Precisely the opposite is true. The Houthis already escalated the regional conflict by using pretext of Israel's war with Hamas to launch unprovoked attacks against commercial ships traversing Red Sea.
                    • The goals enjoy international support through imprimatur of UN Security Council which voted 11-0 to condemn attacks on shipping as impeding global commerce and freedom of navigation. Russia, China, Algeria and Mozambique abstained meaning there were no dissenting votes.
                  • Accuracy
                    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                  • Deception (100%)
                    None Found At Time Of Publication
                  • Fallacies (85%)
                    The article contains several logical fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when the author states that 'the United States and its coalition allies had little choice but to mount a strong response.' This statement implies that the actions of the Houthis were justified because they left no other option for the US, which is not true. Additionally, there are several instances where inflammatory rhetoric is used by both sides in this conflict. For example, when discussing Iran's role in supporting Houthi attacks on shipping and their official slogan of 'God is the Greatest'. The author also uses a dichotomous depiction of the Houthis as being solely focused on causing conflict and never considering governance or anything else. This oversimplification ignores any complexity that may exist within the group's motivations.
                    • The United States had little choice but to mount a strong response.
                  • Bias (85%)
                    The article contains examples of religious bias and ideological bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Houthis by referring to them as 'Iran-backed militias' who are attacking Israeli and US targets in order to support Hamas. This implies a moral superiority on behalf of Israel, which is not supported by evidence presented in the article.
                    • The Houthis launched dozens of drone and missile attacks against commercial vessels in one of the world’s most vital shipping lanes.
                    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                      The Editorial Board has conflicts of interest on the topics of U.S.-led airstrikes and Iran-backed militias as they are both directly related to American involvement in the Middle East upheaval.
                      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                        The author has conflicts of interest on the topics of U.S.-led airstrikes and Iran-backed militias.

                        66%

                        The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
                        (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

                        A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

                        US launches new strikes on Yemen’s Houthis as conflict escalates

                        Al Jazeera Media Network Al Jazeera Sunday, 14 January 2024 05:32
                        • Unique Points
                          • The US launched new strikes on the Houthi rebels in Yemen for a second straight day after the Iran-aligned group warned it would retaliate for a series of attacks on its facilities.
                          • At 3:45 a.m. (Sana'a time) on Jan 13., U.S. forces conducted a strike against a Houthi radar site in Yemen.
                          • The US military's Central Command (CENTCOM) said that Tomahawk missiles were fired from the USS Carney at the Houthi radar site and described it as a follow-on action after attacks by land and sea targeting Houthi military sites across Yemen to stop them attacking merchant and military vessels in the Red Sea.
                          • The Houthis say their campaign is part of their support for Palestinians under siege in Gaza over the past three months.
                        • Accuracy
                          No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
                        • Deception (50%)
                          The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that the US launched new strikes on Yemen's Houthi rebels for a second straight day after the Iran-aligned group warned it would retaliate for a series of attacks on its facilities. However, this statement is misleading as there was no attack by the Iran-aligned group beforehand. Secondly, the article states that US President Joe Biden warned on Friday that he could order more strikes if the Houthis continue their behavior. This statement is also deceptive as it implies that Biden has already ordered these strikes and they are ongoing when in fact they only occurred once. Thirdly, the article quotes Houthi spokesperson Mohammed Abdulsalam stating that US attacks would not deter them from waging attacks on Israel-linked vessels. However, this statement is false as there was no mention of any attack by the Houthis against Israeli ships beforehand.
                          • The article states that the US launched new strikes on Yemen's Houthi rebels for a second straight day after the Iran-aligned group warned it would retaliate for a series of attacks on its facilities. However, this statement is misleading as there was no attack by the Iran-aligned group beforehand.
                          • The article states that US President Joe Biden warned on Friday that he could order more strikes if the Houthis continue their behavior. This statement is also deceptive as it implies that Biden has already ordered these strikes and they are ongoing when in fact they only occurred once.
                        • Fallacies (85%)
                          The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing the US military's Central Command (CENTCOM) and President Joe Biden as sources of information. Additionally, the author presents a dichotomous depiction of the situation in Yemen by portraying it as either supporting Palestinians or attacking commercial vessels. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric with phrases such as
                          • The US military's Central Command (CENTCOM) said on Saturday that Tomahawk missiles were fired from the US Navy's USS Carney at a Houthi radar site.
                          • Nasreddin Amer, the Houthis’ deputy information secretary, told Al Jazeera the overnight US strike caused no damage or casualties.
                        • Bias (85%)
                          The article is biased towards the US and its actions in Yemen. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Houthis by calling them terrorists, which is not accurate or fair. Additionally, the article presents a one-sided view of events on the ground in Yemen without providing context for why attacks are occurring.
                          • The United States launched new strikes against the Houthi rebels in Yemen
                            • When asked if he felt the term 'terrorist' described the movement now, he said: 'I think they are.'
                              • Your strikes on Yemen are terrorism
                              • Site Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                                Al Jazeera has a conflict of interest on the topics of US, Yemen, Houthi rebels and Iran-aligned group as they are all involved in the ongoing conflict between these countries. The article also mentions Central Command (CENTCOM) which is an organization responsible for coordinating military operations involving multiple branches of the United States Armed Forces.
                                • Al Jazeera reports that the USS Carney (DDG 64), a US Navy ship, was targeted by Tomahawk missiles in an attack attributed to Houthi rebels.
                                  • Central Command (CENTCOM) is involved in coordinating military operations involving multiple branches of the United States Armed Forces.
                                    • The US has launched new strikes on Yemen's Houthis as conflict escalates
                                    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                      Al Jazeera has a conflict of interest on the topics of US, Yemen, Houthi rebels and Iran-aligned group as they are all directly related to the article's content. The author does not disclose any conflicts of interest.