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.
Calling it a missile can be sensationalism to some people.
People are entitled to their own opinions, but not their own facts. It’s a “missile” if it has a means of self-propulsion (otherwise it’s a “bullet” or “shell”) and a guidance system (otherwise it’s a “rocket”). Maybe some people would think calling a missile what it is is sensationalism, but they’re just wrong.
They sensationalized the headline with omissions to make a point.
Yes, I’m aware of what they were trying to do. Their point was stupid and they were petty to make it.
I’ve always wondered what the difference is between a “rocket” and a “missile”, but constantly forget to look it up. Now I know it’s a guidance system. Thanks!
Ballistic missiles don’t usually have guidance systems though…. Those are cruise missiles and why the original articles distinction matters.
A missile is a rocket with a payload, which is just a projectile with an engine.
The article better just call it a projectile to avoid any avenue of sensationalism.
Fact, it’s a projectile.
Describing it further as a missile, bullet, mortar, shell. Can all be considered sensationalism.
You seem to have missed the point, where’s the line of a description being sensationalism?
A ballistic missile is sensationalized of missile, missile is sensationalized of projectile. Projectile is sensationalized of weapon.
Where’s the line dude……?
Describing it further as a missile, bullet, mortar, shell. Can all be considered sensationalism.
No, that’s a lie. Words have meanings and you aren’t entitled to pretend “missile” isn’t factually accurate.
It is factually correct, just like ballistic missile is too. It lets you know it’s a dumb missle vs a smart one.
If that distinction isn’t important, why is missile over projectile?
You still missed the point entirely… do you need a stool or something? You can’t have your cake and eat it too lmfao. You’re being a massively hypocritcal troll if missile is important over projectile, but not clarifying ballistic as well. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Buddy was being a little pedantic with their example, but it was needed, multiple people (you included) are putting bias into sensationalism, and sometimes the only way to point that out is through exaggeration.
It’s funny that you STILL missed their point and are arguing that missile is important over projectile/weapon, but not ballistic…. Lmfao.
